Fraud victims who were scammed through Meta’s platforms are suffering long-term emotional and financial consequences, according to new research from Which?.
The consumer watchdog is now calling for tougher enforcement of the Online Safety Act.
The survey conducted by Which? of 1,501 UK adults who had money stolen through fraud in the past two years found that social media platforms continue to play a significant role in online scams, with Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram identified as the most common sources of fraudulent activity.
The research found that nearly two-thirds of victims said the scam involved at least one website or app. Among those who first encountered fraudulent content online, 55 per cent said they initially came across it on social media.
Meta’s platforms accounted for the majority of those reports, with Facebook cited by 28 per cent of victims who were tricked into making payments, followed by WhatsApp (17 per cent) and Instagram (10 per cent).
Beyond the financial losses, Which? said victims frequently reported significant emotional harm. Nearly two-thirds said the experience increased their stress levels, while 54 per cent said it had negatively affected their mental health. Almost half also reported a lasting impact on their financial situation.
Many respondents described feelings of anxiety, shame and self-blame, with some saying they were too embarrassed to tell friends or family about what had happened.
One victim told Which? that they felt “stupid and ashamed”. Another said that it had impacted their marriage.
The survey also found that 23 per cent of victims had changed the way they pay for goods online after being scammed, with some reporting they had lost confidence in digital payment methods altogether.
Severe consequences
Which? found that people living with professionally diagnosed mental health conditions, disabilities or longstanding health conditions at the time they were defrauded were more likely to experience severe financial consequences, including falling into debt, struggling to afford everyday essentials and having accounts permanently closed.
Victims also criticised the way platforms handled reports of fraud. One respondent who reported a Facebook scam described the reporting process as “entirely automated”, saying they received only generic responses and wanted access to real support staff and clearer updates.
The consumer group argues that technology companies have insufficient incentives to tackle scams voluntarily, pointing to estimates from Juniper Research that social media companies
generated almost £3.8 billion from scam advertising across Europe in 2025.
Which? is calling on Ofcom to rapidly implement and enforce the Online Safety Act’s provisions on fraudulent advertising, arguing that stronger regulatory action is needed to force platforms to take greater responsibility for scams hosted on their services.
Rocio Concha, director of policy and advocacy at Which?, said the research lays bare the long-lasting emotional impact fraud can have on victims.
“Fraud takes a serious toll on victims’ stress levels and mental health as well as their finances, and many were left too ashamed to tell the people closest to them,” she added.
“Despite the financial harm and human misery they cause, we believe that the tech giants who profit from scams on their platforms will not take enough action against fraudsters unless they are legally compelled to do so.
“Ofcom must implement the Online Safety Act’s measures on fraudulent advertising as soon as possible and the Government must ensure that it does so urgently and robustly.”
Responding to the findings, a Meta spokesperson said: “Scammers are determined criminals who use increasingly sophisticated tactics to defraud people and evade detection on our platforms and across the internet. We fight scams on and off our platforms because they’re not good for us or the people and businesses that rely on our services.”
An Ofcom spokesperson added: “Combatting online fraud is a priority for us, and we’re working at pace to implement new rules on paid-for fraudulent ads. The timeline for this has been affected by factors beyond our control, in particular a legal challenge against the government that raised complex issues, but tech firms don’t have to wait – they can start making improvements for their users now. Sites and apps that fail to meet their legal duties, once in force, can expect to face serious consequences.”
