Treat a financial post as a claim to check, not a completed comparison. Identify the speaker, the product and the original evidence before sending money or personal information. A confident video cannot replace written terms.
Extract the actual claim
Write one sentence stating what the post promises, including the amount, time period and conditions. Separate a personal experience from a claim about every customer. Look for the original provider document, date and full cost. If the post supplies only a screenshot or a cropped result, leave the claim unverified rather than reconstructing missing information.
Check identity independently
Locate the organisation’s official site without following a private-message payment instruction. For regulated financial services, use the relevant official register and check that the permissions fit the service; the FSCA consumer section is a starting reference [1]. A matching name alone does not verify a social-media account or a particular offer.
Keep the action proportional to the evidence
Do not send passwords, verification codes or money to unlock an alleged benefit. Capitec’s fraud guidance explains why instructions to share credentials or move money deserve scrutiny [2]. Keep a copy of suspicious messages and use independently located official support. Decide only after the claim, costs and recipient can all be checked.
Separate evidence from the action link
Make a three-column note: claim, original evidence and action requested. If the evidence is a genuine provider document but the requested payment goes to an unrelated recipient, that mismatch needs its own verification. Check dates and missing conditions before comparing numbers. If the speaker is paid to promote a product, keep the commercial relationship visible rather than treating the recommendation as an independent survey. Save the original post if reporting is needed, but share verified sources rather than repeating the promise. The absence of an obvious spelling mistake does not replace verification of identity, terms and destination.
A calculation you can check
Fictional claim: a post promises R120 from R1,000 but omits a R50 charge. Net stated gain would be R70, not R120, before any other costs. The calculation still does not verify that the promised payment exists.
Questions about this decision
Does a large following prove expertise?
Check the specific claim and professional permissions where relevant. Popularity is not the document supporting a product term.
What if a post cites a real bank?
Open the bank’s own site independently and locate the exact offer. A real name can appear in an unauthorised message.
How do I evaluate a return claim?
Identify period, fees, risk, calculation and original evidence. Do not treat an unexplained screenshot as a forecast.
Should I follow a time-limited instruction?
Pause long enough to verify the recipient and terms. If verification is blocked, do not send money merely to preserve the deadline.
Does a disclaimer make a post accurate?
Check the evidence anyway. A label does not repair a false number or an unsupported product condition.
What should I keep if I suspect fraud?
Save messages, dates and payment references, then report through official channels. Avoid posting your account information publicly.
Can I share the post before checking it?
Share a verified original source instead of repeating an unexplained financial promise.
What does SaveWise verify here?
This guide explains a checking process. It does not certify a named influencer, investment or private message.