Dating scams in Australia (2026)

Romance scams cost Australians $139.9 million in 2025. That puts them third on the ACCC's loss table, behind investment fraud ($837.7 million) and payment redirection ($166.8 million). In 2024, romance scams ranked second at $156.8 million. The drop year-on-year is real. The scale is not small.

Those figures come from the ACCC's combined dataset, pulling from Scamwatch, ReportCyber, IDCARE, the Australian Financial Crimes Exchange, and ASIC. The actual number is higher. The ACCC consistently notes that reported losses undercount real losses, because most people don't report. Shame and the belief that banks won't help are the main reasons.

How romance scams work

The mechanics are broadly consistent. Someone initiates contact on a dating platform or social media. They're attractive and available. The conversation moves quickly. Within days or weeks, a problem appears: a medical emergency, a business deal that needs short-term capital, a customs fee on a package. Money is requested, then more.

The more sophisticated operations are sometimes called pig butchering, from the Mandarin phrase for fattening a pig before slaughter. The scammer builds genuine emotional rapport over weeks, then introduces a crypto trading platform showing impressive returns. The target invests, sees the gains reflected in the app, invests more. When they try to withdraw, the platform disappears. These are not small operations. They run out of scam compounds in Southeast Asia, often using trafficked workers as operators.

The common thread across all types: patience. A romance scammer who asks for money in week one is an amateur. The ones that cost people tens of thousands take months.

Where contact starts

The mental model most people carry is that romance scams start on dating apps. The more accurate picture is that social media accounts for more initial contact than dating apps. Facebook and Instagram are consistently the dominant contact channels in ACCC reporting. This matters because people lower their guard on platforms they use daily for genuine social connection.

Dating apps are a real vector, particularly free platforms with low account creation barriers. Tinder, Bumble, and Facebook Dating are the most common dating app starting points. The low cost to create an account lets scammers run fake profiles at scale. Paid subscription platforms have a harder time for scammers for the same reason they have a harder time for anyone: they cost money to use.

Contact typically moves off-platform quickly. WhatsApp and Telegram are the preferred second stage. This removes any moderation or reporting mechanism the original platform had, and creates a private channel the scammer controls.

Red flags

These appear across ACCC case documentation:

• Emotional intensity that moves unusually fast. Declarations of love or deep connection within days are not normal.
• Wanting to move off the platform immediately. WhatsApp or Telegram within the first few conversations.
• Photos that reverse-search to stock sites or other people's social media. Google Images and TinEye both work. Takes thirty seconds.
• Always overseas, on a ship, on an oil rig, in a conflict zone, or otherwise unable to meet. There is always a reason.
• A first request that is small. A gift card, a modest transfer, a small fee. The point is establishing a pattern, not the amount.
• Any mention of a trading platform, investment opportunity, or crypto returns. This is a near-certain flag in a romance context.

The platforms reviewed on this site

The platforms reviewed here have different risk profiles from free mainstream apps. That's worth understanding clearly.

RSVPis Australia's oldest dating site with an Australian moderation team. Fake profiles exist on any platform but the paid model reduces volume.

eHarmony has moderation and identity signals built into its matching process. One note: the ACCC is currently pursuing action against eHarmony over misleading subscription pricing and auto-renewal practices. That is a separate issue from romance fraud. Both are documented in the review.

Ashley Madison had a significant data breach in 2015. That history is documented in the review along with what the platform has changed since. The user base on Ashley Madison, and on Adult FriendFinder and Victoria Milan, tends to be people with specific intent who are less susceptible to the long-game emotional manipulation that romance scammers rely on.

The higher-risk scenario is using a free mainstream app and having contact moved off-platform before the scammer is properly established. That is the mechanism the ACCC data points to most consistently.

If you've been targeted

Report to ACCC Scamwatch at scamwatch.gov.au/report-a-scam. Reporting feeds the national data that the ACCC uses to identify and disrupt active scam operations. It takes less than ten minutes and directly contributes to the combined figure the ACCC can act on.

If money has been transferred: contact your bank immediately. The Australian Financial Crimes Exchange coordinates between banks on scam-related transactions. Speed matters more than anything else at that stage.

For support: IDCARE (idcare.org) is the national identity and cyber support service. They handle romance scam cases, not just data breaches. The service is free. Most people who have been through this find talking to someone who understands the operational mechanics of how the scam worked more useful than generic counselling.