The review's concern lies with the courts. The Fraud Act 2006 is "broadly sound" and "well placed to address AI-enabled fraud," it says—the difficulty is that the courts hearing these cases increasingly aren't equipped for them.
Tools once reserved for sophisticated criminals are "now widely accessible," the report says, meaning magistrates and non-specialist Crown Court centres "will face cases of a nature and scale they have not previously encountered," leveraging AI, cross-border fund transfers and cryptocurrency. Training for the toughest trials already exists through the Judicial College's "Long and Complex Trials" course, but it is optional and, the review notes, often overshadowed by other courses. Complex fraud work is concentrated among a cadre of judges in major cities, leaving regional Crown Courts short on both experience and infrastructure.
The report recommends asking the college to weigh whether that course should be updated or replaced with a bespoke module on fraud and related offences—and whether such training should be mandatory for any judge likely to preside over complex fraud. Fisher further noted that, "in light of the volume of fraud cases, it would be valuable for the wider judiciary to have a greater awareness of how to manage cases involving AI-enabled fraud and cryptocurrency-based money laundering."
Half of all crimeYet enforcement barely keeps pace. Only 13% of fraud outcomes end in a charge or summons, the review found—about one in every 54 reports.
