How to detect document fraud in business? Guide and solutions

Document fraud is now a significant risk factor for businesses, regardless of their size or industry. Document falsification, identity theft, alteration of supporting documents or production of false files directly expose the organisation to legal, financial and even criminal consequences.

The widespread digitisation of document exchanges now requires companies to be able to establish the integrity, origin and date of the documents they produce, receive or store.

This article offers practical advice to companies on how to detect document fraud and prevent it effectively.

Table of contents

• What is document fraud? Definition
• What are the five types of document fraud?
• How can false documents be detected?
• Evidence and traceability to support document fraud prevention
• Best practices for preventing document fraud in the workplace

Key points

• Document fraud is based on a deliberate intention to deceive and can involve any type of document (contracts, invoices, documentary evidence, identity documents).
• There are many forms of fraud: falsification, counterfeiting, identity theft, fake documents.
• Fraud exposes the company to financial losses, contractual disputes and risks of non-compliance.
• Fraud detection relies on a combination of human checks and technical tools, but cannot identify all cases of fraud.
• Fraud prevention, based on the implementation of mechanisms for traceability, integrity and authenticity of documents (time stamping, electronic seals, archiving), makes it possible to limit the possibilities of manipulation in the long term.

What is document fraud? Definition

Document fraud refers to all practices involving the alteration, fabrication, use or presentation of a document with the aim of deceiving a third party or obtaining an undue advantage.

It can relate to the content of the document (modified data, false information), its origin (usurpation of name or signature) or its conditions of issue (false date, signature conditions).

Document fraud is not a mistake. It is the result of a deliberate intention to deceive others for personal benefit. It can be applied to various types of documents: contracts, invoices, identity documents, accounting documents, certificates, diplomas, delivery notes, etc.

What are the five types of document fraud?

Document fraud takes many forms but is always based on the same logic: altering a document to obtain an unauthorised benefit or legal effect. In practice, certain categories of fraud occur repeatedly within organisations.

• The falsification of existing documents consists of modifying certain data in an authentic document (amount, date, identity, mandatory information), such as an invoice or contract amended post its creation
• Counterfeiting involves creating a document that imitates an official original (certificate, attestation, supporting document) in order to make it appear valid.
• Identity theft involves using the name, position or signature of a manager, employee, partner or organisation to legitimise a document or decision.
• The fraudulent use of stolen or misappropriated documents, sometimes slightly modified, is common in invoicing fraud.
• The creation of false documents, such as false bank details, makes it possible to produce evidence that does not actually exist: the existence of a false bank account, a false address, etc.

When a company falls victim to document fraud, it may incur direct financial losses, including improper payments, false invoices or misappropriation of funds. Contracts may be disputed. Beyond the immediate financial impact, fraud often leads to operational disruption, additional processing costs, and strained relationships with partners or customers.

In regulated sectors, it may also prompt internal or external audits and weaken compliance with applicable regulatory or normative frameworks (such as GDPR or ISO standards).

How can false documents be detected?

Detecting document fraud relies on a combination of human verification and technical support. No single indicator, taken in isolation, can be used to conclude that fraud has occurred; it is the overall analysis of the document, its data and the context in which it was issued that should raise alarm bells. Companies therefore benefit from structuring their controls around several levels of verification, tailored to volumes and risks.

Level one: manual analysis and visual checks

Visual inspection remains an essential first step. It involves identifying inconsistencies in formatting, anomalies in signatures, missing mandatory information, or unusual discrepancies between dates, amounts, and references. Comparisons with previous documents, internal templates or external sources can also help identify frequent discrepancies. These controls rely primarily on the vigilance of the teams involved, particularly in finance, purchasing or human resources.

Level two: automated processes and contribution of technology

When document volumes increase, manual checks quickly reach their limits. Automated verification processes, particularly in KYC (Know Your Customer) and KYB (Know Your Business) frameworks, make it possible to check the consistency of the information declared against reference databases.

Digital solutions based on OCR (optical character recognition) facilitate data extraction and comparison, while algorithmic analysis and AI help identify recurring anomalies or atypical patterns.

Finally, the use of file metadata, particularly PDF metadata, makes it possible to detect inconsistencies related to the creation or modification of documents.

Evidence and traceability to support document fraud prevention

Detecting document fraud is a process requiring constant adaptation. As detection tools become more sophisticated, fraudsters resort to increasingly sophisticated techniques to circumvent them. This dynamic leads to a simple conclusion: it is not possible to detect everything.

This is why companies must complete their detection systems with prevention mechanisms. The objective is no longer only to identify fraud but also to reduce the opportunities for manipulation at an earlier stage, using technical solutions based on traceability and evidence.

• Timestamping makes it possible to establish a definite date and guarantee the integrity of a document over time.
• Electronic signatures and Electronic Seals identify the author or issuer of a document and secure the issuance process.
• Electronic archiving ensures the long-term preservation of documents, while allowing access and operations performed on these documents to be traced.

By making documents more difficult to alter without leaving a trace, these mechanisms limit areas of uncertainty and act as a deterrent.

Best practices for preventing document fraud in the workplace

Preventing document fraud relies above all on good internal organisation and training for teams that are exposed to it.

Training should enable teams to understand the issues surrounding fraud, identify risky situations and adopt the right reflexes.

Training alone is insufficient. Organisations must also put in place written procedures governing controls and verification, and implement technical mechanisms that provide authentication, traceability and protection of document integrity for evidential or auditable records.

Finally, the implementation of a clear anti-fraud policy, adapted to the size and activity of the company, helps to harmonise internal practices. While the challenges differ between SMEs and large groups, the objective remains the same: to reduce areas of uncertainty and limit the possibilities for document manipulation.

Conclusion

Document fraud remains a persistent risk for organisations, one that is intensified by technological progress. Detection is necessary, but on its own it cannot keep pace with increasingly sophisticated methods. A preventive approach is therefore required, embedding safeguards within document systems that preserve integrity and authenticity, such as timestamping or Electronic Seals. By structuring document processes and reducing areas of uncertainty, organisations limit opportunities for manipulation and place themselves in a stronger position should fraud later give rise to dispute or litigation.