Fraud monitoring has shifted from a discretionary control to a core prudential requirement across every major regulatory regime, with supervisors now demanding structured detection and prevention capabilities rather than treating fraud oversight as an afterthought.
According to ZIGRAM, the financial toll underlines the urgency. UK fraud losses hit £1.168bn in 2023, with authorised push payment fraud accounting for roughly £460m of that figure, while the Home Office estimates fraud’s broader economic and social cost at £14.4bn for the 2023-24 financial year.
Regulators increasingly expect coverage that extends beyond payments alone, spanning logins, device changes, beneficiary updates and session-level anomaly detection.
Requirements vary by jurisdiction but share common ground. In the US, FinCEN mandates that Suspicious Activity Reports be filed within 30 days of detection, or 60 days where no suspect has been identified.
The EU’s PSD2 and EBA guidelines require fraud reporting broken down by payment instrument, channel and authentication method, alongside strong customer authentication.
The UK’s FCA and PSR focus on APP fraud performance reporting and reimbursement rules, while India’s RBI Master Directions require Early Warning Signals (EWS) frameworks, Red Flagged Accounts (RFA) and board-level governance via a Special Committee of the Board for Monitoring and Follow-up of cases of Frauds.
Governance remains central to regulatory expectations. Boards must approve fraud risk appetite, review aggregate metrics and ensure resourcing for independent challenge, while senior management is expected to translate policy into escalation paths across fraud, AML, cybersecurity and operations teams.
Fraud KPIs, including loss rates, false-positive ratios and case backlogs, should reach audit and risk committees regularly.
Technology expectations are also intensifying. Regulators are pushing institutions toward risk-based, explainable detection tools that combine real-time and batch monitoring, machine learning-driven anomaly detection, device intelligence and behavioural analytics, all integrated with core banking, AML screening and case management systems. The EU AI Act now requires transparency and human oversight wherever automated systems are used for fraud prevention.
In India specifically, Master Directions dated 15 July 2024 apply to commercial banks, Regional Rural Banks and All India Financial Institutions, with 2026 developments set to tighten obligations further around 24/7 digital payment fraud monitoring and instant alerting for UPI transactions.
RegTech providers such as ZIGRAM are positioning their platforms to help institutions operationalise these obligations, combining transaction monitoring, entity risk assessment and fraud-focused analytics to align detection capabilities with jurisdictional requirements.
Read the full ZIGRAM post here.
Copyright © 2026 RegTech Analyst
Copyright © 2026 RegTech Analyst
