UK: Swift: News And Views From Smith & Williamson´s Investigations And Forensic Team

Last Updated: 25 October 2006

Article by Graham Hain

They say prevention is better than cure. In the world of fraud, it’s less expensive too. Associate director Graham Hain explains how and why.

Fraud On The Increase

Fraud has often been in the news in recent times – whether it’s yet another corporate failure or a new initiative to tackle it. There is a clear message that fraud is on the increase and that it is costing companies more than ever before.

In 2004, fraud in the UK amounted to £15.8 billion, according to figures from Norwich Union and it estimated that most fraud is committed against government, over £4 billion was against the private sector.

Hidden Costs

The damage caused to a company by fraud is not only limited to direct financial losses, but includes intangible costs such as:

  • Loss of shareholder confidence
  • Damage to reputation
  • Loss of customers
  • Missed business opportunities
  • Loss of valued employees.

These hidden cost are difficult to calculate, but the Home Office estimates that it could amount to as much as an additional third of the cost of the direct losses.

Taking Action

Here’s the good news. There are a number of low-cost measures that can be taken to reduce the likelihood of fraud, and potentially save a lot of heartache and money in the long term.

First, businesses should identify an individual in the organisation who is to be responsible for managing fraud risk. This person needs to understand what risks the business is exposed to and develop a plan to lessen those risks. To do this effectively, the individual will need to have an in-depth knowledge of the business and will probably be at executive level.

Responsibility for fraud risk may start with senior management but it should not end there. Every employee should be aware that fraud is not tolerated and that everyone is responsible for fraud prevention and detection.

Creating An Anti-Fraud Culture

One of the most effective ways to raise awareness of fraud risk within an organisation is to issue a Fraud Policy Statement (FPS). The FPS should clearly state that the company requires honest action and that it will not tolerate fraud by employees, customers or suppliers.

To be effective it is vital that the FPS is read, understood and acted upon. From the beginning of their employment, new joiners should be made aware of the FPS and its importance. Ideally, this should form part of the induction process. It is important to set the company tone of zero tolerance to fraud.

Some convicted fraudsters claim that business cultures helped to facilitate their offences. According to findings by Perpetuity Research and Consultancy International. If executives count personal items as company expenses or make lavish gifts to customers, some employees may feel justified in their own fraudulent activities. Remove the justification, and the likelihood of fraud is reduced.

A positive reinforcement tool is fraud awareness training, which is targeted at employees that work in high-risk areas, such as accounts, sales and those with responsibility for cash. Training acts as a deterrent to fraud and can encourage people to identify and report any suspicions.

If awareness training is preceded by a survey of attitudes to fraud, the training can be tailored to an organisation’s needs, with reference to the overall company culture. Other initiatives, such as focus groups and workshops, can highlight what an organisation needs to do to raise the profile of fraud risk amongst its employees.

Take Action Against Fraud

  • Appoint an executive who is responsible for fraud risk
  • Issue a fraud policy statement
  • Vet all new employees properly
  • Monitor employees through regular appraisals and surveys
  • Provide key employees with periodic fraud awareness training
  • Perform a fraud vulnerability review for your company

Prevention Through People

The recruitment process can be a valuable tool in fraud prevention. When recruiting new employees, references should always be taken.

The National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) reported, in 2003, how company owners or senior employees conduct some of the highest value frauds. Clearly, within certain roles, the opportunity to commit fraud is high, so it may be prudent to conduct rigorous checks on such people at the beginning of their employment. The extent of the checking should be proportionate to the position being filled.

Unsurprisingly, debt, addictive lifestyles and greed are also shown to be key factors in the perpetration of frauds. In addition, fraud can occur when employees are under pressure to meet budgets or surpass targets, so it’s important for businesses to monitor employees and recognise the warning signs of stress. The appraisal process can be an effective mechanism for identifying pressures, difficulties and grievances of individual employees.

Keeping Risk In Check

To counter fraud, businesses should also ensure that their security systems and processes are scaled with the size and focus of the organisation. A period of growth, diversification or a merger may mean that certain measures are no longer aligned with the risks they were put in place to mitigate.

Fraud vulnerability reviews can highlight both; business areas that have a high likelihood of fraud and those where the impact could be substantial. Internal controls exist to mitigate risks and should be balanced in the context of these two factors of instance and impact. Reviews help organisations to significantly reduce the opportunity for fraud, without creating bureaucracy that could stifle the enterprise.

In Summary

Fraud is big and getting bigger. When it strikes, it is usually expensive, not only in terms of the sums directly involved, but also the knock-on effect to other business areas. Several practical measures can tackle the three elements that create greater risk of fraud: opportunity, motivation and justification as shown in the fraud triangle. Putting these measures into action any organisation – big or small – can significantly reduce the risk of a fraud being committed.

Article by Andrew Howell and Catriona Aves

Internal investigations can eat up company resources. Andrew Howell and Catriona Aves of Barlow Lyde & Gilbert highlight recent cases of companies that have recovered the costs.

Major internal investigations in businesses rarely seem to be out of the headlines, especially very costly ones in response to pressure from regulators. Kroll and Deloitte’s expensive investigation into an alleged fraud at advertising giant WPP is just one example.

With the current emphasis in litigation on preparing cases upfront, huge sums can be spent on internal reviews before proceedings even begin. In cases where an investigation leads to litigation, to what extent can businesses recover internal review costs? Can, for example, an action be justified solely to recover investigation costs and nothing more?

In principle, so-called wasted management costs are recoverable, but there have been relatively few successful cases. There has been uncertainty as to whether a claimant needs to prove some additional expenditure or loss of revenue or profit to succeed, or whether the fact that the time has been spent is of itself sufficient.

The R&V Case

Two recent High Court decisions in R+V Verischerung AG v Risk Insurance & Reinsurance Solutions SA & Others [2006] have, however, revisited this topic. The first decision, in January 2006, made it clear that lost management time is, in principle, a distinct head of damage and that costs can be recovered even if no loss of profit or revenue or additional expenditure is shown. The second decision, in July 2006, related to the practicalities of putting together a claim.

R+V was a case about contracts of reinsurance; specifically the negotiation and operation of binding authorities under which R+V authorised the defendant, Risk Insurance & Reinsurance Solutions, to write contracts of reinsurance on its behalf. The defendants concluded various additional agreements under the binders which entitled them to receive very significant commissions, without R+V’s knowledge.

The court found the defendants guilty of dishonest conspiracy. R+V spent a great deal of time investigating and seeking to mitigate the effects of this conspiracy, as well as handling claims made under the contracts for reinsurance. R+V sought compensation for all of this investigation time.

By allowing R+V’s claim in January 2006, in principle, Mrs Justice Gloster rejected the argument that it was only the loss due to the diversion of resources as a result of the conspiracy which could be claimed. This was because the effect of time spent on the investigation deprived the employer of the resource of their employees. Therefore, a claimant need not show loss of profit or business as a remit of the investigation (so this does not exclude non-profit making organisations from claiming).

The court went on to state that it could see no difference in principle for recovery between (a) the time spent by employees working in a department specifically set up to investigate and mitigate breaches, and (b) where there is no such department but employees nonetheless spent time pursuing such investigations (a distinction drawn in Admiral Management v Para-Protect [2002]).

Quantifying The Recovery

However, the hearing in January 2006 did not deal with the actual amounts R+V could recover. This was dealt with at a separate hearing in July 2006 (R+V Verischerung AG v Risk Insurance & Reinsurance Solutions and Others [2006]), where Mr Justice Tomlinson endorsed the approach of Mrs Justice Gloster, making it clear however that it required proof "with sufficient particularity" that there had been "some significant disruption" to the business. Drawing upon Mrs Justice Gloster’s judgment, this means evidence of employees being "significantly diverted" from their normal activities.

In order to quantify the worth of "significant disruption", Mrs Justice Gloster’s judgment implied that the employee’s salary is the relevant benchmark by which to assess any damages due. R+V took this on board, and its evidence for the July hearing included a calculation of the gross wage of each employee and employee statements (22 in total), confirming time spent on the matter. The claim comprised employee time, internal overhead costs and fees charged by external contractors.

R+V claimed €3,328,357 and recovered €3,143,357. €185,000 was disallowed because Mr Justice Tomlinson felt that the work represented by this amount probably related to subsequent litigation rather than prior investigations.

Risk appeared not to challenge much of the evidence produced by R+V, so the minutiae of the evidence was not examined. However, Mr Justice Tomlinson appeared satisfied with the evidence, commenting that R+V had "attempted to discharge the evidential burden that lies upon it without disproportionate expense and without…descending into a high degree of particularity." It seems, therefore, that the court was prepared to take a realistic approach to the evidence required, although this may have been influenced by the dishonesty allegations in this case.

Record Keeping Critical

R+V’s successful recovery undoubtedly rests upon the records it was able to produce. The importance of records for a successful claim is well established and exemplified by Tate & Lyle Food and Distribution Limited and Another v Greater London Council and Another [1982]. Here, the principle of recovery for wasted management time as a result of breach of contract was accepted, but the claim failed because the claimant didn’t provide any contemporaneous records.

Since Tate & Lyle, though, the courts have relented somewhat and allowed claims where records have not been contemporaneous, but reconstructed, as was the case for the successful claimants in both Pegler Limited v Wang (UK) Limited [2000] and Horace Holman Group v Sherwood International Group Limited [2001].

However, the court acknowledged in Pegler that this is likely to be an exercise containing "discrepancies, exaggerations and errors". The amount recovered was less than that claimed and no doubt less than if contemporaneous documents had been available. In R+V, although there appear to have been contemporaneous records (underwriting and claims files), a lot of work had to be done to justify the claimed figures.

To ensure the opportunity to recover internal costs is not lost, it is helpful to adopt a system that accurately records all of the time spent by employees (in addition to professional costs). Records need to identify the particular task being carried out, so as to constitute a meaningful record against which the court can assess losses. Equally, evidence that an internal investigation causes disruption to other parts of the business (which commonly proves to be the case) needs to be collated contemporaneously.

Questions Of Disclosure

If investigation costs are to be claimed in subsequent litigation, all records of that initial review are potentially disclosable. Thought needs to be given to how to maintain a division between privileged documents which relate to the merits of the investigation but which a claimant wouldn’t want to disclose, and documents which record the work done which a claimant has to disclose to recover its costs.

The distinction is often not an easy one to draw. In a recent case involving Barlow Lyde & Gilbert, a court order was obtained to hive-off the calculation of the investigation costs precisely to avoid concerns about disclosing privileged documents before the substantive issues in the claim had been resolved.

The R+V decisions, then, clarify the principle that wasted management and staff time costs in relation to investigations can be recouped, if supported by evidence and that the court will take a pragmatic approach, accepting both contemporaneous and reconstructed records.

This surely makes sense. The reluctance to draw a distinction between established investigatory departments and ad hoc investigative work by employees is also helpful recognition of the realities of the burdens placed upon organisations facing such investigations. It is a cost burden which is only likely to increase.

Internal Costs Of Litigation

By contrast, internal costs incurred in relation to management time spent on litigation itself are not generally recoverable as exemplified by the €185,000 that R+V were not entitled to recover. Similarly, if an organisation expends costs investigating a claim to defend what turns out to be an unfounded court action, is there any reason logically why it should not be able to recover those costs as well as its legal expenses? As matters stand, these investigation costs aren’t usually recoverable either, probably for reasons of pragmatism to stem further disputes about the costs of litigation.

Nonetheless, for a potential claimant embroiled in internal investigations which could easily expand into litigation, the message from R+V is clear: investigation costs are recoverable but internal procedures may need to be revised to ensure lost time doesn’t always mean (still more) lost money.

An earlier version of this article appeared in the May 2006 edition of Accountancy and is reproduced with the kind permission of Wolters Kluwer Ltd.


Examples of recent cases in which the forensic accounting team have been involved.

Suited And Booted

Expert report on insolvency
A supplier of men’s suits appointed us to provide an expert report. We had to determine whether the wholesaler it supplied was insolvent at a date when payments for stock had been promised. The Defendant’s expert agreed that the wholesaler was insolvent. However, the case still went to trial, and Graham Hain gave evidence. Judgment is awaited.

Out Of Africa

Expert evidence on hotel valuation
We were instructed in a case relating to the sale of a hotel in Africa in the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA). Instructed on behalf of the Claimant, Doug Hall of Smith & Williamson provided expert evidence on valuation and due diligence issues and gave evidence at the LCIA. The full damages claimed were awarded.

Under The Spotlight

Investigating a former FD
Following the departure of a finance director, we were instructed to investigate his actions in certain areas where significant liabilities came to light. Our independent review of the evidence allowed the company board and its legal advisers to negotiate with the finance director in relation to his compromise and earn-out agreements.

Travel Disruption

Forensic examination of share value
We were engaged by an investor in a travel company facing a claim from its previous owner for loss of shares in the company to which he attached an inflated value. By forensic examination of the company’s trading track record and a realistic assessment of its future trading prospects, we were able to demonstrate that its shares had a minimal value resulting in the Claimant dropping the case before trial.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.