Final answer:
Legal action for fraud includes criminal law, where the government charges the offender, and civil law, where victims seek restitution. Civil action can potentially offer restitution and deterrence, but its effectiveness varies.
Step-by-step explanation:
When organizations fall victim to fraud, they have a couple of options for seeking justice and recovery of losses. First, legal action can be taken in the form of criminal law, where the government, not the victim organization, charges the perpetrator with a crime. The goal of criminal law is to punish the offender and uphold the rules of society. In contrast, civil law allows private parties, such as victim organizations, to seek restitution for harm caused. Civil action can indeed be a way to get restitution and at times, can also deliver a message to discourage others from committing similar offenses. However, this does not mean that civil actions always achieve restitution or deterrence effectively.
As such, the statement that legal action is taken in fewer than half of frauds could be true as not every case of fraud results in legal proceedings. On the other hand, it is not the victim organization but the government that brings legal criminal action against the perpetrator. Regarding civil action, while it could be a method to seek restitution (Civil action is a good way to get restitution), it is not always successful or sufficient. Finally, while civil action can potentially deter further fraud by sending a message (Civil action sends a message to others not to commit fraud), its effectiveness in doing so is variable and depends on multiple factors including publicity, the severity of the judgment, and the financial health of the defendant.