What to Say to Candidates When Fraud Signals Appear (Neutral Script)

TL;DR

When fraud signals appear in an interview, the worst mistake is confronting the candidate directly or accusing them.
It instantly escalates the situation and creates:

• Bias risk

• Emotional conflict

• Compliance exposure

• Reputation damage

The goal is not to prove guilt.
The goal is to verify alignment between the interview performance and the candidate’s true skill level.

This guide gives you neutral scripts to use immediately.

Why This Conversation Must Be Neutral

Fraud signals can be caused by:

• Coaching

• Over-preparation

• Real AI scripting

• Proxy interviewing

• Or simply interview anxiety

Saying the wrong thing can:

• Create claims of discriminatory treatment

• Damage employer brand

• Pressure interviewers into silence

• Result in hiring misjudgments

So the language must be:

• Descriptive, not emotional

• Behavioral, not interpretive

• Standardized, not personal

The Core Framing Sentence

This is the anchor you use every time:

Our goal is to ensure that the interview reflects your own reasoning and experience so that any hiring decision is accurate and fair to you and to the team.

This shifts the frame from:

• Policing

  To

• Protecting fairness

When Fraud Signals Appear During the Interview

Use the Pause + Clarify Script:

Let’s slow down for a moment.
I want to make sure we are assessing your own thinking.
Can you walk me through how you personally arrived at that step, including the tradeoffs you considered?

This:

• Brings the answer back to authenticity

• Removes reliance on rehearsed or AI-generated responses

  
  Read more: Candidate Fraud in Hiring: How to Spot It and How Sherlock Helps?

If the Candidate Continues With Memorized or Scripted Responses

Use:

Thank you. To ensure we are understanding your personal decision-making, could you describe a specific example where you applied this approach and what changed your direction?

This tests:

• Memory

• Ownership

• Adaptability

AI cannot do this consistently.
Real experience can.

When Fraud Signals Are Clear After the Interview

Do not send this in rejection email.
Do not accuse the candidate.

Instead, schedule a verification call.

Email Template

Hi <Name>,

Thank you for your time in the interview process. Before we finalize next steps, we would like to schedule a brief follow-up session focused on clarifying project ownership and reasoning details. This is part of our standard process applied whenever we want to ensure we have the most accurate and fair evaluation of a candidate’s experience.

Please let us know your availability for a 15-minute session

This is:

• Neutral

• Non-accusatory

• Process-based

• Audit-safe

The Verification Call Script (Use Word for Word)

Thank you for joining the follow-up session.
This step helps ensure the interview reflects your own experience and reasoning.
We apply this consistently for fairness.

We are going to revisit a few questions with more focus on your direct involvement and decision-making process. Take your time. There are no trick questions

Then ask:

• Timeline recall

• Tradeoff explanation

• Adaptation reasoning

If they can answer, proceed in the process.
If they cannot, proceed with non-fit decision.

No accusations.
No moral tone.
Just signal.

The Rejection Script (If Needed)

Use:

Thank you again for your time. Based on the verification session, the interview responses did not provide enough evidence of direct ownership or independent reasoning required for this role. We appreciate your effort throughout the process and wish you success in your search

Avoid:

• “We believe you misrepresented your work”

• “We think you cheated”

• “We suspect AI involvement”

These create unnecessary conflict and legal risk.

For Hiring Managers: How to Explain the Decision Internally

We were not able to validate the candidate’s ownership and reasoning depth. The signal does not support moving forward

This protects:

• Team trust

• Process consistency

• Manager credibility

Conclusion

Handling fraud signals well is:

• A skill

• A communication discipline

• A cultural tone marker

The goal is not accusation.
The goal is decision integrity.

By using neutral, repeatable language:

• You protect fairness

• You preserve candidate dignity

• You maintain audit safety

• You prevent escalation

• You avoid bias drift

Fraud handling is a quality control process, not a confrontation.