I am always struck by the stories that victims of money scams have to relate. I've heard lots of them over the years on radio programmes such as BBC Radio 4's You and Yours and Money Box, and elsewhere, such as on LBC.
The victims of big-money scams seem to fall into three main groups.
There are those who are phoned out of the blue and told by their bank - or rather someone who claims to be their bank - that their accounts have been hacked and that their balances need to be shifted pronto into another account where the money will be safe. They are hustled by the caller, given no time to think, and of course the money is whipped away into the hands of fraudsters who control the 'safe' account, and it's never seen again. It's usually a successful sting - however sensible, level-headed or forewarned the victim has hitherto believed themselves to be. The correct response (I would say) is to put the phone down, travel to the nearest bank branch, and enquire in person with genuine bank staff. But I'm sure many people can't react so coolly when presented with a dire situation. (I dare say I would - or at least could - fall victim too: the psychological compulsion to take a safe and simple way out from sudden catastrophe, overriding all caution, must be overwhelming)
Then there are those looking for a better return on their spare cash, who see attractive advertisements when searching the Internet, or on social media, and are enticed into a fake or worthless investment scam that sucks more and more money from them. The scammers intend to strip them bare, and if possible draw others in. I suppose it's hard to resist an apparently golden opportunity to make big money from trendy-sounding assets. Of course you have to possess a lot of cash to be attracted in the first place. (That theoretically means I should never fall victim of investment scams! All my small savings are for eventual necessary spending - the next car, the next bout of dentistry, the next pair of glasses. I will never now have a nest-egg in the background that I might risk losing)
Thirdly there are the victims of so-called romance fraud. This is the cruellest scam of all, the victim being led up the garden path in the name of love and companionship and eventually asked to lend money to the person who has achieved ascendency over them. Oddly but typically, scammer and victim never meet: it's another online thing where all is taken on trust. The grooming process may extend to several months before the sting happens; but by then the victim may be too well under the control of the scammer (and his team) to refuse cooperation. I have met women - it's most often women who fall victim - who told me they immediately became wary as soon as money was mentioned. I've heard about women who questioned the reason they were being asked to give money to the scammer, but were cleverly and convincingly reassured, and persuaded to cough up just like the most gullible victim would. It's like a magic spell, and it all ends the same. They are left broken-hearted, embarrassed, self-doubting, and seriously out of pocket. (As I love my freedom, and never intend to give it up for the sake of having anyone special in my life, I'd like to believe I would be quite immune to romance fraud. But the sensible side of me says 'Remain on your guard!', and I am listening)
There are many other types of money scam, big and small. But these three are the main ones I've heard about.
Now there's one thing that links them all: the victim has some money. And I've often wondered how the scammers know who they are, if they are trying to target those people who have enough cash to make an elaborate sting worthwhile. Have they, for instance, subverted amenable bank employees to put the finger on a likely sucker? If they can do this, it would be a very efficient way to select victims. I'm thinking particularly of the first kind of fraud mentioned above, where they impersonate the bank to panic the victim into moving funds to an account that the fraudsters control. But surely it would be a wonderful advantage to have a well-off would-be investor, or a lonely heart with money to spare, handed to them on a plate?
Or do they leave it to pure chance, relying on the victim selecting themselves, either from greed or silliness? Such as responding to a social media advertisement, or to some YouTube video about how to invest very cleverly, or a great profile on a dating app? Cupidity and gullibility must work a lot of the time, human nature being what it is. Who doesn't pay at least some attention to the promise of a better return, or to finding the perfect partner?
I can certainly see why most banks have long resisted compensation codes (and now coming legislation) to restore cash taken from money fraud victims. They know how irrationally people will behave when pushed or lured, and compensation costs them dear. But they now also see that rapid no-quibble compensation is going to be the name of the game, up to an £85,000 maximum anyway. They'll be forced to tighten their procedures and checks, to limit the leakage of serious money to scammers. And that, of course, means yet more inconvenience and delay for the public, whenever any non-routine transaction occurs. As when buying a house or car. Each money transfer will have to be thoroughly checked out, more so than now. Let's hope that no important transaction fails because a bank took too much time to satisfy itself that all was genuine.
If you would like to give me feedback on this post, or make an enquiry, please email me from my Blog Profile.
