Agenda item

1.     The report was presented by the Interim Head of Counter Fraud, James Flannery. The Following key points were highlighted:

        a)     It was reported that the Counter Fraud Team had substantially delivered its 2025–26 Action Plan, with one action relating to the use of artificial intelligence for document verification deferred pending identification of an appropriate pilot area. Members noted that reported irregularities had increased compared with the previous year, reflecting improved awareness and reporting, while actual losses had reduced.

        b)     Members were advised that a recent anti-corruption self-assessment had identified several good practices within the Council, together with opportunities to improve transparency. A fuller report, including recommendations and an action plan, would be presented at a future meeting.

        c)     During discussion, Members received an update on the financial impact of the Kent Card provider outage. It was reported that work was ongoing to assess any additional costs incurred and to seek recompense from the outgoing provider where appropriate.

        d)     Members discussed the deferred action relating to the use of artificial intelligence and were advised that further work was required to assess potential applications and ensure that any investment would provide value for money.

        e)     The Committee considered the effectiveness and resourcing of the Counter Fraud Team. It was noted that the service continued to work closely with management teams across the authority and that existing resources were considered sufficient to address current fraud risks. Members were advised that future efficiencies were likely to be achieved through greater use of data analytics.

        f)      The Committee discussed Blue Badge misuse and variations in referral levels across district councils. It was reported that work was underway with district councils and parking managers to share best practice and improve awareness, detection and reporting arrangements.

        g)     Members received an update on the Kent Intelligence Network and its work in identifying business rates irregularities. It was noted that intelligence gathered from individual cases was shared across partner authorities to support wider fraud prevention activity.

        h)     Questions were raised regarding the recovery of losses arising from reported irregularities. The Committee was advised that recovery action was pursued through the Council’s debt recovery processes and that lessons learned were used to strengthen controls and reduce the risk of recurrence.

        i)      The Committee discussed arrangements for monitoring declarations of interest and gifts and hospitality. It was reported that work was underway to improve management information and reporting, with enhanced monitoring expected to be introduced during the year.

        j)      An update was provided on the National Fraud Initiative and the use of data matching to identify potential overpayments following the death of service users. Further matching exercises were due to be undertaken during 2026–27, with results to be reported to a future meeting.

        k)     The Committee also considered fraud risks associated with Local Government Reorganisation. It was confirmed that these risks were being incorporated into programme risk management arrangements and that a further report would be brought to a future meeting.

2.         (i) RESOLVED Members NOTED the Counter Fraud Annual Report  

                  inclusive of quarter 4 progress for 2025/26, reported irregularities

                  from 1 January 2026 – 13 March 2026 and completion of the

                  Counter Fraud Action Plan for 2025/26.

            (ii) RESOLVED Members REVIEWED, COMMENTED on and

                  APPROVED the Counter Fraud Action Plan for 2026/27

            (iii) RESOLVED Members NOTED the outcome of KCC’s

                  Compliance to the Fighting Fraud and Corruption Locally  

                  Checklist.    

Post Meeting Note

Following a Member’s question, the Interim Head of Counter Fraud confirmed

that KCC have not, and are not, funding the litigation which is being

progressed by Dover DC. This is the responsibility of Dover DC as the

billing authority and administrator of business rates in that area.