Combating romance fraud – prevention, detection and supporting victims
Fighting financial crime, including Authorised Push Payment (APP) fraud continues to be one of our strategic priorities. This is in line with the national system prioritiesLink is external, which include frauds that cause high levels of harm, such as romance fraud. We set out key findings from our review of how firms detect and prevent romance fraud, and the measures they take to protect their customers against it.
Who this review applies to
This multi-firm review will be of interest to UK Payment Service Providers (PSPs), including banks, building societies, and other businesses that provide payment accounts.
1. Introduction
Romance fraud involves people being convinced they are in a genuine relationship and deceived into sending money to criminals.
Romance fraud can result in a significant emotional, psychological and financial impact on those targeted. It is growing in scale and complexity. There was a 9% increase in romance fraud reports in the financial year 2024/2025, amounting to losses of over £106m. The City of London Police estimateLink is external victims sustain an average loss of £11,222 (2025). Victims often don’t report romance fraud due to shame and stigma, so the true scale is likely to be much greater.
We recognise the challenge for PSPs to tackle romance fraud effectively. Fraudsters have often developed a high-level working knowledge of the banking sector and how to circumvent anti-fraud systems and controls. Compounding this, victims may be deeply emotionally invested in the relationship and reluctant to accept they are being defrauded, making intervention and prevention even more difficult.
2. What we did
We reviewed 6 firms, including retail banks and payment firms: some well-established and others newer to the market. We focused on how firms detect and prevent romance fraud, and support victims.
We met with firms to understand their systems, governance, and investigative procedures for tackling this kind of fraud. We also reviewed relevant documentation such as policies, procedures, and internal guidance. These insights informed our assessment of 60 confirmed romance fraud cases, allowing us to evaluate how effectively firms applied their approaches in practice.
The losses in these cases ranged from £100 to £428,249. After the review, we gave firms individual feedback.
Our review focused specifically on cases where a victim was defrauded. We know firms do prevent many romance fraud cases through successful interventions using anti-fraud systems and controls.
This was a standalone review, but the findings should inform firms’ broader fraud strategies. Tackling fraud requires a whole-system approach, with firms, government, and law enforcement working together to reduce harm.
3. Key challenges firms face
A significant majority (85%) of the cases we examined originated from online platforms, including social media and dating websites. While customers must remain vigilant and take steps to protect themselves in an increasingly digital world, online platforms also have a critical role to play in preventing fraud and reducing harm. This includes raising user awareness, promoting safe online behaviours and implementing effective measures to detect and remove fraudulent content.
In many cases, fraudsters build a relationship with the victim over weeks or even months, gradually gaining their trust before requesting payments. Firms typically only have visibility once payments are made. Our review found fraudsters often began by requesting low-value payments, likely to reinforce trust and avoid detection. These transactions can appear consistent with a customer’s usual spending patterns, making them harder for firms to identify. Once a firm perceives a payee as trusted, subsequent payments are less likely to be flagged, increasing the risk of continued fraud.
In nearly half of the cases we reviewed, victims did not disclose the true purpose of the payment when questioned by their firm. This limits firms’ ability to detect and prevent fraud effectively.
Our review found that romance fraud cases include a wide variety of frauds ranging from traditional romance fraud to cases involving friendship, to the use of adult services. We also identified cases where the fraudster and the victim had met in person. These factors make it difficult for firms to identify the true nature of events, in distinguishing genuine romance fraud from civil disputes or complex relationship breakdowns.
Another key challenge firms face is that some victims begin sending payments from accounts held with other firms or open new accounts elsewhere. This limits visibility and makes it difficult for firms to know if funds have already been sent to fraudsters. This is a well-recognised gap across industry. Third-party solutions, such as Cifas APP Victim Check, may help address this issue by enabling firms to share data on known fraud victims. This has the potential to support more consistent and structured information-sharing between firms.
(OMITTED BELOW)
