Slashdot Mirror
Insurance Claims to be Tested by Lie Detector
Albanach writes "HBOS, one of the largest UK banks is to introduce random lie detector analysis of insurance claims according to this article from the Edinburgh Evening News. The three month trial will see calls from its 1.5 million policy holders randomly subjected to voice stress analysis. Those flagged up will then receive a set of questions designed to expose 'potential fraudsters'."
Now they will be able to refuse you insurance payment based upon a method that doesn't hold up in court, at least not in the U.S. Does it in Europe?
... the people who are actually stressed or whatever about making the claim itself?
I know lie detectors are supposed to be calibrated, but they aren't fool-proof and to hang decisions like this on them is just foolhardy.
Last time I had to make an insurance claim, it was against someone who thru their own negligent driving resulted in me having a serious enough motorbike accident to fuck my ankle, my bike & nearly write off their new, expensive enough, car. And I wasn't going fast, and did what I could to avoid it.
It was stressful enough having to deal with the claims people etc, tryin gto pick at everything anyway, so how is this going to help?
lie detector tests are about as good as flipping a coin. I wonder what the result would be if they just randomly chose ~50% of their claimants and investigated them...
Accentuate the positive, don't waste your mod points on the negative.
Well, if they don't use the lie detector test as the only way of establishing truth or deception, this might not be completely terrible.
Remember, police don't generally use the polygraph to make a direct case against someone. They use it in conjunction with hard evidence and a narrowed list of suspects for a particular, established crime. As long as an insurance company is smart enough to not use the test to try to claim "you're lying! You weren't hit by the other driver" based on a nervous test taker who trips the system simply by knowing that (s)he is taking it, and they go on other evidence as well, like police reports and the like, things should be okay.
For other things, like theft, if someone is confident enough that they'll succeed by reporting something stolen, then trying to claim it on insurance, it's pretty likely that they'll now take steps to practice to lie to a polygraph convincingly. That would render things completely useless.
Either way, we'll have to see what the results of use are, and hope that they don't claim fraud upon people who are exhonerated later.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Insurance Agent: I'm sorry sir. This policy only covers real damage. Not made up damage.
Homer: D'oh!
There are a lot of people who try to scam the insurance companies and I end up paying for it through higher premiums. These are private companies and if you don't want to deal with one that uses lie detection don't. But I'll be the first in line to sign up with a company that does.
Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
Minnesota Polygraph Statute
181.75 Polygraph tests of employees or prospective employees
prohibited.
Subdivision 1. Prohibition, penalty. No employer or agent thereof
shall directly or indirectly solicit or require a polygraph, voice
stress analysis, or any test purporting to test the honesty of any
employee or prospective employee. No person shall sell to or
interpret for an employer or the employer's agent a test that the
person knows has been solicited or required by an employer or
agent to test the honesty of an employee or prospective employee.
An employer or agent or any person knowingly selling, administering,
or interpreting tests in violation of this section is guilty of
a misdemeanor. If an employee requests a polygraph test any
employer or agent administering the test shall inform the employee
that taking the test is voluntary.
Subd. 2. Investigations. The department of labor and industry
shall investigate suspected violations of this section. The department
may refer any evidence available concerning violations of
this section to the county attorney of the appropriate county,
who may with or without such reference, institute the appropriate
criminal proceedings under this section.
Subd. 3. Injunctive relief. In addition to the penalties provided by
law for violation of this section, specifically and generally, whether
or not injunctive relief is otherwise provided by law, the courts of
this state are vested with jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations
of this section and to require the payment of civil penalties.
Whenever it shall appear to the satisfaction of the attorney general
that this section has been or is being violated, the attorney general
shall be entitled, on behalf of the state, to sue for and have injunctive
relief in any court of competent jurisdiction against any such
violation or threatened violation without abridging other penalties
provided by law.
Funny they don't require this before they take your money. Maybe they should be subject to my lie detector when I subscribe with them: are they really going to be there 24 hours a day with a hold time of under 10 minutes? Will they settle all of my claims, or just the claims that they feel are reasonable? If a natural disaster occurs, and several $Billions are filed simultaneously, will I still be covered, or will they simply go bankrupt? Will they really save me 15% or more?
Really, brillant strategy. Take money, and then decline service later. Maybe computer techs should be in the same business: I'll take your money now, but when you need service I'll just blame it on you and continue to post to
--
$tar -xvf
On multiple occasions I failed polygraph tests that kept me from getting an internship. It's pretty annoying to have someone telling you you're lying. You're really quite powerless to do anything but deny it. Then they'll kindly show you the door.
These things have no place. They are not useful for job screening. They are not useful for investigative purposes. They are not reliable enough for any application. Congress was right to refuse to be polygraphed while under investigation- I would certainly refuse any future polygraph. They shouldn't be hypocrital, though. They should strike down polygraph use entirely.
Trusting polygraphs is a threat to our national security. Not only because double agents and such can easily pass them while lying (any well trained person can), but because so many qualified applicants are replaced with less qualified applicants who can satisfy the voodoo magic of a polygraph machine. Personally, I would like the very best working for the CIA, NSA, etc.
I think that this will catch low level fraud such as exagerated and false claims on things like household work and travel insurance. How well will depend on how good the equipment is and how frequently it is used. Also, publicising its use will have a great detterent effect which is why they are doing so.
However higher up the food chain this is just not going to replace effective investigation. In my scams I always ensure that I have employed some patsy like an office manager who believes what he saying when he talks to the insurance investigator - I do this because most of those guys are really good and pick up on body language which is a very frequent way they pick up on something phoney.
As the article says; it is only the start it will not by itself prove anything - it only provides a starting point. Those of us on the exciting side of the fraud industry know the key to a successful scam is thorough organisation and meticulous planning - most of my schemes would probably survive a 'red light' because of that, but I intend to continue avoiding that risk.
A useful toy but not the panacea thank God.
with the patentdead eyecon0meter. definitely requires yOUR attention, as we remain in crisis mode, whilst the evile wons seek new/exciting ways to keep the wool over yOUR eyes.
no blood oath/integrity test needed to pay the outrageous premiums to those fauxking thieves?
get off it robbIE.
the lights are coming up now.
you can pretend all you want. our advise is to be as far away from the walking dead contingent as possible, when the big flash occurs. you wouldn't want to get any of that evile on you.
as to the free unlimited energy plan, as the lights come up, more&more folks will stop being misled into sucking up more&more of the infant killing barrolls of crudeness, & learn that it's more than ok to use newclear power generated by natural (hydro, solar, etc...)methods. of course more information about not wasting anything/behaving less frivolously is bound to show up, here&there.
cyphering how many babies it costs for a barroll of crudeness, we've decided to cut back, a lot, on wasteful things like giving monIE to felons, to help them destroy the planet/population.
no matter. the #1 task is planet/population rescue. the lights are coming up. we're in crisis mode. you can help.
the unlimited power (such as has never been seen before) is freely available to all, with the possible exception of the aforementioned walking dead.
consult with/trust in yOUR creator. more breathing. vote with yOUR wallet. seek others of non-aggressive intentions/behaviours. that's the spirit, moving you.
pay no heed/monIE to the greed/fear based walking dead.
each harmed innocent carries with it a bad toll. it will be repaid by you/us. the Godless felons will not be available to make reparations.
pay attention. that's definitely affordable, plus you might develop skills which could prevent you from being misled any further by phonIE ?pr? ?firm? generated misinformation.
good work so far. there's still much to be done. see you there. tell 'em robbIE.
the rest of the wwworld is laughing/crying at/for US in sympathy/disgust, as we fall/jump into the daze of the georgewellian corepirate nazi life0cide, whilst criticizing their ip gangsters, which are also members of the walking dead.
Recently the german supreme court held lie detector tests generally inadmissible in criminal as well as civil cases because the method is "unscientific and unreliable".
Makes one feel safe to know that the FBI is using this junk as one cornerstone in giving and maintaining security clearances.
Ok i think there was a typo in the story, they must have ment that they would use voice stress analysis on random calls and if it found that the claimer was too calm it would flag further investigation. If your house has just burnt down your probably not going to sound normal, if your planning a fraud you're more likely to have practiced a convincing conversation.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
We covered this fairly well in a recent psychology and law seminar course I took.
.45 pistol?" and responses are measured. Heightened responses, as well as the actual answer given, for the actual weapon used are interpreted as the suspect having knowledge that a particular weapon was used in the crime. Over a certain number of questions (I cannot recall the number) the probability that someone will have the highest reactions to the actual answers to the questions who did not have anything to do with the crime is very small, even if you were imagining how you would commit the crime.
The short version: The control question test is crap. The guilty knowledge test seems to be a good test.
Long version:
Polygraphs only measure autonomic nervous system response. A difference in their charts could be stress associated with lying, but it could equally be startle from a loud noise outside the interview room, uncomfortability with the particular question in general, annoyance that you've been asked the same question multiple times, or any number of other things.
As you stated, the baseline of the control question test (CQT) is worthless. It's all a trick to convince the testee(sp?) that the polygraph machine is an all powerful detector of false information. It is also very easily fooled by simple techniques. Polygraphers will say it has a 95% or better accuracy rate, but there is evidence that the CQT can have a one-third rate of false positives. The unreliability of the CQT is the reason why polygraph evidence is inadmissible in most courts.
The guilty knowledge test (GKT) is much more difficult to set up but more reliable in its results. The GKT works best in murder cases, and also in robbery cases as well. The police must keep certain aspects of the crime from the media, such as type of weapon used or where the body was found for example, and use those for the test.
The suspect is then attatched to a polygraph and asked questions such as "When you killed X, did you use a hunting knife, baseball bat,
From what I've seen, this test has a much higher reliability rate than the control question test though it is used about 0% of the time. It does, however, rely on the suspect not having been shown crime scene photos and the evidence to be used in the questioning not being leaked.
Why is it that I always think I've never made sense when I reach the end of anything I write?
"I swear I won't break you if you let me take you where the willows never weep" -- Switchblade Symphony