ATM Crime

Reference Number: 


Request Date: 

Tuesday, 17 October, 2017

Response Date: 

Tuesday, 14 November, 2017

Request Details: 

For each of the last four calendar years, including this one, how many ATMs / cash machines have been broken into, or attempts have been made to be break into them.

I am not interested in distraction thefts, where cash has been stolen when someone is using the ATM, but where machinery, tools etc have been used to try to remove the machine from the wall.

For each case, can you tell me how much was stolen; the damage caused and the outcome, including any arrests

Exemptions Applied: 


SYP Response: 

I contacted our Crime Management System (CMS) Administrator for assistance with your request. She has advised:

There are no examples of this type of offence in the Home Office Counting Rules, therefore I have taken the following approach to this request.

I have searched CMS crime register for offences recorded between 01-Jan-2014 and 31—Oct-2017, where

  • the offence is recorded under the Home Office Offence class OTHER THEFT OR UNAUTHORISED TAKING
  • where the property sub class ATM (CASH MACHINE) has been recorded as either STOLEN or DAMAGED,
  • where the scene of crime is not like DWELLING.

 I have also searched using the same criteria but where the Meter type – CASH DISPENSER.

Using the results from the above searches, I have manually reviewed the ‘circumstances of the offence’ field of each records and found four that appear to meet the criteria of your request.

  • A forklift truck used to extract ATM from a building – no record of any monies taken.  A number of individuals charged
  • A vehicle was used to remove ATM from a stand – offenders fled when disturbed, no cash taken.  Outcome: named suspect, evidential difficulties (Police Decision).
  • Chain wrapped around an ATM and an unsuccessful attempt made to drag it away. No cash taken.  No outcome recorded.
  • A crowbar was used to enter an ATM and an unsuccessful attempt made to remove the cash.  No outcome recorded.

In addition, South Yorkshire Police can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any other information with regard to an exempt body as the duty in Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply by virtue of the following information:

Section 23(5) Information Supplied by, or concerning, certain Security Bodies

Section 23 is a class based absolute exemption and there is no requirement to consider the public interest in this case.

None of the above can be viewed as an inference that any other information does or does not exist.