Digital fraud continues to cause financial harm for consumers, with 85% of South Africans impacted in the past 12 months.
This is one of the findings of new research titled: “Global Digital Fraud Study: Who Pays for Trust”, compiled by artificial intelligence (AI)-native research platform Yazi.
The study, which is based on 1 234 WhatsApp-driven responses from SA and the UK, explores who loses money, who stays silent, who gets it back, and why the same fraud problem looks different depending on which economy it hits.
Among the listed types of fraud scams are trusted company impersonation, bank impersonation, e-mail and phishing, WhatsApp/messaging scam, online shopping/marketplace and job offers, reveals the study.
The data found that 20% of South Africans lost money, compared with 7% of UK consumers, which equates to roughly three times as many.
A further 64% of affected South Africans believe bank or institution staff may be complicit in fraud, compared with 17% in the UK. In addition, 75% of South African fraud victims recovered none of the money they lost.
It also states that 74% of South Africans already know that AI can be used to clone voices and fake messages, yet awareness made almost no difference to risky behaviour in the study.
“The study combined structured quantitative questions, open text responses, voice notes and AI moderated follow-up interviews,” says Yazi CEO Tim Treagus.
“We wanted to understand fraud from the consumer’s side, not only count incidents after the money had already disappeared. What the study told us is that when fraud succeeds, the financial and emotional cost can be disproportionately severe.”
Treagus explains that the 74% awareness figure is the study’s most uncomfortable finding, because it rules out the easiest explanation.
“South Africans are not uninformed about fraud. Most already know the tricks. What the data suggests instead is something closer to hope outweighing caution: the promise of a way out is often worth more than the risk of being wrong.
“That instinct isn’t unique to fraud. It’s the same pull that keeps people buying lottery tickets long after they’ve worked out the odds, and in a market where the upside of escaping financial pressure feels large and the downside feels abstract, a growing number on a screen can be more persuasive than any warning.”
Thalia Pillay, co-founder and CEO of Orca Fraud, comments: “Ultimately, it’s the intersection of technology and localised intelligence that will protect people. Detection must catch what credentials alone can’t see, and trust has to be earned back.”
The study’s dataset indicates that although 64% of affected South Africans suspect bank or institution staff may be involved in fraud, 47% still report incidents to an institution, a higher reporting rate than the UK.
“In South Africa, people report fraud not because they trust the institution, but because it’s their only realistic route to getting the money back. The UK picture is different: 41% of affected UK consumers have never told anyone, and UK non-reporters most often say they thought nothing could be done (52%) or didn't know how to report it (42%).
“Self-blame is a distinctly South African barrier, mentioned by 24% of South African non-reporters, against 3% in the UK.”
The study shows human impact emerged most clearly in participants’ own words. One young South African woman told researchers: “It made me feel like I was no longer safe anymore, whether I’m outside my house or on my phone. It felt like I’m in danger everywhere I go.”
Another participant, who lost between R5 000 and R9 999, described making repeated deposits after being promised investment returns that never materialised.
Share
