No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to undertake an exploratory study on mapping the investment fraud methods and tactics used by scammers against the emerging literature on scam compliance. Design/methodology/approach Qualitative interviews were conducted with victims of investment fraud supported by the engagement of specialist counsellors and allied health professionals who specialise in scam victim support (including investment fraud). Findings Investment fraud offending in the cases sampled exhibited a number of dominant offending traits and methodological themes. These included a strong reliance or dependency on legitimate service provisioning on the part of the fraudster and the use of key trust measures to lure the victim. The empirical data revealed the presence of a number of scam compliance influences captured in the literature, including trust, social influence and urgency, as well as others not previously documented that pave the way for further research attention. Research limitations/implications The research only examined a sample of investment fraud victim experiences that engaged a national victim support service immediately following detection over a 24 month period. Practical implications The research found that offending relied upon the participation of trust-building signals and measures. Legitimate economy participants appear to play a dominant role in enabling investment scam activities, further creating efficiencies for criminals. The offending tended to follow a number of distinct but connected phases. Impacts were influenced by specific offending attributes, such as whether remote access was given to offenders of a victim’s device, as well as the nature of the identity credentials access. Originality/value The research has practically applied an emerging view of scam compliance influences and vulnerabilities within an investment fraud context. The study is novel in its thematic analysis of the distinct phases and tactics used by scammers.

Loss of control over one’s identity through identity usurpation, or identity theft, results in victimization characterized by multiple species of harm: material harms such as financial loss; medical harms such as psychological distress and consequential physiological illness; and moral harms such as infringement of autonomy. Digital data breaches are a common means by which identity can be usurped and laws have been enacted requiring data-holders to notify data subjects when their personal information held on digital databases has been compromised. The intention is that victims should then be able to undertake their own mitigation measures. This paper explores the efficacy of this approach as a solution and argues that this policy – particularly in the light of new digital criminal methodologies – creates a conflict of victims’ interests. It is an unintended outcome of policy that exacerbates, rather than resolves, identity usurpation and associated victimization in the digital environment.

No abstract

No abstract