Supporting risk
Theft & Fraud Exposure
Comprehensive claim exposure driven by vehicle theft and fraud environment signals. This page explains the public signals behind theft & fraud exposure and how they tend to show up in claims and pricing pressure in King And Queen County.
County signal
15
/ 100
Vehicle theft rates are below the national distribution.
Sources
Public, regulator-grade inputs used for this risk.
- FBI UCR/NIBRS
- NICB reports
- NICB fraud reports
- State DOI fraud unit summaries
Signals tracked
What we measure for this risk
Vehicle theft baseline
Reported motor vehicle thefts in 2024 for King And Queen County.
31 thefts per 100k vehicles.
Coverage: Observed totals. Source: FBI CDE NIBRS (motor vehicle theft).
Core signals
Primary public inputs that define theft exposure in King And Queen County.
Vehicle theft rate
Auto thefts per 100k vehicles with trend direction.
Sources: FBI UCR/NIBRS, NICB reports
Additional signals
Supplemental theft and fraud signals added as coverage expands.
Fraud environment
Fraud prevalence signal (low / medium / high).
Sources: NICB fraud reports, State DOI fraud unit summaries
Why theft exposure matters
Theft exposure captures how frequently vehicles are stolen and the loss pressure that follows.
- Higher theft rates mean more comprehensive claims and replacements.
- Persistent theft pressure can lift premiums and tighten underwriting.
- Fraud environments can increase scrutiny and slow claim resolution.