Consumer research published by fraud prevention company Outseer shows that 42.9% of US respondents aged 65 and over believe a customer manipulated into sending a bank transfer to a fraudster should bear the loss themselves. Among those aged 18 to 24, the figure stands at 25.6%. The findings form part of a wider study covering 7.029 consumers across seven markets.
A generational divide on liability
From age 25 onwards, the share of US respondents placing responsibility on the customer rises with each successive age group, moving from 22.7% to 23.5%, 27.8%, 32.5%, and finally 42.9% among those aged 65 and over. Younger respondents lean the other way: 55.4% of 18 to 24-year-olds say the sending bank, the receiving bank, or both should cover the cost, compared with 35.9% of over-65s.
The pattern appears specific to the US. In the UK and India, which were also covered by the study, the share of respondents blaming the customer shows no clear correlation with age, ranging from 18.9% to 33.3% in the UK and from 22.0% to 32.7% in India.
The data arrives as the US debate on scam reimbursement develops with considerably less regulatory clarity than in the UK. There, the Payment Systems Regulator’s regime divides the cost of in-scope authorised push payment (APP) scam claims equally between sending and receiving banks.
According to Outseer, any future US framework is likely to be received differently depending on age, with older Americans in the survey leaning towards individual responsibility and younger Americans towards shared institutional accountability. The company also noted that understanding these differing expectations will be relevant both to policy discussions and to how banks explain their approach to protecting customers.
Fraud exposure and consumer expectations
The research also points to broad fraud exposure in the US. In total, 57.9% of US consumers have personally experienced card-details fraud or seen it affect someone close to them, a higher share than in any of the other six markets surveyed. Fraud protection ranks among the top three reasons for choosing a bank for 56.4% of US respondents, ahead of low fees, rewards, or interest rates.
The effects of fraud extend to trust and conversion. Some 39.2% of respondents say a fraud or scam experience reduced their trust in the provider involved, while 60.0% have abandoned an online checkout at least once because a security process felt too slow or confusing.
On communication, 33.9% of US respondents selected ‘we stop fraud before it reaches you’ as the bank message that appeals to them most, ahead of alternatives centred on monitoring or technology. Outseer interprets this as a signal that consumers prioritise prevention, particularly in scams where a customer is manipulated into authorising a payment that appears legitimate despite being fraudulent. In such cases, the company says, identifying the signals of scam activity and intervening before funds are lost is central to protecting customers.
Methodology
The study surveyed 7.029 consumers across the US, the UK, Sweden, Australia, India, Brazil, and Singapore, including 1.007 respondents in the US. Participants were asked about their concern and experience across 14 fraud and scam types, their attitudes to authentication and liability, and how they would respond if their bank failed to protect them, with results broken down by age and market.
