Hill Dickinson Fraud Unit calls on the industry to set common standards and treat ‘go away’ data as a key fraud indicator.
Although claims which ‘go-away’ are typically seen as a positive result by individual insurers, Hill Dickinson Fraud Unit [HDFU] believes there is a significant hidden cost to the industry when the potential fraud implications are considered.
Over 50% of closed cases handled by HDFU for its insurer client base in 2011 were classified as ‘go-aways’ with fraud alleged or suspected; and an associated cost implication of over £54million. Although these claims disappeared from HDFU’s clients’ radars, it does not mean the claimants have not moved on to attack other insurers with weaker fraud defences. In a sample of 100 proven fraud cases, HDFU identified over 28 ‘go-away’ claims previously made by these proven fraudsters, with a collective value of £693,995.
Hill Dickinson’s Netfoil database flags ‘go-away’ claims in the same manner as proven fraud, in order that its clients can be made aware of a claimant’s risk profile and repeat offenders can be readily identified. This activity is fully ICO compliant and in line with Treating Customer Fairly (TCF) requirements.
Peter Oakes, Head of Fraud, Hill Dickinson says: “It stands to reason that the industry should be evaluating ‘go-away’ data as a key fraud indicator. The challenge is that insurers define and treat ‘go-away’ claims differently and not all insurers record or interrogate ‘go-away’ data. As an industry we should be considering common standards for defining and handling ‘go-away’ claims and exploring how we can collectively benefit from sharing ‘go-away’ data.”
