How to Detect and Prevent Fraud Rings

by Guest Contributor 4 min read July 1, 2020

Every few months we hear in the news about a fraud ring that has been busted here in the U.S. or in another part of the world. In May, I read about a fraud ring based in Georgia and Louisiana that bought 13,000 stolen identities of children who were on the Louisiana Medicaid program and billed the government for services not rendered. This group defrauded the Medicaid program of more than $500,000.

This is just one of many stories that we hear about fraud rings, and given the rapidly changing economic environment, now is the time for businesses to think about how to protect against fraud rings. There are a number of challenges that organizations may have when it comes to sharing trends and collaborations, understanding the ways to tie fraud rings together, creating treatments for identifying fraud rings and ways to store and catalogue fraud ring experiences so they can be easily recognized.

The trouble with identifying fraud rings

It’s important to understand the challenges that organizations have because they see the fraud rings through their own internal lens. Here are a few of the top things businesses should work on:

  • Think like a fraudster. This will help businesses become more creative in their approach to fraud prevention.
  • Facilitate internal collaboration. Share with in-organization partners. Sometimes this can be difficult due to organizational structure.
  • Promote external collaboration. Intel-sharing groups are a great way for businesses to network within their industries and learn about the fraud that others are seeing. An organization that I’ve worked with in the past is the National Cyber Forensic and Training Alliance (NCFTA).

Putting the pieces together

How do businesses identify a fraud ring? There are three steps to get started. The first is reviewing and understanding the data. Fraudsters are lazy and want to replicate the process over and over again, and because of this there is always some piece of information that is repeated. It could be a name, an email address, device fingerprint, or similar.

The second step is tying the fraud ring together. This is done by creating rules to help identify the trends. Having rules in place to identify fraud rings allows businesses to easily pull stats together for their leadership.

Lastly, applying an acronym or name to the particular fraud ring and adding comments to the cases associated with a particular ring will help with post-investigation analysis.

Learning from the past

Before I became a consultant, I remember identifying a fraud ring that was submitting events with the same language pack and where the device fingerprint was staying consistent. Those events were being referred out for review and marked with the same note. At a post-mortem review, I was able to talk to the fraud ring we had seen, and it was easy to pull all events associated with this fraud ring because my team had marked the events with the same comments.

Another fraud ring example happened a few years ago. A client called me and said that they were under a fraud attack and this fraud ring was rotating the email handle. I reviewed the data and came up with a rule to catch this activity. Fraud rings will use email handle rotation to help them keep track of accounts that are opened or what emails they used in the past. By coupling the email handle rotation with an email verification service like Emailage, this insight could be very telling. I would assume that when fraud rings use email handle rotation these emails are new and have just been created.

These are just a few of the many fraud rings that I’ve encountered over the course of my career and I’m sure there will be a lot more in the years to come. The best advice I can give to anyone that reads this post is to understand the data that you are reviewing, look for anomalies within the data, ask questions and test your theories by running queries on the data that you’re reviewing. I would love to hear about the different fraud rings that you’ve encountered over your career.

Stay safe.

Contact us

Related Posts

Building for Bots in the AI Age: Separating Legitimate Agents From Fraudsters

See how NeuroID helps businesses distinguish legitimate AI agents from fraud bots, while Agent Trust verifies agent-initiated transactions.

October 29, 2026 by Laura Burrows
2026 Retail Banking Identity and Fraud Report 

Learn how banks can convert rising fraud investment into protection customers recognize, value and feel in our recent report. Read more!

October 28, 2026 by Laura Burrows
One Platform, Fewer Handoffs, Faster Decisions

The average credit union manages between 100-300 vendor relationships, and nearly a third have no dedicated staff managing them. What was supposed to drive efficiency is stunting growth and compromising the member experience. Application volume is continuing to rise, and consumers expect a loan decision at digital speed. But for credit unions, meeting that expectation isn't the only goal. They must also continue to make the right lending decisions while also prioritizing risk management. The institutions pulling ahead aren't the ones with the most tools. They're the ones that have turned credit, fraud and decisioning into a single, coordinated system. A single loan decision touches: Credit data Identity verification Fraud signals Decisioning logic Reporting Rarely does all of that live in one place. More often, it’s stitched together across separate platforms, each with its own contract and its own support line. When a credit view and a fraud view are generated separately, they must be reconciled instead of read together in the same instant. Every handoff is a place where a decision slows down and a signal gets missed. It's why a fraud pattern that would be obvious next to the credit file often surfaces only after the funds are already gone. Fragmentation also makes it harder to optimize lending strategies over time. When data, analytics and decisioning are disconnected, credit unions have less visibility into what's working, what's changing and where strategies need to be adjusted. An integrated decisioning ecosystem closes those seams by design, with credit, fraud and lending strategy running on one platform and accessed through a single Application Programming Interface (API). Identity and compliance capabilities can be an integrated decisioning flow. The data doesn't need to be reconciled after the fact because it was never separated in the first place. Stop overengineering, start removing friction When decisioning underperforms, the instinct is to build something more custom: a proprietary model, tighter segmentation, more configuration.  Custom modeling has its place for institutions with the scale and data to justify it. But often, for small or mid-sized credit unions, the bigger opportunity is a flexible decisioning strategy that uses a strong, continuously refreshed model. This shouldn't be either/or. The right approach gives credit unions a strong decisioning strategy today, with the ability to introduce more customized analytics and modeling as their needs evolve.  The same principle applies to strategy management: credit unions can gain greater control through self-service capabilities as they build a more sophisticated data science team.   That kind of flexibility is important as credit unions modernize their decisioning infrastructure. Research surveying more than 2,000 senior credit risk and fraud decision-makers across 11 countries found that organizations investing in unified platforms and modern infrastructure are moving faster and realizing the greatest Return on Investment (ROI).   As their needs evolve, credit unions can adjust decisioning strategies without introducing another layer of technology or relying on third parties to make every change. Until self-service is the right fit, choose a partner that understands what makes your credit union’s membership and risk appetite different from others.  Same member, same afternoon, faster answer Consider a credit union growing its auto and personal loan originations.  A member applies for an auto loan on Saturday afternoon. Credit data, identity and fraud signals are read together in a single real-time pass instead of separate reviews:  Most applications resolve immediately, approved or declined based on a more comprehensive view of the applicant. A smaller number are flagged for quick step-up verification and cleared within minutes. Only genuinely ambiguous cases reach an underwriter, who is working from one complete picture instead of reconciling multiple signals. The member has an answer before the weekend is over. The credit union books the loan before competitors even open on Monday. Built to scale This kind of process holds up today. However, the better test is whether it holds up eighteen months from now when application volume has grown, new products are live and the data flowing through the system looks nothing like it does right now. Future-proofing isn't only about handling more volume. It's about having room to be nimbler and make adjustments as quickly as the market changes. A credit union that relies on standard models within a decisioning strategy may want more customized analytics and greater control over its strategies tomorrow. Connect with us With more than three decades of credit expertise and one of the industry's largest data footprints, Experian helps credit unions do more than solve this year's friction. We're helping to build a decisioning foundation that scales, so growth becomes something the system absorbs, rather than something it must be rebuilt around. Explore More

October 21, 2026 by Zohreen Ismail

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Enter your name and email for the latest updates.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Don't miss out on the latest industry trends and insights!
Subscribe