Check Print: A Discussion of a Crime Prevention Initiative That Failed

• NCJ Number: 162433
• Journal: Security Journal Volume: 7 Issue: 1 Dated: (April 1996) Pages: 37-40
• Author(s): G W Pidco
• Date Published: 1996
• Length: 4 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Program/Project Description
• Language: English
• Country: United Kingdom

Annotation

This article focuses on the failed attempt by the Western Australian Police Fraud Squad to implement a crime prevention strategy that uses fingerprints to reduce the incidence of check fraud; reasons why the attempt failed are discussed.

Abstract

The strategy, which is designed to deter the passing of forged or stolen checks, requires consumers who are negotiating checks to place their thumb print on the rear of the check form. If the check is subsequently dishonored and found to be forged or stolen, forensic examination of the fingerprint would make identification and apprehension of offenders more certain; however, the goal of the program is deterrence more than apprehension. Toward this end, any retailer that uses fingerprinting as a condition of accepting checks displays window decals that advise potential customers of this fact. On the basis of the available evidence from both overseas and interstate, the Western Australia Police Fraud Squad attempted to introduce the "check print" program to Perth retailers. Despite assurances that the program did not violate customers' civil liberties, the major retailers declined to participate. Several inquiries were received from small businesses interested in the concept, but none pursued it to implementation. The police considered it unproductive to continue with the initiative. The attempt to institute the "check print" program failed because retailers did not perceive check fraud in Western Australia to be a major problem; they feared customers would perceive it as a violation of civil liberties; and retailers were content to compensate for losses from check fraud by increasing prices. Eventually, retailers may find that consumers will not accept increased prices to offset losses from retail fraud. When public opinion becomes strong on this issue, prevention programs such as "check print" will become more acceptable to both retailers and consumers. 7 references