Best Venue to File an Estafa Case for an Investment Scam From Overseas (Philippine Context)

This article explains where to file, why that venue is proper, and how to proceed when either the victim or the scammer (or both) are outside the Philippines. It focuses on estafa under Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) and related options when the scheme involves investments and the internet.

Quick primer: What is “estafa” in investment scams?

“Estafa” punishes deceit (fraud) that causes damage or prejudice—often by inducing a person to part with money through false promises or misrepresentations. Many investment scams also trigger special laws such as:

PD 1689 (Syndicated Estafa) – when committed by a syndicate (commonly understood as 5 or more offenders) or in large scale; penalties are much heavier.
Securities Regulation Code (SRC) – for unregistered securities, unlicensed selling, investment solicitation without registration, or market fraud.
Cybercrime Prevention Act (RA 10175) – when the scheme uses computer systems, social media, websites, email, or other online means; this can affect venue and investigative tools.

You may pursue both: a criminal complaint for estafa (and related offenses) and regulatory action with the SEC, plus a civil action to recover money.

Core rule: Venue in Philippine criminal cases

Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, venue is jurisdictional: a criminal case must be filed in the place where the offense was committed or any essential element occurred.

For estafa, the key “elements” that determine venue typically include:

Where the false pretenses or deceit were made (e.g., the city where you received the pitch by call, chat, email, webinar).
Where you relied on the deceit and parted with your money (e.g., the city where you deposited/transfered funds, handed cash, or executed documents).
Where damage was suffered (often the complainant’s location when the funds left or when the loss crystallized).

If any one of those elements occurred in City/Province X, filing in X is proper.

When the scam is online (email, chat, social media, websites)

Online conduct often means elements occur in more than one place. Two complementary approaches help:

Traditional estafa venue rule: File where deceit was received (where you read the message or took the call), or where you paid (place of bank branch or where you were physically located when authorizing the transfer), or where damage occurred.
Cybercrime venue rule (RA 10175): If charged as computer-related fraud/online estafa, venue may lie in any location where any element occurred or where any computer system used in the offense is located. In practice, this gives prosecutors and courts flexibility to accept cases in the victim’s locality if the online act impacted them there.

Tip: When drafting your complaint, clearly narrate the city where each online act was received, acted upon, and where money left, and identify the bank branch or payment channel used.

Two common cross-border scenarios & the best venue

Scenario A: Victim in the Philippines, scammer abroad

File in the Philippines if any element happened here:

You received the solicitation while in Manila → venue can be Manila.
You transferred funds from a bank in Cebu City → venue can be Cebu City.
You suffered loss at your residence in Davao → venue can be Davao City.

The case can proceed in the Philippines even if the suspect is abroad. A warrant of arrest may issue; arrest/arraignment requires the accused’s presence. Extradition or mutual legal assistance may be needed to secure custody or evidence abroad.

Scenario B: Victim abroad, scammer (or operations) in the Philippines

Venue is proper in the Philippine locality where the offender committed deceit (e.g., call center or office), received money (Philippine bank account), or executed the scheme. If the only acts happened abroad and no element occurred in the Philippines, local courts may lack jurisdiction for RPC estafa—but regulatory action (e.g., SEC) may still be possible if offers targeted persons in the Philippines or used entities registered here.

Mapping typical facts to venue

Key fact	Venue commonly proper
You watched a Zoom pitch at home in Quezon City	Quezon City (deceit received)
You deposited money at BPI Makati branch	Makati City (payment)
You wired funds via app while physically in Iloilo	Iloilo City (place of act/damage)
Funds landed in a recipient account in Pasig	Pasig City (receipt/part of execution)
Company office used to make calls is in Taguig	Taguig City (execution)
Website run on a server or device located in Cebu	Cebu City (cyber venue theory)

You may choose any proper venue; you don’t need to file in all of them.

Where exactly to file (offices)

Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor with jurisdiction over the chosen venue (for criminal complaint for estafa; include PD 1689 and/or RA 10175 if applicable).
NBI – Anti-Fraud / Cybercrime Divisions or PNP – Anti-Cybercrime Group (for investigation, digital forensics, case build-up, and coordination).
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) – Enforcement and Investor Protection Department (EIPD) (for cease-and-desist, show-cause, administrative and criminal referral under the SRC).
Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) (through investigators or prosecutors) for bank inquiries and asset freezing where AMLA predicates apply.

Special note on Syndicated Estafa (PD 1689)

If the scheme is carried out by a syndicate (often 5 or more offenders acting together) or defrauds the public, penalties are higher. Venue remains governed by where any essential element occurred. Plead facts showing number of perpetrators, roles, and public solicitation to support PD 1689.

Evidence and drafting to lock in venue

Identify locations clearly: “On 15 March 2025 in Mandaluyong City, I received a Facebook message from… On 20 March 2025 in Mandaluyong, I transferred ₱500,000 via BDO Shangri-La branch…”
Bank proof: deposit slips, transfer confirmations, statements showing branch codes or transaction metadata (date, time, IP/device if available).
Digital trail: emails with headers, chat exports (with timestamps and sender IDs), website capture, WHOIS, ads, webinar links.
Link to accused: corporate records, IDs used for account opening, delivery receipts, KYC details, beneficiary names/numbers.
Damages computation: principal, promised returns, subsequent top-ups, chargebacks, and net loss.

If the accused is overseas: enforcement paths

Warrant & immigration alerts: Court-issued Warrant of Arrest; Lookout Bulletin or Hold Departure Order (HDO) where legally available.
Mutual Legal Assistance & Extradition: Through the DOJ/DFA, seek evidence abroad (subscriber info, bank KYC, card records) and the accused’s surrender where treaties allow.
Red Notices / Interpol channels: For location and provisional arrests, subject to treaty and probable cause.
Asset measures: AMLA freeze or civil forfeiture against Philippine-traceable proceeds; abroad, rely on foreign counterparts via MLAT.

Even without immediate custody, freezing assets and regulatory actions can reduce harm and preserve recovery chances.

Civil actions alongside the criminal case

Independent civil action for sum of money/damages may be filed where the plaintiff resides or where the defendant resides (for personal actions).
You can reserve civil claims in the criminal case, or waive/reserve depending on strategy (speed, burden of proof, asset reach).
Consider pre-judgment remedies (e.g., preliminary attachment) to secure assets, subject to bond and standards.

Prescription (time limits)

Estafa’s prescriptive period under the RPC generally ranges from 10 to 15 years depending on the penalty bracket (which turns on the amount defrauded and aggravating circumstances). Some special-law offenses have different periods. When in doubt, act promptly and assume the shorter window may be argued.

Practical filing roadmap (checklist)

Decide venue: Pick a city/province where deceit, payment, or damage occurred (or where a computer system used was located for cyber components).
Prepare a Complaint-Affidavit:
- Facts by chronology with dates/places;
- Elements of estafa (deceit + damage) are explicitly tied to those places;
- Attach documentary and digital evidence;
- Identify proper respondents (individuals + corporate officers).
Annexes: IDs, proof of transfers, chat/email printouts, corporate queries, screenshots with URLs/timestamps, sworn certifications.
Special pleadings: Include PD 1689, SRC violations, RA 10175 where facts fit; request AMLA coordination for tracing/freezing.
If you’re abroad: Execute your Complaint-Affidavit before a Philippine embassy/consulate or have it apostilled per current rules; issue a Special Power of Attorney to local counsel for filing and hearings.
File with the Prosecutor’s Office of your chosen venue; simultaneously refer to NBI/PNP-ACG and SEC EIPD for parallel action.
Follow the inquest/prelim-investigation flow: expect the issuance of subpoenas, submission of counter-affidavits, and a resolution recommending filing (or dismissal).
Post-filing: If an Information is filed in court, arraignment and trial follow; coordinate on warrants, asset measures, and recovery efforts.

Frequently asked edge cases

Money sent to multiple accounts in different cities: Any city where you sent funds or where funds were received may be chosen; pick the venue with the strongest documentary links and easiest logistics.
Victim moved cities after paying: Venue is pegged to where the element occurred, not your current residence—though cyber venue may still support the city where damage was felt at the time.
All deceit occurred in a webinar hosted from overseas: If you attended and paid while in the Philippines, local venue is still proper.
Only the last “ghosting” happened here (no payment here): Weak venue—strengthen by proving deceit was received here (calls, messages) or that damage was realized here.

Bottom line

For investment-scam estafa with cross-border or online features, choose a Philippine venue tied to any essential element: where deceit reached you, where you paid, or where you suffered damage. Use cybercrime venue rules to your advantage when the scheme was conducted online. In parallel, activate SEC enforcement and AMLA tools, and prepare for MLAT/extradition steps if the accused is abroad. A carefully drafted Complaint-Affidavit that pinpoints location facts will make or break venue and, ultimately, your case.