header-logo header-logo

08 November 2012
Issue: 7537 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Blow-by-blow account

276% rise in financial whistleblowing since 2007

The number of potential whistleblowers contacting the Financial Services Authority (FSA) for help has increased nearly threefold in recent years.

Information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by global investigations firm Kroll Advisory Solutions shows a rise of 276% since 2007 in the number of contacts to the FSA whistleblowing helpline. The FSA was contacted by 3,733 people in the year leading up to May 2012, compared with 994 calls made in the year leading up to May 2008.

According to Kroll, almost one in five of its corporate investigations in the last year was prompted by a whistleblower—of which 60% were upheld, and 19% were found to be malicious or revenge-driven.

It says the increase is likely to be due to three factors: rising financial crime; the fact it is easy to create electronic identities and therefore easy to perpetrate fraud; and the development of clearer and more established procedures for whistleblowing and protection for whistleblowers.

Benedict Hamilton, managing director at Kroll, says: “Whistleblowing cases are becoming much more common and they can be hugely significant for companies; we have investigated cases where losses of up to £1bn have been reported by a whistleblower.

“As companies increasingly invest in often risky emerging markets and individuals see criminal opportunities made possible by the advancement of technology, we believe cases of whistleblowing will continue to rise. The increase in these cases is also being driven by the introduction of more stringent regulation and guidance governing whistleblowing procedures. 

“It is crucial that companies respond very quickly and in an appropriate manner to a whistleblowing allegation to understand the facts behind it and ensure the best outcomes are achieved.”

Issue: 7537 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll