Search

How can we help?

Icon

Victim of fraud? How to identify the perpetrator

Every day companies and individuals lose money to fraudsters, who hack into email accounts and alter emails sent from companies to their customers, or send sophisticated phishing emails from fake domain names designed to dupe customers into believing they are from a trusted supplier. Often, the emails will say that bank details have been changed, and that customers should make payment of a genuine invoice into a new account, which in reality is an account controlled by the fraudster.

Once the customer has transferred the funds, the money is usually quickly transferred on or withdrawn by the fraudster, leaving the customer little opportunity to reverse the transaction and retrieve their money.

When asked to identify the individuals behind the accounts used in these scams, banks will typically refuse to help, citing confidentiality and data protection obligations. But it is possible to force a bank to disclose identity details and transaction records via court order.

A ‘Norwich Pharmacal’ order (“NPO”) is a type of court order which compels an innocent third party (often a bank) who is mixed up in wrongdoing to disclose information that will assist the victim in identifying the wrongdoer, or obtaining information which is necessary to bring a claim against the wrongdoer. To obtain an NPO, it is necessary to issue a claim against the bank or other third party holding the information, accompanied by a detailed witness statement setting out the fraud which has occurred, the information required and why it is needed. A hearing before a judge will then take place, which can be arranged at very short notice where time is of the essence.

The court has a discretion as to whether to make an NPO, and will need to be satisfied that there is clear evidence of wrongdoing, that the information requested is required by the victim and cannot be obtained any other way, and that the bank or other third party is involved in the wrongdoing and is not merely a witness to it.

When asked to identify the individuals behind the accounts used in these scams, banks will typically refuse to help, citing confidentiality and data protection obligations. But it is possible to force a bank to disclose identity details and transaction records via court order.

It is also necessary for the victim to agree to pay the bank’s costs of responding to the claim and complying with the order, and to agree to compensate the bank in the event that it suffers any loss if it later transpires that the order should not have been made.

Often, banks will take a neutral position in relation to applications for NPOs where there has been fraud i.e. they will not consent to the order sought, but will not oppose it either. An application to freeze any remaining funds in the relevant accounts can be made alongside the application for a NPO, although it may be too late to retrieve any funds if too much time has passed from the date of the fraud.

Obtaining an NPO requires some intensive work on the part of the victim and its lawyers and is not a cheap exercise; however an order can usually be obtained in a matter of days and in a large scale fraud, can be key to stopping the fraudster in their tracks and retrieving stolen funds.

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 03 November 2026
  • Commercial Real Estate

Ban on upwards-only rent reviews: What can landlords of 1954 Act protected leases do?

The commencement of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act (the Act) poses a real threat to the interests of landlords whose business tenants are protected under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA) (as well as those that are outside the LTA).

art
  • 29 October 2026
  • Immigration

UK Immigration shake-up: More flexibility for skilled workers, but at what cost?

The UK Government has outlined further changes to its immigration system, with new measures affecting international graduates, sponsored workers, and businesses employing overseas talent.

art
  • 28 October 2026
  • Privacy and Data Protection

Remote working: 5 key data protection risks for employers

Remote working has become more prominent in modern business. While flexible working arrangements can improve productivity and employee wellbeing, they also create new data protection risks. Regardless of the physical location in which work is done, compliance with UK GDPR does not change.

art
  • 27 October 2026
  • Employment

Fire and Rehire update: Key changes delayed

The Government has published two documents giving key updates to the anticipated changes around ‘fire and rehire’ and restricted contractual variations, coming about as a result of the Employment Rights Act 2025 (“ERA 2025”). We now understand that these changes will now be delayed to March, rather than January 2027.

art
  • 26 October 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

Shareholders’ Agreements for Founders and Investors – SHA Series Part 3 of 5

A shareholders’ agreement is arguably one of the most valuable corporate governance agreements (along with articles of association) in any private UK company with more than one shareholder.

art
  • 23 October 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Section 172 Companies Act 2006: Key lessons from Saxon Woods v Costa

The Supreme Court’s decision in Saxon Woods v Costa UKSC 21 clarifies directors’ duties under Section 172 Companies Act 2006, confirming that good faith requires both honest belief and appropriate conduct.