Problems with a global fraud list

The concept of a global fraud list as proposed in Sarah Kennedy’s article (News Analysis, 17 January) is indeed a monumental project to undertake. The task of collating and disseminating such information could be fraught with problems, as would finding insurers across the world to be amenable to providing the data and subscribing to such a service.

There is already the well-established National Insurance Crime Bureau (NCIB) in America and the more recent Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB) in the UK. Perhaps the International Association of Insurance Supervisors, which has planned to launch this idea, would be better off confining it to in and around the European Community.

As the EU has expanded, theft and fraud investigators such as myself, are seeing changing trends in this area; with the rapid increase of spurious claims from European nationals.

And don’t forget the vehicles and plant equipment stolen and which find their way to various countries on the continent.

Keeping a bureau of this nature confined to a continent must surely be more manageable for the number of countries in Europe alone. Find a country in the Middle East to set up an identical operation, then get these together with the existing IFB and NCIB to exchange information when the need arises. Then we will have a global interacting co-operative to collate and disseminate the crucial intelligence required to combat insurance fraud.

One must also realise such a global bureau would have to rely on insurers as subscribers for it to work.

Given the magnitude of this proposed network, if you cannot provide a top-rate information service it will unfortunately be rapidly doomed to failure.

Richard Heritage

St Leonards-on-Sea