Approaches to Tackling Distraction Burglary – lessons from recent research

Nathalie Collomb-Robert

The views expressed in this report are those of the authors, not necessarily those of the Home Office (nor do they reflect Government policy).

Introduction

This report provides guidance for practitioners working to reduce distraction burglary and aims to raise awareness of approaches that have been used to address distraction burglary. The report is relevant to practitioners already involved in tackling distraction burglary as well as those planning to do so. The approaches outlined in this report are of particular interest to Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs), the police, local authorities, health professionals, and other organisations that engage with older people on a regular basis.

Executive Summary

This report was devised to offer practical guidance to practitioners aiming to tackle distraction burglary. The main recommendations are as follows:

  • Identify the distraction burglary problem locally by adopting a problem solving approach, gathering knowledge on the offenders, the victims and the locations.
  • Develop an evidence-led approach; draw on evidence from other areas of the country. Consult with neighbouring CDRPs and police forces to ascertain the nature and extent of their distraction burglary problem. Share information on offending patterns and consult on effective solutions.
  • Conduct a cost-benefit analysis prior to engaging in distraction burglary interventions. This will help to balance the cost of intervention against the benefit to be gained from reducing a relatively infrequent, yet harmful type of crime.
  • There are three main strategies for dealing with distraction burglary - increased enforcement, target-hardening through situational approaches and educational approaches.
  • Enforcement approaches can increase the risk of detection and subsequent conviction of offenders.
  • Situational approaches such as security measures and doorstep protocols can prove successful in tackling distraction burglary.
  • Educational approaches that raise awareness of distraction burglary help to improve knowledge about how to prevent individuals becoming victims of distraction burglary. This can be achieved by targeting elderly people at risk directly through awareness days or drama presentations or by targeting those who know, are related to, live near or work with older people.
  • The report offers further information on useful internet links, past and existing projects and literature references on distraction burglary.

Definition of distraction burglary

Distraction burglary is defined by the Home Office as “Any crime where a falsehood, trick or distraction is used on an occupant of a dwelling to gain, or try to gain, access to the premises to commit burglary” (Home Office Counting Rules for Recorded Crime, April 2003).

The level of offences is relatively low when compared with crime overall. In 2003/04, distraction burglary accounted for just 4% of all burglary in England and Wales. However, this figure is likely to be a significant under-estimate of the true level, due to lower levels of reporting compared to other forms of burglary. For example, Steele (2001) estimates that only 12% of offences are reported to the police. Given its relative rarity, it is important to weigh up the ‘opportunity-cost’ associated with tackling distraction burglary, rather than other, more frequently occurring types of crime. In making this assessment, one needs to consider the particularly high social and economic costs of distraction burglary, as well as the fact that often the victims are vulnerable community members, particularly older residents. For example, Donaldson’s (2003) study following up the fate of elderly victims of burglary, found that burglary victims were 2.4 times more likely to have died or to be in residential care than non-victims two years and eight months following the burglary.

Some research has been conducted looking at the specific offending activities of ‘distraction burglars’[1] and has shown that some distraction burglars may gain entry only by deception, others by forcing entry. Unfortunately distraction burglaries may also involve force or (threat of) violence. A wide range of methods can be used to commit distraction burglary, including the use of bogus officials, bogus calls for help or ‘befriended then distracted’.

Methodology

This report draws on two evaluated distraction burglary projects commissioned by the Home Office and Police Standards Unit.

  1. The Leeds Distraction Burglary Initiative (LDBI) was a crime prevention project funded under the Home Office’s Targeted Policing Initiative, which was part of the Crime Reduction Programme. The project ran between April 2001 and April 2003 with the purpose of reducing incidents of distraction burglary within the Metropolitan District of Leeds.
  1. The Cambridgeshire Distraction Burglary & Rogue Trader Taskforce was established in August 2001 to facilitate a multi-agency cross-county approach to these issues and was principally funded until March 2003 by the Home Office Police Standards Unit Innovations Fund. The Taskforce aimed to reduce the problem of bogus callers and rogue traders and the opportunities for crime by raising awareness in the community.

This report pulls together the evidence and good practice from these initiatives to tackle distraction burglary and examines the factors that should be considered in setting up such projects. The report is divided into five sections:

  • Identifying the local problem and how to turn this into action
  • Enforcement approaches
  • Situational crime prevention approaches
  • Awareness raising approaches
  • The importance of partnership working in distraction burglary initiatives.

Identifying the problem locally

The first stage when considering a distraction burglary project is to identify the extent to which distraction burglary is a problem in the area. Here, there are number of questions that should be taken into account:

  • Is distraction burglary a significant problem locally? Here, one must consider how frequently distraction burglary offences occur compared to other types of offence. A notional cost-benefit analysis of the merits of tackling distraction burglary and its relative costs may be useful to compare the cost of intervention with the benefits derived from preventing an infrequent but harmful type of crime. One should also consider giving the public some support to tackle distraction burglary. For example, intervening on this problem may help to build public confidence or reduce fear among the most vulnerable. There may also be value in examining the recent trajectory in the trend of distraction burglary offences prior to commissioning additional work. If, for example, the number of distraction burglary offences has been declining, it is possible that they will continue to decline without any further intervention.
  • Who has the data to understand the nature of the problem? While the police are the natural owner of data on distraction burglary, there are a range of other organisations that may be able to shed light on the nature of the local burglary problem. In many cases, this may be more qualitative than statistical. Possible organisations to approach include Trading Standards and charities targeting the elderly. Regardless of the source of the information, one must consider the means by which it was collected, and the definitions used that may have been applied to it.
  • Who has the capacity to tackle a local problem? Prior to commencing analysis on the nature and extent of the problem, one should consider who is going to undertake the intervention and whose resources are going to be expended to tackle the problem. It will be easier to launch activity if addressing the problem of distraction burglary clearly falls within the mandate or priorities of one or more organisations. It is important to note that failure to identify a clear lead for intervention should not necessarily be used as an excuse for inaction. It merely highlights the fact that agreeing a course of action in tackling distraction burglary may be more problematic.

Taking a problem solving approach

  • Think effectiveness. To be effective, any crime prevention initiative needs to be evidence-led. There are a number of problem solving methodologies developed for crime reduction work, including SARA and 5Is (Clarke & Eck, 2003; Eckblom, 2004)). These techniques help to develop a thorough understanding of the problem and to address aspects of the problem. They can also assist in identifying how to evaluate the impact of those approaches.
  • Think identification of the problem. Another common analysis tool used in crime reduction problem solving is the Problem Analysis Triangle[2]. This requires the practitioner to understand the crime from three key aspects; the victim, the location and the offender (see Felson and Clarke, 1998; Clarke and Eck 2003). The evidence generated from analysis of the problem should help to identify approaches that will be most suitable for addressing one or more sides of the problem analysis triangle (for more on the problem-analysis triangle, see

Gathering the information

  • Look at what you’ve got. Existing data systems should provide a starting point for analysis of the local distraction burglary problem. This will include data held by the police on distraction burglary offences, as well as information held by other organisations (for example Trading Standards and charities that work with older people).
  • Make use of data and intelligence sharing protocols. It is crucial to set up a police database, storing information on such crimes (with information such as modus operandi (MO), offender profile, victim profile, location profile etc.). It is recommended to use such a database as one of the first steps in developing an evidence-led approach. This is in line with ACPO’s recommendations to join in intelligence-sharing where forces will be recording to common standards and sharing information and intelligence on distraction burglary and rogue trading. Forces in the country are increasingly agreeing on data and intelligence sharing protocols.
  • Talk with others. While data systems will provide the ‘hard facts’ about a problem, it is important to draw on ‘softer’ information regarding the nature of distraction burglary in the area. This is particularly important, given that this offence is under-reported. The views, experiences and perceptions of professionals that work with the groups most often targeted by distraction burglary can validate and supplement the information from data systems. Furthermore, there are a number of agencies that routinely receive useful intelligence from the public about the activities of distraction-type offenders (including utility companies, Trading Standards, Social Services and the voluntary sector such as Age Concern and Help the Aged).
  • Draw on evidence from previous initiatives. This will help to identify potentially useful approaches to apply locally, as well as highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of particular interventions. Where possible speak to others that have run similar initiatives as information available in reports and on web sites seldom provides all the detail required – especially the challenges associated with implementation.
  • Consult with neighbouring Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships to see whether they are aware of a distraction burglary problem in their area and share information on offenders and useful approaches. The use of inter Police Force structures such as those used in Operation ‘Liberal’[3] have been shown to improve information sharing on the activities of some highly mobile offenders.

Questions to ask

In undertaking the analysis of a distraction burglary problem, there are a number of questions that should be considered. Following the dimensions of the problem analysis triangle, there are questions that can be asked about the offender, the victim and the location.

The offender

Questions associated with the offender include:

  • How many offenders are there? Information on known distraction burglars, as well as descriptions of distraction burglars in crime reports of unsolved distraction burglaries may provide an indication of the size of the offending population in the local area.
  • How far are offenders travelling? One of the features of distraction burglary is the long distances that offenders are often willing to travel in the commission of a crime. This may mean gathering information on known offenders in neighbouring police forces.
  • With what other crimes are distraction burglars associated? Offenders are seldom specialists and often commit a range of crimes. Consideration should be given to identifying other types of crime committed by distraction burglars (e.g. rogue traders). This may be achieved by cross referencing MOs and intelligence on crimes that have been occurring in the area. Indeed, detected offences of other kinds may result in distraction burglars being ‘self-selected’ in the sense that if they commit one type of offence, they are more likely to have committed a distraction burglary.

The victim

Questions associated with victims include:

  • How old are victims? Distraction burglary is often targeted disproportionately on the elderly and most vulnerable in society. Attention should be given to the age profile of victims in order to determine the group most likely to require intervention.
  • Do the victims live alone? Those living on their own are likely to be most at risk – especially single females.
  • Are they repeat victims? Once an individual has been a victim, they are at an increased risk of being victimised again. Consideration should be given to examining whether they have been the victim in the past of distraction burglary or of similar offences. There is some evidence to suggest that distraction burglars may share information on potential targets (see Steele, 2001). In general, the heightened risk associated with repeat victims suggests that preventative intervention is most cost-effectively targeted on this group.

The location

Questions associated with locations include:

  • What type of dwelling is targeted?Those living in types of accommodation synonymous with older people such as bungalows, tend to be at higher risk of victimisation.
  • In what condition is the victimised property maintained? Offenders may identify properties with gardens that look poorly maintained as a hint that the person living there may be a suitable target (Thornton, A. et al, 2003). This may also identify a suitable means of intervention (exterior maintenance) that may reduce the risk of being a victim of distraction burglary.
  • What is the time profile of offences? Is there a particular time of day, day of week or time of year when distraction burglaries tend to occur and does this coincide with other local events that may explain why an offender and victim are brought together in space and time?

Approaches to tackling distraction burglary

Once a thorough understanding of the problem has been obtained, interventions that will best address aspects of the problem should be developed. There are three main approaches that are used to tackle distraction burglary:

  • Enforcement approaches - detecting and apprehending the offender;
  • Situational approaches - making the environment less conducive to the crime;
  • Educational approaches - raising awareness of the crime among vulnerable groups.

These are not mutually exclusive categories and most projects will use a mixture of approaches. The following pages explore each of these in turn.

Enforcement approaches

Enforcement approaches are concerned with detecting and apprehending the offenders involved in distraction burglary. The key purpose behind such approaches is to raise the actual and perceived risk of detection and subsequent conviction of offenders, with the expectation of deterring others from committing such offences. Table 1 outlines a number of interventions that have been used to tackle distraction burglary.

Table 1: Examples of enforcement interventions

Problem being addressed / Description of intervention / How it works / Example of Project employing intervention
Low detection rate for distraction burglary offences / Specialist distraction burglary detective / Detective is able to build up local knowledge of distraction burglary problem and therefore help to increase the likelihood of detection / Leeds Distraction Burglary Initiative
Low detection rate for distraction burglary offences / Specialist distraction burglary Scenes of Crime Officer / Officer able to build up specialist knowledge about how to collect forensic evidence in distraction burglary cases, thereby increasing the likelihood of a positive match, thereby increasing the risk of detection. / Leeds Distraction Burglary Initiative
Limited cross-border intelligence on offenders who are known to travel long distances / Intelligence collection and dissemination co-ordinated across multiple police forces / Increases knowledge on known distraction burglars which may help to detect additional cases / Leeds Distraction Burglary Initiative
Operation Liberal

The bullet points below offer some more details on some of the information provided in the table above.

  • Devote resources to the issue. A dedicated police officer for distraction burglary to undertake the cross-divisional activity can be beneficial in tackling this type of crime if resources allow or if the problem has been identified as significant (or it could be that a police officer has this role as part of their duties). Such officers have been used in a variety of ways by different projects but have generally been found to be effective. A dedicated officer for distraction burglary can become an ‘intelligence champion’ in relation to this crime type and help in identifying prolific offenders as well as initiating greater recording of incidents within a police area and consequently gaining a greater understanding of the issue of distraction burglary. This was found to be particularly effective in the Leeds project.
  • Act quickly. A dedicated officer can be present on the crime scene shortly after the crime is reported, ensuring urgent forensic examinations are conducted during the first visit, limiting post-offence contamination (for instance offenders are likely not to be wearing gloves when committing a distraction burglary and crucial forensic evidence could be taken from the scene of crime; however fingerprints can easily be lost if not obtained quickly from the crime scene) They can also offer support to the victim and can return within the next few days when additional information may be gathered from victims.
  • Offer extra support to victims. Victims of distraction burglary are often traumatised by their experience and it is important to ensure that such visits will contribute to their recovery. Links with other agencies such as Victim Support can assist with this.
  • Evaluate. More research is needed regarding enforcement approaches to tackling distraction burglary. Building evaluation into a strategy and disseminating the findings is important to identify how enforcement may best contribute to a reduction in distraction burglary.

Situational approaches