“I knew it was a scam”: Understanding the triggers for recognizing romance fraud

• Published date: 01 November 2023
• Author: Cassandra Cross
• Date: 01 November 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12645

DOI: 10.1111/1745-9133 .12645

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

CYBERCRIME AND CYBERSECURITY

“I knew it was a scam”: Understanding the

triggers for recognizing romance fraud

Cassandra Cross

School of Justice, Queensland University

of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland,

Australia

Correspondence

Cassandra Cross, School of Justice,

Queensland University of Technology,

GPO Box 2434, Brisbane QLD 4001,

Australia.

Email: ca.cross@qut.edu.au

Abstract

Research Summary: This article investigates the con-

tributing factors (or triggers) to a realization of romance

fraud victimization, based on 1015 reports lodged with

Scamwatch (Australian online reporting portal for

fraud) between July 2018 and July 2019 (inclusive). The

article examines the free text narrative of each report

to propose five discernible trigger categories: further

requests for money; characteristics of communications;

verification checks; an offender’s action(s); and being

told by a third party.

Policy Implications: Based on a comprehensive under-

standing of these five categories, the article advocates

for broader messaging approaches to encompass finan-

cial literacy and well-being, cyberliteracy and critical

thinking skills, cybersecurity practices, and respect-

ful and healthy relationships. Leveraging the use of

these wider education and awareness campaigns could

improve recognition of romance fraud. Importantly,it is

suggested that banks and other financial institutions are

in a strong position to focus their efforts on some of these

broader messages to effect positive change.

KEYWORDS

reporting, romance fraud, scam, victims

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and

reproduction in any medium, providedthe original work is properly cited.

© 2023 The Authors. Criminology & Public Policypublished by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society of Criminology.

Criminology & Public Policy. 2023;22:613–637. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/capp 613

614 CROSS

Romance fraud “refers to situations where an individual is deceivedfor f inancial gainby someone

with whom the victim perceives to be in a romantic relationship” (Buil-Gil & Zeng, 2022,p.460).

The use of a personal and intimate relationship is an effective tool used by offenders in which

to build trust with their victim and request money (Anesa, 2020, p. 1). Romance fraud statistics

are rising globally.The Internet Crime Complaint Centre (IC3) (USA) received reports from more

than 24,000 victims who lost more than USD$956 million to romance fraud in 2021 (IC3, 2022,

p. 12). ActionFraud (UK) received losses totaling £95.1 million in 2021, an increase of 73%

from the previous year (Cavaglieri, 2022). More than HKD$160.8 million was reported as lost

by victims in Hong Kong (Lee, 2020), with numbers of victims more than doubling in the

first half of 2021 compared to 2020 (Heung & Yau, 2021). The universal scale of romance

fraud is worth noting, with increased victimization observed across both the Global North

and Global South (CAFC, 2021; Othman, 2020;SABRIC,n.d.). Australia is not immune. In

2021, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) reported AUD$142 mil-

lion in losses (ACCC, 2022), a significant increase from AUD$83 million in 2019 (ACCC, 2020).

Romance fraud has been in the top three categories of financial loss for more than a decade

(ACCC, 2021).

Despite the magnitude of the above statistics, existing research clearly establishes the underre-

porting of fraud. Several studies estimate that reporting of fraud falls below one third (Mason &

Benson, 1996; Rebovich & Layne, 2000; Schoepfer & Piquero, 2009; Titus et al., 1995), with online

fraud having an even low rateof reporting (Smith, 2007, 2008). Notwithstanding, existing research

focuses largely on the motivation behind fraud reporting and the process of attempting to lodge a

complaint across the “fraud justice network” (Button et al., 2013). This focuses largely on the per-

ceived outcome of reporting and their goals in disclosing. One of the main challenges to accurate

fraud reporting is victims’ inability to recognize their own victimization (Button & Cross, 2017).

Individuals will not report a crime they do not believe has occurred. Therefore, the factors driving

recognition of romance fraud have had less attention.Although some of these reasons seem obvi-

ous, there is perceived value in assessing these to better understand how they can be harnessed

to more effectively disrupt or prevent victimization.

This article provides insights into the perceived “trigger” that prompted recognitionof romance

fraud victimization. Using complaints made to Scamwatch (an online Australian fraudreporting

portal), this article explores the circumstance(s) detailed by victims that are believed to have led

to a recognition of being defrauded. It is based on romance fraud reports of 1015 individuals who

lodged a report through the Scamwatch portal between July 2018 and July 2019 (inclusive) and

who identified as having sustained a financial loss.

To achieve this, first, it provides a greater context to romance fraud, and what is currently

known about reporting. Second, it outlines the underpinning method and a detailed description

of the data set. Third, the article puts forward five categories of triggers—(additional) requests

for money; aspects of communication; action(s) of the offender(s); verification checks; and third-

party intervention. Lastly, the article locates these findings in the broader context of romance

fraud, with a particular focus on how this knowledge can be integrated into policy that can

improve prevention.

Overall, the article argues that these triggers provide scope to broaden current prevention

messaging, to overcome the potential stigma and negativity associated with fraud victimization

(Cross, 2015, 2018a). Linking with non-fraud-specific prevention messaging and integrating into

broader education and awareness campaigns may have benefits to romance fraud. Further, it

posits that banks and financial institutions are strongly positioned to target their efforts on a

broader preventative agenda.