National Trading Standards: Doorstep Crime Report 2015 Tim Day Lead Officer in Doorstep Crime Chartered Trading Standards Institute

The National TS DSC report National Trading Standards survey of Local Authority TS Services 77% response rate (128 LAs) – down from 95% previous year. Examines: - Levels of DSC & financial loss. LA priorities & resources. Police & TS response and recording. Impact on victims & victim profile. Organised Crime Group involvement & modern day slavery.

Doorstep Crime - Definition Offenders cold-calling at the homes of consumers, most commonly older adults and / or vulnerable consumers, offering to carry out property repairs such as roofing, tarmac work, block paving, fascia and soffit installation and gardening work, or to sell products such as fish, furniture, mobility aids, security systems and energy saving products. It often involves charging extortionate prices for the goods or services, including charging for unnecessary goods or services, deliberately damaging property in order to obtain work, leaving work unfinished, substandard and poor quality work, claiming to have done work which has not been done, claiming work is required urgently, and false statements being made about a variety of things including goods and services being required for specific reasons and membership of trade associations.

Extent of DSC: Financial loss Average financial loss reported to Trading Standards (amongst those able to measure it) was £1,280.

Financial loss – scaled up 17,264 reports. Total financial detriment of average losses reported to TS: £22.1 million. Levels of underreporting also need to be acknowledged – estimates between 1% and 10% of incidents being reported. This means anywhere between £221 million to £2.2 billion lost annually to DSC.

Enforcement response: Police Lack of uniformity of service delivery to vulnerable victims and to offending. 14% gave DSC high priority. 32% gave it low priority. 32% said they did not investigate DSC to the same standard as other crimes. 95% said their crime plan/PCC strategy included protecting the vulnerable.

Police recording & response What prevents DSC from receiving higher priority: 72% said resources. 78% said they had higher priorities. 33% lack of awareness. 17% lack of training. 17% said low crime levels. 86% of forces said the introduction of a specific crime recording code would improve their response to DSC. Lack of crime code for DSC. – 62% of forces unable to analyse/monitor levels of DSC.

Enforcement response: Trading Standards The average number of prosecutions per LA in England and Wales has remained at 1 prosecution per LA per year (1.07 in 2013/14 and 0.95 in 2014/15). 25 LAs had taken two or more prosecutions in 2014/15 (20% of responding LAs, 15% of all LAs). (down from 32 in 2013/14). Resources: Total spend on TS £124m (from £213m in 2009). 5 TS Services with a budget of less than £200,000. Lack of forensic capability for most LAs to submit items for analysis including fingerprinting and DNA, to assist with the identification of offenders.

Victimology: Demography 121 victim impact surveys completed nationally. 65% of victims were aged 75 and over, with the largest group (over 20%) being aged 80-84. 54% female and 46% male 57% of victims lived alone.

Victim demography Semi-detached houses (33.6%), bungalows (31.9%) and detached houses (24%) 55% of victims already had a ‘no doorstep selling’ sticker 43% of victims had a handrail / grab rail, ramp to their door, or a key safe for use by carers. 28% of victims had a neglected garden.

Victimology: Health 63% had a physical impairment, for example mobility issues. 38% of victims have falls, with 23% of those being unable to get themselves up after having a fall. 43.5% had a long standing illness such as cancer, diabetes or heart disease. 39% had sensory impairment. 13% had a mental health condition such as depression. 13% had a cognitive impairment such as dementia.

Victimology: Health Over 40% of victims take four of more medications a day. 26% said they, or those close to them, were concerned about their memories, but only 12% had received a formal capacity test. Yet, only 14% of victims had some form of formal care provision

Victim demography – Levels of independence 20% of victims said they could not manage their shopping. 24% could not manage cleaning their home. 22% could not get to and from medical appointments. 17.5% could not put their rubbish out. 30% could not manage looking after their home and garden. 27% could not manage looking after their pets, for example, walking their dog.

Loneliness, Social isolation & impact 34% of victims had experienced bereavement in the past two years. (more susceptible and deliberately targeted.) 17% of victims leave their homes once a week or less. 41% of victims said they felt lonely, with 26% feeling lonely every day. Impact: 23% of victims said the incident had affected their health. 50% suffered financial detriment. 38% said it reduced their confidence generally. 26% said it left them feeling down or depressed. 12% were left feeling afraid at home. 13% of victims felt more afraid of crime as a result of the incident.

Victim experience When asked how they felt about the offenders during the incident victims said: They were friendly 69% They were polite 60% They were trustworthy 45% 18% felt offenders were forceful 16% felt they were suspicious 12% untrustworthy 8% aggressive

Victimology: Victim Experience During the incidents, victims reported feeling: Pressurised 46% Comfortable 41% In control 30% Depressed or anxious 17% Helpless 15% Confused 14% Resigned 11% 83% of victims said they also receive unwanted telephone calls and 84% of victims said they receive unwanted mail.

Victimology: Victim Experience 75% of victims had security measures in their home. 73% had panic alarms. 37% monitored alarm systems. 20% an emergency call alarm. 23% felt they’d been a victim of fraud or scam in the past. 18% said they’d deal with doorstep callers in the future.

What will you take away from this presentation? Tim.day@hertfordshire.gov.uk