Payment fraud has become a regular feature in the news, and regrettably the current circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic have only increased the prevalence of this fraud. The perpetrators have become both ever more brazen and ever more sophisticated in their attempts to trick their victims into paying sometimes very large sums of money to an account that they, the fraudster, control. The profile of victims ranges from individuals dealing with their personal bank accounts, right the way through to multi-national companies whose losses to these frauds can be counted in the millions. Although it is possible to track down the fraudster responsible, this is not always a feasible option – often due to the likely expense of doing so. Therefore a person who has been tricked into paying the fraudster instead of the person they intended to pay may often look to see whether they can blame the intended payee for the fraud.
To discuss these issues, we are joined today by Matthew McGhee, a barrister at Twenty Essex. Matthew has direct experience of cases where counterparties blame each other for these sorts of frauds and will be discussing how the blame game between the parties should be settled. He drew on this experience, together with other cases of cyber fraud, in publishing ‘A Practical Guide to Cyber Fraud Litigation’ earlier this year and is often asked to advise or act in such cases.
You can listen to this new episode on the track player below, or listen to all episodes on our Podcasts page, as well as on Spotify and iTunes.
We very much hope you enjoy this week’s podcast and thank you for your continued support of the TDN.