The Fraud Act 2006 is the key legislation that defines fraud offences in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. It replaced older, more complex laws with a clear and flexible framework designed to tackle modern fraud.
Although a CIFAS marker is not a criminal conviction, the Fraud Act 2006 provides the legal benchmark for what actually counts as fraud. This makes it central to understanding whether a marker has been applied fairly.
The Three Ways Fraud Can Be Committed #
Under the Act, fraud is committed in three main ways:
- Fraud by False Representation (Section 2)
- Making a false statement, knowing it may be untrue or misleading, with intent to make a gain or cause a loss.
- Example: Using falsified documents to apply for a loan.
- Fraud by Failing to Disclose Information (Section 3)
- Not disclosing information when under a legal duty to do so, in order to make a gain or cause a loss.
- Example: Failing to declare debts or adverse history when required on a credit application.
- Fraud by Abuse of Position (Section 4)
- Abusing a position of trust to make a gain or cause a loss.
- Example: An employee diverting funds from their employer’s account.
Other Key Offences in the Act #
- Possession or Making of Articles for Use in Fraud (Sections 6 & 7)
Criminalises holding or creating equipment or documents intended for fraud. - Obtaining Services Dishonestly (Section 11)
Covers situations where someone gains services without paying, using deception.
Relevance to CIFAS Markers #
The Fraud Act 2006 requires dishonesty and intent for a criminal conviction. By comparison, CIFAS markers can be applied at a lower threshold, based on an organisation’s reasonable belief supported by evidence.
This is why proportionality is crucial:
- A CIFAS marker is not the same as a criminal conviction.
- However, it can have similar consequences (financial exclusion, reputational harm).
- Therefore, the evidence behind a marker must still meet the CIFAS Standard of Proof (clear, relevant, and rigorous).
Courts have also emphasised proportionality in cases like R v Andrewes [2022] UKSC 24, which confirmed that serious penalties must not be applied without clear proof of dishonesty and direct benefit from wrongdoing.
Why This Matters for Challenges #
If a bank or organisation files a marker against you, you can ask:
- Does the evidence show dishonesty or simply an error?
- Was there intent to gain or cause loss?
- Does the conduct fit into one of the defined CIFAS case categories?
If the answers are unclear, the marker may be unfair or unlawful, and you have grounds to challenge it.
