counts of fraud

USAGE SUMMARY

'counts of fraud' is a correct and usable phrase in written English.
It is used to refer to instances or instances of fraudulent behavior. For example, "The police uncovered eight counts of fraud against the suspect."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

59 human-written examples

He faces seven counts of fraud.

The New York Times

Mr. Causey has been indicted on multiple counts of fraud.

The New York Times

found Jim guilty on 24 counts of fraud & conspiracy.

The New Yorker

Mr. Scrushy was indicted last month on 84 counts of fraud.

The New York Times

In 2002, the US sought the Britons' extradition on seven counts of fraud.

The Guardian - Business

Mr. Madoff pleaded guilty to 11 counts of fraud, money laundering, perjury and theft.

The New York Times

Facebook has called Ceglia's claim "fraudulent" and pointed to his former convictions on counts of fraud.

The Guardian - Tech

Nine months later, a federal grand jury charged him with four counts of fraud.

The New York Times

The 10 counts of fraud this man now faces are nothing new in US scam circles.

The Guardian - Lifestyle

The decision affects three counts of fraud for which Black was convicted by a Chicago jury.

The Guardian - Business

An earlier version said incorrectly that David Stockman was recently indicted on six counts of fraud.

The Guardian - Arts

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When reporting on legal cases, use "counts of fraud" to specifically denote the number of individual charges related to fraudulent activity a defendant faces.

Common error

Avoid using "amounts of fraud" when you intend to convey the number of charges. "Amounts of fraud" refers to the monetary value involved in fraudulent activities, not the number of indictments or charges.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "counts of fraud" functions as a noun phrase that describes the number of charges related to fraudulent activities in a legal or investigative context. Ludwig AI confirms its widespread use across different sources, particularly in reporting legal proceedings.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

100%

Less common in

Science

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "counts of fraud" is a common phrase used to specify the number of charges related to fraudulent activities, predominantly in legal and journalistic contexts. As Ludwig AI indicates, this phrase is grammatically sound and widely accepted, emphasizing clarity in describing the scale of accusations. Related phrases include "charges of fraud" and "allegations of fraud", but it's crucial to differentiate "counts of fraud" from "amounts of fraud", which refers to the monetary value involved. When writing, use "counts of fraud" to accurately denote the number of individual charges and avoid using "amounts of fraud" when conveying the number of charges. The frequency of its use suggests a neutral, professional register, suitable for reporting factual information. It's a common phrase in News & Media, authoritative sources include The New York Times, The Guardian and BBC.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

charges of fraud

Replaces "counts" with "charges", emphasizing the formal accusations.

instances of fraud

Substitutes "counts" with "instances", highlighting specific occurrences.

allegations of fraud

Replaces "counts" with "allegations", focusing on unproven accusations.

fraudulent charges

Inverts the structure, placing the adjective "fraudulent" before "charges".

indictments for fraud

Replaces "counts" with "indictments", specifying formal legal accusations.

fraud offenses

Uses a more general term, referring to offenses related to fraud.

fraudulent activities

Replaces "counts" with a broader description of the unlawful conduct.

cases of fraud

Uses "cases" instead of "counts", indicating legal matters.

fraud violations

Emphasizes the breaking of rules or laws related to fraud.

fraud prosecutions

Focuses on the legal actions taken against those committing fraud.

FAQs

How is "counts of fraud" used in legal contexts?

In legal contexts, "counts of fraud" refers to the specific number of charges or indictments related to fraudulent activities that a defendant faces. For example, someone might be charged with multiple "charges of fraud".

What's a suitable alternative to "counts of fraud" in a news report?

In a news report, you could use alternatives like "allegations of fraud" or "instances of fraud", depending on the context and the stage of the legal proceedings. "Allegations" implies unproven claims, while "instances" suggests confirmed occurrences.

Is there a difference between "counts of fraud" and "amount of fraud"?

Yes, the terms differ significantly. "Counts of fraud" indicates the number of individual charges or indictments, while "amount of fraud" refers to the total monetary value involved in the fraudulent activity. Don't confuse "counts of fraud" with "amount of fraud".

When is it appropriate to use "counts of fraud" versus more general terms?

Use "counts of fraud" when you need to specify the precise number of charges a person or entity faces. More general terms like "fraudulent activities" or "fraud offenses" are appropriate when you're discussing the nature of the misconduct without focusing on the specific number of charges.