E-crime is a national concern

E-crime needs a national profile

For banks to become the first point of contact for customers who are victims of online fraud makes sense.

The old, round-the-houses reporting process was unnecessary, ineffectual and only added to the confusion surrounding electronic crime. Last week’s change simplifies the process and makes official that which is already common practice.

And, while no one wants to admit it, it is also a step towards London’s Metropolitan police force taking over the role left vacant by the dissolution last year of the National High-Tech Crime Unit (NHTCU).

Online crime is not like burglary. Perpetrators do not seek out a specific victim for a specific reason – an expensive stereo by an open window, for example. E-crimes such as phishing instead work by volume targeting of entirely generic quarry. So it makes absolute sense for attacks to be reported en bloc by the banks rather than piecemeal by individual victims.

Yet the fact that it makes so much sense serves only to highlight the counter-intuitive absurdity of dissolving the NHTCU in the first place.

The decision that the most fragmented, non-geographic of crimes – most of them perpetrated from abroad – should be investigated by local police forces never made any sense. The fact that the majority of local e-crime units are understaffed, underskilled and underfunded just adds weight to the argument.

Ever since the NHTCU’s demise there has been talk of a central investigative role for the Met. But a key sticking point is the money – an extra job for the Met would require extra funding from the cash-strapped Home Office.

Giving increased responsibility to the private sector not only fits the type of crime, it also keeps a lot of the legwork away from the police and avoids having to make a commitment to a new role for the Met.

Regardless of official statements, last week’s change is a clear step back to a national response to e-crime. And on that basis, it is to be applauded.