X hits on this document

178 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

44 / 48

CORPORATE FRAUD HANDBOOK

Exhibit 1.32

2006 National Fraud Survey: Recovery of Victims’ Losses

No recovery

42.1%

Percent of Loss Recovered

1–25%

26–50%

6.8%

51–75%

6.0%

76–99%

5.3%

23.4%

100%

16.4%

0%

10%

20% 30% Percent of Cases

40%

50%

to support the contention that organizations need to do a better job of actively seeking out fraud. (See Exhibit 1.33.)

The Methods

The principal goal of the first Report to the Nation was to classify occupational frauds and abuses by the methods used to commit them. As a result of the 1996 study we were able to develop a classification system known informally as the Fraud Tree (see page 46) that

Exhibit 1.33

2006 National Fraud Survey: Initial Detection of Frauds

Tip

34.2%

Detection Method

By accident

Internal audit

Internal controls

External audit

12.0%

20.2%

19.2%

25.4%

Notified by police

3.8%

0%

5%

10%

15% 20% 25%

30%

35%

40%

Percent of Cases

Note: The sum of percentages in this chart exceeds 100% because in some cases respondents identified more than one de- tection method.

44

Document info
Document views178
Page views178
Page last viewedThu Jan 19 17:01:46 UTC 2017
Pages48
Paragraphs1200
Words17476

Comments