User guide to crime statistics for England and Wales: March 2026

1.1 Publication of crime statistics

This user guide provides detailed information on the datasets used to compile crime statistics published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS). It is designed to be a useful reference guide with explanatory notes regarding the updates, issues and classifications that are crucial to the production and presentation of the crime statistics.

We publish figures on the levels and trends of crime in England and Wales primarily based on two sets of crime statistics: the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) and police recorded crime data. Each source has different strengths and limitations but together they provide a more comprehensive picture of crime than could be obtained from either series alone. Our quarterly statistical bulletins also draw on data from other sources to provide a more comprehensive picture of crime and anti-social behaviour, including data from Report Fraud (formerly Action Fraud). In addition to quarterly updates, a number of supplementary volumes are produced, containing in-depth analysis of issues such as property crime, homicide and violent crime. Together, these statistics inform public debate about crime and support the development and monitoring of policy.

The dates of forthcoming crime statistics publications are pre-announced and can be found via the GOV.UK release calendar.

Copies of our statistical bulletins on crime are available online.

For further information about the CSEW and police recorded crime statistics, please email crimestatistics@ons.gov.uk or write to:

Public Policy Division, Office for National Statistics, Segensworth Road, Titchfield, Fareham, Hampshire, PO15 5RR.

Crime statistics for Scotland and crime statistics for Northern Ireland are collected and published separately.

2.1 Description of the survey

The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) is a face-to-face victimisation survey. People aged 16 years and over resident in households in England and Wales are asked about their experiences of a range of crimes in the 12 months prior to the interview. Respondents to the survey are also asked about their attitudes towards different crime-related issues, such as the police and the criminal justice system, and perceptions of crime and anti-social behaviour.

The CSEW was extended to include children aged 10 to 15 years from year ending (YE) March 2010 to YE March 2025. For further information, see our Extending the British Crime Survey to children: a report on the methodological and development work report, published in 2010.

In February 2024, we piloted an online Children's Crime Survey, which sampled children from the Department for Education's National Pupil Database. Following the success of this pilot, we decided to stop interviewing children aged 10 to 15 years through the CSEW from April 2025 to allow us to focus on further developing the online survey. First findings from the new survey will be published in autumn 2026.

The main aim of the CSEW is to provide robust trends for the crime types and population it covers; the survey does not aim to provide an absolute count of crime and has notable exclusions. The CSEW excludes those crimes often termed as "victimless" (for example, possession of drugs). As a survey that asks people whether they have experienced victimisation, homicides cannot be included. The CSEW does not cover the population living in group residences (for example, care homes or student halls of residence) or other institutions, nor does it cover crime against commercial or public sector bodies. The Home Office (HO) commissioned a new survey of business crime to run from 2012, following a recommendation made in the National Statistician's Review of Crime Statistics: England and Wales (PDF, 446KB) published in 2011. Detailed findings for the latest Commercial Victimisation Survey (CVS) were published by the HO in their Crime against businesses: findings from the 2023 Commercial Victimisation Survey bulletin in May 2024.

For the crime types and population it covers, the CSEW provides a better reflection of the true extent of crime experienced by the population resident in households in England and Wales than police recorded statistics, because the survey includes crimes that are not reported to, or recorded by, the police. The primary purpose of the CSEW is to provide national-level estimates but some headline figures are available at regional level.

The CSEW is also a better indicator of long-term trends, for the crime types and population it covers, than police recorded crime because it is unaffected by changes in levels of reporting to the police or police recording practices. The methodology and the crime types included in the main count of crime have remained comparable since the survey began in 1981.

CSEW headline crime captures a range of personal and household victim-based crime in the interviewer-led parts of the survey, including:

• theft

• robbery

• criminal damage

• fraud

• computer misuse

• violence with or without injury

It is important to note that sexual violence and domestic violence reported in the interviewer-led parts of the CSEW are prone to considerable under-reporting. This is because many victims will not be willing to disclose these incidents in an in-home, face-to-face personal interview. For this reason, our preferred measures for these types of crimes comes from the survey's self-completion modules, which are presented separately and not included in CSEW headline measures of crime.

Accredited official statistics designation for estimates from the CSEW was temporarily suspended in July 2022 because of concerns about data quality. These concerns were specifically about the low response rate for face-to-face interviews after the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. In June 2024, we published our Crime Survey for England and Wales data quality review: June 2024, exploring the impact of sample size and response rate on data quality for the CSEW.

CSEW estimates were independently reviewed by the Office for Statistics Regulation in October 2024, and they have since been accredited official statistics. They comply with the standards of trustworthiness, quality and value in the Code of Practice for Statistics Code of Practice for Statistics and should be labelled "accredited official statistics". This accreditation was applied to the YE March 23 and YE March 2024 CSEW data.

Estimates of fraud and computer misuse offences

The CSEW did not previously include fraud and computer misuse offences in its estimates. However, new questions on fraud and computer misuse were added in October 2015, following the success of development work. This included a field trial as described in our CSEW Fraud and Cyber-crime Development: Field Trial (PDF, 382KB). Within six months, sufficient data had been gathered to produce initial estimates of fraud and computer misuse. These were published on 21 July 2016 alongside our quarterly release, Crime in England and Wales: year ending March 2016 bulletin, as Official Statistics in Development. The questions investigate the extent and trends of fraud and computer misuse and were reported separately to the main CSEW crime count. The new offences were then included in CSEW headline estimates for the first time in January 2017, once the questions had been asked for a full 12 months.

With two full years of estimates on fraud and computer misuse available from the CSEW since September 2017, we released valid year-on-year comparisons for the first time in our Crime in England and Wales: year ending September 2017 bulletin. These statistics were awarded accredited official statistics status in March 2018.

Achieved interviews and response rates

CSEW estimates for YE March 2026 are based on face-to-face interviews with 31,350 people aged 16 years and over. Face-to-face fieldwork for the CSEW was suspended from late March 2020 to October 2021 because of the pandemic. When fieldwork resumed, the response rate was considerably lower than prior to the suspension of fieldwork. The response rate for YE March 2023 was 42%, compared with 64% for YE March 2020. Preliminary analysis shows that 48% of adults responded to the main survey. The survey is weighted to adjust for possible non-response bias to ensure the sample reflects the profile of the general population. The CSEW gathers information from a sample rather than from the whole population. The sample is designed to be as accurate as possible given practical limitations such as time and cost constraints. Therefore, the estimates presented in this bulletin contain some uncertainty and are not precise figures. This can have an impact on how changes in the estimates should be interpreted. View more information on how we measure and communicate uncertainty for our surveys in Section 8: Statistical conventions and methods.

Technical reports provide further detailed information on the survey design and methodology.

2.2 Crime Survey for England and Wales methodology

The CSEW, previously known as the British Crime Survey (BCS), was first conducted in 1982 covering crime in 1981. It ran at mostly two-year intervals until 2001, when it became a continuous survey. The survey collects data using an in-home face-to-face interview approach. Although there have been changes to the survey over time, like the recent addition of fraud and cybercrime victimisation questions, the wording of questions asked to elicit victimisation experiences have been held constant throughout the life of the CSEW.

The face-to-face CSEW was suspended between 17 March 2020 and 4 October 2021 because of the pandemic. A telephone-operated version of the CSEW (TCSEW) was specifically designed to allow us to continue measuring crime during this period, while face-to-face interviewing was not possible. Survey data for YE March 2020 were based on the face-to-face CSEW and were largely unaffected by the pandemic. Survey estimates from YE June 2022 onwards are based on the face-to-face CSEW.

Survey data for YE June 2020 to YE March 2022 were mainly based on the TCSEW. Please see our User guide to crime statistics for England and Wales: measuring crime during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic for more information.

The core sample is designed to be representative of the population of households in England and Wales and people living in those households. As such, it is possible to use the small users' Postcode Address File (PAF), which is widely accepted as the best general population sampling frame in England and Wales. As mentioned earlier, the CSEW does not cover the population living in group residences or other institutions, although excluding the minority of the population that lives in such establishments is thought to have little effect on CSEW estimates, according to a research report from 2008.

At each sampled address the interviewer is required to establish that the address is eligible; ineligible addresses include vacant properties, second homes, non-residential addresses and establishments where people are living in group residences, for example, care homes or student halls of residence. In the rare situations where one PAF address leads to two households, the interviewer randomly selects which household to approach.

Once the household is determined to be eligible, a sole person aged 16 years or over is selected at random for interview. No substitutes are permitted.

The overall sample size for the CSEW was reduced from 46,000 households per year in YE March 2012 to 35,000 households in YE March 2013. The sample size reduction took 12 months to implement. Readers of the quarterly bulletin will have seen a gradual decrease in the unweighted bases referenced in tables, as data based on the old sample size reduced to the new sample size. The annual sample size has been reduced to 31,000 households, following the return to face-to-face interviewing in October 2021 and the lower response rates achieved.

The cluster design of the sample was also revised for YE March 2013. The prior sample design employed between 2008 and 2012 had been a mixed design, differing between three types of area, each type defined by the spatial density of its addresses. In high-density areas the sample was unclustered, while in other areas the sample was clustered with 32 addresses issued in each sampled middle layer super output area (MSOA). In low-density areas, a pair of lower level super output areas (LSOAs) was sampled in each sampled MSOA and 16 addresses issued in each one. There is a correlation between the spatial density of addresses and the degree to which victimisation rates vary between neighbourhoods. Consequently, unclustered samples in these areas yielded estimates with greater precision than clustered samples. Inclusion of an unclustered sample component not only improved the precision in these areas but brought a net increase in precision for national and police force area estimates as well. This design was further developed in two ways for YE March 2013 survey.

The unclustered sample design in high-density areas was extended so that three-year datasets became unclustered in every type of area. This was achieved by ensuring that every sample cluster was used at least once over the course of the three-year period from April 2012 to March 2015. Bespoke sample clusters (relating to victimisation rates) that were more heterogeneous than MSOAs were used, with the aim of increasing the precision of annual estimates. For full details of the new design, including a description of the creation of the bespoke cluster design, see Survey Methodology Bulletin, No 71, September 2012.

The 2025 to 2026 sample was designed to yield interviews with a nationally representative sample of 31,000 households in England and Wales. This included a boost of 5,900 interviews in high crime areas. The boost was designed to produce estimates of neighbourhood crime in high crime areas across England and Wales, and within seven police force areas (PFAs):Metropolitan Police, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, Kent, and Merseyside. High crime areas were identified based on the crime domain from the English Index of Deprivation and the Community Safety Index in Wales.

Except for the City of London PFA (which is merged with the Metropolitan PFA for the purpose of analysis), the sample is designed to yield a minimum of 585 interviews with people aged 16 years and over, in each of the 42 territorial PFAs. This was reduced from 625 for the 2019 to 2020 survey year. Prior to the transfer of responsibility for the survey from the Home Office to the Office for National Statistics in 2012, the previous sample design yielded a minimum of 1,000 interviews in each PFA. The driver for the reduction in the sample size was both the abolition of central targets for police forces and the outcome of the government's 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). The Home Office conducted a consultation with users and concluded that reducing the sample size was the best option available; the new design would not introduce any discontinuity to important CSEW estimates or trends and would lead to "fairly modest" reductions in the precision of estimates at PFA level.

Figure 1 shows confidence intervals around CSEW estimates of household and personal crime since YE March 2005. The chart illustrates that the sample size reduction (implemented in YE March 2013 survey) had little effect on confidence intervals around estimates of crime for England and Wales as a whole (confidence interval data are available in the User Guide tables).

Figure 1: CSEW number of incidents and confidence intervals for estimated levels of household crime and personal crime

Households or people aged 16 years and over, England and Wales, year ending March 2005 to year ending March 2026

Notes:

1. Following a methodological change to the handling of repeat victimisation in the CSEW, these data are not comparable with data published before January 2019. For more information see Improving victimisation estimates derived from the Crime Survey for England and Wales. 
2. The range given for these estimates is based on a 95% confidence interval see Section 8 of the User Guide for more information. 
3. New victimisation questions on fraud and computer misuse were incorporated into the CSEW from October 2015. Up to YE September 2017 the questions were asked of half the survey sample. Data are presented from YE March 2018 onwards because the questions are being asked of a full survey sample. 
4. Data for YE March 2021 and March 2022 are not available, as the CSEW was paused because of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

Prior to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, CSEW response rates remained relatively consistent year to year and the target sample sizes were always achieved, either by increasing the sample size when the response rate falls, or reducing the number of repeat calls to sampled households when the response rate increases. Severe disruption to face-to-face fieldwork during the pandemic resulted in a sharp fall in the survey response rates and inability to meet the required interview targets for 2022 to 2023. For 2023 to 2024 onwards, the response rate stabilised to some degree and delivery of required interviews was closer to target.

Table 1 shows the variations in the achieved sample size for each year compared with the actual response rate, as well as other sampling changes that have occurred over the life of the survey.

While maintaining an achieved sample size helps uphold the precision of the survey's estimates, it cannot compensate for variations in non-response bias when the response rate varies. The survey has previously been very successful in maintaining a high response rate with little variation between years (over 70%). The decrease in response rates has not affected the representativeness of the survey, as described in our Crime Survey for England and Wales data quality review: June 2024 methodology. However, the sample profile is monitored closely on a quarterly basis to ensure it remains representative of the population. The CSEW uses calibration weighting to adjust for differential non-response, further reducing the chances of bias. For more information, see Section 8.3: Weighting data. In addition, an evaluation of non-response bias on the CSEW is conducted each decade by comparing census results with both CSEW responders and non-responders. Results of the 2011 Census non-response link study using CSEW data were published in the Survey Methodology Bulletin No. 73 (PDF, 3.23MB)

2.3 Crime Survey for England and Wales interviewing

Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) estimates are based on analysis of structured face-to-face interviews carried out using computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI), where interviewers record responses to the questionnaire on tablets. The mode of interview changed in the 1994 CSEW from a paper-based questionnaire to CAPI. CAPI allows logic and consistency checks to be incorporated into the survey to improve data quality. For example, the interviewer is unable to move on to the next question until a discrepancy or inconsistency has been resolved.

The main CSEW questionnaire for people aged 16 or over has a complex structure consisting of a core set of modules asked of the whole sample, a set of modules asked only of different sub-samples, and self-completion modules asked of the whole sample. For example, modules include victimisation; performance of the criminal justice system (CJS); contact with and attitudes to the police and the CJS; mobile phone theft; anti-social behaviour; plastic card fraud; and demographic characteristics of the respondent and household.

Survey development is carried out on an annual basis to reflect emerging issues. The wording of victimisation questions remains largely unchanged year on year, although some revisions to the fraud victimisation questions were implemented in 2021 to 2022. The precise set of other modules asked in each survey year varies from year to year.

Self-completion modules are used in the CSEW to collect information on topic areas that respondents could feel uncomfortable talking about to an interviewer. The use of self-completion on laptops allows respondents to feel more at ease when answering questions on sensitive issues, because of increased confidence in the privacy and confidentiality of the survey. The self-completion modules were traditionally only asked of respondents aged 16 to 59 years. From October 2016, the upper age limit on the self-completion module was removed from a quarter of the survey sample and we assessed uptake from older participants alongside consideration of ease of use and other factors to determine whether the upper age limit could be removed. Testing showed that self-completion acceptance declines as age increases, with the proportion of people completing the modules decreasing significantly for those aged 75 years and over. Therefore, the upper age limit was raised from 59 to 74 years from the start of the new survey year in April 2017. The first results for this extended age range were published in the annual supplementary tables in our Crime in England and Wales: year ending March 2018 bulletin. During the pause in face-to-face CSEW interviewing in 2020, we took the opportunity to review the way we delivered the self-completion modules to ensure they were both inclusive and sustainable for the future. Working closely with stakeholders, we made the decision to remove the upper age limit once the CSEW returned to the face-to-face mode of delivery.

Respondents can complete these self-completion modules on the interviewer's tablet by themselves (computer assisted self-interviewing (CASI) and, when finished, their answers are hidden. The self-completion modules are at the end of the face-to-face interviews and, for respondents aged 16 years or over, cover topics such as illicit drug use, domestic abuse and sexual assault.

A self-completion module, asking respondents about abuse experienced during childhood was added in April 2015 for one year and was re-run for the survey YE March 2019 and YE March 2024.

The data from this module for YE March 2024 were published in our Abuse during childhood in England and Wales: March 2024 bulletin on 5 November 2025.

Improvements were made to the survey questions in consultation with stakeholders for YE March 2024. The questions underwent cognitive testing with people with lived experience of abuse during childhood before being added to the CSEW. Prior to YE March 2024, the survey questions asked respondents about abuse experienced before the age of 16 years. For YE March 2024, the questions ask about abuse experienced before the age of 18 years. In addition to asking about emotional abuse, physical abuse and sexual abuse, a new question was added to measure experience of neglect. The survey questions also ask information relating to:

• relationship to the perpetrator

• where the incident took place

• the age at which the abuse started

• whether the respondent told anyone at the time

The data from this module represents people's experience of abuse over many years and does not provide a "moment in time" prevalence estimate. We do not provide a time series for this data or use these estimates to draw any conclusions about changes over time.

Self-completion modules were first included in the 1996 and 2001 CSEWs to improve estimates of domestic violence (as shown in Domestic Violence: Findings from a new British Crime Survey self-completion questionnaire and Domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking). The self-completion module on illicit drug use was introduced in 1996 and comparable questions have been asked since then. These questions are not asked of children on the CSEW.

For YE March 2011 CSEW, an alternative set of questions were developed to measure the prevalence of domestic abuse, sexual assault and stalking in the self-completion module. The alternative set of questions was included in YE March 2012 and YE March 2013 as part of a split-sample. These formed part of a split-sample experiment to assess the effect of question changes on estimates of prevalence of these offence types. Results from this experiment were published in 2011 and formed the basis of a public consultation on questions to include in the CSEW self-completion module in future.

As of YE March 2014, the split-sample was dropped and just the new questions were asked. Analyses of the experiment for YE March 2013 were published in Methodological note: split sample for intimate personal violence (PDF, 497KB), which includes details of the adjustment applied to the back series to make a comparable time series.

In addition to the self-completion module to measure the prevalence of domestic abuse, sexual assault and stalking, different self-completion modules covering the nature of partner abuse and the nature of sexual assault are also rotated into the survey. These modules are included in alternate survey years, but neither were included in YE March 2016, as they were replaced with the new module on experiences of abuse during childhood. In YE March 2023 survey, an error in the survey resulted in missing data for some respondents from October 2022 to January 2023 inclusive. As a result, estimates for YE March 2023 for domestic abuse, sexual assault and stalking are based on eight months of interviews and exclude the affected survey months. Further details are available in the 2022 to 2023 CSEW Technical Report.

New domestic abuse questions were included from April 2023, as part of a split-sample experiment that aimed to improve the measure of domestic abuse. Half of respondents received the new domestic abuse questions and were not presented with the sexual assault and stalking questions. The other half of respondents were presented with the original domestic abuse questions, along with the sexual assault and stalking questions. Following a full evaluation, we concluded that the new questions provided a better measure of domestic abuse. Therefore, we decided to change to using the new survey questions in the CSEW to measure domestic abuse from April 2025. The full evidence behind our decision is provided in our Evaluating a new measure of domestic abuse article.

This means that, from April 2025, our official statistics on domestic abuse are derived from the new domestic abuse questions. In addition, estimates from the new questions for YE March 2023 and YE March 2024 should be treated as official statistics.

To align with the new domestic abuse questions, the questions on stalking were updated in April 2025. In addition, the questions on sexual victimisation were removed from the survey in April 2025 and replaced with new questions in October 2025. For more information on the question redevelopment, see our Redevelopment of sexual victimisation statistics: research update November 2025 article.

2.4 Time periods covered

Prior to YE March 2002, Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) respondents were asked about their crime-related experiences in the previous calendar year; but when the CSEW changed to a continuous survey, respondents were asked about crime in the 12 months prior to interview. Since becoming a continuous survey, CSEW estimates are published based on interviews carried out over a 12-month period. For example, estimates are derived from interviews carried out between April 2025 and March 2026 for the publication of the YE March 2026 CSEW.

As respondents are interviewed on a rolling basis over the course of a year, the time period covered by the data is not directly comparable with any calendar year. Therefore, tables and figures including trends over time refer to the year in which the crime took place for interviews prior to YE March 2002 (so interviews conducted in 1996 relate to victimisation in 1995 and will be labelled as 1995 in tables and figures), and the year in which the survey interviews took place for interviews since YE March 2002. Other questions on the CSEW (for example, attitudes to policing, confidence in the criminal justice system (CJS)) ask the respondent their current views or attitudes and thus the data are referenced as the year in which the respondent was interviewed.

Because respondents are interviewed at different times in each month, they are asked about experiences of crime in the current month, and in the 12 months prior to interview. Crimes experienced in the interview month are excluded from the 12-month reference period used for analysis. For example, the reference period for a respondent interviewed in:

• April 2025 is April 2024 to March 2025
• March 2026 is March 2025 to February 2026

For CSEW interviews conducted between April 2025 and March 2026, the reference period includes incidents experienced by respondents between April 2024 and February 2026. This makes March 2025 the midpoint for the reference period, as it is the only month to be included in all respondents' reference periods. With March 2025 as the mid-point, police recorded crime for YE September 2025 provides the most comparable period across these data sources.

The Home Office commissioned methodological work to consider the use of an alternative method of presenting the data based on crimes experienced in a particular year. The British Crime Survey: Methods Review 2009 compared the trajectory of a range of crime types, presenting the data based on the year the interview took place compared with the year the incident took place. There was no evidence that this different basis for reporting would have produced different findings over the period of 2001 to 2009. However, during this period a steady decline in crime was experienced. The review also noted that moving to presenting data based on the year that the incident took place would mean that analysts would have to wait an additional year before a complete dataset would be available to them. No changes were made to the CSEW as a result of this study.

2.5 Crime Survey for England and Wales measures of crime

The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) provides estimates of the levels of household and personal crimes experienced by respondents. Household crimes are considered to be all vehicle and property-related crimes and respondents are asked whether anyone currently residing in the household has experienced any incidents within the reference period. An example of a household crime would be criminal damage to a car (the owner of which could be anyone in the household). Personal crimes relate to all crimes against the individual and only relate to the respondent's own personal experience (not that of other people in the household). An example of a personal crime would be an assault.

Published CSEW data excludes sexual offences (except for "wounding with a sexual motive") as the number of sexual offences picked up by the survey is too small to give reliable estimates. Section 5: Offence types provides a full definition of offence types.

Details of experiences of crime are recorded in a series of victim modules. The first three victim modules include detailed questions relating to each incident; the last three victim modules are shorter modules, designed to be much quicker to complete to avoid respondent fatigue during the interview. The order in which the victim modules are asked depends on the type of crime - less-common crimes are prioritised in order to collect as much detailed information as possible. Respondents are asked about their experiences of crime in the 12-month reference period and up to six victim modules can be completed by each respondent.

Repeat victimisation

Most incidents reported are one-off, single occurrences, but in a minority of cases respondents may have been victimised a number of times in succession. In these cases, respondents are asked whether they consider these incidents to be a "series"; that is "the same thing, done under the same circumstances and probably by the same people." Where incidents are determined to be in a series, the number of incidents is recorded, but with only one victim module being completed based on the most recent incident.

Since the survey began in 1981, only the first five incidents of a series were included within estimates. Historically, including up to five repeat incidents as a maximum within each series for any individual victim had proven to be an effective way of reducing the effects of sample variability from year to year. This approach enabled the publication of incident rates that were not subject to large fluctuation between survey years and yielded a more consistent picture of changes in victimisations over time once high-order repeat victimisations were treated in this way. However, for some crime types such as violence, this resulted in point estimates being consistently lower than estimates if all high-order repeat victimisations were included. It may also have introduced additional measurement error where high-order repeat victimisation disproportionately affected a subgroup within the population; for example, women suffering from sustained repeat victimisation by a violent partner or family member.

In 2015, following criticism of this methodology, we commissioned a review of the methods for treating high frequency repeat victimisation. The review, which evaluated a range of methods, was completed in spring 2016 and the final proposed method was published on 6 July 2016 in the Review of methodology for addressing high-frequency repeat victimisation in Crime Survey for England and Wales estimates. We welcomed views from users on the recommendations in a consultation that ran from 6 July to 13 September 2016.

Based on feedback received, a proposal for how to address high-frequency repeat victimisation in the future was presented to the National Statistician's Crime Statistics Advisory Committee in late September 2016. The agreed proposal, along with a summary of the feedback received and our plans for the next steps, was published in a response to the consultation in early November 2016. In our response, we recognised that removing the cap of five was essential to improving crime statistics for many of our users and agreed to adopt a lighter cap of the 98th percentile of victim incident counts for each crime type (calculated over several years). The final methodology implemented from December 2018 included the following elements:

• removing the arbitrary limit of five on the number of repeat incidents of crime included in the survey estimates

• replacing this limit with a crime-specific imputation method based on the 98th percentile value, to track changes in repeat victimisation over time

• adjusting the design weights used on the survey to reduce the level of variance in the weights, which will in turn lessen the volatility in survey estimates

The 98th percentile values are calculated for each crime type using three-year rolling datasets. For most crime types, the 98th percentile value is lower than five, indicating a low level of repeat victimisation for these crimes.

Where this is the case, we have not lowered the maximum number of incidents counted within a series below five (and so, included numbers of incidents above the 98th percentile). The estimates for criminal damage and violence offences are the only categories to be noticeably affected by implementing the 98th percentile methodology.

User guide Table 13 details the three-year rolling 98th percentiles for the number of incidents in a series by crime type within the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW). These 98th percentiles have been applied to the dataset associated with the last year included in the calculations. For example, 98th percentiles for the three years ending March 2020 will be applied to YE March 2020 estimates. The 98th percentiles act as a new maximum number of incidents that can be included within a series.

The entire CSEW time series going back to 1981 was revised under the new methodology and first published alongside our Crime in England and Wales: year ending September 2018 publication in January 2019. As such, data published in this release onwards are not comparable with data contained in previous bulletins.

Uncapped CSEW data are published alongside our quarterly Crime in England and Wales publication to give users choice over which estimates to use. These estimates of incidents will be subject to considerable volatility from year to year and are not the main measure of incident estimates from the CSEW.

It should be noted that the move away from the cap of five to the 98th percentile affected incident estimates only. Estimates of the victims of crime and their associated prevalence rates were affected to a small degree by the change to the component weights that also formed part of the methodological change. Further information on the methodology for repeat victimisation (including changes to the component weights) can be found in Improving victimisation estimates derived from the Crime Survey for England and Wales.

Offence coding

The final stage, based on information collected and processed from the victim modules, is the coding procedure. Specially trained coders determine whether what has been reported constitutes a crime and if so, what offence code should be assigned to the crime. The full list of CSEW offence codes is shown in Appendix 2. CSEW crime statistics are produced from these data and presented as incidence or prevalence rates, based on counts of incidents or victims.

Incidence rate

The number of crimes experienced per household or individual

The incidence rate takes account of the number of times respondents have been victimised. Aggregating these incidents, and combining them with household and personal data, produces a number of incidents that can be presented as a rate per 1,000 households (for household crimes) or as a rate per 1,000 people aged 16 years or over or children (for personal crimes).

The overall number of incidents can be estimated for England and Wales based on the incidence rate and using population estimates for the household and people aged 16 years or over populations. In YE March 2026, incidence rates for household-level crimes were multiplied by 25,728,200 households; for personal-level crimes, rates were multiplied by 48,734,500 people aged 16 years or over. This provides the number of incidents for each crime type, all rounded to the nearest 100. Published estimates are rounded to the nearest 1,000 incidents. Section 8: Statistical conventions and methods provides further information on population and household data used in the calculation of CSEW incidents.

We do not produce incidence rates for domestic abuse, sexual assault and stalking. Information about experiences of these crimes is collected via a self-completion module. The questions focus on identifying whether someone was a victim, not the number of times they were victimised.

Prevalence rate

The proportion of the population who were victims of an offence once or more

Unlike incidence rates, prevalence rates only take account of whether a household or person was a victim of a specific crime once or more in the reference period, not the number of times victimised. For the majority of crime types, these figures are based on information from the victim module, where respondents and their households are designated either as victims or non-victims. The proportion of victims provides the prevalence rate, often described as the risk of being a victim of crime - this describes only an average rate. Analysis of the CSEW shows that victimisation rates vary depending on factors associated with personal, area and household characteristics. For example, see our Crime in England and Wales quarterly bulletin.

Since the CSEW also collects additional information from households, it is possible to determine prevalence rates for subgroups, such as vehicle or bicycle-owning households. Risk among these groups is higher than for the population in general, as the household population includes those who do not own vehicles or bicycles.

For domestic abuse, sexual assault and stalking, prevalence rates are based on information collected from a self completion module of the survey. Respondents are asked if they have experienced a range of different behaviours, and the proportions of respondents who report having experienced these behaviours provide the prevalence rates (see Section 5.1: Violent crime for more information on domestic abuse, sexual assault and stalking).

Multiple and repeat victimisation

Multiple victimisation is defined as the experience of being a victim of more than one crime in the previous year.

This includes those who have been victims of more than one crime of the same type within the last 12 months (repeat victimisation) and those who have been victims of more than one CSEW crime of any type within the last 12 months. People who have experienced multiple victimisation include those who have been a victim of more than one personal crime, or have been resident in a household that was a victim of more than one household crime, or have been a victim of both types of crime.

Levels of repeat victimisation account for differences between incidence and prevalence rates. For instance, high levels of repeat victimisation will be reflected in lower prevalence rates compared with incidence rates.

2.6 Changes to the presentation of crime statistics

The 2011 National Statistician's Review of Crime Statistics: England and Wales (PDF, 446KB) gave several recommendations to be addressed. This included that the Office for National Statistics (ONS) develop proposals for the future dissemination of crime statistics, with the aim of improving the presentation for users and providing a clearer picture of crime. We ran a consultation at the end of 2012 to set out proposed changes to the content of regular crime statistics outputs, and to the presentation of the crime classification used in those outputs.

We published our Future dissemination strategy for the publication of National Statistics on crime in England and Wales in January 2013. This included changes to the presentation of police recorded crime statistics implemented in our July 2013 bulletin, and to the CSEW, implemented in our July 2014 bulletin. Although the changes included reclassifying some elements of each data series, the overall count did not change. Changes to the presentation included:

• the introduction of a new high-level "theft offences" category

• the movement of some individual offences between categories

• for police recorded crime, the formation of two broad categories to distinguish between crimes with a specific identifiable victim (referred to as "victim-based crime") and those without a direct victim (referred to as "other crimes against society")

• for the CSEW, robbery was moved from violence into a separate standalone category

A more in-depth explanation of police recorded crime reclassifications can be found in our Presentational changes to National Statistics on police recorded crime in England and Wales methodological note (PDF, 104KB). More information on reclassifications for the CSEW can be found in our Presentational and methodological improvements to National Statistics on the Crime Survey for England and Wales methodological note (PDF, 176KB).

There have also been several other changes to the presentation of crime statistics. The presentation of data on fraud was updated to reflect new operational arrangements in reporting and recording practice, and new estimates of fraud provided by the CSEW. Specifically, fraud data presented in the police recorded crime series now shows offences recorded by Report Fraud, a public-facing national reporting centre that records incidents of fraud and internet crime directly from the public and other organisations. The recorded fraud figures also now incorporate available data at England and Wales level from two industry bodies: Cifas and UK Finance.

The CSEW introduced new questions on fraud in October 2015. First estimates were included in the main estimate of CSEW overall crime for the YE September 2016 quarterly update, published in January 2017. Estimates of fraud were previously classed as official statistics in development. Following assessment in March 2018 by the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR), CSEW estimates of fraud were classified as National Statistics. Further information is provided in Section 5.4: Fraud.

2.7 Crime Survey for England and Wales revisions policy

The general principle applied to the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) will be that when data are found to be in error, both the data and any associated analysis that has been published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) will be revised in line with our revisions and corrections policy.

The CSEW revisions policy covers:

• all approved researcher special licence datasets held by funding departments, the UK Data Archive and the ONS's Secure Research Service (SRS) 

• all end user licence datasets held by funding departments and the UK Data Archive (UKDA)

• data appearing in quarterly bulletins; articles; short stories; ad hoc data requests; and any other form of ONS publication that utilises data from the CSEW

There are a number of reasons why we may wish to revise CSEW data, once it has been published and/or the datasets disseminated, for example if:

• errors are discovered in raw, or derived variables

• new derived variables are issued

• it is decided that the methodology used to calculate a variable needs to be amended

• reweighting is performed following revision to population estimates

While every effort is made to thoroughly check the data before they are either published or released for dissemination, errors do on occasion occur. In these instances, the following procedure is followed.

The problem is identified and reported to the head of our Crime, Income and Wealth Division for consideration. We then establish whether there is an error and whether a revision is necessary (if an error is only minor, it is unlikely we will reissue a dataset, instead recording the error in the User Guide). The error will be corrected by our analysts, and a record of the impact of the revision in terms of scale and necessary publication revisions is made. A notice will then be issued to those organisations in receipt of CSEW data, including the Home Office, Ministry of Justice, and other government departments, detailing the error and its impact. The necessary revisions will be made to any publications using ONS procedures. The datasets will be reissued to UKDA, SRS and other data users. All users of the datasets affected will be informed that revisions have been made. The revisions will be made as soon as the impact of the error has been established and it is possible to carry out any amendments to our publications.

New derived variables

If new derived variables (DVs) are issued, and no existing DVs are revised, it will not be necessary to reissue the datasets affected but simply to issue the new DV, which can be appended to the existing datasets. Any new DVs will be issued as soon as they are available and have been checked (though if a number of DVs are to be added they will be added in one go).

Methodological changes

The CSEW was first conducted in 1982 (covering crime in 1981) and ran at mostly two-year intervals until 2001, when it became a continuous survey. Although there have been changes to the survey over time, the wording of the questions that are asked to elicit victimisation experiences have been held constant throughout the life of the CSEW. The core sample has always been designed to be representative of the population of households in England and Wales and people living in those households. Where a methodological change is required, the impact on current and past datasets will need to be assessed and a revision policy developed, giving careful consideration to any effect on the long time series of data available.

3.1 Introduction to police recorded crime

Police recorded crime statistics for England and Wales cover a wider range of offences than the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), but do not capture all crimes. Figures are restricted to a subset of notifiable offences that have been reported to and recorded by the police. Notifiable offences include all offences that could possibly be tried by jury (these include some less serious offences, such as minor theft that would not usually be dealt with this way), plus a few additional closely related summary offences dealt with by magistrates' courts, such as assault without injury.

Police recorded crime data also cover a wider population of victims than the CSEW, for example, residents of institutions, tourists, and crimes against commercial bodies are included in the police data but not in the CSEW. The notifiable offence list also includes "other crimes against society" where there is no specific victim (such as possession of drugs and possession of weapons).

Police data are the primary source of local crime statistics and are a good measure of offences that are well reported to, and well recorded by, the police, including lower-volume crimes (for example, homicide). However, it misses offences that are not reported to or recorded by the police. Trends can be affected by changes in how crimes are recorded, police activity, and public reporting, making long-term comparisons challenging. There are also concerns about inconsistent recording quality across police forces and over time.

The statistical returns from which most of the figures in police recorded crime are taken are derived from extracts from local force record management systems recorded by the 43 territorial police forces of England and Wales, plus the British Transport Police (BTP). These data are supplied to the Home Office on a monthly basis for each crime within the notifiable offence list (see Appendix 1: Recorded crime list). They are then quality assured by the Home Office Crime Analysis Unit before they send the final data to us at the end of each quarter for final preparation and publication. Police recorded crime data are published as official statistics, not accredited official statistics. Their accreditation was removed by the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) in 2014 following an assessment which found evidence that the quality and consistency of the underlying data may not be reliable.

3.2 Role of organisations

This section provides information about the roles and responsibilities of the organisations involved in the publication and production of crime statistics in England and Wales.

Home Office

The Home Office collects, processes and analyses national crime and policing data provided by the 43 territorial police forces of England and Wales, and the British Transport Police (BTP) (crimes in England and Wales only). This includes a number of quality assurance checks of police recorded crime before submitting data to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

To promote consistent and accurate recording and classification of crimes and outcomes, the Home Office maintain a set of Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR) for recorded crime.

Police forces

Each of the 43 territorial police forces of England and Wales, plus the BTP separately record crime and incident contact management information for operational policing purposes. These administrative data sources are also used to provide a data return to the Home Office on the number of notifiable offences recorded by the police, as well as the result of the related investigation (known as the "crime outcome"). Each police force has a Force Crime Registrar (FCR) who monitors the application of the HOCR and has a final arbiter role with respect to local crime recording decisions.

His Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services

Although His Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) is not involved in the publication and production of crime statistics, HMICFRS conducts regular inspections of crime recording to ensure that crimes are recorded by the police in accordance with the Home Office Crime Recording Rules. Each force will be inspected on crime data integrity in the 2025 to 2027 round of police effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy (PEEL) inspections. Further information on previous inspections is available in the HMICFRS PEEL assessments.

Office for National Statistics

Police recorded crime data are supplied to and published by the ONS in aggregate form on a quarterly and annual basis as part of a schedule of routine official statistics. These are published as part of the Crime in England and Wales bulletins.

Police recorded crime statistics are published on a rolling 12-month basis at the national level, as well as by Police Force Area and Community Safety Partnership (CSP) Area level. CSPs were introduced by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and bring together responsible authorities (including the police, fire and rescue services, local authorities, local health partners and the Probation Service) to formulate and implement strategies to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour (ASB) in their communities. There are over 300 CSPs in England and Wales, operating as either district, unitary, or borough partnerships. The reports are typically published within four months of the period to which they refer.

3.3 Published sources of police recorded crime statistics for England and Wales

Police recorded crime statistics for England and Wales are available from a number of different published sources. The main sources are the official statistics published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) as well as the Home Office open data tables.

While these statistics are based on data extracted from police crime recording systems, there are a number of important differences between them, both in terms of the data they hold and their intended use. In addition to these sources, local police forces also publish data covering their own areas. Time periods used and crime types covered, as well as frequency of release, may vary between police forces. Summarised police force data can also be sourced from the Police.uk platform, which provides the public with the main information about their local area.

Official statistics published by the Office for National Statistics

The statistical bulletins published by the ONS include data on police recorded crime. These data are based on information supplied by police forces to the Home Office on a monthly basis. After conducting quality assurance with forces, the Home Office supplies aggregated data to the ONS on a quarterly basis.

The presentation of data focuses on England and Wales as a whole, although some geographic breakdowns by Police Force and Community Safety Partnership Areas are included for broad offence groupings. The bulletins provide a summary report on the latest crime statistics broken down by individual offence types, presenting these in the context of longer-term trends. Where possible, supporting commentary explains possible drivers of changing levels of crime. Our statistical bulletins also present other sources of statistics (including victimisation data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW)) to help provide a fuller picture of trends and patterns in crime.

Home Office open data tables

The Home Office publish a set of open data tables on police recorded crime to coincide with the publication of the ONS quarterly statistical bulletin on crime. These tables are based on the same police recorded crime dataset as that used in the ONS statistical bulletin. They provide a more detailed breakdown of police recorded crime counts by individual offence classifications for each Community Safety Partnership and Police Force Area.

The open data tables are designed to meet the needs of the expert user by providing a rich source of data to enable bespoke analyses. The large data tables (available in CSV and ODS formats) requires some manipulation to extract data for specific time periods, areas and offence types. Users can download open data tables from the Home Office's Police recorded crime and outcomes. Please see the Home Office's police recorded crime and outcomes open data tables user guide for more information on how to use these tables.

Police.uk local area data

As well as supplying monthly recorded crime data to the Home Office, police forces provide data for the Your area section of police.uk. Police.uk is the official website for policing services in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It provides a range of information and services, including a mapping tool that enables users to explore street-level crime. Crime data broken down by Police Force and Lower-layer Super Output Area (LSOA) can also be downloaded.

The crime counts are based on data submitted by the police separately from the data used in the official statistics. While these data are ultimately sourced from the same police force record management systems as those used to supply data for the official statistics, there are some important differences between the Police.uk crime maps and ONS official statistics, most notably that:

• extracts from force record management systems can be taken at different times for those supplied to the Home Office for statistical returns and, therefore, volumes of crime and investigative outcomes may differ

• crime mapper data are published more quickly (with less lag time between the period to which the data refer and the date of release)

• because of the monthly publication cycle, crime mapper data are more likely to include crimes where there has been a subsequent decision to "transfer or cancel" the offence (Section 3.5: Crime recording standard and counting rules provides further details)

• crime mapper data are restricted to those crimes for which geographical location information is available; crimes without this information are excluded from the map

Alongside police recorded crime data, the crime mapper tool also includes data on ASB incidents recorded by the police and information on justice outcomes in a local area (a "justice outcome" is a crime that has been resolved by the police or a court). More information on police.uk data is available on their website.

Criminal justice system data delivery dashboard

The Criminal justice system (CJS) data delivery dashboard is published by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). This dashboard brings together a range of criminal justice data. It gives an overview of the justice system, from the point a crime is recorded by the police to when a case is completed in court.

The metrics in the dashboard cover three priority areas for the criminal justice system:

• improving timeliness

• increasing victim engagement

• improving quality of justice

3.4 UK Statistics Authority assessment

The Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) provides independent scrutiny of police recorded crime statistics. The OSR published an assessment report on crime statistics in England and Wales in 2014. It found that the quality and consistency of the underlying data for police recorded crime may not be reliable and removed their accredited official statistics designation. Following this assessment, and on the advice of the assessment team, the Authority Board restored the accredited official statistics designation to the statistics on unlawful deaths, based on the Homicide Index. All other recorded crime statistics remain undesignated.

In May 2024, the OSR published a review on the quality of police recorded crime statistics for England and Wales. The review recognised the significant improvements that have been made to crime recording since their 2014 assessment and recommended further actions for reconsidering reaccreditation. See our 2025 Action plan for improving the quality of police recorded crime statistics in England and Wales for how we plan to address the OSR recommendations.

3.5 Crime recording standard and counting rules

Crime recording standards

In April 2002, the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) (PDF, 52KB) was introduced across England and Wales. The NCRS was devised by the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC), formerly the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), in collaboration with the Home Office. It was designed to ensure greater consistency between forces in recording crime and to take a victim-oriented approach to crime recording, with the police being required to record any allegation of crime that in law was a crime unless there was credible evidence to the contrary immediately available.

This resulted in an increase in the number of crimes recorded and therefore our statistical bulletins mainly focus on trends in police recorded crime following the introduction of recording changes in police recorded crime from year ending March 2003. In April 2015, changes to NCRS introduced the necessity to record crimes reported by parents, carers and professional third parties, regardless of whether there was victim confirmation of the crime.

The national standard for incident recording (NSIR) counting rules are followed to ensure that all incidents, whether crime or non-crime, are recorded by police in a consistent and accurate manner. For example, anti-social behaviour (ASB) incidents. While most statistical returns submitted to the Home Office and subsequently published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) are notifiable crimes, some crime incident data are also published, such as ASB and domestic abuse-related incidents.

Recording crimes and counting rules

When an incident comes to the attention of the police there is a decision made about whether a crime has been committed. Frontline officers and staff are encouraged to follow the Home Office Counting Rules to ensure that crimes are recorded consistently and accurately.

Crimes recorded in England and Wales tend to be incident based, with the Principal Crime Rule of the HOCR stating that, "if the sequence of crimes in an incident, or a complex crime, contains more than one type of crime, then count the most serious crime". Where there is a course of conduct amounting to either stalking, harassment, or controlling or coercive behaviour reported by a victim, then in most cases the relevant course of conduct crime should be recorded as the principal crime. Generally, this will be in preference to other more serious notifiable crimes reported at the same time and committed by the same offender.

This is in contrast to the Scottish Crime Recording Standard and Counting Rules, under which each of the individual crimes or offences would be separately recorded in most cases. For example, an incident where an intruder breaks into a home and assaults the sole occupant would be recorded as two crimes in Scotland, while in England and Wales it would be recorded as one crime.

In addition, there is the Finished Incident Rule in the HOCR. The Finished Incident Rule states that, "an incident comprising a sequence of crimes between the same offender (or group of offenders) and the same victim should be counted as one crime if reported to the police all at once". However, in Scotland, where individual dates and times are known or where a different locus is identified, separate crimes will be recorded.

All crimes are recorded by the police in England and Wales, but they are split into two categories: notifiable and non-notifiable crimes, with the HOCR applying to notifiable crimes. Only those crimes that are notifiable are submitted to the Home Office in statistical returns and then in turn published by the ONS in their quarterly statistical bulletin Crime in England and Wales.

The HOCR and how crimes are classified are continuously reviewed and updated. Since the introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS), there have been some substantial changes to recording classifications. Changes in 2012 reduced the number of crime classifications from 148 to 126. However, there was no change to offence coverage and the overall number of crimes was not reduced in any way. For all categories, a back-series was created so that long-term trends are consistent from year ending March 2003.

In 2014, changes to the operational arrangements for the reporting and recording of fraud offences meant that many fraud offences previously recorded by police forces were recorded centrally by Action Fraud, with the counting rules for fraud being replaced by the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB) fraud rules.

In 2018, conduct crimes (stalking, harassment and controlling coercive behaviour) were recorded in addition to other crimes until June 2023. They are now recorded as the principal offence if the conduct crime is deemed to be the more impactful offence. As a result, offences that often occur alongside a conduct crime will no longer be included in the police recorded crime series. See the HOCR for all updates.

Cancelled crimes

Police forces record some crimes that are subsequently cancelled. Crime reports that are cancelled are removed from police crime data and thus from the police recorded crime statistics.

The majority of cancelled record decisions are made by police forces before data are submitted to the Home Office, and although some revisions are made to published crime statistics as a result of transferred or cancelled records, these are typically small. The HOCR set out circumstances under which a crime report may be cancelled. These include situations where a crime is considered to have been recorded in error or where, having been recorded, additional verifiable information becomes available that determines that no crime was committed. For further information, see the Cancellations section of the Home Office's Crime Recording Rules for Front line Officers and Staff (PDF, 954KB).

3.6 Operational context and administrative data collection

The crime recording process starts at the point at which an incident comes to the attention of the police. This could be through a victim calling 999 or 101 (or reporting it to the police via another means such as online), an incident being referred to the police by another agency, or being identified by the police directly (for example, officers encountering an incident while on patrol).

While there are standardised rules used by all police forces to ensure consistency in decisions around when a crime is recorded, and what type of crime it is (see Section 3.5: Crime recording standard and counting rules for details) the process by which the incident is subsequently logged and data are extracted for submission to the Home Office for inclusion in the official statistics varies between police forces. Forces currently use one of five different records management systems (RMS) and employ different internal processes in recording and managing crimes:

• 28 forces use Niche RMS: Avon and Somerset, British Transport Police, Cheshire, Cleveland, Derbyshire, Devon and Cornwall, Dorset, Dyfed-Powys, Gwent, Gloucestershire, Hampshire, Humberside, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, City of London, Merseyside, Northamptonshire, North Wales, North Yorkshire, Northumbria, Nottinghamshire, South Wales, Staffordshire, Surrey, Sussex, Thames Valley, West Yorkshire and Wiltshire

• 14 forces use RMS from NEC Software Solutions UK (NECSWS); 4 forces use NECSWS Connect (Lancashire, Metropolitan Police, South Yorkshire and West Midlands); 9 forces use NECSWS Connect - Athena (Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Norfolk, Suffolk, Warwickshire and West Mercia); and Greater Manchester use Police Works (acquired by NECSWS in 2022)

• Durham use Red Sigma (built in-force using Microsoft Dynamics

• Cumbria use Mark 43

Like any administrative data, risks to the quality and integrity of police recorded crime data exist at some stages of the operational and decision-making processes used in the collection. The main areas of risk are whether or not a crime is recorded, and if recorded, whether or not it is correctly classified, and where applicable cancelled appropriately. However, it is possible to summarise the process in general terms (see Figure 2a). This does not apply to fraud offences, which have separate reporting and recording processes (see Section 5.4: Fraud).

Figure 2a: Crime recording process map

Source: Office for National Statistics

Notes:

1. National Standard for Incident Recording.
   
2. Further information on decisions around when a crime should be recorded is provided in the National Crime Recording Standard.
   
3. For full definitions of different types of crime recorded by the police, see the Home Office Counting Rules for recorded crime.
   
4. Some police forces use civilian investigators to triage some crimes before they are then referred on or not to investigating officers.
   
5. Section 3.5: Data on transferred and cancelled records provides further information on transferred or cancelled records.

Download this image Figure 2a: Crime recording process map

.png (107.5 kB)

Special collections and data flags

Alongside the main police recorded crime data collection, the Home Office also requires forces to submit additional data on crimes that exhibit specific characteristics, for example, the use of a weapon in an offence, or whether a crime was domestic abuse-related. These separate data collections are often termed "special collections" and police forces meet the requirement to supply these data by adding a "flag" to crimes that meet the criteria for inclusion so that these can be used as identifiers for such crimes.

Special collection data published as part of the quarterly Crime in England and Wales bulletin include offences involving weapons (knives or sharp instruments and firearms), domestic abuse-related offences, child sexual abuse and online crime. Police forces either send these additional data as part of their Home Office Data Hub data submissions, or via a separate manual return.

Forces raised concerns with the Home Office that some of the special collections, based upon these identifiers, were likely to be of variable quality since they relied on flags being manually assigned to a crime record. With many other priorities, it was possible that some recorded offences may not have had the flags correctly applied in the returns to the Home Office. For example, while the number of robberies recorded will have been a correct count of those on the force record management systems, the aggravating factors - such as whether the offence involved a knife or sharp instrument - may not have always been correctly identified.

In the past, some forces carried out extensive manual reviews of their crime records or used automated database extraction queries to ensure data returns were accurate. Other forces relied on officers and staff remembering to flag a record accurately. To improve the consistency and accuracy of such data, the Home Office developed a computer-assisted classification tool called the National Data Quality Improvement System (NDQIS) in 2020. This tool uses software developed by Datactics, which scans the free text and other relevant fields of a crime in force record management systems. This is where the detailed nature and circumstances of a crime is captured by a call handler or an investigating officer. The system can identify crimes that should be flagged but may have been missed in the manual flagging process, as well as those that may have been flagged in error.

The NDQIS project's three broad aims are to:

• improve the accuracy of the flagging of offences used for compiling special data collections

• increase the consistency and comparability of data across forces

• reduce the burden on forces to supply high-quality data

NDQIS is now in use for five police collections to automatically flag offences rather than relying solely on a manual added marker. These are knives or sharp instruments, domestic abuse-related offences, child sexual abuse-related offences, and online crime. There are 42 police forces that have NDQIS available to them and the use of NDQIS across police forces by collection can be seen in the relevant datasets.

NDQIS has also been rolled out to forces for the hate crime collection but in a more limited way - forces can use NDQIS to help them identify records that have not been flagged correctly, but flags will not be added automatically as with other collections. This is because of the more subjective nature of whether an offence was hate crime-related or not, which means the automatic addition of flags is not appropriate.

Not all forces adopt the system at the same time when NDQIS is applied to a new data collection, and it is normal for forces to go through a period of testing and often further development. During this phase, each force will be able to assess how NDQIS affects the flagging of crime records in their recording system. After NDQIS is applied to a new data collection, the number of forces using the system will normally increase as they complete this testing phase. For data collections where NDQIS has been applied, published tables include information on the number of forces that have applied NDQIS to the flagging of offences.

For more information on NDQIS methodology, please see our Police recorded offences involving knives or sharp instruments: methodology changes. An update to this methodology article will be published later in 2026.

3.7 Quality assurance

A wide range of processes and checks are used to ensure the quality of police recorded crime data. This section documents the steps undertaken to quality assure data that are captured and published as official statistics by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and Home Office. This includes a summary of the quality checks made at each stage of the data journey, from capture to publication.

The process of producing official statistics on police recorded crime is complex. Data are collected in real time, as frontline officers and staff respond to incidents and enter information into their Crime Record Management System. This is then updated on a continuous basis as investigations proceed and new information or evidence is obtained. Important decisions are made early in the process, including whether or not an incident constitutes a crime and if so what the classification of that crime should be, ultimately for statistical purposes.

The UK Statistics Authority Administrative Data Quality Assurance Toolkit provides guidance about acceptable levels of quality assurance (QA) for administrative data. This user guide draws on that guidance, recognising that QA of administrative data is more than just checking that the figures add up. It is an ongoing iterative process to assess the data's fitness to serve their purpose. It covers the entire statistical production process and involves monitoring data quality over time, and reporting on variations in that quality.

Police force-level quality assurance

When an incident is reported to the police, incident recording should be carried out in line with the Police Code of Ethics and the national standard for incident recording (NSIR) by the reporting officer. An investigating officer will then update the record with information on whether a crime should be recorded or not, and classify this crime, using the Home Office Crime Recording Rules (Figure 2a).

Each police force has a Force Crime Registrar (FCR) who monitors the application of the Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR) and has a final arbiter role for local crime recording decisions. FCRs provide independent scrutiny to assure the quality of crime records by undertaking audits. The national structure and links between FCRs help to ensure data are consistent. This includes the use of a nationally agreed crime data quality assurance manual (DQAM), which is regularly reviewed, and a national data quality working group meets regularly to consider specific issues, to advise His Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) on inspection activity and to support FCRs in the development of local risk-based audits.

Crime management staff in each police force then check extracts are complete and correct using sense checks and comparisons.

Figure 2b: Data submission process map

Source: Office for National Statistics

Notes:

1. Further information on decisions around when a crime should be recorded is provided in the National Crime Recording Standard.
   
2. For full definitions of different types of crime recorded by the police see the Home Office Counting Rules for recorded crime.
   
3. The quality assurance process varies by force but may include checking that expired codes have not been used, or that an offence has not been recorded under more than one offence code.
   
4. Humberside do not currently submit their data through the Home Office Data Hub. These forces aggregate their dataset so that a total recorded crime count is given for each offence classification. These aggregated counts are submitted to the Home Office via Excel-based spreadsheet.

Download this image Figure 2b: Data submission process map

.png (73.2 kB)

Home Office quality assurance

Police forces make an automated monthly submission of their record-level data to the Home Office Data Hub, which is then aggregated by offence classification after submission. The Home Office Crime Analysis Unit undertakes a series of validation checks on receipt of the data and query outliers with forces who may then resubmit data. These checks include:

• variation checks - the total number of recorded crimes and the number recorded against each offence type are compared with the previous years' figures to check for any major deviations from the time series trend

• checks for evidence of a high number of transferred or cancelled records (previously referred to as "no crimes") for individual offence types - in particular, homicide offences should not usually be transferred or cancelled, so checks include a flag on any negative homicide offences, as explained in Section 3.5: Data on transferred or cancelled records

• checks against offences recorded under redundant codes - no offences should be recorded against expired codes

• several other ad hoc quality checks carried out by the Home Office

Any anomalies or errors identified through these checks result in a report being returned to the relevant force for validation or correction.

The Home Office routinely collects data from police forces on the number of incidents that have been recorded as crimes but have then been transferred or cancelled. A table showing the numbers and percentages of transferred or cancelled records by offence group is available in Table UG11 of our User Guide tables and by Police Force Area from the Home Office's Crime outcomes in England and Wales statistics.

Great care is needed in interpreting data on transferred or cancelled records. In particular, the proportion of cancelled records does not in itself infer high or low compliance with the overall requirements of the HOCR.

Levels of cancelled records are particularly susceptible to local recording practice and the IT systems in use. A police force having a high level of cancelled records may be indicative of that force having a local recording process that captures all reports as crimes at the first point of contact, and before any further investigation has taken place to consider the full facts. Equally, a police force with a low level of cancelled records may be indicative of a recording practice by which reports are retained as incidents only until a fuller investigation has taken place.

The Home Office Crime Analysis Unit returns their figures to individual forces for quality assurance once a quarter. Once the quality assurance process is complete, a "snapshot" of the live database is taken, and final data are supplied to the ONS. Therefore, it should be noted that figures in one release may differ slightly from figures published later. This does not mean that the figures previously published were inaccurate at the time that they were reported. The size of these revisions tends to be small and it is our policy not to revise previously published recorded crime figures unless they arise from a genuine error (for example, a force subsequently reports that when supplying thefts and robbery figures they had been transposed).

The general principle for any revision will be that when data are found to be in error, both the data and any associated analysis that has been published will be revised in line with the Corrections and revisions policy for official statistics.

ONS quality assurance

The ONS publishes police recorded crime in England and Wales on a quarterly basis. This provides the latest statistics for the year ending the most recent quarter. The content of the publication is retained as far as possible to ensure continuity of data, though when changes are required, they are subject to formal ONS statistical practice.

We ensure that where time series are revised, or changes are made to methods or coverage, we produce consistent historical data, wherever possible, and user guidance. If it is not possible to produce consistent historical data then advice on potential effects will be given where possible. This includes information about the nature and extent of changes made to police crime records, and how to interpret these changes.

ONS statisticians maintain contact with the Home Office and police forces through regular communications and meetings. Such meetings provide a forum for ONS statisticians to consult with data providers and bring any changes to data collection requirements to their attention. It also provides a forum for the Home Office and police forces to advise ONS statisticians of any forthcoming changes to their administration systems that may affect the data collection.

ONS statisticians receive data from the Home Office on a quarterly basis. The data are in the form of aggregate information, showing the number of crimes each year by crime code by Police Force Area and Community Safety Partnership. The data supplied are based on an extract from the Home Office Data Hub. The data are used to produce the quarterly Crime in England and Wales bulletin series and provide users with valuable insight into how the volume and nature of crime changes over time. It also includes a comparison with previous years and provides monthly breakdowns.

The quality assurance (QA) checks at the ONS take two forms: an in-depth look at how the current year's figures compared with those of the previous year; and a trends analysis looking for irregularities in time series data for broad aggregates. The system compares the latest year's figures with previous years for each offence type and highlights instances where the data might warrant further investigation. For example, if the absolute percentage difference is greater than or equal to 50% and the absolute difference in number is greater than 100. Additional manual checks look at longer-term trends at a crime group level. This analysis highlights unusual breaks in the trend, prompting further investigation.

This all generates a detailed list of queries on anything that may at first appear unusual in the data. If the Home Office has not supplied a note explaining the anomaly, the ONS contacts the Home Office for further investigation. In response to the queries raised from these checks, the Home Office supplies ONS statisticians with explanatory commentary based on their knowledge and intelligence, such as local initiatives and operations, which is then reflected where appropriate in the statistical publication.

During the QA checking process, it is possible for errors to be found in both the new reporting year's data as well as the data for previous years. Where errors are identified in the new reporting year's data, corrections are made. While we do not routinely revise figures for previous years, we are committed to correcting errors in the data and providing suitable explanations for any changes made to previously published data. Once that stage of QA is completed, the data are then used to produce a set of data tables.

Data triangulation

Within the bulletins, we also present data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) and other administrative data, such as hospital admissions. These data can be used together to develop a more complete picture of the number of crimes experienced by individuals and households, as well as provide comparisons and can be used to check trends.

We present CSEW estimates and police recorded crime figures for main crime types and indicate which is the preferred measure for each crime type and how they can be used together. Hospital data for admissions for injury caused by use of weapons are used as a comparison for police recorded offences involving weapons.

3.8 Risks, limitations and challenges of police recorded crime statistics

Police recorded crime statistics, like any administrative data, will be affected by the rules governing the recording of data, systems in place, human error, and operational decisions on the allocation of resources. More proactive policing of non-victim-based crimes in a given area, such as drug offences or possession of a weapon, could lead to an increase in crimes recorded without any real change in underlying crime trends. Therefore, when examining trends in police recorded crime data presented in statistical bulletins, it is important to pay attention to the commentary, which will explain any caveats associated with the data.

Changes in recording practices have affected the reliability of police recorded crime figures, particularly for violent crime and sexual offences, making them better indicators of police activity than crime trends. Improvements in compliance with the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) since 2014 have led to increases in the number of crimes recorded by the police. However, it is not possible to quantify the scale of this or assess how this effect varies between different police forces.

Ongoing consultation on the formulation and development of the policy on crime recording is provided through working groups comprising members of the Home Office, the Office for National Statistics (ONS), police force regional representatives and representatives of the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC), His Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS), and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Any changes of significant statistical impact will be subject to wider user consultation and be subject to final ministerial clearance.

Reviews and audits of data quality

HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services inspections and reviews

Following the National Statistician's 2011 review of crime statistics, the HMICFRS reviewed police crime and incident reports in all forces in England and Wales in their 2012 report, The crime scene: A review of police crime and incident reports. The review found a wide variation in the quality of decision making associated with the recording of crime (a range of between 86% and 100% from the lowest to the highest performing force), which was a cause for concern.

In 2013, the Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) into crime statistics raised further concerns of under-recording of crime by the police. In particular, concerns regarding the accuracy of police recorded crime data for sexual offences were raised. This resulted in a further HMICFRS inspection of the crime recording accuracy across all 43 territorial police forces in 2014, Crime recording: making the victim count (PDF, 1.1MB). The report highlighted that, at the national level, an estimated four in five offences (81%) that were brought to the attention of the police and should have been recorded as crimes, actually were recorded, with compliance for specific offence types as follows:

• burglary – 89%

• robbery – 86%

• criminal damage and arson – 86%

• other offences (excluding fraud) – 83%

• sexual offences – 74%

• violence with or without injury – 67%

HMICFRS conducts regular inspections of crime recording to ensure that crimes are recorded by the police in accordance with the Home Office Crime Recording Rules. Since 2014, each individual police force across England and Wales has been monitored and assessed once in a two-year cycle. Police effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy (PEEL) assessments feed into the monitoring process and provide information about crime data integrity and the quality of crime recording. The most recent PEEL assessments for each police force are provided in Appendix 4: Summary of rolling programme of crime data integrity inspections (His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services). Further information on previous inspections are available in the HMICFRS PEEL assessments.

In 2025, HMICFRS published a report, How effectively do the police record crime?, which summarised improvements to police forces' recording practices, on the basis of the ongoing Crime Data Integrity programme.

It showed that crime recording accuracy nationally has improved from 2014 to 2025:

• from 80.5% to 94.8% of all crimes (excluding fraud)

• from 66.9% to 93.6% of violent crime

• from 74.2% to 95.9% of sexual offences

Each force will be inspected on crime data integrity in the 2025 to 2027 round of PEEL. However, forces will no longer receive a graded judgment for crime data integrity. Instead, HMICFRS will carry out a dip sample of files in each force and include any relevant findings in specific characteristics for other PEEL core questions. If there are concerns about a force's performance in relation to crime recording, it may result in carrying out a full crime data integrity audit. Any forces identified to not be responding to concerns raised in the HMICFRS monitoring process is moved into enhanced monitoring, known as the Engage phase. In the Engage phase, forces will develop an improvement plan to address the specific causes of concern, specify areas for improvement and provide recommendations. The force may receive support from external organisations such as the College of Policing or the National Police Chiefs' Council, brokered by HMICFRS.

Office for Statistics Regulation reviews

An Office for Statistics Regulation review on the quality of police recorded crime statistics in 2024 considered the quality of police recorded crime statistics and the reaccreditation of these statistics as accredited official statistics. The review looked at the quality of the underlying data, data processing and assurance, and identified the main factors that have led to improvements to crime recording by police forces in recent years.

They found a positive shift in the culture around crime recording in police forces since 2014. The main features of good crime recording that we identified included strong data leadership and governance, and investment in people, processes and systems. Clear data governance arrangements, regular training and guidance for police officers and staff on crime recording, and centralisation of crime recording by a dedicated crime management unit all support accurate and consistent recorded crime data.

The reintroduction of regular external auditing of crime recording in 2014 has been an important driver of improvements to crime data integrity. These improvements contributed to the rise in the number of reported crimes recorded by the police between 2015 and 2020. Forces confirmed that HMICFRS inspections of crime data integrity had been instrumental in bringing about improvements to their crime recording standards. In some cases, it has led to systemic change; for instance, overhauling crime recording processes and practices following an inspection.

However, challenges were still noted with the consistency of data across police forces. These include the interpretation of Home Office Counting Rules, variety in IT systems used, and quality assurance standards. Police forces' approaches to quality assurance have been improved by use of the Home Office Data Hub tool. Recommendations from the report include for:

• the Home Office to better understand the quality assurance processes of police forces, and the strengths and limitations of differing IT systems across police forces

• the ONS to communicate the quality of police recorded crime data, and the framework used to assess this

• collaboration across the polices forces, HMICFRS, the Home Office and the ONS to ensure strong communication and strengthen oversight

All Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) crime is victim based, as it is derived from a survey of people's experiences of crime, which must have a victim for it to be recorded. The CSEW measures both the number of incidents and number of victims for:

• violence with and without injury

• robbery

• theft offences (including burglary, vehicle theft, other household theft, theft from the person, other personal theft, and bicycle theft)

• criminal damage and arson

• fraud

• computer misuse

It also provides estimates for the number of victims for domestic abuse, sexual offences, stalking, and harassment.

Police recorded crime includes both victim-based crimes and other crimes that do not normally have a direct victim, referred to as "other crimes against society". Police recorded victim-based crime includes:

• violence against the person (including homicide, death or serious injury - unlawful driving, stalking, and harassment)

• sexual offences

• robbery

• theft offences

• criminal damage and arson

• fraud

• computer misuse

In addition, victim-based crime can be separated into crimes against people and households, and crimes against businesses.

Police recorded "other crimes against society" include:

• drug offences

• possession of weapon offences

• public order offences

• miscellaneous crimes against society

The CSEW and police recorded crime data cover different crime types, so they are not directly comparable. This is particularly true for violent crime. In published crime statistics, CSEW headline crime estimates only include violence with and without injury, which are covered by the interviewer-led parts of the survey. Stalking and harassment are collected in a different part of the survey and are presented separately in our statistics. Homicide, and death or serious injury - unlawful driving offences are not covered by the CSEW, because it is a victim-based survey.

Police recorded violent crime also features "violence with injury" and "violence without injury" categories. However, these categories are not directly comparable between the CSEW and police recorded crime. This is because police recorded crime in these categories includes offences such as attempted murder, intentional destruction of viable unborn child, and endangering life, which are not included in the CSEW.

Based on year ending (YE) March 2026 data, 62% of police recorded violent crime is captured by CSEW headline crime estimates. A third of all police recorded violent crime is now classified under stalking and harassment (32%). The remaining 6% excluded from the survey are mostly offences leading to death, other serious offences, such as attempted murder, or offences involving children. These offences are less common and only make up a small proportion of police recorded crime.

4.1 Comparable subset of crime

To compare the crime rates measured by the CSEW and police recorded crime, a comparable subset of crimes has been created for a set of offences that are covered by both measures. Various adjustments are made to the recorded crime categories to maximise comparability with the CSEW, but they are not adjusted to exclude victims of commercial offences and offences committed against children aged under 16 years. Over three-quarters of CSEW offences (excluding fraud and computer misuse) reported in interviews in recent years fall into categories that can be compared with crimes recorded by the police.

The mapping between CSEW categories and police recorded offence codes is approximate and categories will not be directly equivalent in all cases. One recent amendment to this comparable subset is the addition of "attempted assault" to the CSEW violence category. Time series data back to year ending (YE) March 2003 have been adjusted accordingly. For further information, see Exploring diverging trends between the Crime Survey for England and Wales and police recorded crime: July 2024.

Violence

Recorded crime offences included in this category:

• Assault with intent to cause serious harm (5D)

• Assault with injury (8N)

• Racially or religiously aggravated assault with injury (8P)

• Assault with injury on a constable (8S)

• Assault with injury on an emergency worker (other than a constable) (8T)

• Assault without injury on a constable (104)

• Assault without injury (105A)

• Racially or religiously aggravated assault without injury (105B)

Robbery

Recorded crime offences included in this category:

• Robbery of personal property (34B)

Theft from the person

Recorded crime offences included in this category:

• Theft from the person (39)

Domestic burglary in a dwelling

Recorded crime offences included in this category:

• Residential burglary of a home (28I)

• Attempted residential burglary of a home (28J)

• Distraction burglary - residential (home) (28K)

• Attempted distraction burglary - residential (home) (28L)

• Residential burglary of unconnected building (28M)

• Attempted residential burglary of unconnected building (28N)

• Distraction burglary - residential (unconnected building) (28O)

• Attempted distraction burglary - residential (unconnected building) (28P)

• Aggravated burglary - residential (home) (29B)

• Aggravated burglary - residential (unconnected building) (29C)

Vehicle-related theft

Recorded crime offences included in this category:

• Aggravated vehicle taking (37.2)

• Theft from a vehicle (45)

• Theft or unauthorised taking of motor vehicle (48)

• Interfering with a motor vehicle (126)

Bicycle theft

Recorded crime offences included in this category:

• Theft or unauthorised taking of pedal cycle (44)

Criminal damage to a dwelling

Recorded crime offences included in this category:

• Criminal damage to a dwelling (58A)

Criminal damage to a vehicle

Recorded crime offences included in this category:

• Criminal damage to a vehicle (58C)

Reporting rates: findings from the CSEW

The CSEW asks whether incidents were reported, or otherwise came to the attention of the police. It is estimated that only 42% of CSEW comparable crime in YE March 2026 was reported to the police. This shows considerable differences in reporting rates between different types of offences and some variability in reporting rates over time (see Table A6 of our Crime in England and Wales: Annual supplementary tables). Discrepancies between the trends in the CSEW and police recorded crime may reflect trends in reporting rates.

4.2 Analysis of trends in comparable crime

Introduction

The CSEW and recorded crime series have broadly displayed similar trends for overall crime, with some inconsistencies because of reporting and recording changes. Both series in the comparable subset decreased from YE March 2003 to YE March 2014. However, while CSEW crime has generally continued to fall, police recorded crime increased between YE March 2014 and YE March 2020. More recently, police recorded crime fell between YE March 2023 and YE March 2026.

There is no obvious methodological change to the survey that might explain the divergence between the two data series since YE March 2013. The divergence in trends between the two data sources is mainly because of improvements in recording practices in police recorded crime. This effect has been more pronounced for some crime types, like violence with and without injury. However, flattening trends over the last few years may suggest that improvements in recording practices are beginning to have less effect on some offences. The increased focus on the quality of crime recording by the police, following His Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) report, Crime recording: making the victim count report (PDF, 1.1MB), published in 2014, is likely to have improved compliance levels.

The HMICFRS report also recommended changes to the Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR) for reports of crime received from professional third parties, like local authority social services or the medical profession. This may have increased reports of crimes against vulnerable people, such as victims of child abuse, domestic abuse, and elder abuse.

For further details, see our Exploring diverging trends between the Crime Survey for England and Wales and police recorded crime: July 2024 methodology, which looks at the issue of a possible divergence between police recorded crime and CSEW trends, using two comparable subsets of crime types from both series.

Ratio comparing CSEW reported crime and police recorded crime

It is possible to calculate a ratio using volume measures of both CSEW and police recorded crime, using the comparable subset of crimes outlined in Section 4.1: Comparable subset of crime. In theory, if all crimes from the CSEW subset were reported to the police and subsequently recorded by the police, the ratio would be 1. Some variation in the ratio is to be expected because of the inherent variability of sampling associated with the survey.

Between YE March 2003 and YE March 2015, the divergence ratio was between 0.6 and 0.8 for almost the entire period. This means that CSEW reported a higher number of incidents than offences recorded by the police. However, in YE March 2016, the divergence ratio rose to 0.87, from 0.73 in the previous year. The divergence ratio also rose to above 1, to 1.09, in YE March 2017. This was the point at which offences recorded by the police became larger than CSEW reported incidents. Since then, the divergence ratio has risen sharply, increasing to 1.81 in YE March 2023; however, this has fallen to 1.66 in YE March 2026.

The current disparity in the divergence ratio (1.66) can mainly be explained by the specific ratio disparities for violence with and without injury (2.62) and robbery (2.55) offences. These offences are personal level crimes and are therefore influenced by differences in coverage. This is because the CSEW does not capture crimes against non-household populations, or those aged under 16 years old. While these differences in coverage would fully explain the disparities for robbery offences, it only partially explains the differences for violence with and without injury offences.

The disparity in violence with and without injury offences in YE March 2026 can also be explained by known limitations of the CSEW for estimating incidents of violence with and without injury; the underestimation of domestic violence in the interviewer-administered parts of the survey and capping of the number of repeat incidents to reduce year-to-year volatility in survey estimates and provide a better measure of trend over time.

For further details, see our Exploring diverging trends between the Crime Survey for England and Wales and police recorded crime: July 2024 methodology, which explores the current disparity in the divergence ratio in detail.

The quality of Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) and police recorded crime data varies in strength, depending on the crime type being measured. Our data quality framework has been compiled to help inform users about the quality of crime statistics and about which data source provides the most reliable measure of current levels and trends over time for different types of crime. The framework classes the quality of the preferred data source for each crime type as "good", "moderate", or "poor".

The quality of CSEW crime estimates (current volume) are assessed by calculating coefficients of variation, which are available in Table UG14 of our accompanying dataset. The coefficient of variation makes it easier to understand whether a standard error is large, compared with the estimate itself, and can be used to compare the relative precision across surveys and outcomes. A coefficient of:

• 10% or less suggests there is a low level of uncertainty (good)

• 10% to 20% suggests there is a moderate level of uncertainty (moderate)

• more than 20% suggests there is a high level of uncertainty (poor)

We also consider survey limitations, such as respondents' willingness to report more sensitive crimes. Reliability of trends over time will also be affected by changes to the questionnaire and sample size.

For police recorded crime, ratings for crime types are assessed based on information from His Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) crime recording inspections, changes to recording practices, variation in police activity, and levels of reporting, where available.

Table 2 presents the preferred data source and quality rating for understanding volume and trends in crime by crime type. Please see specific crime type subsections in this section for definitions, preferred data source and further information.

Table 2: Preferred data source and data quality indicators by crime type

5.1 Homicide

Definitions

Homicide is a collective term referring to the offences of murder, manslaughter and infanticide.

Murder and manslaughter are common law offences that have never been defined by statute, though they have been modified by statute. The manslaughter category includes the offence of corporate manslaughter, which was created by the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, which came into force on 6 April 2008.

The offence of infanticide was created by the Infanticide Act 1922 and refined by the Infanticide Act 1938. Infanticide is defined as the killing of a baby aged under 1 year by their mother while the balance of her mind was disturbed because of giving birth.

Where several people are killed by the same suspect, the number of homicides counted is the total number of victims killed, rather than the number of incidents. For example, the 39 victims of human trafficking found in a lorry in Grays, Essex in October 2019 are counted as 39 individual homicides.

Single incidents involving multiple victims can affect trends in homicide. Therefore, we also present the number of homicide incidents (which can involve one or more victims but are only counted as one incident) in our statistics as an alternative view on trends.

Preferred data source for homicide: Home Office Homicide Index

The Home Office receives two sources of information on homicide from the police forces of England and Wales (including the British Transport Police if the offence occurred within England and Wales). These sources are:

• police recorded crime – the monthly aggregated recorded crime return

• the Home Office Homicide Index – a more detailed statistical return for each recorded homicide, containing additional information such as victim and suspect details, and the circumstances of the offence

These two sources provide reliable trend information for homicide. However, our preferred source is the Homicide Index because it takes account of court outcomes and is accredited official statistics.

This offence is not captured by the CSEW.

Further information on the Homicide Index

The Home Office Homicide Index contains record-level detail about homicides recorded in England and Wales. The collection began in 1946 and was based on paper records sent from the police to the Home Office. Electronic records are available from 1977. The Homicide Index is continually being updated with revised information from the police as investigations continue and as cases are heard by the courts. It is therefore viewed as a better source of data than the main recorded crime data.

Homicide Index data are based on the year when the offence was first recorded, not when the offence took place or when the case was heard in court. In most cases, offences will be recorded in the same year they take place. However, this is not always the case. For example, 96 of the 97 deaths resulting from the Hillsborough disaster, which took place in 1989 but were recorded as manslaughters in YE March 2017, following the verdict of the Hillsborough Inquest in April 2016. Another example is the 173 homicides attributed to Dr. Harold Shipman, which took place over a long period of time but were recorded by the police during year ending (YE) March 2003, as a result of Dame Janet Smith's inquiry.

When the police initially record an offence as a homicide, it remains classified as such unless the police or courts decide that a lesser offence, or no offence, took place. The Homicide Index takes account of court outcomes, so figures from this source will differ from the main police recorded crime collection.

Data are collected through a detailed Homicide Index online form that is completed by the police within 30 days of the homicide being recorded. The process includes robust, in-form validation and guidance to improve the quality of data submitted to the Home Office. In addition, the Home Office works closely with police forces and assists individuals responsible for completion of the form (usually the Senior Investigating Officer). Police forces are encouraged to contact Home Office statisticians if they have any questions about what data are required.

In addition to engaging with individual police forces, the Home Office engages with other relevant working groups and agencies, including:

• the National Police Chiefs' Council's Homicide Working Group (HWG), which is a multi-agency group concerned with homicide investigation and recording that helps police forces share best practice

• the National Crime Agency (NCA), who play an important role in the investigation of homicides, working closely with local forces

• the Home Office Forensic Pathology team, who assist and train police forces and Coroner's Officers on the identification and investigation of homicide cases

When a suspect is charged with a homicide, the police update the online form with suspect information (for example, age, gender and ethnicity). When the case has been through the courts, it is updated with case outcome information (for example, indictment, court outcome, date of conviction, and sentence length). Forces will obtain information on case outcomes from their own Management Information System, the Home Office Large Major Enquiry System (HOLMES) database, or the Police National Computer (PNC).

The information that is returned is quality assured in several ways. The online form includes validation checks, including checks for blank fields and consistency checks. For example:

• if the victim is aged 10 years and the suspect is aged 40 years, the relationship of victim to suspect cannot be parent (in this case, the force would be asked to amend to son or daughter)

• if the method of killing was "sharp instrument", the field "was a sharp instrument used" cannot be "no"

• the date of charge or conviction must be after the date of the homicide

The Home Office carries out quarterly checks of the number of homicides from the returns received as part of the main police recorded crime collection against the number of returns to the Homicide Index for each Police Force Area (PFA). At the end of each financial year, the Home Office sends data to forces on suspects charged and court outcomes. Forces can use this to check against their source systems, to ensure the data are accurate and timely for the annual publication. The total number of homicides in each PFA is also compared with the totals from the main police recorded crime return and the special data collection on offences involving firearms.

Home Office statisticians run a range of data validity checks on the Homicide Index data, mainly on the fields that are included in the published statistics. These include checks for:

• fields with missing or blank data, such as age, sex, number of victims, and suspects

• fields with open text, such as "other method of killing" or "other circumstances", to see if any responses can be recoded back into any of the predetermined categories

• duplicate records

The data are delivered to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) in the form of aggregate tables for the annual release of our Homicide in England and Wales articles. Our crime statistics team carries out further quality assurance checks on data tables supplied by the Home Office, focusing on the internal validity of the data and the consistency with other available sources. Where concerns over data quality are identified, we will raise these concerns with the Home Office, who will refer questions to police forces where necessary.

Figures published from the Homicide Index in our annual Homicide in England and Wales release are not directly comparable with provisional figures for homicide from police recorded crime. This is because these are subject to change, though the changes between provisional and final figures have generally been small in recent years.

5.2 Offences involving the use of weapons

The Home Office collects additional data from the police on offences involving the use of firearms, knives or sharp instruments, or corrosive substances. These additional collections reflect the serious nature of these offences.

Offences involving the use of firearms

Definitions

Offences involving the use of firearms cover any notifiable offence recorded by the police where a firearm has been fired, used as a blunt instrument, or in a threat. They include:

• firearms that use a controlled explosion to fire a projectile – this category includes handguns, and shotguns and rifles; these types of weapon are often used in the more serious offences, and tend to account for most of the fatalities and serious injuries from such offences

• imitation firearms – this category includes replica weapons and low-powered weapons that can fire small plastic pellets, such as BB guns and soft air weapons; while injuries can occur from offences involving these weapons, they are less common and tend to be less serious

• air weapons – most offences that involve air weapons relate to criminal damage; while air weapons can cause injury (and sometimes fatalities), by their nature they are less likely to do so than firearms that use a controlled explosion

Firearm possession offences where the firearm has not been used in any of these ways are recorded elsewhere.

Preferred data source for offences involving the use of firearms: police recorded crime

Police records are the preferred source for tracking firearms offences, as they provide an accurate assessment of current levels and trends. Recent increases in firearms offences, specifically between YE March 2015 and March 2020, reflect both real-world changes and improved police recording practices. These trends are further validated by NHS hospital admission data.

The CSEW is not a reliable source for this data, as firearms offences occur too infrequently to be captured accurately in a general household survey.

Further information on offences involving the use of firearms collection

Most information that the Home Office receives from the police is in the form of a record-level dataset. For each offence involving a firearm, information is provided on:

• the victims' personal details (such as age and sex)

• the type of firearm used

• whether an injury was sustained

• where the offence took place

These data are sent to the Home Office on a quarterly basis. The police also send summary data on offences involving air weapons for certain lower-level offences, such as criminal damage, to the Home Office annually.

It is not always possible for the police to categorise the type of firearm that has been used in an offence. For example, some imitation weapons are so realistic that they are indistinguishable from a real firearm. The police will record which type of weapon has been used, given the evidence available. They may rely on descriptions from victims or witnesses if they do not have sufficient information about the type of firearm used in the offence, or if the firearm was concealed.

Home Office statisticians carry out internal quality assurance of the offences involving firearms data before submitting the data to the ONS. These checks include:

• in-built spreadsheet checks within police force returns, including validation procedures that check for duplicates, missing fields, and to ensure that fields are consistent; for example, if a victim has been injured, validation procedures check that the weapon usage category is not "used as a threat"

• quarterly variation checks of the total number of offences involving firearms against the number recorded against each offence type; these data are compared with previously supplied figures to check for any large deviations from the data time series trend

• cross-referencing figures with other data sources, such as the Home Office Homicide Index, to ensure consistency for homicide offences where a firearm has been involved

• returning data held by the Home Office to individual forces before the annual publication so forces can confirm that the Home Office data match the data held on their own systems; forces can resubmit data if required

Figures on the use of firearms in recorded offences, excluding offences involving air weapons, are published in our quarterly Crime in England and Wales bulletins. More detailed information, including on offences involving air weapons, is published in our annual Offences involving the use of weapons: data tables.

Offences involving the use of a knife or sharp instrument

Definitions

Offences involving a knife or sharp instrument (knife-enabled crime) include offences where a knife or sharp instrument has been used to injure a victim or used as a threat. This includes offences where the weapon may not have been seen but is believed by the victim or another witness to be present at the time of the offence.

The Home Office collects this additional data from police forces for selected offences only. This includes:

• attempted murder

• threats to kill

• assault with injury

• assault with intent to cause serious harm

• robbery

• rape

• sexual assault

• homicide (figures are taken from the Home Office Homicide Index)

Preferred data source for offences involving the use of a knife or sharp instrument: police recorded crime

Police recorded crime is the preferred data source for tracking offences involving knives or sharp instruments. These data offer a reliable view of current levels and trends. However, the increases in these offences observed between YE March 2015 and YE March 2020 are attributed to a combination of real-world changes and improved police recording practices. These trends are further supported by NHS data on hospital admissions for assault with a sharp object.

These incidents are not adequately captured by the CSEW because they are relatively rare.

Further information on offences involving a knife or sharp instrument collection

The Home Office has collected additional data from police forces for selected offences involving knives or sharp instruments since April 2008.

In YE March 2009, this group of offences included:

• attempted murder

• grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent

• GBH without intent

• threats to kill

• robbery

• sexual assault

• rape

From YE March 2013, the selected offences included:

• attempted murder

• assault with injury

• assault with intent to cause serious harm

• threats to kill

• robbery

• sexual assault

• rape

Figures for homicide where the method of killing was by a sharp instrument are taken from the Home Office Homicide Index and are published alongside the knife or sharp instrument figures. Data are not directly compatible over the time period because of the changes in coverage and issues relating to a clarification in the Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR) for GBH with intent.

Since April 2019, data collection has been aided by the National Data Quality Improvement Service (NDQIS). This service was introduced to help address issues with the quality and consistency of manual data flagging, which was known to be inconsistent across forces. Before the NDQIS, many forces solely relied on a police officer or support staff member adding an identifier or tag (flags) to a respective crime record; however, consistency in adding these flags was variable across forces.

NDQIS was piloted with forces and was shown to improve data quality and comparability, leading to a national launch of the new process. We first published data on offences involving knives or sharp instruments processed through NDQIS in our Crime in England and Wales: year ending December 2020 bulletin. This included data for 12 police forces:

• Derbyshire

• Dyfed-Powys

• Greater Manchester Police

• Leicestershire

• Lincolnshire

• Merseyside

• Metropolitan Police

• Northamptonshire

• South Wales

• South Yorkshire

• West Midlands

• West Yorkshire

By March 2026, 41 forces had switched to NDQIS.

Once forces have extracted information from their crime recording systems and applied NDQIS, where applicable, counts of these identifiers or flags are sent to the Home Office. They are then quality assured by statisticians before the final data are sent to the ONS to be published.

The NDQIS pilot resulted in clarification and changes to recording practices for offences involving a knife or sharp instrument. It showed inconsistency in recording practices where threats were involved. Some forces were including offences where a knife was not present (for example, the offender states "I will get a knife and stab you"), while other forces excluded these offences. New guidance has added a series of rules to ensure consistency between forces. These rules state that:

• the knife or sharp instrument should be present at the time of the offence, or believed to be present by the victim, which includes cases where the sharp instrument is not seen but the threat is believed, or only a knife handle is seen; for example, if an offender threatens to stab a victim during a robbery and the threat is believed and belongings are handed over, this would be considered an offence involving a knife or sharp instrument, whether the weapon was seen or not

• "remote threats" should not be recorded; for example, threats over social media to use a knife

• "future threats" should not be recorded; for example, offences where the perpetrator threatens to use a knife or sharp instrument in the future (for example, "I will get a knife and stab you")

• "idle threats" should not be recorded; for example, where an offender says they will stab someone in passing but there is no evidence that a knife was present when the threat was made

Other changes to recording practices resulting from the NQDIS pilot included the:

• removal of broken bottles and glass from the collection; while sharp, these are weapons that are generally used in the heat of the moment without a premeditated motive, and their removal aligns the collection closer to what the public would consider to be "knife crime"

• removal of pens and pencils from this collection for similar reasons; the collection still covers other sharp instruments that may be used in a similar way to knives, such as scissors, syringes or axes

• addition of sharp tools, such as chisels and screwdrivers, as these tools are carried and used in a similar premeditated way to knives

• inclusion of sharp instruments when used as blunt instruments, as the victim will not know whether the offender will use the weapon to stab with the blade, or to strike with as a blunt instrument; this change also brings the collection in line with offences involving firearms, where firearms used as blunt instruments are included in the data

Data collected since the implementation of the new NDQIS methodology and the change in coverage for the offences involving knife or sharp instruments collection are not comparable with those collected before April 2019. To preserve the time series, data for YE March 2020 were collected from forces on both the old and new methods and coverage. These data were used to create a set of ratios between the two datasets that could be used to adjust the back series. Data for forces who have moved to the new methodology and coverage have been adjusted back to YE March 2011. However, some forces improved how these data were recorded before April 2019, so data are not directly comparable before this date.

Further information on the introduction of NDQIS can be found in our Police recorded offences involving knives or sharp instruments: methodology changes report, last revised on 13 May 2021. More information on NDQIS and its wider application to other flagged recorded crime collections can be found in Section 3.6: Operational context and administrative data collection.

Home Office statisticians carry out internal quality assurance of the offences involving knives or sharp instruments data before submitting the data to the ONS. These checks include:

• carrying out a quarterly variation check of data received from police forces; the total number of recorded crimes and the number recorded against each offence type are compared with the previous quarters' figures to check for any large deviations from the time series trend

• cross referencing the data with the main recorded crime returns; the knife or sharp instrument collection (for forces who have not yet moved to NDQIS) contains information on the total number of offences for the selected offences, which are compared with the main recorded crime return to ensure consistency

• using the total number of offences in the knife or sharp instrument collection to create a "ratio" for the number of offences that involved a knife or sharp instrument (figures for which are published at the national level); these ratios are also checked at the PFA level to ensure ratios do not deviate from the trend

• verifying data on offences involving a knife or sharp instrument with police forces on a quarterly basis before publication

• returning data held by the Home Office to individual forces before the annual publication, so forces can confirm that the Home Office data match the data held on their own systems; forces can resubmit data if required

5.3 Violence with or without injury

Definitions

Violence with or without injury covers a range of offence types, from minor assaults such as pushing and shoving that result in no physical harm to assaults with serious wounding. This includes offences where the victim was intentionally stabbed, punched, kicked, pushed, or jostled, and offences where the victim was threatened with violence, regardless of injury. Homicide, death or serious injury – unlawful driving, and stalking and harassment are presented separately in our statistics.

Police recorded "violence with injury" and "violence without injury" categories are not directly comparable with the CSEW categories. This is because police recorded crime includes offences such as attempted murder, intentional destruction of viable unborn child, and endangering life, which are not included in the CSEW.

CSEW violence with or without injury is categorised by offence type and according to the victim-offender relationship. These CSEW offence types are:

• wounding – an incident that results in severe or less serious injury (for example, cuts, severe bruising, chipped teeth, bruising, scratches requiring medical attention, or any more serious injuries)

• assault with minor injury – an incident where the victim was punched, kicked, pushed, or jostled, and the incident resulted in minor injury to the victim (for example, scratches or bruises)

• violence without injury – an incident (or attempt) where the victim was punched, kicked, pushed, or jostled, but resulted in no injury

Estimates for wounding, assault with minor injury and violence without injury add up to overall violence.

The categories of CSEW violence according to the victim-offender relationship are:

• "domestic" – includes wounding and assaults that involve partners, ex-partners, other relatives, or household members

• "stranger" – includes wounding and assaults in which the victim did not have any information about the offender(s), or did not know and had never seen the offender(s) before

• "acquaintance" – includes wounding and assaults in which the victim knew one or more of the offenders, at least by sight (does not include domestic violence)

Incidents of police recorded violence with and without injury are presented under "violence against the person" recorded by the police, which includes the "violence with injury", "assault with intent to cause serious harm", "violence without injury", "death or serious injury – unlawful driving" categories.

"Violence with injury" and "assault with intent to cause serious harm" offences include:

• injury resulting in permanent disability

• more than minor permanent disfigurement

• broken bones

• fractured skull

• compound fractures

• substantial loss of blood

• internal injury

• lengthy treatment or serious psychiatric injury (based on expert evidence)

• shock (when accompanied by expert psychological evidence)

"Violence without injury" offences are those where, at most, a feeling of touch or passing moment of pain is experienced by the victim. This category also includes "threats to kill", where an individual fears that the offender's threat is real and may be carried out

"Death or serious injury – unlawful driving" offences are presented separately. They include:

• death by dangerous driving

• careless or inconsiderate driving

• driving under the influence of drink or drugs

• driving while being an unlicensed or uninsured driver

Homicide, stalking and harassment offences are presented separately (see Section 5.1: Homicide and Section 5.4: Stalking and harassment).

Preferred data source for violence with or without injury: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is the preferred source for tracking overall trends in violence with or without injury, as it provides a more reliable long-term measure than police records. While the survey accurately estimates "non-domestic" violence (incidents involving strangers or acquaintances), it tends to underestimate domestic violence because victims may be reluctant to disclose incidents during face-to-face interviews. This means prevalence rates from the survey's self-completion module are the preferred measure for domestic abuse (which includes estimates of physical abuse) and are published separately.

Police recorded crime data remain essential for providing a detailed mix of the violent crimes police handle and for identifying local crime hotspots at a more granular level than the CSEW can provide.

Further information on police recorded violence with or without injury

Long-term trends in police recorded violence with or without injury are affected by changes to police recording processes and practices. This includes:

• improvements to recording practices

• expansion of the recorded crime collection to include new offences

• changes to HOCR and variations in police activity

This effect has been more pronounced for some crime types. For many types of offence, these figures do not provide reliable trends in crime. However, recent decreases in these offences may be because the effect of recording improvements has lessened.

Police recorded crime data are subject to changes in police recording practices. Changes to the HOCR in 1998 had a profound impact on the recording of violent and sexual crime. The number of "violence against the person" offences recorded by the police increased by 118% because of the 1998 changes, according to the Home Office's Recorded crime statistics for England and Wales, April 1998 to March 1999 report (PDF, 118KB). Much of this increase resulted from a widening of the offence coverage to include assaults with little or no physical injury and offences of harassment (with no injury).

The National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) was introduced in April 2002. This also resulted in increased recording of violent and sexual crimes, particularly for less serious offences and for some other offences. There was an estimated "NCRS effect" of 23% on violence against the person offences in the first 12 months of implementation. However, it was recognised that this effect was unlikely to be complete within the first 12 months, as outlined in the Home Office's National Crime Recording Standard: An analysis of the impact on recorded crime report (PDF, 277KB), published in 2003.

Crime recording accuracy for violence with or without injury in England and Wales also increased following the HMICFRS inspection of all 43 territorial police forces in 2014, as described in their Crime recording: making the victim count report (PDF, 1.1MB). In 2014, an estimated two-thirds of violence with or without injury offences (67%) that were brought to the attention of the police and should have been recorded as crimes were actually recorded. Following improvements to recording practices, this had increased to 94% according to the most recent data available in 2025. For more information, see HMICFRS's How effectively do the police record crime? publication.

5.4 Stalking and harassment

Definitions

Stalking is defined in the CSEW as two or more incidents causing distress, fear, or alarm. The police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) define stalking as a pattern of unwanted, fixated and obsessive behaviour that is intrusive; it can include harassment that amounts to stalking or stalking that causes fear of violence, or serious alarm or distress in the victim. The offender's behaviours may appear "harmless" and may in themselves seem lawful, particularly if considered in isolation, rather than as part of a pattern of behaviour.

CSEW harassment is designed to measure wider experiences of harassment, including one-off incidents of harassment; this differs from the definition of harassment in police recorded crime.

Harassment, as defined by the police, is behaviour intended to cause a person alarm or distress. The behaviour must occur on more than one occasion, but it does not have the be the same kind of behaviour on each occasion. It addresses series of incidents that do not amount to the commission of a substantive offence by themselves but, when looked at as a course of conduct, are likely to cause fear, alarm or distress.

The CSEW repeated harassment measure is closer aligned to police recorded harassment, as it only includes related incidents that occur on more than one occasion.

Preferred data source for stalking and harassment: Crime for Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is the preferred source for assessing the prevalence of stalking and harassment and provides a good indicator of current levels of these offences. However, changes in measurement mean current figures for stalking cannot be directly compared with older data; harassment figures are only available from YE March 2023 onwards. CSEW harassment provides a measure of repeated harassment, but further development is needed to align it more closely with police recorded harassment.

Police records for these conduct crimes have been substantially affected by changing recording rules. Between 2018 and May 2023, police were required to record stalking or harassment, in addition to any other reported crime from the same incident. Since May 2023, rules changed to require only one record, ideally the conduct crime, as it typically has the greatest impact on the victim. However, HMICFRS highlighted that police still frequently fail to record conduct crimes at all or prioritise other offences over them when multiple crimes are reported; for more information, see their How effectively do the police record crime? publication.

5.5 Other violent offences and domestic abuse

The other violent offences recorded by the police include:

• attempted murder

• conspiracy to murder

• endangering life

• cruelty or neglect to children

• abandoning a child under two years of age

• child abduction

• kidnapping

Domestic abuse-related offences

Police recorded crime statistics do not specifically identify offences of domestic abuse because it is not a legal definition. Such offences are recorded in accordance with the intent of the offence and any injuries sustained, for example, assault with injury. However, cases involving domestic abuse are flagged as such, which enables identification of domestic abuse-related offences.

A new law defining "controlling or coercive behaviour in intimate or familial relationships" as a criminal offence was enacted in December 2015. This enabled the police to capture coercive control through psychological and emotional abuse, as well as physical abuse, and to identify this as a separate offence.

Crime Survey for England and Wales domestic abuse

Based on the new CSEW domestic abuse questions, a victim of domestic abuse is defined as someone who has been a victim of at least one of the specified abuse types and therefore experienced one or more of the abusive behaviours carried out by a current or ex-partner, or other family member. The abuse types included are:

• emotional abuse

• economic abuse

• health abuse

• marital-status-related abuse

• domestic threats

• domestic stalking

• domestic sexual assault

• physical abuse

Details on which abusive behaviours are included in each abuse type are in Section 11: Concepts and definitions of our Evaluating a new measure of domestic abuse methodology.

5.6 Sexual victimisation

Definitions

Sexual victimisation

The CSEW sexual victimisation module captures a range of sexual offences, including:

• rape or assault by penetration (including attempts)

• being forced to penetrate

• indecent exposure

• unwanted sexual touching

• sharing or receiving intimate images

Sexual offences

In police recorded crime figures, "sexual offences" cover a broader range of offences than are measured by the CSEW, including:

• rape

• sexual assault

• sexual activity with minors

• sexual exploitation of children

• other sexual offences

There are several different offence codes used for rape and sexual assault, depending on the age and sex of the victim.

The group of "other sexual offences" recorded by the police covers sexual assault and unlawful sexual activity. These offences can involve consenting adults or children and is therefore particularly influenced by police activity in investigating these crimes. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 introduced certain offences, such as sexual grooming, indecent exposure, and other miscellaneous sexual offences.

Preferred data source for sexual victimisation: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW self-completion module is the preferred source for estimating the prevalence of sexual victimisation. Face-to-face interviews produce numbers that are too low and unreliable to report because of the sensitive nature of these crimes. This means that most sexual offences are excluded from the CSEW headline crime count (except sexual wounding offences).

Since YE March 2005, the survey has used a private self-completion module to encourage disclosure of sexual offences. While these estimates provide a strong indication of current prevalence, smaller sample sizes in some previous years have resulted in larger margins of error and fluctuating trends. Recent improvement to measurement also means that current figures are not comparable with previous figures.

Police recorded crime is not used for trend analysis, as rising figures often reflect improvements in police recording and an increased willingness of victims to come forward, rather than a real-world increase in crime.

5.7 Robbery

Definitions

A robbery is an incident or offence in which force, or the threat of force, is used either during or immediately before a theft or attempted theft. As with "violence against the person", police recorded robberies cover a wide range of seriousness, from armed bank robberies to muggings for mobile phones or small amounts of money.

Recorded crime offences also distinguish between robbery of personal property ("personal robbery") and business property ("business robbery"). Robbery of business property is a recorded crime classification where goods stolen belong to a business or other corporate body (such as a bank or a shop), regardless of the location of the robbery. The taking of vehicles during robberies (carjacking) is also included as robbery.

The CSEW covers robberies against individuals aged 16 years and over who are resident in households. Following changes to the classification of CSEW offences implemented in July 2014, robbery is no longer included in the violent crime count and is presented in a standalone category instead. As part of the 2012 public consultation on the presentation of crime statistics, a proposal was made about the CSEW classification to move robbery out of violence and into a separate standalone category to match how these offences are treated in police recorded crime.

Preferred data source for robbery: police recorded crime

Police recorded crime is the preferred measure for robbery. For personal robbery, police data are more reliable than the CSEW, which has high year-to-year volatility because of small sample sizes. Police trends in this area are generally stable and are validated by CSEW findings.

For business robbery, police data are a reasonable trend indicator but has been affected by a clarification to HOCR in 2025. As of April 2025, rules have been clarified to ensure that if an offender uses or threatens violence against staff or security during a theft, including while attempting to escape, it must be recorded as a business robbery. This clarification has resulted in a marked increase in recorded business robbery offences since April 2025.

5.8 Theft offences

Police recorded theft offences include all offences recorded by the police involving theft, encompassing:

• burglary

• offences against vehicle owners

• theft from the person

• bicycle theft

• shoplifting

• all other theft offences

CSEW theft offences include all personal and household crime where items are stolen, including:

• theft from the person

• other theft of personal property

• domestic burglary

• vehicle-related theft

• bicycle theft

Burglary

Definitions

The CSEW covers domestic burglary only. Domestic burglary is an unauthorised entry into the victim's dwelling or building not connected to a dwelling but does not necessarily involve forced entry; entry may be through an open window or by entering the property under false pretences (for example, impersonating an official). Burglary of a dwelling and burglary of a building not connected to a dwelling are also presented separately in our statistics.

CSEW domestic burglary does not cover theft by a person who is entitled to be in the dwelling at the time of the offence (for example, party guests or tradespeople); this is called theft from a dwelling and is included in the subcategory "other household theft".

The subcategories of domestic burglary that are captured by the CSEW are:

• "burglary with entry" – comprises burglary where a building was successfully entered, whether something was stolen or not

• "burglary with loss" – comprises burglary where a building was successfully entered and something was stolen

• "burglary with no loss" – comprises burglary where a building was successfully entered but nothing was stolen

• "attempted burglary" – used if there is clear evidence that the offender made an actual, physical attempt to gain entry to a building (for example, damage to locks or broken doors) but was unsuccessful

The police record an offence of "burglary" if a person enters any building as a trespasser and with the intent to commit an offence of theft, GBH or unlawful damage. Like the CSEW, police recorded residential burglary separates out offences into burglary of the actual dwelling and burglary of unattached buildings within the grounds of the dwelling, like sheds. These categories have been in place since April 2023.

From April 2017 to March 2023, residential burglary was not separated out by burglary of the actual dwelling and burglary of unattached buildings. These classification changes affect percentage change figures for all subcategories of burglary where it is not currently possible to make meaningful comparisons over time. There were no changes made to burglary in commercial or community buildings (non-residential burglaries). Figures for total burglary are unaffected by the classification changes.

Preferred source for domestic/residential burglary: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is the preferred source for current levels and tracking long-term trends of domestic/residential burglary. Police records are also considered reliable in this area because burglary is a well-reported crime with consistent recording practices. Though there have been several recent changes to subcategories of residential burglary, total residential burglary is comparable between these sources from April 2017 onwards.

Preferred source for non-residential burglary: police recorded crime

Police recorded crime is the primary source for data on non-residential burglary (such as businesses or outbuildings). These data are considered stable and are further validated by the Home Office Commercial Victimisation Survey.

Notably, the CSEW does not capture non-residential burglary, which makes police records essential for this offence category.

Vehicle-related theft

Definitions

The CSEW includes offences against private households only but relates to vehicles owned by any member of the household (including company cars). CSEW offences cover cars, vans, motorbikes, motor scooters, or mopeds used for non-commercial purposes. They are published in three categories:

• "theft from vehicles" – refers to both theft of parts and accessories of motor vehicles and to theft of contents

• "theft of vehicles" – a vehicle is driven away illegally, whether or not it is recovered

• "attempted thefts of and from vehicles" – no distinction is made between attempted thefts of and attempted thefts from vehicles, as it is often difficult to ascertain the offender's intention

If parts or contents are stolen and the vehicle is moved, the incident is classified as "theft of a vehicle".

The police recorded crime category of vehicle offences covers private and commercial vehicles, but does not distinguish between the two. The categories are:

• "theft or unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle" – a vehicle is taken without the consent of the owner or other lawful authority; this includes incidents where there is intent to permanently deprive the owner or where intent is not evident, typically including "joyriding" where the car is later recovered

• "aggravated vehicle taking" – a vehicle, once taken, is known to have been driven dangerously, damaged, or to have caused an accident

• "theft from a vehicle targeting property in or on the vehicle" – also includes attempts

• "interfering with a motor vehicle" – includes crimes where damage has been caused to the vehicle as part of an attempt to steal either the vehicle or its contents, or to take the vehicle without consent, but the specific intent of the offender is not obvious; for example, a car door may have been damaged, which shows an attempt was made to open it, but it cannot be determined if the intent was to steal the car or its contents

"Interfering with a motor vehicle" offences are not separately identifiable in the CSEW. Further investigation of CSEW data suggests "interfering with a motor vehicle" is often included in the attempted vehicle theft category, but could be viewed as criminal damage or even as nuisance in some instances.

The taking of vehicles during robberies (carjacking) is included within the robbery offence group.

Preferred data source for vehicle theft against individuals and households: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is the preferred source for current levels and tracking long-term trends in thefts against individuals and households.

Police recorded crime also provides a reliable indicator, as vehicle theft has high reporting rates and consistent recording standards.

Preferred data source for vehicle theft against businesses and organisations: police recorded crime

We rely on police recorded crime data for thefts against businesses and organisations, as these incidents are not captured by the CSEW. However, a limitation of police data is that vehicle thefts against businesses are not currently categorised separately from personal thefts. To supplement this, data from the Home Office Commercial Victimisation Survey can be used to provide a more complete picture of business-related vehicle crime.

Bicycle theft

Definition

Police recorded crime includes offences where a pedal cycle is stolen or taken without authorisation. The CSEW covers thefts of bicycles belonging to the respondent or any other member of the household. This category does not include every bicycle theft, as some may be stolen during the course of another offence (for example, burglary). Where this is the case, the offence will not be recorded as bicycle theft but as the more serious crime type. Therefore, where a bicycle is stolen as part of another offence, it would be classified by the police and in the CSEW as:

• "burglary" – when the bicycle is stolen from inside a house by someone who was trespassing; if a bicycle is stolen from a connected garage or non-connected garage or outhouse and no attempt was made to steal anything else, then this is classified as bicycle theft

• "theft from a dwelling" – when the bicycle is stolen from inside a house by someone who was not trespassing

• "theft from a vehicle" – if the bicycle is one of a number of things stolen

• "theft of a vehicle" – if the bicycle was in or on the vehicle when it was stolen

Preferred source for bicycle theft: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is the preferred source for current levels and tracking long-term trends in bicycle theft. While the survey provides a reliable historical view, the relatively low number of victims in the sample can lead to some year-to-year volatility in the estimates.

Police recorded crime is also considered a reasonable indicator of trends, as recording practices in this category have remained stable over time.

Other household theft

Definition

CSEW "other household theft" covers:

• "theft from a dwelling" – includes thefts that occurred in the victim's dwelling by someone who was entitled to be there

• "theft from outside a dwelling" – covers both incidents where items are stolen from outside the victim's home and thefts in non-connected buildings (for example, garden sheds) by someone who was entitled to be there

Preferred source for other household theft: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is the preferred source for current levels and tracking long-term trends in other household theft. Although these offences are captured in police recorded crime, they are not separately identifiable from within the "other theft offences" category.

Theft from the person

Definitions

"Theft from the person" covers theft (including attempts) of a handbag, wallet or cash, among other things, directly from the victim, but without the use of physical force or threat of physical force against the victim. The CSEW category is broken down into three subcategories:

• "snatch theft" – where there may be an element of force involved but this is only just enough to snatch the property away

• "stealth theft" – where no force is used and the victim is unaware of the incident (pickpocketing); stealth theft makes up the majority of "theft from the person" incidents

• "attempted snatch or stealth theft" – where an attempt is made to steal, which may or may not involve an element of (minor) force, but is unsuccessful

For police recorded crime, "theft from the person" offences are those where there is no use of threat or force in the process of the theft. Stealth theft is included as part of this recorded crime category and cannot be separately identified from snatch theft.

Preferred source for theft from the person: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is the preferred source for current levels and tracking long-term trends in theft from the person. Its estimates are prone to year-to-year volatility because of the relatively small number of victims identified in the sample. However, the trends observed in the CSEW are largely validated by police data.

Police records provide a more stable indication of trends and have not been substantially impacted by changes in recording practices, but are likely to be underreported.

Other theft of personal property

Definition

CSEW "other theft of personal property" covers thefts away from the home where:

• no force was used

• there was no direct contact between the offender and victim

• the victim was not holding or carrying the items when they were stolen (for example, thefts of unattended property)

Preferred source for other theft of personal property: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is the preferred source for current levels and tracking other theft of personal property.

These offences are captured in police recorded crime, but they are not separately identifiable from within the "other theft offences" category.

Other police recorded theft categories

Police recorded crime is the primary source for shoplifting data, as this offence is not captured by the CSEW. However, these statistics should be interpreted with caution; shoplifting is frequently underreported, so fluctuations in the data may reflect changes in reporting behaviour or police recording practices, rather than actual crime levels. The Home Office Commercial Victimisation Survey provides some validation, but its small sample size often leads to year-to-year volatility, making long-term trends difficult to isolate.

The police recorded crime offence group of "other theft" offences covers thefts that are not covered by other acquisitive crime offence groups (for example, thefts from vehicles are included in offences against vehicles). For example, unauthorised taking (including metal theft) is included in the "other theft" offences category. A new metal theft data collection has been established because of the volume of metal theft crime, and its impact on the economy and the particular industries that are targeted. More information is available in our Property crime tables, England and Wales dataset.

Theft of business property is covered in police recorded crime but is not separately identifiable from personal or household theft offences.

5.9 Criminal damage and arson

Definitions

The CSEW defines criminal damage as intentional and malicious damage to the home, other property or vehicles, which ranges from arson to graffiti. Where damage occurs in combination with burglary or robbery, the burglary or robbery codes take precedence over the damage codes in offence coding.

The CSEW produces estimates for criminal damage to vehicles, and arson and other criminal damage (to the home and other property). "Criminal damage to a vehicle" includes any intentional and malicious damage to a vehicle, such as scratching a coin down the side of a car or denting a car roof. However, it does not include causing deliberate damage to a car by fire; these incidents are recorded as arson and, therefore, are included in the "arson and other criminal damage" category. The CSEW only covers damage against private households.

Police recorded criminal damage results from any person who, without lawful excuse, destroys or damages any property belonging to another, intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged. Damage that is repairable without cost, or that is accidental, is not included in police recorded crime statistics. Vehicle criminal damage is classified under the offence "criminal damage to a vehicle". "Arson and other criminal damage" includes intentional or malicious damage to the home or other property and arson, where there is any deliberate damage to property belonging to the respondent or their household (including vehicles) caused by fire.

For vehicle crime, if a vehicle is stolen and later found deliberately destroyed by arson by the same offender, one crime of "theft of a vehicle" is recorded by the police and in the CSEW. If there is evidence that someone unconnected with the theft committed the arson, then an offence of "arson" is recorded by the police, in addition to the theft. For the CSEW, only an offence of "theft of a vehicle" would be recorded because, in practice, it would often not be possible to establish that the arson was committed by someone unconnected with the theft.

Preferred source for criminal damage and arson against individuals and households: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is the preferred source for current levels and tracking long-term trends in criminal damage and arson against individuals and households.

Police records are also considered reliable in this area because of consistent recording practices, but some offences are likely to be underreported.

Preferred source for criminal damage and arson against businesses, organisations and society and the state: police recorded crime

Police recorded offences against business are not separately identifiable and these offences are not captured by the CSEW. Instead, we can use information from the Home Office Commercial Victimisation Survey.

5.10 Fraud and computer misuse

Definitions

Fraud involves a person dishonestly and deliberately deceiving a victim for personal gain of property or money or causing loss or risk of loss to another. The legal definition of fraud in England and Wales is set out in the Fraud Act 2006. Most incidents fall under the legal definition of "fraud by false representation", where a person makes a representation that they know to be untrue or misleading (for example, banking and payment card frauds, and dating scams).

Computer misuse is when fraudsters hack or use computer viruses or malware to disrupt services, obtain information illegally, or extort individuals or organisations. These offences are covered by the Computer Misuse Act 1990.

The CSEW categories for fraud and computer misuse include:

• "advance fee fraud" – occurs when a payment is made to fraudsters, who claim to be in a position of authority, to transfer money or for a promise of employment, wealth or gifts (including lottery scams and inheritance fraud)

• "bank and credit account fraud" – usually involves falsely obtaining or using personal bank or payment card details to carry out fraudulent transactions; this can involve using a false identity, deceitful credit application, credit or debit cards, cloned cards, cheque books, or online accounts

• "consumer and retail fraud" – occurs when goods or services were paid for but failed to materialise, were misrepresented at point of sale, or were faulty or stolen; this includes bogus callers, ticketing fraud, phone scams, and computer software service fraud

• "other fraud" – includes categories that do not meet the criteria for advance fee fraud, banking and credit account fraud, or consumer and retail fraud; this includes investment fraud and charity fraud

• "computer misuse" – unauthorised access to personal information (including hacking)

• "computer virus" – includes any computer virus, malware or Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack; a DDoS attack is an attempt to make a machine or online resource unavailable to its intended users

Recorded fraud and computer misuse

Recorded fraud and computer misuse are classified into Report Fraud categories. All recorded computer misuse presented in our statistics are recorded by the City of London police in the Report Fraud system. However, recorded fraud includes reports from industry bodies that have not been classified as crimes by the City of London police using the HOCR. Therefore, we refer to these figures as the "recorded fraud series", rather than police recorded fraud.

The CSEW fraud and computer misuse categories broadly align with the classification system used by Report Fraud. However, some Report Fraud categories do not apply to the general household population, such as "fraud by abuse of position". Other categories have been subsumed into the "other fraud" category, such as "charity fraud", where numbers were considered too small for measurement by the survey.

For information on how CSEW categories align with Report Fraud categories, see Appendix 3. More information about these fraud types is available in the Home Office Counting Rules for fraud (PDF, 1.2MB).

Preferred data source for fraud and computer misuse against individuals and households: Crime Survey for England and Wales

The CSEW is our preferred source for understanding current levels and trends in fraud and computer misuse. It provides reliable estimates of the extent of fraud and computer misuse against individuals and households. CSEW estimates capture high-volume, lower-harm offences well, but are not as good at providing reliable figures on more serious forms of fraud or computer misuse.

Recorded fraud and computer misuse are not reliable indicators of overall volume or trends. Many victims do not report incidents to Report Fraud. Data from Report Fraud cover only those crimes that are reported to them. Approximately 13% of fraud incidents and 4% of computer misuse incidents estimated by the CSEW were reported to Report Fraud in YE March 2026. Trends over time in recorded fraud have also been affected by changes in reporting and recording systems, and improvements to recording practices.

Preferred data source for fraud and computer misuse against businesses, organisations, state and society: recorded fraud and computer misuse series

Recorded fraud and computer misuse are not reliable indicators of overall volume or trends. Data on fraud against businesses and organisations are mainly based on reports from Cifas and UK Finance, which only cover their member organisations. They do not represent all businesses and organisations in England and Wales, and membership changes over time, which affects data comparability. The CSEW does not capture these offences.

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology's Cyber security breaches survey provides additional information on computer misuse offences against businesses and organisations. The Home Office's Economic Crime Survey provides additional information on fraud against UK businesses.

Further information on Crime Survey for England and Wales fraud and computer misuse

Questions on fraud and computer misuse were fully integrated into the CSEW in 2015. Further information on the development, testing and evaluation of these questions can be found in our CSEW Fraud and Cyber crime development: Field trial - October 2015 methodological note (PDF, 382KB).

Up to the end of September 2017, only half the survey sample was asked the new questions; this was done to test for detrimental effects on the survey as a whole and to help ensure that the historical time series was protected. From October 2017 onwards, the full survey sample was asked the new questions. We have accounted for this combination of full and half survey sample by scaling up the weights to represent the total population. Fraud and computer misuse have formed part of the CSEW headline crime estimates since YE March 2017.

Fraud and computer misuse statistics were formally assessed by the Office for Statistics Regulation against the Code of Practice for Statistics and were awarded national statistics status in March 2018.

Further information on recorded fraud and computer misuse

Report Fraud are responsible for bringing together reports made through its public-facing service with fraud and cybercrime reports from two industry bodies, Cifas and UK Finance. These are shared with statisticians in the Home Office and the ONS for presentation in crime statistics, as outlined in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Sources of administrative data on fraud

Source: Office for National Statistics

Notes:

1. Report Fraud was launched by City of London on 04 December 2025.
2. Further information on decisions around when a crime should be recorded is provided in the National Crime Recording Standard.

Download this image Figure 5: Sources of administrative data on fraud

.png (136.4 kB)

Report Fraud public-facing service

Report Fraud is a new national cybercrime and fraud reporting system that was launched by the City of London Police (CoLP) on 4 December 2025 to replace Action Fraud and the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB). Members of the public who have been a direct victim of fraud can report incidents to Report Fraud online or by phone. Some victims are unaware of Report Fraud and report to their local police force, who either direct them to Report Fraud or submit the offence to Report Fraud on the victim's behalf.

Most financial institutions, insurance and telecommunication companies provide reports of fraudulent activity to industry bodies, such as UK Finance and Cifas. Some businesses and organisations report incidents of cybercrime and fraud directly to Report Fraud. This includes small- to medium-size businesses and charities. Even large corporations and government bodies will report directly to Report Fraud where they want a formal police record.

Other bodies also investigate cybercrime and fraud, such as the National Cyber Security Centre and the Serious Fraud Office. All incidents reported through these routes should also be reported to Report Fraud, but they are not always. As a result, these crimes may be missing from the official statistics.

Report Fraud receives reports from across the UK as a whole and the figures for England and Wales are based on victims' address details. Cases of fraud where the victim's address is known to be outside of England and Wales are removed from the statistics, as no information is available on where offences take place and this is often hard to define for fraud offences.

Report Fraud analyses the fraud reports to identify potential lines of enquiry for a police investigation. Where a viable lead is identified for investigation, Report Fraud will distribute packages that contain batches of offences that appear to be linked and hold intelligence value for the police (crime packages) to police forces or other appropriate agencies.

Report Fraud public-facing service – crime recording process and quality assurance

Similar to other crime types, when an incident is reported by phone to Report Fraud, the recording of the allegation will be recorded. This is in line with National Crime Recording Standards and Home Office Crime Counting rules, relating to the recording of crime and incidents. Reports made by the victim using the online reporting tool will be automatically assessed by the system and classified as a crime or incident at the time the record is made.

CoLP's dedicated Report Fraud Force Crime Registrar (FCR) monitors the application of the HOCR relating to fraud and cybercrime; it has a final arbiter role for recording decisions. The new Report Fraud system has automated quality assurance checks that should improve the quality of recorded fraud and computer misuse data.

Cifas

Cifas is a not-for-profit fraud prevention service that gathers intelligence on fraud from over 750 members across public and private sectors in the UK. Its coverage includes all the major banks and around 90% of plastic card providers; for more information, see the list of all member organisations participating in Cifas's data-sharing scheme. Cifas intelligence is shared with both its membership and with the CoLP for reporting and investigation purposes.

In addition to offering members fraud prevention services, Cifas collects data in their National Fraud Database (NFD) for the UK on a range of different frauds and financial crimes, including:

• banking and credit industry (including cheque, plastic card and online bank accounts, application fraud, and mortgage-related fraud)

• insurance-related fraud

• telecom industry fraud

• business trading fraud

• fraudulent applications for grants from charities

Cifas data do not currently include data on "remote purchase" fraud (where the card is not present). Most cases of remote purchase fraud involve card details that have been fraudulently obtained through unsolicited emails or telephone calls, or digital attacks, such as malware and data hacks. Card details are then used to make fraudulent purchases over the internet, phone or by mail order.

Cifas does not hold data on fraud relating to lost or stolen cards and ATM (cash machine) fraud. This means that a high proportion of plastic card fraud is not included in our fraud statistics. However, some victims may report such incidents directly to Report Fraud.

Cifas break down their data based on available information on addresses; these data are included in our published fraud figures at an England and Wales level. Address information may be the victim's address or it may be an address used by the fraudster.

Cifas reports

All members record instances of fraudulent activity by creating a case on Cifas's NFD, after they have investigated it. Cifas currently shares all cases (information reports) that could amount to a crime with Report Fraud. Before 4 December 2025, Cifas only shared a subset of reports for intelligence purposes, which meant that some reports that could amount to crimes were not passed on.

Before sending to the CoLP, Cifas conducts the following quality assurance steps on their reports, including:

• ensuring its members follow the Cifas National Fraud Database Handbook for information reports; these principles outline the standard of proof required to file a case to the NFD, and adhering to these principles helps members maintain the quality and integrity of the data

• carrying out a compliance review process, which checks the accuracy of the information recorded and whether the case meets the required standard of proof for a sample of records; members are asked to verify the information and send the evidence to Cifas, which is then reviewed and validated

• carrying out additional checks to help identify inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the data; for example, data subject access requests from individuals are used for review of information reports

Cifas also share aggregate-level data based on their reports directly with the Home Office. This provides data on the number of reports shared with Report Fraud by type of fraud. Cifas classify reports by types of fraud that closely align with fraud categories in the HOCR. This is currently what our published statistics for Cifas are based on.

UK Finance

UK Finance is a trade association that represents 300 firms across the UK financial industry. UK Finance provides advocacy, policy and operational services. As part of these services, it releases a fraud report twice a year, which provides the value and volume of fraud losses reported by its members. This report provides the most complete picture of the scale of fraud experienced by UK financial institutions. The latest figures are reported in their Annual Fraud Report 2026.

UK Finance also provides its members with intelligence-sharing services; one of these services shares data with the CoLP for reporting and investigation purposes.

UK Finance collates information on fraud cases from its members in a central database, the Case Management Information System (CAMIS). UK financial institutions are usually members of both UK Finance and Cifas, and are required to report all fraud incidents via CAMIS, including:

• unauthorised plastic card fraud – includes using lost or stolen cards, counterfeit cards, card ID theft where criminals use fraudulently obtained card or card details with stolen personal information to open or take over a card account held in someone else's name, and remote purchase fraud where criminals use stolen card details

• unauthorised cheque fraud – includes forged, altered and counterfeit cheques

• unauthorised remote banking fraud – includes telephone banking and online banking

• authorised push payment fraud – where victims are manipulated by criminals into sending them money

UK Finance reports from the Case Management Information System

Each case reported to UK Finance via CAMIS does not represent one person being defrauded, but instead refers to the number of cards or accounts that have been defrauded. For example, if a fraud was conducted on two cards that both belonged to the same person, this would represent two instances of fraud, not one.

The information on CAMIS goes through an extensive quality assurance process. This includes:

• automated checks – built into the monthly preset templates that members complete; these help to ensure that there is always a loss associated with a report, for example

• data plausibility (inputs) checks – data for individual members are subject to range-check scrutiny against previously submitted data at a granular level, which is automated within spreadsheets or by manual assessment

• data plausibility (outputs) checks – for public-facing data series, data management spreadsheets include visible warnings if a data observation is a series outlier or falls outside defined tolerance intervals

• consistency checks – to identify unusual changes between time periods at both the member and industry level; datasets containing totals and subtotals are automatically checked by the system, which highlights errors that result in a "failed submission" and require amendment

• reconciliation process – where UK Finance asks members to check and sign off submissions before the annual statistics are published; UK Finance also uses other data sources, such as market share data, to validate the distribution of fraud reports across members

UK Finance provides the Home Office with data from CAMIS directly. We present these data in our quarterly bulletins to provide further context and to give a clearer picture on the full scale of fraud experienced by UK Finance members. These figures are presented at UK level only.

CAMIS data only include confirmed cases (where a loss was suffered). Therefore, figures exclude incidents of attempted fraud where the attempt has been stopped or prevented, for whatever reason (for example, by bank detection systems), before a loss has occurred. UK Finance does collect data on prevented fraud, though this is not supplied to the ONS because of the potential for double counting. The prevented fraud data are available in UK Finance's Annual Fraud Report (PDF, 2.8MB).

UK Finance reports shared with Report Fraud

UK Finance members share actionable intelligence via a separate platform that is provided by UK Finance. These intelligence reports are shared with Report Fraud for intelligence and enforcement purposes, and are not intended to be a complete record of all frauds reported by its members. This means that some reports that could amount to crimes are not passed on. This includes cases of remote purchase fraud, which accounts for a high proportion of plastic card fraud that is excluded from figures. This means that there are many cases recorded separately by UK Finance members that are not shared with Report Fraud because they hold insufficient information to be of value from an intelligence perspective.

To ensure that UK Finance information reports can be used in our statistics and that fraud offences are counted consistently, UK Finance reports shared with Report Fraud are assigned to the HOCR offence code "NFIB5A (Cheque, Plastic Card and Online Bank Accounts)".

UK Finance produces data at UK level only. Therefore, an estimate for the total number of fraud offences reported by UK Finance and referred to Report Fraud at England and Wales level is calculated from the UK figures. This is done by calculating a weighting factor for UK Finance based on the proportion of Cifas data occurring in England and Wales. Specifically, Cifas calculate the proportion of UK Cifas offences recorded as being based in England and Wales (for each fraud type common to both Cifas and UK Finance) and multiply by the proportion of offences within that fraud type. The sum of these provides an overall weighting for estimating the proportion of fraud offences measured by intelligence shared by UK Finance members that were England and Wales based.

Both sets of industry data from Cifas and UK Finance relate only to fraud that is identified and reported, and only fraud affecting organisations that are part of the respective membership networks. As such, neither dataset can provide a complete picture of fraud in the industry sectors they represent. While membership of Cifas and UK Finance has remained fairly stable over the last few years, it is possible that coverage could change as new members join or existing members withdraw. The addition or withdrawal of one large member might be sufficient to substantially affect reported overall figures for fraud.

Bringing the recorded fraud series together

Our recorded fraud statistics have included data from industry bodies since 2015. Report Fraud continues to bring together all reports made through its public-facing service, alongside fraud reports provided by Cifas and UK Finance.

Before 4 December 2025, only incidents reported directly by the public to Action Fraud were classified as crimes by Action Fraud, whereas Cifas and UK Finance reports were retained solely as information reports. In addition, Cifas and UK Finance only shared a subset of reports for intelligence purposes, which meant some reports that could amount to crimes were not passed on.

From 4 December 2025, Report Fraud has combined all reports made through its public-facing service with fraud reports from Cifas and UK Finance. Under the new system, Cifas now shares all information reports that could amount to a crime. Cifas reports are now classified as crimes when they meet the HOCR. UK Finance reports continue to be used as information reports for the purpose of supporting investigations and law enforcement.

It is important to note that Cifas and UK Finance provide data from their respective memberships to Report Fraud via their individual databases; however, several member organisations contributing to those separate databases are members of both industry bodies. It is possible, therefore, that there may be some double- or triple-counting between these two sources and the offences recorded via direct reports to Report Fraud by victims. For example, where police are called to a bank and apprehend an offender for a fraud offence, police record this crime with Report Fraud and the bank report the same crime to Cifas and UK Finance as part of their processes.

As the new Report Fraud system codes Cifas reports, a cross-referencing exercise will then be run automatically against Report Fraud crime records. Any identified duplicates will be investigated with a manual check and, if confirmed, the Cifas report will be cancelled. When this process has been tested and evaluated, it is anticipated that a similar exercise will be carried out with UK Finance data.

The Home Office and the ONS have agreed that while the CoLP start to use this new system, they can temporarily suspend their supply of recorded cybercrime and fraud data. This is to enable the CoLP to give priority to aligning the legacy Action Fraud data against Report Fraud. This will ensure consistency, improve the experience for victims reporting cybercrime and fraud, and provide essential information needed for the police to manage investigations. Therefore, recorded cybercrime and fraud data are not presented in our quarterly bulletins.

Additional quality assurance checks

The Report Fraud team at the CoLP supplies aggregate-level Report Fraud data and UK Finance intelligence data to the Home Office via Excel spreadsheets. Cifas also sends aggregate-level fraud data directly to the Home Office. The Home Office then sends data from all three sources to the ONS, and we process and publish them as the recorded fraud and computer misuse statistics for England and Wales.

Similar to other crime types, the Home Office Crime Analysis Unit and the ONS undertake a series of quality assurance checks. The Home Office carries out sense and consistency checks on receipt of aggregated Report Fraud data; they query outliers with the CoLP, who may then resubmit data. The CoLP are currently exploring how to give Home Office access to record-level information from the Report Fraud system. This would enable the Home Office to carry out more thorough quality assurance and more detailed analysis. It would also align the process for police recorded fraud and computer misuse data with other police recorded crime data.

The Home Office also receives aggregate-level Cifas and UK Finance data. Again, the Home Office's quality assurance of these data is limited to sense and consistency checks, which allow the Home Office to identify unusual changes over time. As part of its data submission, Cifas sends the Home Office a summary report on notable increases or decreases in the number of offences since the previous quarter; the report also discusses possible causes of the changes, such as changes to a company's reporting processes. Cifas also sends a list of members to highlight changes to membership, which helps the Home Office (and the ONS) contextualise the data.

Our quality assurance checks take two forms:

• an in-depth look at how the current year's figures compare with the previous year's figures

• a trends analysis, which looks for irregularities in time series data for broad aggregates (see Section 3.7: Quality assurance for further information)

Designation of fraud and computer misuse statistics

The official statistics in development label has been removed as of our quarterly Crime in England and Wales: year ending March 2024 bulletin. This is because Home Office statisticians believe the data are now provided to a consistent standard each quarter. These are now labelled official statistics.

In April 2025, the Office for Statistics Regulation published their Review of fraud and computer misuse statistics for England and Wales. The review outlined several recommendations for improvements. They included:

• strengthening the quality assurance processes for Action Fraud data

• introducing HMICFRS inspections for these crime types

• better communication about the quality of these statistics

5.11 Crimes against children

Abuse as a child

An additional self-completion module was added to the YE March 2016 CSEW. This module asked questions about experiences of abuse respondents aged 16 to 59 years may have suffered as a child. It only asked about abuse perpetrated by an adult. Childhood was defined as the period the respondent was aged under 16 years. This first version of the module defined childhood abuse within four distinct domains:

• emotional abuse

• physical abuse

• any sexual abuse

• witnessing domestic abuse as a child

Questions within this module were refined following consultation with stakeholders and the module was included for a second time in the YE March 2019 survey. Changes made to the questions included asking about sexual abuse perpetrated by anyone, rather than adults only, and separating experiences of sexual abuse into contact and non-contact. This module was asked of respondents aged 18 to 74 years.

This module returned to the field in April 2023 in the YE March 2024 CSEW. Following engagement with stakeholders and cognitive testing of the questions in 2022, further changes were made to the questionnaire to improve the quality of estimates produced. Importantly, the module is asked of all respondents aged 18 years and over, and covers experiences of abuse before the age of 18 years, rather than 16 years. This uses a definition of childhood that is in alignment with the legal definition. Other main changes include adding data collection on neglect as an additional domain of abuse, separating out sibling abuse as a response option, and improving questions relating to abuse perpetrated by those aged under 18 years.

We present data on child emotional abuse, child physical abuse, child sexual abuse, and child neglect in our Abuse during childhood in England and Wales: March 2024 bulletin, published on 5 November 2025.

Emotional abuse

Child emotional abuse is the persistent emotional maltreatment of a child that causes severe and persistent adverse effects on the child's emotional development. It may involve:

• conveying to a child that they are worthless, unloved, inadequate, or valued only as far as they meet the needs of another person

• not giving the child opportunities to express their views, deliberately silencing them, or "making fun" of what they say or how they communicate

• age- or developmentally inappropriate expectations being imposed on children

• seeing or hearing the ill-treatment of another

• serious bullying, causing children frequently to feel frightened or in danger

• the exploitation or corruption of children

All types of maltreatment of a child involve some level of emotional abuse, but it may also occur alone. A child may be emotionally abused by an adult or multiple adults, or by another child or multiple children.

Emotional abuse is only captured by the CSEW where the perpetrator was a person aged 18 years and over.

Physical abuse

Child physical abuse is the non-accidental infliction of physical force on a child. This may involve:

• hitting

• throwing

• poisoning

• burning or scalding

• suffocating

• otherwise causing physical harm to a child

• a parent or carer fabricating the symptoms of, or deliberately inducing, illness in a child

A child may be physically abused by an adult or adults or by another child or children.

Physical abuse is only captured by the CSEW where the perpetrator was a person aged 18 years and over.

Sexual abuse

Child sexual abuse estimates from the YE March 2024 CSEW include three subcategories:

• non-contact sexual abuse

• contact sexual abuse

• rape or assault by penetration (including attempts)

This definition has been expanded since the questions were first included in the YE March 2016 CSEW. For the YE March 2024 survey, the following acts were included in each category.

Non-contact sexual abuse includes:

• where the respondent indicated that someone made them watch or listen to sexual acts or look at sexual images

• made or shared sexual images of the victim

• deliberately exposed themselves to the victim

• sent the victim sexual images or videos of themselves or others

Contact sexual abuse is defined by being touched sexually; it includes:

• touching or kissing any part of your body with any part of their body in a sexual way

• being forced into touching your own or someone else's body for sexual purposes

Unlike in previous publications, this category does not include rape or assault by penetration (including attempts) for the YE March 2024. It also does not include any acts where a person is made to penetrate another person, with a penis or any object.

Rape or assault by penetration (including attempt) is any act where a person is penetrated without consent, or is made to penetrate another person, with a penis or any object in either case.

Child sexual abuse is captured by the CSEW where the abuse was carried out by both perpetrators under 18 years of age and aged 18 years and over.

Neglect

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) define four types of neglect:

• physical neglect – not meeting a child's basic needs

• educational neglect – not making sure child receives an education

• emotional neglect – not meeting child's needs for nurture and stimulation

• medical neglect – not providing appropriate healthcare

For the NSPCC definition of neglect, see their Protecting children from neglect webpage.

In the CSEW, neglect is defined as:

• not meeting a child's basic needs, such as for food, clothing or shelter

• not supervising a child adequately or providing for their safety

The CSEW only captures neglect where the perpetrator was a parent, carer or guardian.

5.12 Other crimes against society

This high-level category was introduced to separate out crimes that do not normally have a specific identifiable victim. Trends in such offences can reflect changes in police activity, rather than in levels of crime. "Other crimes against society" includes the categories of "drug offences", "possession of weapons", "public order", and "miscellaneous crimes against society".

Drug offences

Drug offences include:

• trafficking in controlled drugs

• possession of controlled drugs (excluding cannabis)

• possession of cannabis

Preferred source for drug offences: police recorded crime

Trends are available from police recorded crime figures, but these do not currently provide a reliable indication of trends in crime. These figures reflect levels of police activity, rather than levels of crime.

We cover illicit drug use based on results from CSEW in our Drug misuse in England and Wales articles.

Possession of weapons

Possession of weapons offences relate to licensing, ownership and carrying of weapons where there was no violence involved at the time of the offence. Trends in these offences can be influenced by police activity. Any circumstances in which a weapon has been used against a victim would be covered by other relevant victim-based offences.

Preferred source for possession of weapons offences: police recorded crime

Trends are available from police recorded crime figures, but these do not currently provide a reliable indication of trends in crime. These figures reflect levels of police activity, rather than levels of crime.

Public order offences

These offences cover circumstances where an offender is behaving in a way that causes, or would be likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress. These classifications would not be used in any circumstances where physical violence is used (or attempted) against a specific victim. The classification may include some cases where violence is used, or threatened. The largest proportion of such cases are state-based crimes, where the police have acted to restore public order and no individual victim has been identified.

Preferred source for public order offences: police recorded crime

Trends are available from police recorded crime figures, but these do not currently provide a reliable indication of trends in crime. These figures reflect levels of police activity, rather than levels of crime, and have also been subject to improvements in recording.

Miscellaneous crimes against society

Miscellaneous crimes against society comprise a variety of offences. The largest volume offences include:

• handling stolen goods

• threats to commit criminal damage

• perverting the course of justice

5.13 Hate crime

Hate crime covers any notifiable offence that is perceived, by the victim or any other person, as having been motivated (entirely or partially) by a hostility or prejudice to a personal characteristic or perceived personal characteristic, such as ethnicity or religion.

In 2007, the police, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Prison Service (now the National Offender Management Service), and other agencies that make up the criminal justice system agreed a common definition of "hate crime" and five "strands" that would be monitored centrally. This was mainly to ensure a consistent working definition that would allow accurate recording and monitoring. The five monitored strands are:

• race or ethnicity

• religion

• sexual orientation

• disability

• transgender identity

Crimes based on hostility to age, sex or appearance, for example, can also be hate crimes, although they are not currently centrally monitored.

Hate crime can take many forms, including:

• physical attacks – such as assault, GBH and murder, damage to property, offensive graffiti, and arson

• threat of attack – such as offensive letters, abusive or obscene telephone calls, groups hanging around to intimidate, and unfounded, malicious complaints

• verbal abuse, insults or harassment – such as taunting, offensive leaflets and posters, abusive gestures, dumping of rubbish outside homes or through letterboxes, and bullying at school or in the workplace

Statistics on hate crime, covering both crimes recorded by the police and estimates from the CSEW (every third year) are published in the Home Office's Hate crime statistical release.

Racially or religiously motivated hate crime

The CSEW question on whether an incident was motivated by race was first introduced in 1988, and has been kept as a separate question since then. CSEW information on racially motivated hate crime has been previously published in the Ministry of Justice's Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System publication.

Religiously motivated hate crime used to be asked as a separate question in the YE March 2006 and YE March 2007 CSEW. This question was merged into the main CSEW questions when further hate crime questions referring to sexual orientation, age, and disability were introduced in YE March 2008. Gender was added as a motivation in the YE March 2010 survey, and transgender or gender identity was added as a motivation to the YE March 2012 survey.

Racially aggravated offences are also collated through police recorded crime data and are legally defined under Section 28 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 (Section 39) added the religiously aggravated aspect. Racially and religiously aggravated offences are categorised together in police recorded crime and cannot be separately identified.

5.14 Anti-social behaviour

The term "anti-social behaviour" (ASB) was formalised in the late 1990s to describe a wide range of nuisance, disorder and crime that affects people's daily lives.

The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 defined ASB in law as someone "acting in a manner that caused, or was likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself".

Police recorded anti-social behaviour incidents

ASB incidents are recorded by the police, in accordance with the National Standard for Incident Recording (NSIR).

In many cases, these incidents may still be crimes in law, such as littering or dog fouling, but they are not severe enough to result in the recording of a notifiable offence. Thus, they are not included in the main police recorded crime collection.

Figures should be interpreted as incidents recorded by the police. However, these figures do provide an incomplete count of the extent of reported ASB, as some incidents (for example, problems with nuisance neighbours) are also reported to other agencies, such as local authorities or social landlords. Such reports will not generally be included in these police figures.

From YE March 2012, ASB has been organised into three categories:

• personal

• nuisance

• environmental

Personal

Personal ASB includes incidents that are perceived as either deliberately targeted at an individual or group, or having an impact on an individual or group, rather than the community at large.

It includes a range of incidents, from those that cause concern, stress, disquiet, and/or irritation, to those that have a serious impact on people's quality of life. At one extreme of the spectrum, it includes minor annoyance; at the other end, it could result in risk of harm, deterioration of health, and disruption of mental or emotional well-being, resulting in an inability to conduct normal day-to-day activities through fear and intimidation.

Nuisance

Nuisance ASB incidents are where an act, condition, thing, or person causes trouble, annoyance, irritation, inconvenience, offence, or suffering to the local community in general, rather than to individual victims. It includes incidents where behaviour goes beyond the conventional bounds of acceptability and interferes with public interests, including health, safety and quality of life.

Just as individuals have differing expectations and levels of tolerance, communities have different ideas about what behaviour goes beyond being tolerable or acceptable.

Environmental

The environmental ASB category deals with the interface between people and places. It includes incidents where individuals and groups have an impact on their surroundings, including natural, built and social environments.

This category is about encouraging reasonable behaviour while managing and protecting the various environments so that people can enjoy their own private spaces, as well as shared and public spaces.

Quality in recording of anti-social behaviour incidents

Incidents are recorded under NSIR in accordance with the same "victim-focused" approach that applies for recorded crime. However, these figures are not quality assured as frequently as the main recorded crime collection, and data are validated by forces on an annual, rather than quarterly, basis.

A 2010 report by HMICFRS raised concerns over the recording of ASB incidents. Based on their review of around 1,000 ASB incidents, they found that some incidents recorded by the police as ASB were instead being recorded as crimes and that incidents handled this way varied between police forces. They also found that there was poor identification of repeat, vulnerable and intimidated victims of ASB at the first point of contact.

HMICFRS also found that there was greater variation in the recording of anti-social incidents across police forces than in recording notifiable offences. There was variation in how police forces recorded types of ASB incidents into the three strands, which have been used since YE March 2012. This suggests that there are still discrepancies in how police forces are categorising incidents.

Recent inspections by HMICFRS have found that many forces need to improve how they identify and record ASB, as outlined in their The policing response to antisocial behaviour report.

Perceptions and experiences of anti-social behaviour measured by the Crime Survey for England and Wales

Questions about actual experiences of ASB problems were added for the first time to the YE March 2012 CSEW. Analysis is presented on the proportions of people who have experienced any of 13 specific types of ASB, including:

• begging, vagrancy or homeless people

• drink-related behaviour

• groups hanging around on the streets

• inconsiderate behaviour – includes repeated and/or inappropriate use of fireworks, youths kicking and/or throwing balls in inappropriate areas, cycling and/or skateboarding in pedestrian areas or obstructing pavements, and people throwing stones and/or bottles

• litter, rubbish or dog fouling

• loud music or other noise

• nuisance neighbours

• out-of-control or dangerous dogs

• people being intimidated, verbally abused or harassed

• people committing inappropriate or indecent sexual acts in public

• people using or dealing drugs

• vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to property

• vehicle-related behaviour – includes inconvenient and/or illegal parking, abandoned vehicles, speeding cars or motorcycles, car revving, and joyriding

We discussed the impact of the CSEW questionnaire changes on responses to questions on ASB in our Methodology note. The analysis showed there was evidence of a small order effect on estimates of any ASB. However, the order effect observed in Module C did not result in a significant change to prevalence estimates of any ASB.

The CSEW also has two long-standing questions on ASB. They are: "how much of a problem is ASB in your area" and "how much of a problem are specific behaviours in your area". Responses may include:

• abandoned or burnt-out cars

• noisy neighbours or loud parties

• people being drunk or rowdy in public places

• people using or dealing drugs

• rubbish or litter lying around

• teenagers hanging around on the streets

• vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to property

6.1 Perceptions of crime levels

Questions on the perception of change in national and local crime have been included in the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) since 1996. Perceptions of local crime levels used to be asked of the whole sample that had lived at their address for three or more years, but since April 2008 the question has been asked of three-quarters of the sample, irrespective of how long they have lived at their address (with the exception of the year ending (YE) March 2012, when this question was asked of half the sample). For trend comparisons, respondents who have lived at their address for less than three years have been excluded from YE March 2009 to YE March 2012 figures.

6.2 Worry about crime

The worry about crime indicator on the CSEW has four components: worry about burglary, car crime, violent crime and, fraud. The measure for worry about burglary is the percentage of respondents who say they are "very worried" about having their home broken into and something stolen, and the measure for worry about fraud is the percentage of respondents who say they are "very worried" about being a victim of fraud.

The measure for worry about car crime is based on two questions on worry about "having your car stolen" and "having things stolen from your car". It uses a scale that scores answers to the questions as follows:

• two equals "very worried"

• one equals "fairly worried"

• zero equals "not very worried" and "not at all worried"

Scores for individual respondents are calculated by summing the scores across each question, resulting in an overall score ranging from zero to four. The percentage for this component is based on respondents residing in households owning, or with regular use of, a car and who score three or four on this scale.

The measure for worry about violent crime is based on a scale constructed from questions on worry about mugging, rape, physical attack by a stranger and racially motivated assault. The same coding system for question responses is used as for the car crime questions. Once results from the four questions are combined, the scale for the overall score ranges from zero (that is, all responses are either "not very worried" or "not at all worried") to eight (that is, all responses are "very worried"). The percentage for this component is based on respondents who score four or more on this scale.

6.3 Confidence in the police and local council

Questions relating to levels of confidence in the police working with local councils was added to the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) in October 2007. The current question asks respondents for the extent to which they agree that the police and local council are dealing with the anti-social behaviour and crime issues that matter in their local area.

In April 2011, changes were made to the filtering of questions in the "Performance of the Criminal Justice System (CJS)" module for the YE March 2012 survey year, which may have brought about unintentional order effects to responses to questions in this module. A separate methodological note was produced alongside the YE March 2012 publication on "Public perceptions of policing", to explore whether changes to questions within the "Performance of the Criminal Justice System" module led to an order effect on responses to questions on attitudes to the police and the CJS.

The analysis concluded that changes to the filtering of questions in the "Performance of the Criminal Justice System" module in the YE March 2012 CSEW had an effect on responses to some of the later questions within that module on:

• overall rating of the local police

• perceptions of the local police

• confidence in the police and local council

As such, the YE March 2012 data for these questions are not directly comparable with those for earlier years.

The changes do not seem to have had an effect on responses to the questions on confidence in the CJS and therefore data for these questions are comparable over time. A full breakdown of the findings is shown in Table 5 of our Crime and Justice methodology.

6.4 Ratings and perceptions of the local police

The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) measures perceptions of the local police both in general terms and in specific aspects of their work. Since April 2003, the CSEW has measured the proportion of those who believe the local police are doing "a good or excellent" job. In addition, people's perceptions of specific aspects of police work have been measured since October 2004. These questions ask how much people agree or disagree with the following statements:

• the police in this area can be relied on to be there when you need them

• the police in this area would treat you with respect if you had contact with them for any reason

• the police in this area treat everyone fairly regardless of who they are

• the police in this area understand the issues that affect this community

• the police in this area are dealing with the things that matter to people in this community

• the police in this area can be trusted

• taking everything into account I have confidence in the police in this area

New questions on attitudes to the police in the local area were introduced in April 2024 on half the survey sample. Respondents are asked how much they agree or disagree with the following statements: 

• I would follow an order given by the police in this area regardless of whether I felt the order was right or wrong 

• the police in this area show good standards of behaviour when carrying out their day-to-day jobs 

• I would be comfortable calling the police if I needed their assistance with something 

• I would be willing to help the police if they asked me for information about something

Police and Crime Commissioners and other police initiatives

From November 2012, Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) were elected by the public to be responsible for overseeing police forces. A CSEW question introduced in April 2012 asks people whether they were aware of this.

7.1 Geographical

ACORN

A classification of residential neighbourhoods (ACORN) was developed by CACI Ltd and classifies households into 1 of 62 types according to demographic, employment and housing characteristics of the surrounding neighbourhood. ACORN is useful in determining the social environment in which households are located. The main seven-group breakdowns are characterised as follows:

• Luxury Lifestyles – Exclusive Addresses, Flourishing Capital, Upmarket Families 

• Established Affluence – Commuter-Belt Wealth, Prosperous Professionals 

• Thriving Neighbourhoods – Mature Success, Settled Suburbia, Metropolitan Surroundings, Up-and-Coming Urbanites, Aspiring Communities

• Steadfast Communities – Semi-Rural Maturity, Traditional Homeowners, Family Renters, Urban Diversity, Stable Seniors 

• Stretched Society – Tenant Living, Limited Budgets, Hard-Up Households 

• Low Income Living – Cash-Strapped Families, Constrained Pensioners, Challenging Circumstances 

• Not Private Households – Not Private Households

The ACORN classification is still available on the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) dataset, but the National Statistics output area classification (OAC) is now used in standard demographic tables released as part of the National Statistics outputs.

Community safety partnerships

Set up under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the community safety partnerships (CSPs) are, in nearly all cases, coterminous with local authority areas. They include representatives from the police, health, probation and other local agencies and provide strategies for reducing crime in the area. As of December 2022, there were 314 CSPs in England and Wales. In England they were previously termed crime and disorder reduction partnerships (CDRPs). Recorded crime figures for headline offences for each CSP are published on the Office for National Statistics (ONS) website.

Regions

Government office regions (GORs) were established across England in 1994. Reflecting a number of government departments, they aimed to work in partnership with local people and organisations to maximise prosperity and the quality of life within their area. In 1996 the GORs became the primary classification for the presentation of regional statistics. There are currently nine regions in England:

• North East

• North West

• Yorkshire and The Humber

• East Midlands

• West Midlands

• East of England

• London

• South East

• South West

Wales is not subdivided but listed alongside the England regions in UK-wide statistical comparisons. Government offices were closed on 31 March 2011, and from 1 April 2011 the areas covered by the former GORs are referred to as "regions" for statistical purposes.

Indices of Deprivation

Local area deprivation is measured using the English indices of deprivation 2019 for areas in England and the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation 2019 for areas in Wales. There are seven domains of deprivation:

• Income

• Employment

• Health

• Crime

• Barriers to Housing and Services

• Living Environment

There are a number of indicators of deprivation in each of these domains, such as level of unemployment and incapacity benefit claimants, which are combined into a single deprivation score for each local area on that domain. The analysis in this report uses the employment deprivation indicator.

To examine the relationship between experiences of crime and deprivation, the local areas are ranked according to their scores on the employment deprivation domain. The 20% of areas with the highest deprivation scores are identified as the most deprived areas on the employment deprivation domain, and the 20% of areas with the lowest deprivation scores are identified as the least deprived.

An Index of Multiple Deprivation is also available, which combines all seven separate domains into one index. The English Indices of Deprivation 2019 are the responsibility of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG). Further information is available in the English indices of deprivation 2019 document. Further information on the Welsh index of deprivation is available in the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation 2019 document.

Local authority areas

These areas are a combination of metropolitan and non-metropolitan districts, unitary authorities and London boroughs. As of April 2023, there were 317 local authorities in England and 22 in Wales. These areas provide the basis for community safety partnerships, although since their formation a number of partnerships have merged to cover multiple local authority areas. In some cases, figures are reported for local authority areas that applied in the year ending (YE) March 2003 for the sake of continuity, even where there have been amalgamations.

Output Area Classification (OAC)

The 2021 classification of output areas is used to group together geographic areas according to important characteristics common to the population in that grouping. These groupings are called clusters and are derived using 2021 population Census data. The OAC is a classification created in collaboration between the ONS and University College London.

The classification is freely available from the ONS and other sources for all to use and complements commercially available classifications.

Further information and details about OAC are available.

Physical disorder

The term "physical disorder" is used in the CSEW to describe a measure based on the interviewer's assessment of the level of:

• vandalism, graffiti and deliberate damage to property

• rubbish and litter

• homes in poor condition in the area

Using guidance, the interviewer has to make an assessment as to whether each of these problems is very common, fairly common, not very common or not at all common. For each, very and fairly common are scored as one and not very common and not at all common are scored as zero. A scale is then constructed by summing the scores for each case. The scale ranges from zero to three, with high disorder areas being those with a score of two or three. The measurement of respondents' own perceptions of disorder in the local area is described under anti-social behaviour in Section 5.7.

Rural and urban areas

The analysis of crime in rural and urban areas is based on the ONS recommended method for categorising the level of rurality. There are two approaches: the ONS rural and urban definition and the local authority (LA) classification. Both were developed to produce a view of rural and urban areas from government statistics. Where data below the LA level are available, the ONS rural and urban definition must be used to produce rural and urban totals. Where LA level data are the lowest geographic data available, then the LA classification should be used. More detail is given below.

For CSEW analysis, the rural and urban definition has been used, as CSEW data are collected below the local authority level. For police recorded crime analysis, the LA classification has been used, as police recorded crime data are not collected below the LA level.

Rural and urban 2004 definition (England and Wales)

The rural and urban definition, an official National Statistic, was introduced in 2004 and defines the rurality of output areas. Categories used to aggregate to rural or urban are as follows.

Rural areas are those classified as:

• town and fringe - sparse

• village - sparse

• hamlet and isolated dwellings - sparse

• town and fringe - less sparse

• village - less sparse

• hamlet and isolated dwellings - less sparse

Urban areas are those classified as:

• urban - sparse

• urban - less sparse

Rural and urban 2014 definition (England and Wales)

An updated rural and urban definition, an official National Statistic, was introduced in 2014 and defines the rurality of output areas based on the 2011 Census definition. Categories used to aggregate to rural or urban are as follows.

Rural areas are those classified as:

• rural town and fringe

• rural town and fringe in a sparse setting

• rural village

• rural village in a sparse setting

• rural hamlet and isolated dwellings

• rural hamlet and isolated dwellings in a sparse setting

Urban areas are those classified as:

• urban major conurbation

• urban minor conurbation

• urban city and town

• urban city and town in a sparse setting

Rural and urban local authority (LA) classification (England)

The revised LA classification introduced in 2009 differentiates between rural and urban for those statistics that are only available at LA level. The three-way classification at the similar community safety partnership level and police force area level has been applied.

At the community safety partnership level, the classification is as follows:

"Predominantly rural" areas are those classified as:

• rural-80: districts with at least 80% of their population in rural settlements and larger market towns

• rural-50: districts with at least 50% but less than 80% of their population in rural settlements and larger market towns

"Significant rural" areas are those classified as districts with more than 37,000 people or more than 26% of their population in rural settlements and larger market towns.

"Predominantly urban" areas are those classified as:

• major urban: districts with either 100,000 people or 50% of their population in urban areas with a population of more than 750,000

• large urban: districts with either 50,000 people or 50% of their population in urban areas with a population between 250,000 and 750,000

• other urban: districts with fewer than 37,000 people or fewer than 26% of their population in rural settlements and larger market towns

A different methodology, but with similar criteria, is used to produce the three-way classification at the police force area level.

Super output areas

Super output areas (SOAs) are aggregated geographical areas built from output areas. Introduced in 2004 and updated following the 2011 and 2021 Census, they are designed for the collection and publication of small area statistics and as the building blocks for all National Statistics on a geographical basis. To support a range of potential requirements there are two layers of SOAs:

• lower layer - built from groups of output areas (typically five)

• middle layer - built from groups of lower layer SOAs

7.2 Household

Household accommodation type

The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) uses this definition of the household's accommodation, based on the National Statistics harmonised classification:

• house or bungalow: detached, semi-detached and terraced

• flat or maisonette: includes purpose-built block, non-purpose built and all flats and maisonettes

• other accommodation types: includes caravans and mobile homes; includes bedsits

Household reference person

For some topics it is necessary to select one person in the household to indicate the characteristics of the household more generally. Following the National Statistics harmonised classifications, the CSEW replaced head of household with household reference person (HRP) in YE March 2002. The HRP is the member of the household in whose name the accommodation is owned or rented, or is otherwise responsible for the accommodation. Where this responsibility is joint within the household, the HRP is the person with the highest income. If incomes are equal, then the oldest person is the HRP.

Household structure

The classification of households in the CSEW is based on the number and combination of people aged 16 years or over and children living within a household, divided into those where there is:

• one person aged 16 years or over and one or more children (aged under 16 years); this does not necessarily denote a lone parent family, as the person may be a sibling or grandparent of the child 

• more than one person aged 16 years or over with one or more children (aged under 16 years)

• one or more people aged 16 years or over with no children (aged under 16 years)

Household income

Total household income is the combined income of all members of the household. It includes income from all sources including earnings from employment and self-employment, pensions (both state and private), benefits and tax credits, interest from savings and investments, maintenance, student grants and rent payments received. This question was removed from the YE March 2019 survey but added back in the YE March 2020 survey. Therefore, household income breakdowns are not provided for the year ending March 2019. The current question for YE March 2020 onwards uses the definition of the household's income based on our National Statistics harmonised classification. As the income bandings are slightly different, data are not comparable with previous years.

Tenure

The following definition of tenure is used by the CSEW based on the National Statistics harmonised classification:

• owners: households who own their homes outright, or are buying with a mortgage (includes shared owners, who own part of the equity and pay part of the mortgage or rent)

• social-rented sector tenants: households renting from a council, housing association or other social-rented sector

• rented privately: households privately renting unfurnished or furnished property, including tenants whose accommodation comes with their job, even if their landlord is a housing association or local authority

7.3 Personal

Ethnic group

Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) respondents are asked to make a choice from a card to identify their ethnic background using the standard National Statistics harmonised classification; this classification is based on the 2011 Census question. The standard demographic tables released annually provide breakdowns by ethnic background; the last topic-based analyses from the CSEW, focusing on the experiences of people from different ethnic minorities, are reported in Attitudes, perceptions and risks of crime: Supplementary Volume 1 to Crime in England and Wales, 2006 to 2007.

Marital status

The CSEW uses the following categories for marital status, which are based on the National Statistics harmonised classification:

• married - includes same sex civil partnerships

• cohabiting

• single

• separated - includes same sex civil partnerships

• divorced - includes legally dissolved same sex civil partnerships

• widowed - includes surviving civil partners

Employment status

The CSEW uses the following categories for employment status, which are based on the National Statistics harmonised classification but includes further breakdowns for those in the "economically inactive" category:

• in employment: includes people doing paid work in the last week; working on a government-supported training scheme; or doing unpaid work for own or family business 

• unemployed: actively seeking work or waiting to take up work

• economically inactive: those who are retired; going to school or college full-time; looking after home or family; are temporarily or permanently sick; or doing something else

Base sizes for the student categories of employment status differ from those in the occupational classification. Economically inactive students exclude those who are in employment or in other ways economically active. Full-time students are recognised as such within the occupational coding.

Occupation

The National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification (NS-SEC) is an occupationally based classification, but provides coverage of the whole adult population. The NS-SEC aims to differentiate positions within labour markets and production units in terms of their typical "employment relations".

CSEW analysis is based on the three analytic classes provided within NS-SEC, but also describes full-time students in a separate category (usually included within the "not classified" category). Base sizes for the student categories differ in NS-SEC from those in the economic classification, as economically inactive students exclude those who are in employment, or in other ways economically active, but full-time students are recognised as such within the occupational coding of NS-SEC.

Sexual orientation

The CSEW uses the following categories for sexual orientation, which are based on the Equality Act 2010:

• Heterosexual or straight

• Gay or lesbian

• Bisexual

• Other

Sex

The CSEW uses the following categories for sex:

• male

• female

Sex is currently interviewer-coded using information on the respondent's sex before interview (for example, from respondent title: Mr, Mrs, or Ms) collected at recruitment stage. At interview, if there is any uncertainty then the respondent is asked to confirm.

Gender identity

From 1 October 2019 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) respondents were asked whether their gender is the same as the sex they were registered at birth; this question is based on the Census. The following categories are used for gender identity, which are based on the gender identity harmonised principle for data collection (interim).

'Yes' = gender the same as sex registered at birth

'No, please specify' = gender different from sex registered at birth

Gender the same as sex registered at birth refers to those whose gender identity is the same as their sex registered at birth and includes male when registered male at birth and female when registered female at birth (cisgender).

Gender different from sex registered at birth refers to those whose gender identity is different from the sex they were registered at birth (trans). Our use of the term 'trans' is inclusive of a range of genders identities, including:

• binary male or female genders when not the same as registered at birth

• non-binary genders such as those on a continuum between male and female non-gendered identities (neither male nor female).

Breakdowns by gender identity are provided in the annual trend and demographic tables for YE March 2020 and YE March 2023 onwards.

Religion

The CSEW uses the following categories for religion, which are based on the National Statistics harmonised classification:

• No religion

• Christian

• Buddhist

• Hindu

• Jewish

• Muslim

• Sikh

• Other

Disability

The definition of disability used is consistent with the core definition of disability under the Equality Act 2010. A person is considered to have a disability if they have a long-standing illness, disability or impairment which causes difficulty with day-to-day activities.

8.1 Confidence intervals and statistical significance

The main Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) estimates are based on a representative sample of the population of England and Wales aged 16 years and over each year. A sample, as used in the CSEW, is a small scale representation of the population from which it is drawn (more information can be found in Table UG1 of the User Guide tables for sample sizes within the CSEW).

Any sample survey may produce estimates that differ from the figures that would have been obtained if the whole population had been interviewed. It is, however, possible to calculate a range of values around an estimate, known as the confidence interval (also referred to as margin of error) of the estimate. At the 95% confidence level, over many repeats of a survey under the same conditions, one would expect that the confidence interval would contain the true population value 95 times out of 100. Because of this variation, changes in estimates between survey years or between population subgroups may occur by chance.

In other words, the change may simply be because of which people were randomly selected for interview. We are able to measure whether this is likely to be the case using standard statistical tests and conclude whether differences are likely to be because of chance or represent a real difference. Only increases or decreases that are statistically significant at the 5% level (and are therefore likely to be real) are described as changes within the main bulletin, and in the tables and figures these are identified by [s].

Confidence intervals on the CSEW are based on complex standard errors (CSEs) around estimates, which reflect the stratified and semi-clustered design of the survey and are typically calculated using the SPSS Complex Sample Module . Complex survey analysis can also be carried out using python and Rstudio by using the samplics and surveys packages to calculate CSEs and confidence intervals. Where standard errors are calculated without the complex element, a design effect of 1.2 is applied to the confidence interval and significance testing to allow for the fact that the survey design is not a simple random sample.

Statistical significance for change in CSEW estimates for overall crime, all theft offences, neighbourhood crime, all property crime, all hate crime and all racially motivated crime, cannot be calculated in the same way as for other CSEW estimates. This is because these crimes combine a mixture of crimes against household and crimes against the person. As there is an extra stage of sampling used in a personal crime rate (selecting the person aged 16 years or over for interview) compared with a household crime rate (where the respondent represents the whole household), technically, these are estimates from two different, though obviously highly related, surveys.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) methodology group has provided an approximation method to use to overcome this problem. The approach involves producing population-weighted variances associated with two approximated estimates for overall crime.

The first approximation is derived by apportioning household crime equally among adults within the household (in other words, converting households into adults), and second by apportioning personal crimes to all household members (converting adults into households). The variances are calculated in the same way as for standard household or personal crime rates (that is, taking into account the complex sample design). An average is then taken of the two estimates of the population-weighted variances. The resulting approximated variance is then used in the calculation of confidence intervals for the estimates and in the calculation of the sampling error, to determine whether such differences are statistically significant.

This method incorporates the effect of any covariance between household and personal crime. By taking an average of the two approximations, it also counteracts any possible effect on the estimates of differing response rates (and therefore calibration rates) by household size.

Our User guide tables provide 95% confidence intervals around CSEW estimates for incidents of crime victimisation by age and sex, and key perception measures.

8.2 Population estimates

Crime Survey for England and Wales

The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) uses population estimates for two purposes: in calibration weighting and in calculating the estimates of numbers of crimes.

For the calculation of estimates for numbers of CSEW incidence rates, personal-level crimes are multiplied by estimates (or projections for the most recent time period) of the household population aged 16 years and over in England and Wales and household-level crimes by estimates (or again, projections for the most recent time period) of the number of households in England and Wales.

Following the completion of a programme of work to reweight CSEW data on the 2011 Census-based population and household estimates, from the Crime in England and Wales, year ending March 2014 release onwards, both the CSEW and police recorded crime data are using 2011 Census-based estimates.

CSEW estimates from YE March 2002 onwards were also reweighted using 2011 Census-based population and household estimates in YE March 2014. In addition to the use of 2011 Census-based estimates, two other methodological changes were also made to population data used in the production of CSEW estimates from YE March 2002 onwards. These changes were:

• using household-only population estimates

• linearly interpolating population estimates to more closely match the CSEW reference period

Household-only population estimates

Until YE March 2002, to calculate crime estimates, incidence rates for personal-level crimes were multiplied by estimates for the total population aged 16 years and over in England and Wales, not just those resident in households.

However, the CSEW does not sample from the entire adult population of England and Wales; it interviews people aged 16 years or over resident in households and does not cover people living in communal establishments (for example, students' halls of residence and NHS nurses' accommodation) or other institutions (for example, prisons), or homeless people. Therefore, CSEW estimates had previously been calculated using marginally larger population totals than are most appropriate. It is more logical to multiply incidence rates for personal-level crimes by the household-resident only population, as this is the population the CSEW covers.

By including the non-household-resident population in the calculation of crime estimates, this assumes that the household-resident and non-household-resident populations experience similar levels of crime victimisation, and this is unlikely to be true.

2011 Census-based household-resident only population data have been supplied to enable the calculation of CSEW estimates in accordance with this new approach; these have been incorporated into the re-weighting of YE March 2002 to YE March 2013 people aged 16 years and over data, and the re-weighting of YE March 2010 to YE March 2013 children (aged 10 to 15 years) data.

As the 2011 Census-based population estimates only dated back to those since the previous Census (2001), CSEW data for years prior to YE March 2002 have not been updated to be based upon the household-resident only populations. This has introduced a minor inconsistency in the CSEW time series between YE December 1999 and YE March 2002.

However, the effects of the weighting updates on the year ending March 2002 CSEW estimates are minimal and have not altered any trends. It is reasonable to assume that any amendments to pre-YE March 2002 CSEW estimates would also be minimal, and therefore, comparisons between post-YE December 1999 and pre-YE March 2002 CSEW data are still sufficiently robust.

No adjustment was necessary for estimates of the number of households in England and Wales (published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)) when calculating household-level crimes. These data already relate only to households; they exclude communal establishments (for example: students' halls of residence; sheltered accommodation; and prisons).

Linear interpolation of population estimates CSEW data are typically published for a 12-month interview period; for example, data for YE March 2013 relate to interviews that took place between April 2012 and March 2013 (more information is available in Section 2).

For YE March 2026, the earliest month an interview takes place is April 2025. Respondents are asked about crimes that took place in the 12 months prior to their interview. This means that the earliest crimes recorded by the YE March 2026 CSEW occurred in April 2024, and the latest crimes recorded by the YE March 2026 CSEW occurred in February 2026. The midpoint of the period "April 2024 to February 2026" is March 2025. Therefore, the most appropriate population or household estimates to multiply CSEW incidence rates by would be from the end of March 2025.

However, published population (and household) estimates are mid-year data; that is, for a given year, they relate to the population or households in England and Wales as at the end of June of that year. Prior to the reweighting programme, CSEW estimates for YE March 2013 were calculated from mid-2012 (end of June 2012) population data.

It is possible to calculate an estimate for the population as at the end of March 2012 by linearly interpolating on two surrounding data points in the time-series. This approach is valid given that the components of population change, namely births, deaths and net migration, can be assumed to occur equally spread out across the year (for example, not all births occur in January, or all deaths in February; rather, they occur throughout the year).

Using the example of the YE March 2026 CSEW, given end of June 2025 and end of June 2026 population estimates, estimates from the end of March 2026 can be calculated as March 2026 equals June 2025 plus (June 2026 minus June 2025) multiplied by 0.75. Population estimates from the end of September 2026 and December 2026 could be calculated by replacing the 0.75 multiplication factor by 0.25 and 0.50, respectively.

For households, the linear interpolation was constrained to just two data points: the estimates for the number of households for mid-2001 and mid-2011; at the time the reweighting programme was completed, 2011 Census-based estimates for the intermediate years had not been produced by MHCLG. Estimates for mid-2002 to mid-2010 were themselves linearly interpolated from the mid-2001 and mid-2011 estimates, and end-of-March estimates linearly interpolated from these. Although less accurate (having only two data points 10 years apart), this approach remains valid given that in the pre-2011 Census-based estimates, the estimated number of households had been continually increasing (not fluctuating up and down). Also, similarly to the individual population, the creation and break-up of households can be assumed to occur equally spread out across the time period.

Our quarterly crime statistics bulletins, from the Crime in England and Wales, period ending March 2014 bulletin onwards, contain revised CSEW estimates from YE March 2002. These are calculated from population and household estimates that have been successively linearly interpolated. This does not include YE June data, because the population and household estimates are already produced as at the end of June. This methodology was incorporated into the reweighting of YE March 2002 to YE March 2013 people aged 16 years and over data, and the reweighting of YE March 2010 to YE March 2013 children (aged 10 to 15 years) data.

No linear interpolation was necessary for population estimates used for the pre-YE March 2002 CSEW years (YE December 1981 to YE December 1999), because respondents were asked about their experiences of crime in that year. This means the midpoint of the reference period for these years would be as at the end of June.

The population and household estimates used in the calculation of CSEW estimates are presented in Table 3a.

Further details about the reweighting and methodological changes to the population and household estimates used in the calculation of numbers of CSEW incidents are available in the methodological note accompanying the "Crime Statistics, YE March 2014" release, Presentational and methodological improvements to National Statistics on the Crime Survey for England and Wales.

All population and household estimates and projections used in the actual calculations of CSEW data are unrounded.

Police recorded crime

Crime rates derived from police recorded crime figures are based upon total mid-year population estimates for England and Wales, as shown in Table 3b.

All population estimates used in the actual calculations of police recorded crime rates are unrounded.

8.3 Weighting data

All Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) percentages and rates presented in crime statistics publications are based on weighted data. Table UG1 shows the unweighted base, which represents the number of people or households interviewed in the specified group for YE March 2026.

Two stages are used in the weighting of the CSEW sample:

1. Verian (CSEW contractor, formerly known as Kantar Public) apply weights to the raw data before supplying the dataset to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

2. Calibration weighting is used to adjust for differential non-response; this weighting is conducted by the ONS on receipt of the data from Verian.

Weighting on the CSEW

The weights constructed by Verian are based on a number of components:

• w1: weight to compensate for unequal address selection probabilities between police force areas (PFAs), given some areas are more populated than others

• w2: "address non-response weight" to compensate for the observed variation in response rates between different types of neighbourhoods (based on region and neighbourhood classification indicators)

• w3: dwelling unit weight (which relates to the number of dwelling units in a household), to compensate for situations in which only one dwelling unit can be selected in multiple "dwelling unit" households

• w4: individual selection weight (to account for different probabilities of a respondent being selected based on different sized households)

• numinc: a weight applied based on the number of incidents reported in each series of victim reports

For the core sample, these components are used to create two design weights, the core household weight and the core individual weight. These are calculated as follows:

• core household weight equals w1 multiplied by w2 multiplied by w3

• core individual weight equals w1 multiplied by w2 multiplied by w3 multiplied by w4

Further scaling, to equalise the quarterly achieved sample size, along with removal of extreme values, is also involved (details of this and of the calculations used to construct the component weights can be found in the 2014 to 2015 Crime Survey for England and Wales Technical Report: Volume One).

The numinc weight is used for the calculation of incidents only.

The new methodology for improving the way we estimate repeat victimisation introduces volatility into the estimates between years. To ensure a usable time series, some minor changes were made to the weights used to compensate for unequal probabilities of selection. This reduces volatility in estimates between years.

When we explored the effects of removing the cap of five from our measure of the number of incidents in a series, there were some instances in which high levels of repeat victimisation (97) coincided with very high weights. In one instance, final weights of more than 6,000 per individual coincided with a series that included 97 incidents of violence. The combined effect of this meant that by uncapping the estimates, one individual was contributing over 582,000 incidents to our annual violence estimates (as compared with the individual's contribution of just over 30,000 incidents with the cap of five in place).

The component weight that contributed directly to this issue was the dwelling unit weight (w3). However, analysis of the data indicated the same issue may arise in the future as a result of the individual component weight (w4), which has similar variability.

A decision was made to trim the component dwelling unit weight at four for the calculation of household weights in the people aged 16 or over datasets. This aligns with the weighting procedures used for the children's element of the CSEW, where this approach has been applied since YE March 2016. A slightly different method of trimming the dwelling unit element of the household weight at the 99th percentile had been implemented on the children aged 10 to 15 years datasets prior to YE March 2016. The effect on the published estimates in moving to the new trimming method was deemed to be negligible.

In calculating the core individual weight, the product of the multiplication of the dwelling unit weight and individual component weights has been trimmed at five. Although trimming of extreme weights may introduce a small amount of bias, this is more than compensated for by the resulting improvement in precision.

Further information on the methodology for repeat victimisation can be found in Improving victimisation estimates derived from the Crime Survey for England and Wales.

Calibration weighting

A review of the then British Crime Survey (now the CSEW) by survey methodology experts at the ONS and the National Centre for Social Research, recommended that the calibration weighting method be adopted.

The ONS calibration weighting is designed to make adjustments for known differentials in response rates between different regions and different age by sex sub-groups. This is particularly the case in incidences where victimisation levels within sub-groups that are more or less likely to respond, is not equal to that of other respondents. For example, a household containing a man aged 24 years and living in London may be less likely to respond than a household containing a woman aged 50 years living in the South West. The procedure therefore gives different weights to different households and individuals based on their sex, age and region composition, in such a way that the weighted distribution of responding households and individuals in these households matches the known distribution in the population as a whole.

The weights are generated using an algorithm that minimises the differences between the weights implied by sampling and the final weights subject to the weighted data meeting the population controls; they are based on calibrating population estimates and projections provided by the ONS. Calibration weights were applied:

• from the YE December 1996 onwards, the CSEW used CALMAR (an SAS-based macro)
• from the YE March 2007, the CSEW used g-Calib within a new SPSS-based data processing system (the weights produced by g-Calib are the same as those from CALMAR)
• from the YE March 2022, the CSEW used the Regenesees package in R

The effects of calibration weights are generally small for household-level crime, but are likely to be more important for estimates of personal-level crime, as for example, young respondents generally have much higher crime victimisation rates than average but also lower response rates to the survey. However, there was only a marginal impact seen in crime trends when calibration weighting was first implemented in the 1996 survey.

When implementing the revised methodology for repeat victimisation, we took the opportunity to make other improvements to the data and have now implemented consistent weighting and calibration techniques back as far as 1991 for the first time.

8.4 Conventions used in figures and tables

The following conventions are used in the crime statistics publications and the user guide (where applicable).

Table abbreviations:

• "0" indicates greater than 0% but less than 0.5% (this does not apply when percentages are presented to one decimal point).

• [x] indicates that the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) question was not applicable or not asked in that particular year

• [u] indicates that for police recorded crime, percentage changes are not reported because the base number of offences is less than 50; for the CSEW it indicates that data are not reported because the unweighted base is less than 50

• [u1] indicates that rate per 1,000 population data for City of London have been suppressed because of the small population size of the police force area

• [c] indicates that data from the CSEW have been suppressed because of disclosure constraints

• [x] indicates for police recorded crime that data are not available

• [s] indicates for CSEW data that the change is statistically significant at the 5% level

• [z] indicates not applicable

Unweighted base

All CSEW percentages and rates presented in the tables are based on data weighted to compensate for differential non-response. Tables show the unweighted base, which represents the number of individuals or households interviewed in the specified group.

Percentages

Perception measures are presented as whole numbers; victimisation measures are presented to one decimal place.

Row or column percentages may not add to 100% because of rounding.

Most CSEW tables present cell percentages where the figures refer to the percentage of people or households who have the attribute being discussed and the complementary percentage, to add to 100%, is not shown.

A percentage may be quoted in the text for a single category that is identifiable in the tables only by summing two or more component percentages. To avoid rounding errors, the percentage has been recalculated for the single category and, therefore, may differ from the sum of the percentages derived from the tables.

Year-labels on CSEW figures and tables

Prior to YE March 2002, CSEW respondents were asked about their experience of crime in the previous calendar year, so year-labels identify the year in which the crime took place. Following the change to continuous interviewing in YE March 2002, respondents' experience of crime relates to the 12 full months prior to interview (more information can be found in Section 2: Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) and year-labels identify the CSEW year of interview.

Other questions on the CSEW (for example, attitudes to policing, confidence in the criminal justice system) ask the respondent their current views or attitudes and thus the data are referenced as the year in which the respondent was interviewed.

"No answers" (missing values)

All CSEW analysis excludes don't knows or refusals unless otherwise specified.

Numbers of CSEW incidents

Estimates are rounded to the nearest 1,000.

9.1 Introduction to open data tables

This chapter contains information on the content and use of the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) open data tables. These tables contain CSEW estimates related to victimisation and perceptions of crime and the criminal justice system (CJS) broken down by demographic characteristics. These tables are released as part of an initiative to make government data more transparent and accessible to the public and external researchers.

For users wanting to access full CSEW datasets, these are available from the CSEW section of the UK Data Archive Section 10: Other reference data provides further information.

It is recommended that prior to using these open data tables, users read Section 2, in particular, of this user guide to familiarise themselves with the context of the data and the scope and limitations of the CSEW as a whole. Full instructions on how to use these open data tables accompany each dataset.

We also produce previous editions of the open data tables (these are available from the first quarter of 2012 following the responsibility for the publication of crime statistics transferring to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) from the Home Office). At present there are no plans to produce a back series to cover earlier CSEW years.

9.2 Table format

The main Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) release consists of six data tables, all with an identical layout. The files have been split by theme, but because all have the same layout they can all be combined into a single table after download.

Tables are laid out in rows and columns with the first row containing column headings. Each row consists of a single CSEW estimate, while each column contains information about the estimate. Estimates are principally broken down by respondent characteristics (identified by the "sex", "age", "household type", and "characteristic" columns). However, other columns provide further information on the estimate, such as the time period it relates to (identified by the "period", "last quarter" and "last year" columns). Further details can be found in the "data table specification" section of this chapter.

This layout is intended to provide CSEW estimates in the most transparent and versatile form for users and allow data to be linked with, for example, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) population estimates for the calculation of numbers of crimes. Further details can be found in the "How to use open data tables" section of this chapter.

All files are made available in CSV (comma separated values) format, which arranges data in rows and columns as outlined in this section. This type of file can be opened in most data analysis programmes.

9.3 File naming

The six main tables are contained in files which use the following naming structure:

"[Measurement type]-[Measurement subcategory]-[Date].csv"

For example, Household-Incidence-2020-Q1.csv

The [Measurement type] and [Measurement subcategory] sections of the filename are used to identify the content of the data file. There are three different values for [Measurement type], each with two values for [Measurement subcategory]:

• Household: Incidence and Prevalence

• Personal: Incidence and Prevalence

• Perceptions: Criminal Justice System (CJS) and Other

Household - Incidence

• Description: contains incidence rates for household crime

• Example of data in file: Number of incidents of burglary per 1,000 households in the 12 months prior to interview

Household - Prevalence

• Description: contains prevalence rates for household crime

• Example of data in file: percentage of households that have been victims of burglary in the 12 months prior to interview

Personal - Incidence

• Description: contains incidence rates for personal crime

• Example of data in file: number of incidents of violence per 1,000 adults in the 12 months prior to interview

Personal - Prevalence

• Description: contains prevalence rates for personal crime

• Example of data in file: percentage of adults who have been victims of violence in the 12 months prior to interview

Perceptions - Criminal Justice System

• Description: contains perceptions of the police and the criminal justice system

• Example of data in file: percentage of adults who think that their local police are doing a good or excellent job

Perceptions - Other

• Description: contains other perceptions of crime

• Example of data in file: percentage of adults who perceive a high level of anti-social behaviour in their local area

The [Date] section of the filename identifies the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) dataset that the release was taken from. It follows the same convention as the "last year" and "last quarter" columns in the tables themselves (more information is available in Section 9.4: Data table specification).

9.4 Data table specification

Data tables are laid out in rows and columns. Each row contains a single Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) estimate, while each column contains information about that estimate. This section provides a description of the meaning behind the values in each column.

Source

Possible values: CSEW

This column identifies the source of the estimate. For this release, this column contains only one value: "CSEW". This field is provided to allow future releases to include data from different sources.

Period

Possible values: 12 months

This column identifies the period covered by the data used to generate the estimate. For this release, this column contains only one value: "12 months". This indicates that the estimate is based on 12 months of CSEW interviews. This field is provided to allow future releases to include data from different period lengths.

Last year

Possible values: various

Combined with the "period" and "last quarter" columns, this column identifies the CSEW interview period that the estimate is based on. The combination of "last year" and "last quarter" identifies the last quarter of interviews that "period" covers. For example, "period" equals "12 months", "last year" equals "2023" and "last quarter" equals "one" denotes that the estimate is based on CSEW interviews between April 2023 and March 2024, that is, the 12 months ending in Quarter 1 (Jan to Mar) 2024.

Last quarter

Possible values: various

Combined with the "period" and "last year" columns, this column identifies the CSEW interview period that the estimate is based on. The combination of "last year" and "last quarter" identifies the last quarter of interviews that "period" covers. For example, "period" equals "12 months", "last year" equals "2023" and "last quarter" equals "one" denotes that the estimate is based on CSEW interviews between April 2023 and March 2024, that is, the 12 months ending in Quarter 1 (Jan to Mar) 2024.

MeasurementVar

Possible values: various (see reference table)

This is the name of the variable that is being measured by the estimate. It could also be considered a dependent variable. In this release it is a crime incidence rate, a crime prevalence rate or a perception of crime. Future releases may contain a wider range of measurements. The variable name is a shorthand way of referring to the measurement in question, therefore the meaning of the values in this column may not be immediately obvious to users. A reference table has been provided with this release that contains more descriptive labels for each of the variable names in this column. For users who have access to the main CSEW dataset from the UK Data Archive, the names here match directly with the variable names on the main CSEW dataset.

Geography

Possible values: England and Wales

This column identifies the geographical area that the estimate relates to. For this release, only estimates for the whole of England and Wales are included. A breakdown by region is available via the "Characteristics" column.

Age

Possible values: 16+; 16-24; 25-34; 35-44; 45-54; 55-64; 65-74; 75+

This column identifies the age of the respondent at the time of interview. Respondents are arranged into banded age groups, with the category of "16+" covering respondents in all age groups combined. This column only contains values where "measurement level" is "person".

Sex

Possible values: All adults; Male; Female

The column identifies the sex of the respondent. The category of "all adults" covers men and women combined. This column only contains values where "measurement level" is "person".

Household type

Possible values: all households; vehicle-owning households; bicycle-owning households

This column identifies the type of household that the estimate relates to, specifically whether the household owns a vehicle or bicycle. Most estimates relate to "all households". Vehicle-owning households" and "bicycle-owning households" provide an alternative measure for the prevalence of vehicle-related crime and bicycle theft respectively, and as such, only have a value for these measures. This column only contains values where "measurement level" is "household".

CharacteristicVar

Possible values: various, GOR, total

This column identifies the variable that is used to provide the full breakdown of estimates by respondent characteristics in the "characteristic" column. It could also be considered an independent variable. It is similar to the "MeasurementVar" column in that it contains variable names that match the variable names on the main CSEW dataset. More descriptive labels for the variable names in this column can be found in the reference table for this column.

The value "GOR" identifies estimates for each of the English regions and for England and Wales separately. The value "total" in this column identifies an estimate that covers all respondents, regardless of individual characteristics. Users should be aware that some characteristics only exist at the personal level and some only exist at the household level (identified in the "measurement level" column).

Characteristic

Possible values: various; total

This column identifies respondent characteristics that the estimate relates to. Characteristics are grouped by "CharacteristicVar" such that each value of "CharacteristicVar" has a number of unique values for "Characteristic" associated with it. As well as those characteristics included on the main CSEW dataset within each "CharacteristicVar", the open data tables also include some combined categories that are not included on the CSEW core variables. The value "total" in this column identifies an estimate that covers all respondents, regardless of individual characteristics and is the only "characteristic" for the "CharacteristicVar" of "total".

Estimate

Possible values: various

This column contains the estimate for "MeasurementVar" for respondents with the characteristics referred to as "geography", "age", "sex", "household type" and "characteristic" from CSEW interviews conducted in the period identified by "period", "last quarter" and "last year". When "measurement type" is "incidence rate" it is a rate per 1,000 adults or households; where "measurement type" is "prevalence rate" or "perception" it is a percentage.

Standard error

Possible values: various

This column contains the standard error of the value of "estimate". As the CSEW is a sample survey, all estimates are subject to a degree of error, reflected in the size of the standard error - the "How to use open data tables" section provides more information. More advanced users may also want to know that as the CSEW is based on a complex sample design, the standard errors included in these tables are complex standard errors that take the sample design into account. This means that no further adjustments, such as design factors, need to be applied to calculations involving these standard errors.

Unweighted count

Possible values: various

Also referred to as the "unweighted base", this column shows the total number of respondents who contributed to the calculation of "estimate". Estimates based on a larger number of respondents are generally more reliable, and those based on a very small number of respondents should be treated with caution. It is recommended that users refrain from using estimates based on fewer than 50 respondents. They have been included here for reference and in the interests of completeness. Estimates based on fewer than 10 respondents are not provided.

9.5 Reference data tables

There are two reference data tables included with this release; one each for the columns "MeasurementVar" and "CharacteristicVar". These provide additional information on the variables included in these two columns in the main data tables. They can be used as lookups to include this additional data in combined tables. The data specification for these tables is provided in this section.

Measurement

MeasurementVar

Possible values: various

This includes all the values in the "MeasurementVar" column of the main data tables.

Measurement label

Possible values: various

This column contains a text description of the measure that "MeasurementVar" relates to.

Measurement level

Possible values: Person; Household

This column identifies the level at which the measurement applies. For personal crimes and perception measures, this column has a value of "person" to indicate that the estimate applies to people (specifically people aged 16 years and over). For household crimes, this column has a value of "household" to indicate that the estimate applies to households in England and Wales.

Measurement type

Possible values: incidence rate; prevalence rate; perception

This column identifies the type of measurement. "Incidence rate" means that the measurement shows the number of crimes per 1,000 adults or per 1,000 households (identified by the "measurement level" column) in the last 12 months. "Prevalence rate" means that the measurement shows the percentage of adults or households (identified by the "measurement level" column) who have been victims of crime in the last 12 months. "Perception" means that the measurement shows the percentage of adults who have a particular perception about crime or the criminal justice system.

Characteristic

CharacteristicVar

Possible values: various

This includes all the values in the "CharacteristicVar" column of the main data tables.

Characteristic label

Possible values: various

This column contains a text description of the measure that "CharacteristicVar" relates to.

9.6 How to use open data tables

At the simplest level, Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) open data tables can be used to find CSEW estimates for certain demographic groups. The CSV files can be imported into most data analysis programmes for this purpose. A full list of the measurements that are included in these tables can be found in the "MeasurementVar" reference table. A full list of demographic characteristics that these measurements can be analysed by using these tables can be found in the "CharacteristicVar" reference table.

The data specification table should make clear to users that to find the estimate they are interested in requires filtering or searching data across different columns to identify the population group they are interested in. For example, overall national estimates for all adults aged 16 years and over can be found by selecting "16+" from the "Age" column, "all" from the "sex" column, and "total" from the "characteristic" column (for personal crime or perception estimates). At the other extreme level of detail, users could find estimates for 16-to 24-year-old married women by selecting the appropriate categories from the "age", "sex" and "characteristic" columns. Other levels of detail can be found by selecting the appropriate values in these fields (or "household type" for household crime estimates).

When using these estimates, users should be aware of the fact that the CSEW is a sample survey and produces estimates with a margin of error around them. As such, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) recommends that users do not use estimates based on fewer than 50 respondents (identified by the "unweighted count" column). This feature of the data should also be considered when comparing differences between groups. Standard statistical tests can be used to identify whether differences between demographic groups are statistically significant. That is, whether the differences seen in the CSEW data are because of differences in the population of England and Wales as a whole, or whether they occurred by chance as a result of the random selection of respondents for the CSEW sample. Users should familiarise themselves with this concept before using these tables.

When comparing estimates, users should ensure that they are only comparing estimates from independent samples. Although the current set of tables only include data for a single time period, future releases may cover other time periods. When comparing data over time, users should consider the time periods that are being used to ensure that they are not overlapping. This can be identified by consideration of the "period", "last year", and "last quarter" columns in the data tables.

Some users may want to combine data in these tables with data from other sources. One common use of this would be to produce counts of crime and numbers of victims by combining the CSEW open data tables with population data. Incidence rates in these tables show the number of crimes per 1,000 adults or 1,000 households. By multiplying the values in the CSEW open data tables by the ONS estimates of the total number of adults or households in England and Wales, divided by 1,000, it is possible to calculate the estimated total number of crimes that took place over a 12-month period.

Similarly, prevalence rates show the percentage of adults or households who were victims of crime in a 12-month period. If these percentages (once converted to a decimal) are multiplied by the total number of adults or households in England and Wales, it is possible to calculate the estimated number of victims of crime. Users should bear in mind that when doing this, it is important to use a population estimate for the same subpopulation as that used in the CSEW open data tables. So, for example, an incidence rate for men aged 16 to 24 years in England and Wales from the CSEW open data tables should be multiplied by a population estimate for men aged 16 to 24 years in England and Wales to calculate the number of crimes against men aged 16 to 24 years in England and Wales.

9.7 Changes to the open data tables variables

For the survey year of year ending (YE) March 2013 (that is, interviews from April 2012 onwards) changes were made to the demographic questions in the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) questionnaire. The changes have been made in accordance with harmonised standards set by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) with the aim of providing consistent data series across government. As these questions were introduced into the survey in April 2012, any annual dataset produced over the previous 12-month period will necessarily have included both the new and the old style questions. This affected datasets for the reporting periods "year to June 2012", "year to September 2012" and "year to December 2012".

New victimisation questions on fraud and computer misuse were introduced into the CSEW in October 2015. The questions were asked of half the survey sample from October 2015 until September 2017, to test for detrimental effects on the survey as a whole and to help ensure that the historical time series is protected. As of October 2017, the questions have been asked of a full sample. Variables relating to fraud and computer misuse have been added to the Open Data tables for YE September 2018 onwards.

10.1 Nature of crime

Additional analysis is published from YE March dataset of the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) relating to the "nature of crime". For a number of crime types (for example, bicycle theft, burglary, vandalism, and violence) tables are available detailing characteristics such as:

• timing of when the incident occurred

• location of where the incident occurred,

• if appropriate cost of stolen items or damage incurred as a result of the incident,

• if appropriate level of injuries sustained and types of weapons used in the incident,

• if appropriate emotional impact of the incident on the respondent

• perceived seriousness of the incident to the respondent

• offenders involved in the incident, if known by the respondent

The latest CSEW figures for most offence types are for YE March 2025, published in our Nature of crime tables.

10.2 Open data tables (police recorded crime)

Data tables on police recorded crime broken down by police force or community safety partnership (CSP), quarterly period and individual offence code are available.

10.3 Archived data

Access to all Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) microdata prior to the move to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) was via the UK Data Archive. Once responsibility, including all historic data, passed from the Home Office to the ONS, new data arrangements were made. However, since all historic data had previously been available for download from the data archive, it was decided that such data would remain available for download as "End User Licence" and "Special Licence" datasets and be unaffected by the transition of responsibility to the ONS.

To access the "Special Licence" datasets the user was required to be an approved researcher. However, following a review of the ONS Approved Researcher scheme in 2016, it was concluded that approved researchers should only access legally protected data in a secure environment and therefore the ONS stopped any further distribution of data under the terms of a "Special Licence". CSEW data previously accessible under "Special Licence" are now available via the ONS's Secure Research Service (SRS) and the Secure Data Service.

Users can download "End User Licence" versions of the CSEW datasets from the CSEW section of the UK Data Archive.

More detailed versions of the CSEW datasets are available via our Secure Research Service (SRS) and the Secure Data Service.

The classifications defined in this appendix are those used for crime recorded by the police and notifiable to the Home Office, correct as of YE March 2024. In general, attempting, conspiring, aiding, abetting, causing or permitting a crime is classified under the heading of the crime itself, though in certain cases it is shown separately.

Recorded crime covers all indictable and triable-either-way offences. Additionally, a few closely associated summary offences are included. Summary offences are identified in the listing, together with the reasons for their inclusion. The crimes on this list are termed notifiable offences and their listing is referred to as the notifiable offences list (NOL).

Most of the offences listed are defined in terms of legal offences (that is, sections of Acts). A comprehensive list of these offences, together with important legal definitions and explanatory notes, appears in the Home Office Counting Rules for Recorded Crime documentation.

Victim-based crime

Violence against the person

In October 2017, a new sub-category has been introduced within the main violence against the person offence group, for “death or serious injury caused by illegal driving”. It contains offences previously counted under violence. Additionally, stalking and harassment offences have been moved out of the sub-category of “violence without injury” and are now in a separate sub-category of “stalking and harassment.”

Homicide

1 Murder
4.1 Manslaughter
4.10 Corporate manslaughter
4.2 Infanticide (Applies to infants aged under 12 months killed by the mother while of disturbed mind).

Death or serious injury – unlawful driving

4.4 Causing death or serious injury by dangerous driving
4.6 Causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink or drugs
4.8 Causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving
4.9 Causing death by driving: unlicensed or disqualified or uninsured drivers
37.1 Causing death by aggravated vehicle taking

Violence with injury

2 Attempted murder
4.3 Intentional destruction of viable unborn child
5D Assault with intent to cause serious harm
5E Endangering life
4.7 Causing or allowing death or serious physical harm of child or vulnerable person
8N Assault with injury
8P Racially or religiously aggravated assault with injury
8S Assault with injury on a constable
8T Assault with injury on an emergency worker (other than a constable)

Violence without injury

3A Conspiracy to murder
3B Threats to kill
11A Cruelty to children or young persons
13 Child abduction
14 Procuring illegal abortion
36 Kidnapping
104 Assault without injury on a constable
105A Assault without injury
105B Racially or religiously aggravated assault without injury
106 Modern slavery

Stalking and harassment

8L Harassment
8M Racially or religiously aggravated harassment
8Q Stalking
8R Malicious communications
8U Controlling and coercive behaviour

Sexual offences

Rape

19C Rape of a female aged 16 or over
19D Rape of a female child under 16
19E Rape of a female child under 13
19J Rape of a female – undefined
19F Rape of a male aged 16 or over
19G Rape of a male child under 16
19H Rape of a male child under 13
19K Rape of a male – undefined

Other sexual offences

17A Sexual assault on a male aged 13 years and over
17B Sexual assault on a male child aged under 13 years
20A Sexual assault on a female aged 13 years and over
20B Sexual assault on a female child aged under 13 years
21 Sexual activity involving a child aged under 13 years
22B Sexual activity involving a child aged under 16 years
22A Causing sexual activity without consent
23 Incest or familial sexual offences
70 Sexual activity with a person with a mental disorder
71 Abuse of children through sexual exploitation
73 Abuse of position of trust of a sexual nature
88A Sexual grooming
88C Other miscellaneous sexual offences
88D Unnatural sexual offences
88E Exposure and voyeurism

Robbery

The main elements of the offence of robbery (Section 8 of the Theft Act 1968) are stealing and the use or threat of force immediately before doing so, and in order to do so. Any injuries resulting from this force are not recorded as additional offences of violence.

34A Robbery of business property
34B Robbery of personal property

Theft offences

Burglary

The main elements of police recorded burglaries (as defined by the Theft Act 1968) are entry (or attempted entry) to a building as a trespasser with intent to:

• steal property from it (including stealing or attempting to steal)
• inflict grievous bodily harm
• commit unlawful damage to property whilst inside

The offence group also includes aggravated burglary (Section 10 of the same Act), which is defined as a burglary where the burglar is in possession of a weapon at the time. The Home Office Counting Rules for Recorded Crime documentation contains details of the types of premises that constitute a dwelling.

Police recorded burglary figures changed from the categorisation of domestic and non-domestic burglary in the Home Office Counting Rules for police recorded crime. From April 2017, new subcategories of residential and non-residential burglary have replaced domestic and non-domestic burglary respectively, but with the important distinction that the classification of residential burglary includes all buildings or parts of buildings that are within the boundary of, or form a part of, a dwelling. Any building not directly connected to a dwelling was previously counted as non-domestic burglary. This change was introduced to draw together burglaries to the main dwelling house and those to other buildings that are part of the overall residential property.

From April 2023, new sub-categories, residential (home) and residential (unconnected buildings) have been introduced. The new classification includes a breakdown of residential burglary from the main home and parts of buildings that are within the boundary of a dwelling. Figures for total burglary, total residential burglary and total burglary – business and community are unaffected.

Burglary

28I Residential burglary of a home
28J Attempted residential burglary of a home
28K Distraction burglary – residential (home)
28O Distraction burglary – residential (unconnected building)
28M Residential burglary of unconnected building
28N Attempted residential burglary of unconnected building
29B Aggravated burglary – residential (home)
29C Aggravated burglary – residential (unconnected building)
30C Burglary – business and community
30D Attempted burglary – business and community
31A Aggravated burglary – business and community

Vehicle offences

37.2 Aggravated vehicle taking

Part of Section 1 of the Aggravated Vehicle Taking Act 1992. Applies to offences of unauthorised vehicle taking (see classification 48) with additional aggravating factors of dangerous driving, or causing an accident involving injury or damage.

45 Theft from a vehicle
48 Theft or unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle

Unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle (part of Section 12 of the Theft Act 1968; also known as taking without consent or TWOC) is a summary offence. It is closely associated with theft of a motor vehicle because at the time of recording it may not be known whether the intention is to permanently deprive the owner.

126 Vehicle interference

Summary offences, closely associated with theft of or from vehicles. The Home Office Counting Rules for Recorded Crime documentation contains detailed guidance for forces on distinguishing between these offences and criminal damage, where a vehicle is reported damaged.

Theft from the person

39 Theft from the person

Bicycle theft

44 Theft or unauthorised taking of a pedal cycle

Shoplifting

46 Shoplifting

All other theft offences

35 Blackmail
40 Theft in a dwelling other than from an automatic machine or meter
41 Theft by an employee
42 Theft of mail
43 Dishonest use of electricity
47 Theft from automatic machine or meter
49 Other theft
49A Making off without payment

Criminal damage and arson

Arson

56A Arson endangering life
56B Arson not endangering life

Not all malicious fires that the police record are included here. If the owner of the property set alight is wounded, then a crime of violence is recorded. If a stolen vehicle is subsequently burnt out, it is recorded as a vehicle theft. An additional arson offence is recorded only if there is evidence that the arsonist is unconnected with the vehicle thief.

Criminal damage

58A Criminal damage to a dwelling
58B Criminal damage to a building other than a dwelling
58C Criminal damage to a vehicle
58D Other criminal damage
58J Racially or religiously aggravated criminal damage

Other crimes against society

Drug offences

Trafficking of drugs

92A Trafficking in controlled drugs

Possession of drugs

92C Other drug offences

Various offences, mostly under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, including permitting premises to be used for unlawful purposes; failure to comply with notice requiring information relating to prescribing, supply etc. of drugs; supply of intoxicating substance; and supply of articles for administering or preparing controlled drugs.

92D Possession of controlled drugs (excluding cannabis)
92E Possession of cannabis

Possession of weapons offences

10A Possession of firearms with intent
10B Possession of firearms offences
10C Possession of other weapons
10D Possession of article with blade or point
81 Other firearms offences
90 Other knives offences

Public order offences

9A Public fear, alarm or distress
9B Racially or religiously aggravated public fear, alarm or distress
62A Violent disorder
66 Other offences against the State or public order

Miscellaneous crimes against society

15 Concealing an infant death close to birth
24 Exploitation of prostitution
26 Bigamy
27 Soliciting for prostitution
33 Going equipped for stealing
33A Making, supplying or possessing articles for use in fraud
38 Profiting from or concealing proceeds of crime
54 Handling stolen goods
59 Threat or possession with intent to commit criminal damage
60 Forgery or use of drug prescription
61 Other forgery
61A Possession of false documents
67 Perjury
69 Offender Management Act offences
76 Aiding suicide
79 Perverting the course of justice
80 Absconding from lawful custody
83 Bail offences
86 Obscene publications, etc. and protected sexual material
95 Disclosure, obstruction, false or misleading statements etc.
96 Wildlife crime
99 Other notifiable offences
802 Dangerous driving
814 Fraud, forgery associated with vehicle driver records

Selected National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB) offences

Additional data on fraud, reported from industry bodies, are provided by Report Fraud. The list shows the offences within NFIB categories and the date from which they were included.

1 April 2011

“419” Advance fee fraud
Application fraud (excluding mortgages)
Bankruptcy and insolvency
Business trading fraud
Charity fraud
Cheque, plastic card and online bank accounts (not PSP)
Computer software service fraud
Consumer phone fraud
Corporate employee fraud
Corporate procurement fraud
Counterfeit cashiers’ cheques and bankers’ drafts
Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) fraud
Dating scams
Door-to-door sales and bogus tradesmen
False accounting
Fraud recovery
Fraudulent applications for grants from charities
His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) fraud
Inheritance fraud
Insurance broker fraud
Insurance related fraud
Lender loan fraud
Lottery scams
Mandate fraud
Mortgage related fraud
Online shopping and auctions
Other advance fee frauds
Other consumer non-investment fraud
Other financial investment
Passport application fraud
Prime bank guarantees
Pyramid or Ponzi schemes
Rental fraud
Share/bond sales or boiler room fraud
Telecom industry fraud (misuse of contracts)
Ticket fraud
Time shares and holiday club fraud

1 January 2012

Computer virus or malware
Denial of service attack
Denial of service attack (extortion)
Hacking (extortion)
Hacking – PBX or dial through
Hacking – personal
Hacking – server
Hacking – social media and email

1 April 2012

Fraudulent applications for grants from government-funded organisations

14 February 2013

Pension fraud by pensioners (or their estate)
Pension fraud committed on pensioners
Pension liberation fraud

1 April 2013

Dishonesty retaining a wrongful credit
Fraud by abuse of position
Fraud by failing to disclose information
Other fraud (not covered elsewhere)
Other regulatory fraud
Retail fraud

1 April 2015

DVLA driver licence application fraud

Crime categories and the offence codes used in the Crime Survey for England and Wales

The list in this appendix gives a breakdown of which offence codes make up the different crime categories that are referred to in the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW). Details of how offences reported in CSEW are placed into the offence codes used can be found in section 5 of the Technical Report. For household crimes the respondent is answering on behalf of the household and when an offence occurs, the whole household is considered to have been victimised. For personal crimes, the respondents themselves have to be the victim of a personal crime for it to be inside the survey’s coverage.

Because of the small numbers of rape, attempted rape and indecent assault offences identified by face-to-face CSEW interviews, results from the main CSEW are too unreliable to report. Because of this, they are not included within the overall count of violence (except for the categories of “serious wounding with sexual motive” and “other wounding with sexual motive”, which are included in the offence type of “wounding”).

Household crimes

All household offences

50: Attempted burglary to non-connected domestic garage or outhouse

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

53: Attempted burglary in a dwelling

55: Theft in a dwelling

56: Theft from a meter

57: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – nothing taken

58: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – something taken

60: Theft of car or van

61: Theft from car or van

62: Theft of motorbike, motor scooter or moped

63: Theft from motorbike, motor scooter or moped

64: Theft of pedal cycle

65: Theft from outside dwelling (excluding theft of milk bottles)

71: Attempted theft of, or from, car or van

72: Attempted theft of, or from, motorcycle, motor scooter or moped

80: Arson

81: Criminal damage to a motor vehicle (£20 or under)

82: Criminal damage to a motor vehicle (over £20)

83: Criminal damage to the home (£20 or under)

84: Criminal damage to the home (over £20)

85: Other criminal damage (£20 or under)

86: Other criminal damage (over £20)

Acquisitive crime against the household

50: Attempted burglary to non-connected domestic garage or outhouse

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

53: Attempted burglary in a dwelling

55: Theft in a dwelling

56: Theft from a meter

57: Burglary from non-connected garage or outhouse – nothing taken

58: Burglary from non-connected garage or outhouse – something taken

60: Theft of car or van

61: Theft from car or van

62: Theft of motorbike, motorscooter or moped

63: Theft from motorbike, motorscooter or moped

64: Theft of pedal cycle

65: Theft from outside dwelling (excluding theft of milk bottles)

71: Attempted theft of, or from, car or van

72: Attempted theft of, or from, motorcycle, motorscooter or moped

Domestic burglary

50: Attempted burglary to non-connected domestic garage or outhouse

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

53: Attempted burglary in a dwelling

57: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – nothing taken

58: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – something taken

Domestic burglary with entry

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

57: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – nothing taken

58: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – something taken

Domestic burglary with loss

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

58: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – something taken

Domestic burglary with no loss

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

57: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – nothing taken

Domestic burglary attempts

50: Attempted burglary to non-connected domestic garage or outhouse

53: Attempted burglary in a dwelling

Domestic burglary in a dwelling

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

53: Attempted burglary in a dwelling

Domestic burglary in a dwelling with entry

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

Domestic burglary in a dwelling with loss

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

Domestic burglary in a dwelling with no loss

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

Domestic burglary in a dwelling attempts

53: Attempted burglary in a dwelling

Domestic burglary in a non-connected building to a dwelling

50: Attempted burglary to non-connected domestic garage or outhouse

57: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – nothing taken

58: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – something taken

Domestic burglary in a non-connected building to a dwelling with entry

57: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – nothing taken

58: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – something taken

Domestic burglary in a non-connected building to a dwelling with loss

58: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – something taken

Domestic burglary in a non-connected building to a dwelling with no loss

57: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – nothing taken

Domestic burglary in a non-connected building to a dwelling attempts

50: Attempted burglary to non-connected domestic garage or outhouse

Other household theft

55: Theft in a dwelling

56: Theft from a meter

65: Theft from outside dwelling (excluding theft of milk bottles)

Theft from a dwelling

55: Theft in a dwelling

56: Theft from a meter

Theft from outside a dwelling

65: Theft from outside dwelling (excluding theft of milk bottles)

Vehicle-related thefts

60: Theft of car or van

61: Theft from car or van

62: Theft of motorbike, motor scooter or moped

63: Theft from motorbike, motor scooter or moped

71: Attempted theft of, or from, car or van

72: Attempted theft of, or from, motorcycle, motor scooter or moped

Theft from vehicles

61: Theft from car or van

63: Theft from motorbike, motor scooter or moped

Theft of vehicles

60: Theft of car or van

62: Theft of motorbike, motor scooter or moped

Attempted theft of and from vehicles

71: Attempted theft of, or from, car or van

72: Attempted theft of, or from, motorcycle, motor scooter or moped

Bicycle theft

64: Theft of pedal cycle

Criminal damage

80: Arson

81: Criminal damage to a motor vehicle (£20 or under)

82: Criminal damage to a motor vehicle (over £20)

83: Criminal damage to the home (£20 or under)

84: Criminal damage to the home (over £20)

85: Other criminal damage (£20 or under)

86: Other criminal damage (over £20)

Criminal damage to a vehicle

81: Criminal damage to a motor vehicle (£20 or under)

82: Criminal damage to a motor vehicle (over £20)

Arson and other criminal damage

80: Arson

83: Criminal damage to the home (£20 or under)

84: Criminal damage to the home (over £20)

85: Other criminal damage (£20 or under)

86: Other criminal damage (over £20)

Personal crimes

All personal (not including rape and indecent assault [note 1])

11: Serious wounding

12: Other wounding

13: Common assault

21: Attempted assault

32: Serious wounding with sexual motive

33: Other wounding with sexual motive

41: Robbery

42: Attempted robbery

43: Snatch theft from the person

44: Other theft from the person

45: Attempted theft from the person

67: Other personal theft

73: Other attempted theft

All violence

11: Serious wounding

12: Other wounding

13: Common assault

21: Attempted assault

32: Serious wounding with sexual motive

33: Other wounding with sexual motive

Other violence categories exist beyond this list but largely depend on details of the offence, such as the level of injury (for example, violence with injury) and victim-offender relationship (for example, domestic violence) that are not reflected in different offence codes. Section 5: Offence types contains more information on different crime categories as a result of these offence characteristics.

Common assault

13: Common assault

21: Attempted assault

Wounding

11: Serious wounding

12: Other wounding

32: Serious wounding with sexual motive

33: Other wounding with sexual motive

Robbery

41: Robbery

42: Attempted robbery

Acquisitive crime against the individual

41: Robbery

42: Attempted robbery

43: Snatch theft from the person

44: Other theft from the person

45: Attempted theft from the person

67: Other personal theft

73: Other attempted theft

Theft from the person

43: Snatch theft from the person

44: Other theft from the person

45: Attempted theft from the person

Snatch theft from person

43: Snatch theft from the person

Stealth theft from person

44: Other theft from the person

Attempted snatch or stealth theft from person

45: Attempted theft from the person

Other theft of personal property

67: Other personal theft

73: Other attempted theft

All theft

43: Snatch theft from the person

44: Other theft from the person

45: Attempted theft from the person

50: Attempted burglary to non-connected domestic garage or outhouse

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

53: Attempted burglary in a dwelling

55: Theft in a dwelling

56: Theft from a meter

57: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – nothing taken

58: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – something taken

60: Theft of car or van

61: Theft from car or van

62: Theft of motorbike, motor scooter or moped

63: Theft from motorbike, motor scooter or moped

64: Theft of pedal cycle

65: Theft from outside dwelling (excluding theft of milk bottles)

67: Other personal theft

71: Attempted theft of, or from, car or van

72: Attempted theft of, or from, motorcycle, motor scooter or moped

73: Other attempted theft

Headline CSEW crime (not including rape, indecent assault¹)

11: Serious wounding

12: Other wounding

13: Common assault

21: Attempted assault

32: Serious wounding with sexual motive

33: Other wounding with sexual motive

41: Robbery

42: Attempted robbery

43: Snatch theft from the person

44: Other theft from the person

45: Attempted theft from the person

50: Attempted burglary to non-connected domestic garage or outhouse

51: Burglary in a dwelling (nothing taken)

52: Burglary in a dwelling (something taken)

53: Attempted burglary in a dwelling

55: Theft in a dwelling

56: Theft from a meter

57: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – nothing taken

58: Burglary from non-connected domestic garage or outhouse – something taken

60: Theft of car or van

61: Theft from car or van

62: Theft of motorbike, motor scooter or moped

63: Theft from motorbike, motor scooter or moped

64: Theft of pedal cycle

65: Theft from outside dwelling (excluding theft of milk bottles)

67: Other personal theft

71: Attempted theft of, or from, car or van

72: Attempted theft of, or from, motorcycle, motor scooter or moped

73: Other attempted theft

80: Arson

81: Criminal damage to a motor vehicle (£20 or under)

82: Criminal damage to a motor vehicle (over £20)

83: Criminal damage to the home (£20 or under)

84: Criminal damage to the home (over £20)

85: Other criminal damage (£20 or under)

86: Other criminal damage (over £20)

200: Bank and credit account fraud – with loss

201: Bank and credit account fraud – with full loss reimbursed

202: Bank and credit account fraud – no loss

203: Advance fee fraud – with loss

204: Advance fee fraud – with full loss reimbursed

205: Advance fee fraud – no loss

206: Non-investment fraud – with loss

207: Non-investment fraud – with full loss reimbursed

208: Non-investment fraud – no loss

210: Other fraud – with loss

211: Other fraud – with full loss reimbursed

212: Other fraud – no loss

320: Hacking and unauthorised access to personal information

321: Computer virus – with loss

322: Computer virus – with full loss reimbursed

323: Computer virus – no loss

324: Other computer misuse

Notes for: Appendix 2: Crime Survey for England and Wales offences

1. Due to the small numbers of rape, attempted rape and indecent assault offences identified by face-to-face CSEW interviews, results from the main CSEW are too unreliable to report; these data are not included within the overall count (except for the categories of “serious wounding with sexual motive” and “other wounding with sexual motive”, which are included in the offence category of “wounding”).

1. CSEW banking and credit account fraud

The following offences recorded by Report Fraud align with incidents presented in CSEW banking and credit account fraud:

NFIB5BA - Cheque, plastic card and online bank accounts (not PSP)

Where criminals steal or fake an individual's bank cards or cheque book, or they obtain their card or account details, allowing them to take money from the victim's account or run up credit in the victim's name. This does not include payment service providers (PSP), for example, PayPal and World Pay, which are not banks but deal in electronic money transfers.

NFIB5D - Mandate fraud

Where fraudsters obtain details of direct debits, standing orders or account transfer details and amend them to transfer monies to other accounts.

2. CSEW consumer and retail fraud

The following offences recorded by Report Fraud align with incidents presented in CSEW consumer and retail fraud:

NFIB3A - Online shopping and auctions

Involves fraud attributable to the misrepresentation of a product advertised for sale through an internet auction site or the non-delivery of products purchased through an internet auction site.

NFIB3B - Consumer phone fraud

Involves victims being tricked into paying premium rate charges, for example, through replying to missed calls and text messages, ring tone scams, and SMS competition and Trivia scams.

NFIB3C - Door to door sales and bogus tradesmen

Where fraudsters attempt to scam individuals after knocking at their door; this usually involves promoting goods or services that are either never delivered or are of a very poor quality.

NFIB3D - Other consumer and retail fraud

Includes frauds involving the misrepresentation of a product advertised for sale or the non-delivery or non-existence of products purchased that do not fit under other types of consumer and retail fraud.

NFIB3E - Computer software service fraud

Involves the victim being contacted and told that there is a problem with their computer, which can be fixed for a fee. No fix actually occurs.

NFIB3F - Ticket fraud

Involves the victim purchasing tickets in advance remotely (for example, over the phone or internet), which are never supplied or turn out not to be valid or are worthless.

3. CSEW advance fee fraud

The following offences recorded by Report Fraud align with incidents presented in CSEW advance fee fraud:

NFIB1A - 419 Advance fee fraud

When a victim receives correspondence purporting to be from a foreign government official offering the recipient the opportunity to share a percentage of a substantial quantity of money by helping the fraudster to place sums of money in an overseas bank account. The communication asks the recipient to send money to the fraudster, usually in increasing instalments.

NFIB1B - Lottery scams

When a victim is informed they have won a non-existent lottery and required to send an advance to release their winnings.

NFIB1C - Counterfeit cashiers' cheques and bankers drafts

When fraudulent cheques or bankers drafts are presented as payment for goods or services ordered over the internet in excess of the actual value. The seller reimburses the purchaser with the excess prior to the cheque or draft being discovered as fraudulent.

NFIB1D - Dating scam

Where the intended victim is befriended on the internet and eventually convinced to assist their new love financially by sending them money for a variety of emotive reasons.

NFIB1E - Fraud recovery

Where fraud victims are targeted to gain personal details and additional money, by means of posing as recovery agents.

NFIB1F - Inheritance fraud

Where victims are told that there is cash from inheritances that have been located in their name, and that an estate report that includes information on where the inheritances are located and how they can be claimed can be provided to them in return for a small fee.

NFIB1G - Rental fraud

Where prospective tenants are tricked into paying advanced fees or rent for the rental of premises which, either don’t exist, are not for rent, are already rented, or are rented to a multitude of victims at the same time.

NFIB1H - Other advance fee frauds

Includes frauds that cannot be classified under any of the other advance fee payment types such as career opportunity scams, clairvoyant or psychic scams, impersonation of officials, racing tipster scams, work from home and business opportunity scams and vehicle matching scams.

NFIB1J - Lender loan fraud

Where the victim is contacted and told that they can have a loan for a fee. The fee is paid and no loan is forthcoming.

4. CSEW other fraud

The following offences recorded by Report Fraud align with incidents presented in CSEW other fraud:

NFIB2A - Share/bond sales and boiler room fraud

Where victims are cold-called by fake stockbrokers and encouraged or persuaded to buy shares or bonds in worthless, non-existent or near-bankrupt companies.

NFIB2B - Pyramid or Ponzi scheme

Pyramid schemes are where individuals are promised rewards for enrolling others into a business that offers a non-existent or worthless product; Ponzi schemes are investment scams that pay returns to investors from their own money, or from money paid in by subsequent investors.

NFIB2C - Prime bank guarantees

Involves a bogus investment scheme promising high yields in a short space of time by buying bank guarantees from “prime” banks.

NFIB2D - Time shares and holiday club fraud

Involves an investment scam that claims people can easily become a property millionaire from buying a timeshare. Holiday club fraud is when individuals are told they have won a “free” holiday or are pressured into signing a contract for a bogus holiday club.

NFIB2E - Other financial investment

Includes other investment scams where individuals are offered a return that is more attractive than a conventional investment, and where the return on the outlay is exaggerated or unrealistic, for example, investment seminars.

NFIB4A - Charity fraud

Occurs when fraudsters organise the fraudulent collection of money using names of genuine charities or fictional ones, or make fraudulent applications for grants from charities or lottery fund organisations.

NFIB6B - Insurance broker fraud

Occurs where victims obtain insurance cover from a broker or someone purporting to be a broker. When a claim is made or the policy checked, they discover that they are not insured, or the cover that they have paid for and thought they had is not what they have.

NFIB16B - Pension fraud committed on pensioners

Pension fraud committed on pensioners.

NFIB16C - Pension liberation fraud

Fraudulent pension liberation schemes.

NFIB18 - Fraud by failing to disclose information

When there is a failure to disclose information by an individual to another person when they have a legal duty to do so.

NFIB19 - Fraud by abuse of position

When someone abuses their position of authority or trust against another person, for personal or financial gain, or to cause loss to another.

NFIB90 - Other fraud (Not covered elsewhere)

Frauds by false representation or obtaining services dishonestly that are not covered elsewhere in other crime types. This offence will only be captured by the CSEW if against an individual rather than a business or organisation.

5. CSEW computer viruses

The following offence recorded by Report Fraud aligns with incidents presented in CSEW computer viruses:

NFIB50A - Computer viruses/malware

A computer virus is a computer program that can replicate itself and spread from one computer to another by using executable code; malware is short for malicious software and consists of programming (code, scripts, or other software) designed to disrupt or deny the operation of a computer (it includes Trojan horses and ransomware - a Trojan horse is often disguised as legitimate software and misleads users of its true intent; while ransomware restricts access to a computer and demands that the user pay a ransom to remove it). This offence will only be captured by the CSEW if against an individual rather than a business or organisation.

6. CSEW unauthorised access to personal information (hacking)

The following offences recorded by Report Fraud align with incidents presented in CSEW unauthorised access to personal information (hacking):

NFIB52B – Hacking - personal

The unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer, and involves the deliberate targeting of a specific computer by the offender - personal computers (including laptops, games consoles and smart phones).

NFIB52C - Hacking - social media and e-mail

The unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer, and involves the deliberate targeting of a specific computer by the offender - social media and email accounts.

NFIB52E - Hacking - extortion

The unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer, and involves the deliberate targeting of a specific computer by the offender and includes an unwarranted demand with menaces (Blackmail) attached to any computer hacking or threat of computer hacking. This offence will only be captured by the CSEW if against an individual rather than a business or organisation.

7. Out of scope

The following offences are not covered by the CSEW as they are crimes against businesses, organisations or society:

NFIB3G – Retail fraud

Committed against retailers that does not involve online sales or cheque, or plastic card sales, for example, refund fraud, label fraud, or obtaining goods or services with no intent to pay; it does not include fraudulent transactions as these are captured in "Cheque, plastic card and online bank accounts" (not PSP).

NFIB4B - Fraudulent applications for grants from charities or lottery fund organisations

Where charities and lottery organisations have provided grants based on false representations or where they have received grant applications that contain false representations.

NFIB5B - Application fraud (excluding mortgages)

When fraudsters open an account (for example, in respect of hire purchase or loans) utilising fake or stolen documents in someone else's name.

NFIB5C - Mortgage related fraud

Where an individual generally involves one or more associates to fraudulently obtain one or more mortgages for profit or to assist in money laundering.

NFIB5E - Dishonestly retaining a wrongful credit

A person is guilty of an offence if (a) a wrongful credit has been made to an account kept by them or in respect of which they have any right or interest; (b) they know or believe that the credit is wrongful; and (c) they dishonestly fail to take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to secure that the credit is cancelled.

NFIB6A - Insurance related fraud

Occurs where policy holders obtain money or replacement goods through false insurance claims or obtain policies by furnishing incorrect details

NFIB7 - Telecom industry fraud (Misuse of contracts)

When contracts are obtained by false representation from service providers, either by using false details or stolen documents or credit cards, or with no intention of paying the contract. Includes mobile phones and internet services.

NFIB8A - Corporate employee fraud

General frauds that target any business and sector specific frauds, where employees or ex-employees obtain property, or greater remuneration through fraud.

NFIB8B - Corporate procurement fraud

General frauds that target any business and sector specific frauds, where excess goods are ordered and then sold on by the offender, or goods of an inferior quality are delivered to those paid for with the offenders pocketing the difference.

NFIB9 - Business trading fraud

When businesses knowingly carry on trading with the intention of defrauding creditors or for any other fraudulent purposes.

NFIB10 - False accounting

Where company assets are overstated or liabilities understated to make a business seem financially stronger than it actually is.

NFIB11 - Bankruptcy and insolvency

Involves companies fraudulently trading immediately before being declared insolvent, or phoenix fraud where a second company starts up overnight with the same directors.

NFIB12 - Passport application fraud

Occurs where fraudsters obtain or try to obtain a United Kingdom passport by false representation.

NFIB13 - Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) fraud

When benefits given out by the Department for Work and Pensions are claimed or sought, fraudulently.

NFIB14 - Fraudulent applications for grants from government funded organisations

Where government funded organisations have provided grants based on false representations or where they have received grant applications that contain false representations.

NFIB15 - HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) fraud

When fraud is committed against HMRC.

NFIB16A - Pension fraud by pensioners (or their estate)

Pension fraud by pensioners.

NFIB17 - Other regulatory fraud

Fraud from regulators that is not covered elsewhere. Examples would include fraud against the Land Registry, insider dealing at the stock exchange, or the Gambling Commission.

NFIB20A - DVLA Driver Licence application fraud

Where fraudsters obtain or try to obtain a United Kingdom driving licence by false representation to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA).

NFIB51A - Denial of service attack

An attempt to make an online service unavailable to its intended users by overwhelming it with a large volume of traffic from multiple sources.

NFIB51B - Denial of service attack - extortion

An attempt to make an online service unavailable to its intended users by overwhelming it with a large volume of traffic from multiple sources and includes an unwarranted demand with menaces (Blackmail) attached to the denial of service attack or the threat of a denial of service.

NFIB52A - Hacking - server

The unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer, and involves the deliberate targeting of a specific computer by the offender - computer servers.

NFIB52D - Hacking – PBX/dial through

The unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer, and involves the deliberate targeting of a specific computer by the offender - telephone systems.

Notes

1. police effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy (PEEL) page.