INTRODUCTION

Fraud is a multifaceted crime that can be perpetrated against a wide variety of potential victims, including businesses, organisations, governments, and individuals. Fraud perpetrated against individuals is often referred to as personal fraud. This includes the fraudulent use of another individual’s personal and/or financial details (credit card fraud and identity theft) and acts intended to deliberately deceive another individual in order to gain some form of advantage or benefit, whether financial or otherwise (scams).

The growing threat of personal fraud has in part been driven by the increasing reliance on internet based technologies and services in the conduct of social and economic transactions. Whilst such technologies enable a greater volume of information to be transmitted at greater speeds, they also increase the potential for criminal misappropriation and exploitation of personal information. The proliferation of information and communication technologies such as the internet and mobile phones has also opened up new channels through which fraudulent scam notifications, offers, and requests are able to be mass-marketed and disseminated to a larger population (UK Office of Fair Trading, 2006).

Australians lost an estimated $1.4 billion dollars due to personal fraud in 2010-11, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ (ABS) Personal Fraud Survey¹. The costs associated with personal fraud extend far beyond the purely financial losses incurred by victims of personal fraud. Other costs include:

• the monetary and human resource costs to banks, businesses, and other financial institutions involved in the recovery and reimbursement of the losses incurred by victims,
• the costs of organisational resources allocated towards combatting personal fraud on the part of law enforcement agencies and regulatory bodies,
• the opportunity cost of the time spent by victims in reporting fraud and recovering their money, identity and/or credit history, and
• the psychological harm inflicted on victims, particularly issues relating to blame and loss of trust in others which can have devastating flow on effects to other inter-personal relationships (Button, Lewis, & Tapley, 2009; UK Office of Fair Trading, 2006).
  

Broader costs to the economy and society in general include a loss of confidence and trust in conducting business online, both on behalf of consumers and businesses (UK Office of Fair Trading, 2006).

Understanding the underlying risk factors associated with personal fraud victimisation is a crucial part of the effort to reduce the prevalence of this crime in society. Aspects of a victim’s socio-demographic background were examined as a broad risk factor in conjunction with experiences of personal fraud victimisation in the 2010-11 Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Personal Fraud Survey (cat. no. 4528.0). The survey found that people belonging to certain socio-demographic groups were more likely than others to experience specific types of personal fraud. Moreover, the survey helped to shed light on the differences in the way in which personal fraud is experienced by different socio-demographic groups. Previous research has suggested that differential vulnerabilities to personal fraud are mediated by a wide array of behavioural, cognitive, and lifestyle factors, both on the individual and group levels (Lee & Soberon-Ferrer, 1997; Titus & Gover, 1999).

The aim of this article is to further explore some of the socio-demographic differences in personal fraud victimisation, building upon the information already published in Personal Fraud, Australia 2010-11 (cat. no. 4528.0). Socio-demographic characteristics the article will focus on include sex, age, marital status, geographical residence, highest level of educational attainment, country of birth, employment status, occupation, equivalised household weekly income, and personal weekly income. The groups will be compared and contrasted in terms of their likelihood of being exposed to and falling victim to different fraud types, their likelihood of reporting the incident to an authority, as well as various other fraud incident characteristics. For more information on these and related concepts, refer to the Glossary. The likelihood of certain socio-demographic groups falling victim to personal fraud may be affected by broader behavioural, cognitive, and lifestyle risk factors associated with each group. Some of these factors include levels of engagement with the internet and other forms of electronic communication, levels of knowledge and awareness about fraud, and levels of commercial and social activity (Titus & Gover, 1999; Lee & Soberon-Ferrer, 1997). Perceived vulnerabilities and financial lucrativeness are added risk factors which may lead to the deliberate and disproportionate targeting of certain groups (Button, Lewis, & Tapley, 2009).

ENDNOTE
1. Financial loss is for the 12 months prior to the interview in 2010-11 for credit card fraud and scams, and for the five years prior to the interview for identity theft.

Previous Page

Next Page