Fleet Fuel Tracking Flags Misuse and Cloned Card Activity

Fuel card controls can expose costs that routine receipt checks miss. The source says unauthorized purchases may account for as much as 15% of a fleet’s fuel costs, whether they come from driver misuse or cloned cards used by outsiders. For fleet managers, transaction level monitoring can help identify both patterns while giving them a clearer record of fuel use across vehicles, drivers and locations.

Fuel fraud takes more than one form. A driver might use a company card for a personal vehicle, buy fuel that doesn’t match the assigned vehicle or ignore purchasing rules. External schemes can target the card details themselves: copied credentials may be used to buy fuel elsewhere, leaving the fleet responsible for the bill. A system that checks only driver behaviour may miss those purchases if they happen outside the fleet’s usual operating area.

The article cites more than $704 million in reported fraud losses in Canada in 2025 and more than $2.4 billion since 2022, attributing the figures to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre. It also says reported cases represent only 5% to 10% of actual incidents. Those figures cover fraud broadly, while the operational concern for fleets is narrower: fuel cards are a repeatable source of value, and copied card data can expose a company even when its drivers follow policy.

What transaction monitoring can reveal

Each card purchase can be assessed using details such as litres purchased, transaction time, location and fuel type. When a purchase falls outside expected patterns, the system can flag it for review. That gives managers a specific exception to investigate instead of requiring them to search through receipts and invoices for anomalies after the fact.

The source describes Foss National Leasing’s system as checking more than 60 transaction indicators. It identifies five practical signals fleet teams can look for:

• More fuel than the tank can hold. An over-capacity purchase can point to multiple vehicles being filled, fuel taken into containers or fuel passed to someone outside the fleet.
• Frequent fills compared with distance. A driver refuelling more often than others travelling similar distances may warrant a closer look. Comparing transactions with distance driven can help distinguish ordinary variation from a pattern.
• Purchases outside usual routes. Repeated stops far from a vehicle’s normal routes or service area can signal misuse, particularly for fleets with defined operating boundaries.
• Fuel that doesn’t suit the vehicle. A purchase inconsistent with the vehicle’s fuel type could be an error or a sign of misuse. Either way, it’s an exception to resolve promptly.
• Transactions outside the fleet’s footprint. Unfamiliar vendors, distant locations or purchases at unusual hours may indicate card credentials were copied. Cross-checking location and timing helps expose activity that driver focused checks can overlook.

An alert doesn’t establish why a transaction occurred. It gives fleet staff a lead to check against the vehicle, route, driver and card rules. The article says the system also checks time of day, vendor anomalies and purchases across vehicles, expanding the review beyond these five examples.

Fuel data can support fleet decisions

Fraud detection is one use for a consolidated transaction record. Fuel consumption by vehicle, driver, region and time can also help managers find unusual performance. If a vehicle’s fuel efficiency declines, the change may point to a maintenance need. Comparing vehicles across the fleet can help identify outliers, while consistent consumption records can inform decisions about when to cycle or replace equipment.

Vendor access matters to day to day operations, too. Foss says its card is accepted at 98% of gas stations across Canada, giving drivers broad access without restricting them to a narrow vendor network or fixed route. The article also points to drivers choosing lower priced fuel as a potential source of savings. It gives no separate figure for that effect, so the stated savings claim is limited to its estimate that preventing unauthorized purchases could cut fuel spending by up to 15%.

Consolidated billing reduces reconciliation work

Monthly fuel administration can mean matching transactions across vehicles, drivers and vendors, then chasing missing receipts and checking invoices. The described fleet card system consolidates purchases into one monthly invoice with reporting that can be filtered by driver, vehicle, location or vendor. That makes it easier to review spending at the level needed for a question, from an individual exception to a broader regional pattern.

The source says fleet managers who previously spent hours reconciling receipts typically reduce that time significantly within the first billing cycle. It provides no measured time saving, so the practical result will depend on the fleet’s current process and transaction volume. Still, a single invoice paired with searchable transaction records gives finance and operations teams a common basis for review.

For fleet operators, the useful test is whether the system connects each purchase to a vehicle, place, time and fuel type, then makes exceptions simple to investigate. That visibility can help catch suspicious spending sooner, improve routine fuel oversight and reduce the manual work required to close out each month.