'Ghost broker' sentenced over bogus policies

A “ghost broker” who pocketed around £50,000 ($87,730) over 15 months has been sentenced in the UK after acting as an illegal intermediary and setting up hundreds of fraudulent motor policies on behalf of other people by using false details and compromised bank accounts.

“From the start of this investigation, it was clear we were dealing with a ghost broker unlike any other,” Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB) Head of Intelligence and Investigations Stephen Dalton said.

“Not only was this fraudster using stolen personal information to sell bogus insurance policies on a large scale, but his customers were also in on the act – requesting fraudulent motor insurance so they could use the road without being detected for no insurance.”

Rodney Bruce Van der Puye, 34, of Cator Street, Southwark, was sentenced last Thursday at Inner London Crown Court to 21 months imprisonment, suspended for two years, and ordered to complete 180 hours of unpaid work.

Van der Puye previously changed his pleas from not guilty to guilty for fraud by false representation, money laundering and providing a regulated claims management service whilst unauthorised, police said.

The fraud targeted some of the UK’s biggest insurance companies, using his, his mother’s and unknowing members of the public’s identities to take out cheaper motor insurance policies.

The activity was spotted by the IFB, which linked 28 suspicious policies to one individual. The case was referred to the City of London Police’s Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED), which uncovered more policies.

IFED’s initial investigation looked into the policies detected by the IFB, which were set up between 2016 and 2017. These were taken out in either Van der Puye’s name or that of his mother, but many used addresses, email addresses and bank accounts linked to other people.

Police say 26 of these policies were taken out to insure just four vehicles over two years. The policies were persistently cancelled by the insurers after the payments were declined due to the bank account holders’ details not matching the policyholders.