09 May 2013
Chapter 4: Mass Marketing Fraud
Coverage: England and Wales
Date: 09 May 2013
Geographical Area: Local Authority and County
Theme: Crime and Justice
Summary
Mass marketing fraud describes activities where uninvited contact is received via email, letters or
phone, making false promises in order to obtain money from victims. The 2011/12 CSEW asked
respondents if they had personally received any emails, texts, letters or phone calls from an
individual or a company they have never heard of before that might have involved a request for
money (which will be referred to as unsolicited communication in this section). The main findings
from the survey showed:
•
•
•
•
•
•
56% of adults had received an unsolicited communication in the previous 12 months. While this
shows that a relatively large proportion of adults were potentially exposed to becoming a victim of
these types of fraud, only a very small percentage actually fell victim.
Those receiving unsolicited communications were more likely to be aged between 25 to 44;
highest rates of receipt were found among those aged 25-34 (63%) and 35-44 (61%). Those
aged 75 and over were less likely to receive such communications (40%).
Of those who had used the internet in the last 12 months, 62% had received an unsolicited
communication compared with 37% of adults who had not used the internet in the last 12
months.
A relationship is observed between those adults who received unsolicited communications and
socio-economic indicators (income, employment and education), indicating that those employed
in managerial and professional occupations, with higher educational attainment and those
households with a higher income were more likely to receive communications. It is not clear
whether this is because they were more likely to be targeted by offenders or simply that they
were more likely to encounter such communication because of more extensive use of the internet
and email.
The most common type of unsolicited communication was an invite to claim a big win in a lottery,
prize draw, sweepstake or competition that had not been entered (40%). This was followed by
fraudulent communications offering an investment with a guaranteed high return (16%), or loan
on attractive terms (15%).
1
For adults receiving either a lottery or romance fraud communication, half were asked to send/
provide money or details, around a third said they didn’t read the communication or listen to the
message(s) and around a fifth said they were not asked to do anything.
Office for National Statistics | 1
09 May 2013
•
•
1
A small minority of those who received either a lottery (3%) or a romance fraud communication
(3%) and were asked to provide either bank, financial, personal details or to contact the sender,
actually replied to the communication.
Less than 1% of adults who received either a lottery communication, guaranteed high investment
return communication or romance1 fraud communication sent or transferred money. The number
of victims is too small to produce any reliable estimates of the scale of victimisation. These may
represent underestimates of the true prevalence of victimisation as some victims may have been
too embarrassed to disclose this information.
Notes for Summary
1. A unsolicited communication which invited the respondent to get to know someone with a view to
a possible friendship/relationship and once they’ve gained the respondents trust, they ask for money
for a variety of emotive reasons.
Introduction
This chapter focuses specifically on Mass Marketing Fraud which is defined here as an uninvited
contact received via emails, letters, phone or adverts, making false promises in order to obtain
money from victims (referred to as unsolicited communication in this section). This is wide ranging
and captures a number of different types of fraud. A person does not have to benefit from the fraud
to be guilty of the offence. As soon as they have made a dishonest/false misrepresentation, they
have committed a fraud.
Mass marketing fraudsters try to lure victims with false promises of large cash prizes, goods or
services in exchange for upfront fees. These can range from foreign lottery and sweepstake frauds
(which target individuals with false promises of prizes provided that upfront payment is made for
fictitious fees and taxes) through to romance fraud (whereby fraudsters feign romantic intentions
1
towards internet daters to secure trust and affection, in the hope of ultimately obtaining money) .
There is concern that mass marketing fraud is becoming a more serious, complex and a growing
crime, both in the UK and across the globe. The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) carried out research
in 2006 where they reported that almost half of the UK adult population (48%) were likely to be
targeted by some kind of scam and they estimated that UK consumers lose about £3.5 billion to
scams every year.
The 2011/12 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) included a module of questions which
asked respondents about their experience of mass marketing fraud. The CSEW asked respondents
if they had personally received any emails, texts, letters or phone calls from an individual or a
company they have never heard of before that might have involved a request for money. The
questions in the survey are designed to distinguish between legal (although unwelcome) junk mail
and attempts at fraud. Those respondents who said that they had never read or listened to the
messages (around 7% of those asked the initial questions) have been excluded from all analysis
presented here.
This chapter looks at the percentage of adults who have received such unsolicited communications
and explores their characteristics. Further questions on whether the respondent replied to the
Office for National Statistics | 2
09 May 2013
communication and whether any money was subsequently transferred were asked of those
respondents who received the following type of communication:
•
•
•
‘A big win in a lottery, prize draw, sweepstake or competition that they haven’t entered’.
,‘The chance to make an investment with a guaranteed high return’ (e.g. shares, art, fine wine
etc.)
‘Invite to get to know someone with a view to a possible friendship/relationship’.
Due to the nature of this crime it is thought to be under-reported. There are a range of explanations
for this, including: victims feeling embarrassed and ashamed; some victims are unaware they are
victims (it takes law enforcement, such as the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) to reveal
it to them); and in some cases those who do attempt to report the crime may be turned away as it
may not always be clear which is the most appropriate organisation to which a specific fraud offence
should be reported.
Notes
1.
Further information on specific examples of mass marketing fraud can be found in the NFA
Fraud typologies and victims of fraud.
Experience of mass marketing fraud
The 2011/12 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) estimated that 56% of adults received
an unsolicited communication in the last 12 months. This is unsurprising given the mass-marketed
nature of the unsolicited communications. Large numbers of unsolicited mailings, e-mails or
telephone calls can be disseminated to individuals whose details are obtained from a purchased
1
mailing list or via automated calling systems or harvested email addresses. Most recipients
will recognise the approach as a scam and ignore it but a small percentage will send off money
and make the scam profitable. Any one can be targeted by fraudsters as generally scams are
customised to fit the profile of the people being targeted (Office of Fair Trading, 2006).
2
There is some evidence to suggest that the majority of unsolicited communications are received via
email, with letters and phone calls being the next most frequent method of communication, although
this varied depending on age of the person targeted.
Table 4.1 shows findings from the 2011/12 CSEW on the different types of unsolicited
communication and the percentage of adults who have received these.
Office for National Statistics | 3
09 May 2013
Table: 4.1 Proportion of adults experiencing each type of unsolicited mass marketing
communications received in the last year, 2011/12
England and Wales
Percentage
A big win in a lottery, prize draw, sweepstake or
competition that you haven’t entered
40
The chance to make an investment with a
guaranteed high return
16
A loan on very attractive terms
15
Someone who invites you to get to know
them with a view to a possible friendship or
relationship
13
Help in moving large sums of money from
abroad
12
A job offer, a franchise offer or other business
opportunity
10
Help in releasing an inheritance
9
An urgent request to help someone get out of
some sort of financial trouble
8
Adopting or buying a pet
3
Some other type of similar request
7
No communication received
Unweighted Base
44
42,232
Table notes:
1.
Source: Crime Survey for England and Wales, Office for National Statistics.
Download table
XLS format
(32.5 Kb)
According to the 2011/12 CSEW the most common type of unsolicited communication was an invite
to claim a big win in a lottery, prize draw, sweepstake or competition that had not been entered
(40%). This was followed by making an investment with a guaranteed high return (16%), then a loan
on attractive terms (15%) (Table 4.1).
Office for National Statistics | 4
09 May 2013
Some respondents received more than one type of unsolicited communication. The 2011/12 CSEW
showed that 54% of adults who received an unsolicited communication received 2 or more different
types, 14% received 5 or more (Table 4.2).
Table 4.2: Number of different types of unsolicited mass marketing communications received
by a respondent, 2011/12
England and Wales
percentages
One
46
Two
21
Three
12
Four
8
Five or more
14
Table notes:
1. Source: Crime Survey for England and Wales, Office for National Statistics.
2. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Download table
XLS format
(23 Kb)
According to the survey those receiving unsolicited communications were more likely to be aged
between 25 to 44; highest rates of receipt were found among those aged 25-34 (63%) and 35-44
(61%). Those aged 75 and over were less likely to receive such communications (40%) (Appendix
table 4.01 (829 Kb Excel sheet)). This could be related to the way fraudsters target people as other
research suggests email is the most common way of reaching people and younger/middle aged
people are more likely to use email.
The pattern seen above was similar for men and women, although men were generally more likely to
have received unsolicited communications than women for each age group (Figure 4.1).
Office for National Statistics | 5
09 May 2013
Figure 4.1: Proportion of adults receiving unsolicited mass marketing communications in the
last year by age and gender, 2011/12
Notes:
1. Source: Crime Survey for England and Wales, Office for National Statistics.
Download chart
XLS format
(18.5 Kb)
Appendix tables 4.01 and 4.02 (829 Kb Excel sheet) shows the proportion of adults who received
an unsolicited communication by personal and household characteristics. A relationship is observed
between those adults who received unsolicited communications and socio-economic indicators
(income, employment and education), indicating that those employed in managerial and professional
occupations, with a higher educational attainment and those households with a higher income
and were more likely to be targeted by fraudsters. It is not clear whether this is because they were
more likely to be targeted by offenders or simply that they were more likely to encounter such
communication because of more extensive use of the internet and email. For example the survey
showed that:
Office for National Statistics | 6
09 May 2013
•
•
Adults in managerial and professional occupations were more likely to have received unsolicited
communications (68%) compared with those in routine and manual occupations (47%) and those
that had never worked or who were long-term unemployed (36%).
Analysis by household income showed a clear linear pattern with the likelihood of having
received unsolicited communication increasing with a households rising income. For example,
72% of respondents living in a household with an income of over £50,000 received at least one
unsolicited communication compared with 46% of those in households with an income of below
£10,000.
The characteristics of those adults targeted by fraudsters are very different to the characteristics of
victims of overall crime, where victimisation rates are typically higher among those in lower income
groups, and in areas of higher deprivation. The pattern observed for mass marketing fraud (is also
seen in plastic card fraud) may suggest that offenders committing these newer emerging crimes are
targeting different groups of the population. However, the pattern may also be influenced by the level
of internet usage and email among these different groups. The 2011/12 survey showed that:
•
Of those who had used the internet in the last 12 months, 62% had received an unsolicited
communication compared with 37% of adults who had not used the internet in the last 12
months.
Respondent characteristics were similar across the different types of mass marketing fraud covered
in the survey, though for some types of fraud the differences were more pronounced (Appendix
tables 4.03 to 4.08 (829 Kb Excel sheet)). For example, for romance fraud where a respondent was
3
invited to get to know someone with a view to a possible friendship/relationship :
•
•
Only 1% of adults who were over 75 were targeted compared with 21% of 25 to 34 year olds.
Of those who had used the internet in the last 12 months, 16% had received a romance fraud
communication compared with 0.4% of adults who had not used the internet in the last 12
months.
Looking specifically at guaranteed high investment return communications:
•
Men received more communications (21%) compared with women (12%), this was also identified
in OFT’s report in 2006.
Notes
1.
Email harvesting is the process of obtaining lists of email addresses for use in bulk email.
2.
See Mass marketing fraud section of the Annual Fraud Indicator 2012
3.
Articles for additional research on romance fraud
What adults were asked to do and their actions
Those respondents who had experienced specific types of mass marketing were asked additional
questions about what they were asked to do and if they responded. Due to constraints on
Office for National Statistics | 7
09 May 2013
questionnaire length, these additional questions were only asked of those who had experienced one
of the following:
•
•
•
A big win in a lottery, prize draw, sweepstake or competition that you haven’t entered.
The chance to make an investment with a guaranteed high return (e.g. shares, art, fine wine
etc.).
Invite to get to know someone with a view to a possible friendship/relationship – referred to as
romance fraud.
Table 4.1 shows that according to the 2011/12 CSEW, 40% of adults received a communication
relating to a big win in a lottery, prize draw, sweepstake or competition that they had not entered,
16% received a communication relating to an investment with a guaranteed high return and 13%
received a communication where they were invited to get to know someone with a view to a possible
friendship/relationship.
Where respondents had received unsolicited communication relating to a big win in a lottery, prize
draw, sweepstake or competition that had not been entered or an invite to get to know someone
with a view to a possible friendship/relationship, the survey collected further information on whether
and how they responded. Questions were asked specifically on whether or not respondents were
asked to send/transfer any money, to provide any bank, financial or personal details or to contact the
sender.
Of those adults who received either lottery or romance fraud communications, half were asked to
send/provide money or details, around a third said they didn’t read the communication or listen to
the message(s) and around a fifth said they were not asked to do anything (Table 4.3).
Table 4.3: Proportion of adults asked to send money or provide any details for those
receiving either a lottery or romance fraud communication, 2011/12
England and Wales
percentages
Type of communication:
Lottery
Romance
Asked to send money or provide
personal/bank details
50
50
Not asked to send anything
18
19
Didn't read the communication/
listen to all the message
32
31
16,219
4,816
Unweighted base
Table notes:
1. Source: Crime Survey for England and Wales, Office for National Statistics.
Office for National Statistics | 8
09 May 2013
Download table
XLS format
(23.5 Kb)
Of those adults who received a lottery communication and were asked to provide something, 58%
were asked to provide their bank details and 53% were asked to contact someone. Of those who
received a romance fraud communication and were asked to provide something, 67% were asked to
1
contact someone and 40% to provide bank details (Table 4.4) .
Table 4.4: What adults were asked to send for those receiving either a lottery or romance
fraud communication, 2011/12
England and Wales
percentages
Type of communication:
Lottery
Romance
Provide bank details
58
40
To contact them/someone else
53
67
Provide any other personal
information (e.g. address,
passport number)
40
38
Send or transfer money
(including Western Union)
35
32
Provide any other financial
details (e.g. credit card, Paypal
account)
31
27
7,767
2,392
Unweighted Base
Table notes:
1. Source: Crime Survey for England and Wales, Office for National Statistics.
Download table
XLS format
(24 Kb)
A small minority of those who received either a lottery (3%) or a romance fraud communication (3%)
and were asked to provide either bank, financial, personal details or to contact the sender, actually
replied to the initial communication (data not shown).
Less than 1% of adults who received either a lottery communication, guaranteed high investment
return communication or romance fraud communication sent or transferred money (data not shown).
Office for National Statistics | 9
09 May 2013
Therefore while the 2011/12 survey shows that a relatively large proportion of adults were potentially
exposed to becoming a victim of these types of fraud, only a very small percentage actually
fell victim. The number of victims is too small to produce any reliable estimates of the scale of
victimisation. These may represent underestimates of the true prevalence of victimisation as some
victims may have been too embarrassed to disclose this information.
Notes
1.
Respondents could answer all categories that applied to them.
Background notes
1.
If you have any queries regarding crime statistics for England and Wales please email
[email protected].
2.
Details of the policy governing the release of new data are available by visiting
www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/assessment/code-of-practice/index.html or from the Media
Relations Office email: [email protected]
The United Kingdom Statistics Authority has designated these statistics as National Statistics, in
accordance with the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 and signifying compliance with
the Code of Practice for Official Statistics.
Designation can be broadly interpreted to mean that the statistics:
•
•
•
•
meet identified user needs;
are well explained and readily accessible;
are produced according to sound methods; and
are managed impartially and objectively in the public interest.
Once statistics have been designated as National Statistics it is a statutory requirement that the
Code of Practice shall continue to be observed.
Copyright
© Crown copyright 2013
You may use or re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format
or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit
www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team,
The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected].
This document is also available on our website at www.ons.gov.uk.
Office for National Statistics | 10