Skip to main content

Expectations vs reality: Responding to online fraud across the fraud justice network

Cross, C. (2018) — International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijlcj.2018.08.001
Type:   Journal Article
Country:   Australia
Tags:   online fraud, fraud justice network, victim reporting, ACORN, Scamwatch, agency expectations, Australia, romance fraud

Synopsis (AI-Generated)

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with 80 Australian online-fraud victims who had reported losses of at least AUD$10,000 to Scamwatch. Interviews covered victimisation, reporting across the fraud justice network, impacts, support use, and desired system improvements. Victims experienced a fragmented reporting system in which agencies referred them between one another or did not accept their complaints. Victims expected reports to generate action, commonly investigation, justice, offender prosecution, or recovery of losses. Participants were a selected group: adults reporting to Scamwatch, consenting to later contact, living within about two hours of five capital cities, and losing at least AUD$10,000.

Identified Gaps (AI-Generated)

The paper identifies inadequate public understanding of agencies’ roles, powers, data sharing, and realistic responses to individual fraud reports. It also identifies limited transparency about how ACORN reports are used, including whether reports produce investigations. Victims need more appropriate, empathetic communication and stronger support and revictimisation-prevention responses.

Methods (AI-Generated)

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with 80 Australian online-fraud victims who had reported losses of at least AUD$10,000 to Scamwatch. Interviews covered victimisation, reporting across the fraud justice network, impacts, support use, and desired system improvements. Verbatim transcripts were coded in NVivo 11 using schedule-based, open, axial, and thematic coding; the author conducted further coding on fraud-justice-network understandings and expectations.

Limitations (AI-Generated)

Participants were a selected group: adults reporting to Scamwatch, consenting to later contact, living within about two hours of five capital cities, and losing at least AUD$10,000. The study therefore focuses on high-loss, primarily metropolitan reporting victims and may not represent lower-loss, non-reporting, rural, or otherwise inaccessible victims. Findings on ACORN are prospective because victimisation occurred before its introduction.

Future Work (AI-Generated)

Prioritise measures that support online-fraud victims and prevent revictimisation, especially given the low likelihood of investigation. Assess whether clearer agency communication, public education about reporting limitations, and greater ACORN transparency improve victim experiences and trust.

Related Research Insights

See how this publication connects to RSRC's living evidence syntheses through current citations and research-topic mapping.

AI-Generated Content Notice

The synopsis and research notes on this page were generated with AI from available publication information and, when available, the uploaded paper text. They may contain errors, omissions, or interpretation issues. Readers should follow the DOI or source link, review the original publication, and make their own judgment about the content.

Found a possible error? Request a correction.