New study: 80% of online scam victims in Netherlands fail to recover losses

The majority of online fraud victims in the Netherlands fail to recover their financial losses, and public awareness of existing legal pathways remains limited, according to a comprehensive new study by De Haagse Hogeschool. The findings, which have not previously been publicized, are expected to influence upcoming policy decisions at the Ministry of Justice, according to Bnr.nl.

Eighty percent of surveyed victims did not get any of their money back, the study revealed. Most victims had lost amounts between 1 and 500 euros. Although one in five victims reported the fraud to police, just 1 percent managed to recover money through the criminal justice system. “That is shocking, but not really a surprise,” said Songül Mutluer, a member of the Tweede Kamer representing GroenLinks-PvdA. “Generally speaking, the police do not have the capacity to follow up on every report of online fraud.”

Since 2021, victims have had the option to pursue a civil legal procedure via a court bailiff—known as the "deurwaardersroute"—but only 0.2 percent of respondents in the study tried to recover money using this method. Awareness of the route was low: just 35 percent of those surveyed were familiar with it.

The research surveyed over 8,000 panel members of the Consumentenbond, of whom nearly 1,800 had fallen victim to online fraud. The results are expected to shape new policy on online fraud, Justice Minister David van Weel previously confirmed in response to parliamentary questions.

Rick van der Rest, product developer at the court bailiff firm LAVG, said his office created the "EHBO Fraude" service to assist victims through civil procedures. “Given the large number of victims, we expected to receive a lot of cases, but we still see very few sign-ups,” he said to Bnr.nl.

Despite the low usage, interest exists. The study showed that 75 percent of respondents would be willing to start such a procedure once informed. Van der Rest emphasized that the civil route is effective—even for smaller sums. “We see in 50 percent of the cases that the money is fully returned within two years, or that there is a clear prospect of recovery. That could be through a payment plan or a court ruling.”

Many victims assume that going through a bailiff is costly, but that’s not true, said Van der Rest. “Building the case and issuing a payment demand is done on a no cure, no pay basis. The costs are shifted to the debtor and don’t fall on the victim.”

Often, the money ends up with a so-called “geldezel” (money mule)—someone who lets their bank account be used by fraudsters. These can be youths looking for quick cash or vulnerable people with intellectual disabilities. “In such cases, we arrange a payment plan in consultation with the person’s legal guardian,” said Van der Rest.

Among the roughly 20 percent of victims who did recover funds, nearly half received compensation from their bank or credit card company. In another 20 percent of cases, the person who received the money paid it back voluntarily or after being asked. For 8 percent, the payment could still be canceled, and in 5 percent of cases, the recovery came through a legal expenses insurance provider.

Despite these mechanisms, researcher Susanne van ’t Hoff-de Goede from De Haagse Hogeschool said that banks could be doing more to inform customers of their options. “Even if something is listed in a protocol, that doesn’t mean all bank employees will follow it,” she said to Bnr.nl.

In early 2021, the Dutch government introduced the PNBF procedure—Procedure NAW-gegevens Begunstigde bij niet-bancaire Fraude—to assist victims in retrieving the name, address, and residence (NAW-gegevens) of the money’s recipient. Victims must file a police report to use this procedure. With this data, they can hire a bailiff to try recovering the funds, particularly when the bank was unsuccessful.

With the data now available, GroenLinks-PvdA MP Mutluer expects government action. “The minister must launch a large-scale public campaign to raise awareness of this procedure,” she said.

Van ’t Hoff-de Goede noted that shame remains a major barrier for many victims. “We must get rid of that, because truly anyone can fall victim to this.” Fraudsters use sophisticated psychological manipulation, or "social engineering," to deceive people, sometimes using information from data leaks or social media. “Even I could fall for it, even though I research online fraud myself.”

She cited the example of a woman who became a victim of WhatsApp fraud after warning her friends and family about it. “One day she got a message from her ‘son,’ claiming to have been robbed and needing immediate money,” said Van ’t Hoff-de Goede. “Her son happened to be traveling at the time, and as a concerned mother, she acted quickly—until she realized it wasn’t her son at all.”

Both Van ’t Hoff-de Goede and Van der Rest believe that society must acknowledge the universality of vulnerability. “We must accept that everyone can fall victim,” Van der Rest told Bnr.nl. “That means not just better prevention, but also creating a digital emergency package for victims.”

Van ’t Hoff-de Goede suggested the creation of a central emergency phone line for financial crimes, akin to 112. “Maybe call it 118—a number to call for financial emergencies. It might not be life-threatening, but it requires urgent action to minimize damage.”

Currently, multiple organizations provide help, but the landscape is fragmented. “That makes it harder for victims to find their way. The information is too scattered. That’s why there must be a single reporting center. This really can happen to anyone.”