Agenda item

This report details the counter fraud work undertaken during the year to 31^st of March 2013 by the Council’s Corporate Anti Fraud Service (CAFS) and the plans for the next financial year.

The Committee received a report presented by Geoff Drake, Chief Internal Auditor, which summarised the anti-fraud work that had been undertaken by the Council’s Corporate Anti Fraud Service (CAFS) during 2012/13. Members were informed that the service would move to a Bi-Borough arrangement on 1^st July 2013 to be managed by the new Bi-Borough Head of Fraud, Andy Hyatt.

Members noted from the report that the team had identified fraud valuing in excess of £8million and that over £5.2million was recoverable by the Council. It was asked whether the full amount could or would be recovered. Officers explained that it was unlikely the full amount would be recovered but that the Council sought to recover as much as possible. Any money recovered from fraud activity was unlikely to be recovered in the same financial year as it would often come via payment plans spread over a number of years and months or from prosecutions. It was anticipated that around a further £1million from fraud in 2012/13 would be recovered beyond the  £510,000 that had already been recovered this year, some of which related to fraud activity in previous years.

The Committee discussed the staffing levels in the CAFS and noted that two vacant posts had not been filled. It was also noted that a significant number of cases were not investigated due to insufficient resources. Members therefore asked whether the service was under-resourced and enquired if it was meeting its targets. Officers explained that whilst it was meeting and exceeding its targets, some cases were being rejected due to insufficient resources. However this was common in most authorities and every fraud team had to choose how to prioritise referrals to make best use of the available resources. With the service moving to the Bi-Borough arrangement, it was expected that the service would improve by operating with greater efficiency and reduced management overheads, which would allow more resources to be allocated to investigators.

The Committee noted the training being undertaken by fraud officers to give them a greater exposure and familiarity with different types of fraud. It was asked whether the recent case of Care Quality Commission investigators failing to detect poor performance at a Cumbrian hospital actually suggested that rather than making investigators more generic, the Council should be preserving their specialist knowledge to ensure more thorough investigations. Officers explained that by extending the skill-set of officers, the Council was able to investigate more cases and the service could be more flexible. It was also highlighted that the specialist skills of individual investigators still existed, only now they were being shared with colleagues and being applied to different fields.

Members highlighted that the Committee had made several recommendations at its previous meeting relating to the investigation and prosecution of officers involved in corporate fraud, and asked for confirmation that they were being implemented. Officers confirmed that the recommendations were being progressed and that all necessary internal audit activity was in the current work programme.

The Committee sought clarification on how the Bi-Borough fraud service would operate. Officers explained that at its inception, the service would operate under a single head of service but as two teams. It was however expected that this would change over time as and when the service required it to.

RESOLVED –

That the report be noted.