IAI SP6 study materials
IAI SP6 study resources

IAI SP6: Insurance Fraud: Terminology, Typologies and Scale

IAI SP6 · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Insurance Fraud: Terminology, Typologies and Scale

This domain tests whether you can name, classify and size insurance fraud accurately. Examiners reward precise vocabulary and a critical reading of statistics; they penalise loose use of the word "fraud" for any inaccuracy.

Core definitions

  • Fraud is a dishonest act or omission intended to make a gain or cause a loss; the Fraud Act 2006 framing is the reference point.
  • Insurance fraud is deception intended to obtain an insurance advantage - at underwriting, at claim, or in the premium chain.
  • Detected fraud is what insurers and the Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB) record; undetected fraud is estimated, not measured.

Typologies

  • Application/underwriting fraud, claims fraud, premium and asset-stripping fraud (often intermediary-driven), and internal fraud.
  • Opportunistic versus organised; exaggeration versus fabrication; premeditated versus spur-of-the-moment.
  • Named behaviours the syllabus expects: fronting, ghost broking, crash for cash, phantom passengers, claims farming, staged theft, arson for profit, double dipping and fabricated slip-and-fall.

Scale and cost

  • ABI-published figures put detected fraud at over £1 billion a year, with application fraud a large share by number.
  • Costs fall on honest policyholders through premiums, and on insurers through reputational and conduct harm.

Worked example

A policy is taken out nine days before a theft claim. The Claims and Underwriting Exchange (CUE) shows a declined theft claim at another insurer seven months earlier, and the address differs from the driving licence. Classification: application fraud (non-disclosure) with a possible premeditated claim, not an opportunistic claim. Reasoning: inception-to-loss timing, prior declined claim and identity inconsistency together shift the case from error to deception.

Traps that cost marks

  • Calling every inaccuracy fraud; genuine mistakes and non-disclosure without dishonesty are different.
  • Quoting total fraud as if it were detected fraud.
  • Mixing categories: fronting is application fraud, not a claims typology.