Fraud prevention is always better than cure. Individuals and smaller businesses need to be made more aware of the risks of financial crime (including theft, fraud, money laundering and bribery and corruption), as well as the great harm they do. That is according to the Fraud Advisory Panel’s latest publication, titled Civil justice initiative: main themes and recommendations. For the seven-page document visit the FAP website – https://www.fraudadvisorypanel.org/pdf_show_216.pdf
The Fraud Advisory Panel’s civil justice initiative aims to encourage fraud victims (especially individuals and smaller businesses) to make more use of the civil courts in England and Wales when trying to get their money back, especially where a criminal investigation and prosecution is unlikely.
The initiative forms part of the national counter fraud strategy, Fighting Fraud Together, between the UK’s public, private and voluntary sectors. The Fraud Advisory Panel is a registered charity and membership organisation: visit – www.fraudadvisorypanel.org
According to the FAP, there is a growing need to explore ways in which the non-criminal route to justice might be used to greater effect both by victims and official agencies.
There are many non-criminal options available to fraud victims seeking to recover their money – civil litigation and asset recovery, insolvency proceedings, dispute resolution procedures and insurance – which can be used as an alternative to, or in combination with, criminal proceedings.
Unfortunately, many victims (and particularly individuals and smaller businesses) have no understanding of the difference between the criminal and civil justice systems, and so remain unaware of the full range of legal options available to them. When it comes to recovering money in particular, fraud victims often have little idea who to approach for information and professional advice. Unsurprisingly then, a number of victims end up dealing with matters entirely alone or else decide to take no action at all.
Greater transparency about options and costs (time as well as money) would allow victims to make better-informed decisions about whether or not the civil justice route is right for them.
