Estafa Complaint Process in the Philippines — A Complete Legal Guide (2025 edition)

1. What Is Estafa?

Provision	Gist	Typical Examples
Art. 315(1) – “Abuse of confidence”	Offender receives money/ property in trust and later converts it.	Agent pockets sales collections; friend refuses to return borrowed car.
Art. 315(2) – “False pretenses & fraudulent acts”	Offender uses deceit before or at the moment of the transaction.	Selling a fake Rolex as genuine; issuing a bouncing check to obtain goods.
Art. 315(3) – “Fraudulent means”	Offender defrauds by removing, concealing or destroying another’s property.	Debtor hides collateral from mortgagee.

Key elements (all modes):

Deceit or abuse of confidence;

Damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation;

Causal connection between deceit/abuse and the prejudice.

Demand (only for misappropriation under 315 [1] (b)) – oral, written, or even implied.

2. Penalties, Amount Thresholds & Prescription

Amount defrauded*	Imprisonment (RA 10951, in force since 2017)	Prescriptive period**
≤ ₱40,000	Prisión correccional (6 m–6 y)	10 years
> ₱40k – ₱1.2 M	Prisión mayor min–med (6 y 1 d–10 y)	15 years
> ₱1.2 M – ₱2.4 M	Prisión mayor max – Reclusión temporal min (10 y 1 d–17 y 4 m)	15 years
> ₱2.4 M	Reclusión temporal max – Reclusión perpetua (17 y 4 m–40 y) plus fine	20 years

* Aggregate if a single fraudulent scheme; split amounts belong to separate informations. ** Art. 90, Revised Penal Code; the clock stops when the complaint is filed with the prosecutor.

3. Jurisdiction & Venue

Territorial venue: Prosecutor’s Office and court of the city/ province where any element occurred (receipt of money, execution of fraudulent document, failure to return, etc.).
Court level:
- Metropolitan/Municipal/Regional Trial Court depends solely on the statutory penalty (not the amount). Under RA 7691, first-level courts handle offenses punishable by ≤ 6 years; otherwise, Regional Trial Court (RTC).
Barangay conciliation? Generally not required because penalties normally exceed one year and/or the offense involves public officers or corporations (Lupon cannot act).

4. Step-by-Step Complaint Flow

Stage	What the Complainant Does	What Government Does	Time-frame*
Preparatory	Draft Demand Letter (if 315 [1] (b)) & gather evidence: receipts, contracts, IDs, bank records, messages.	–	Best within weeks of discovery
Police/ NBI blotter (optional but wise)	Visit nearest PNP Women & Children Desk / Anti-Cybercrime Group or NBI.	Record incident, endorse to prosecutor.	Same day
Affidavit-Complaint	Notarize detailed narration + attach proofs.	Docket, assign investigation number.	Filing date
Preliminary Investigation (Rule 112)	Attend clarificatory hearings; rebut respondent’s counter-affidavit.	1. Issue subpoena (respondent has 10 days) 2. Assess probable cause.	60-90 days (DOJ circular)
Resolution & Information	–	Approve or dismiss. If probable cause: file Information in court and recommend bail.	± 30 days after last pleading
Warrant/ Summons	Post bail if needed.	Judge personally evaluates evidence; may issue warrant or summons.	≤ 10 days (Constitutional limit)
Arraignment & Pre-Trial	Enter plea; explore plea-bargaining (e.g., attempted estafa).	Mark exhibits; court orders mediation.	Within 30 days of court’s receipt
Trial Proper	Testify, present documents/ witnesses.	Prosecution first, then defense; demurrer possible.	Varies; continuous trial rule aims for 180 days
Judgment	–	Conviction → restitution + imprisonment + fine; Acquittal → return seized property.	Upon closure of trial
Appeals & Post-Judgment	Either party may appeal (RTC → CA → SC).	–	15 days (Rule 122)

*Target periods; delays are common.

5. Remedies & Defensive Tactics

For Complainant	For Accused
Petition for Review to DOJ if prosecutor dismisses.	File Counter-Affidavit; invoke lack of deceit, novation, or absence of demand (315 [1] (b)).
Omnibus Motion to lift recalls, seek hold-departure orders (HDO).	Move to dismiss for lack of probable cause; demurrer to evidence after prosecution rests.
Civil action (separate or implied) to recover damages.	Restitution / compromise may mitigate penalty; still does not erase criminal liability once information is filed.

6. Civil Liability & Restitution

Article 100 RPC: Every person criminally liable is also civilly liable.
Remedies:
- Court may order restitution, reparation and indemnification in the same judgment.
- Assets can be garnished via writ of execution once judgment is final.
- Compromise is possible anytime before final judgment (Art. 2034 Civil Code); extinguishes civil but not criminal liability.

7. Special Variants & Overlaps

Special Law	Relation to Estafa	Practical Note
B.P. 22 (Bouncing Checks)	May be charged together with Art. 315 (2)(d) if deceit present.	Each has distinct elements; acquittal in one doesn’t bar the other (Double Jeopardy Rule).
P.D. 1689 (Syndicated Estafa)	If committed by 5 or more persons or by a syndicate to defraud the public, penalty is life imprisonment and no bail.	Typical in large investment scams.
Anti-Cybercrime Act (RA 10175)	Adds the qualifying circumstance of use of computer/ ICT; penalty one degree higher.	NBI-CCD handles.
Financial Products & Services Consumer Protection Act (RA 11765, 2022)	Administrative arm (BSP/ SEC) may cite violators, in addition to estafa complaint.	Useful for bank/ e-wallet fraud.

8. Practical Tips for Complainants

Document the demand. Even an SMS or e-mail reply acknowledging debt strengthens proof of conversion.
Trace money flow. Bank certifications, screenshots, and audit logs often clinch probable cause.
Choose correct venue. Wrong venue is fatal; file where you handed the money or where it should have been returned.
Beware of thresholds. Small-value cases (< ₱8k) can sometimes be filed as Qualified Theft or handled within small-claims civil track instead; analyze penalties for faster relief.
Expect mediation. Many RTCs refer estafa to Philippine Mediation Center after arraignment; use the session to negotiate restitution while preserving criminal pressure.

9. Common Misconceptions

Myth	Reality
“Paying the amount wipes out the case.”	Payment after filing only mitigates penalty; it does not automatically dismiss the criminal action.
“No written contract = no estafa.”	Oral transactions are valid; testimonial and circumstantial evidence can prove deceit.
“Only the police can file.”	Any private individual may file directly with the Office of the Prosecutor; blotter is optional.
“Need to sue in the offender’s city.”	Venue depends on where any element occurred, not on the defendant’s residence.

10. Sample Affidavit-Complaint Outline

Heading & Parties (Republic of the Philippines …)
Personal circumstances (Name, age, status, address).
Narration of facts in numbered paragraphs, covering:
- Date, place, and manner the money/property was received.
- Specific deceptive acts OR fiduciary relationship.
- Demand and failure/refusal to return.
- Amount of damage and supporting documents.
Prayer (request for investigation and filing of information).
Verification & Certification of non-forum shopping.
Attachments: demand letter, receipts, chats, IDs, valuation report.

11. Timeline Snapshot (Typical)

gantt
    title Typical Estafa Case Flow (months are indicative)
    dateFormat  YYYY-MM-DD
    section Pre-Filing
    Demand Letter          :done,    d1, 2025-01-10, 2025-01-17
    Evidence Gathering     :active,  d2, after d1, 15d
    section Prosecutor
    File Complaint         :done,    p1, 2025-02-05, 1d
    Counter-Affidavit      :done,    p2, 2025-02-20, 2025-03-01
    Resolution             :active,  p3, 2025-03-02, 2025-04-15
    section Court
    Info & Warrant         :p4,      2025-04-20, 5d
    Bail & Arraignment     :p5,      2025-05-10, 1d
    Continuous Trial       :p6,      2025-06-01, 180d
    Decision               :p7,      2025-12-15, 1d

12. Conclusion

Filing an estafa complaint in the Philippines is evidence-driven and demand-sensitive. The complainant’s preparation—collating documents, serving demand, and selecting proper venue—often determines prosecutorial success. Once probable cause is found, the case progresses through a streamlined, continuous-trial system, yet practical delays remain. Knowing the updated penalty thresholds under RA 10951, the interplay with special laws, and the tactical value of restitution or mediation equips both litigants and counsel to navigate the process efficiently.

Pro-tip: Early consultation with counsel can ensure your affidavit aligns with the specific mode of estafa alleged, avoiding fatal variances that routinely lead to dismissals.

Updated as of July 11 2025, incorporating all Supreme Court administrative circulars and statutory amendments up to that date.