Filing a Case for Fraudulent Relationship in the Philippines

(Criminal, civil, and special-law perspectives, with practical procedure)

1. What “fraudulent relationship” usually means in Philippine law

Concept	Typical legal hook	Statute / Rule
Romance scam / dating fraud – one party feigns affection to obtain money, property, services	Estafa by deceit (false pretenses)	Art. 315 §2(a) & (b), Revised Penal Code (RPC)
Marriage or engagement obtained through fraud	Annulment of marriage; damages	Arts. 45(3), 45(5), 1390 Civil Code & Family Code
Partner’s economic abuse or deception inside a dating or marital relationship	Violence Against Women & Children (VAWC) – “economic abuse” & “psychological violence”	R.A. 9262
Fraud done online (catfishing, fake identity, phishing links)	Estafa and Cybercrime (computer-facilitated swindling)	Art. 315 RPC in relation to R.A. 10175
Misuse or diversion of money/property entrusted by partner (paluwagan, joint account, remittances)	Estafa by misappropriation	Art. 315 §1(b) RPC
Using intimate images to extort further funds	Photo & Video Voyeurism; Attempted Qualified Theft/Extortion	R.A. 9995, Art. 294 RPC

Key takeaway: “Fraudulent relationship” is not a single codified offense; you always anchor the facts in the specific act of deceit and then determine which law squarely fits.

2. Elements you must establish (core criminal theories)

Estafa by deceit (Art. 315 §2[a] & [b]):
- (a) Offender defrauded another by false pretenses or fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously with the fraud;
- (b) Victim relied on the deceit and as a result suffered damage (monetary or proprietary).
Estafa by misappropriation (Art. 315 §1[b]):
- (a) Money/ property was received in trust or on commission;
- (b) Offender misappropriated or converted it;
- (c) Demand by the offended party;
- (d) Damage to the offended party.
Economic abuse under R.A. 9262 (VAWC):
- (a) Dating or marital relationship (including former or common-law);
- (b) Systematic or sporadic controlling economic acts (withholding support, destroying credit standing, or defrauding victim);
- (c) Resulting mental, emotional or economic suffering.
Cyber-estafa (RPC + R.A. 10175):
- Same estafa elements, and the deception used a computer system or digital network.

3. Choosing the right cause of action

Goal	Suggested filing	Why
Punish the fraudster and possibly recover money through restitution	Criminal complaint for Estafa (and Cyber-estafa if online)	Restitution can be part of the criminal judgment; pressure of jail time
End an abusive dating/marital setup and get protection + support	R.A. 9262 complaint (Barangay Protection Order or direct to Prosecutor)	Gives immediate protection orders, allows civil damages plus mandatory support
Dissolve a marriage obtained by deceit	Petition for Annulment on the ground of fraud (Art. 45)	Marriage becomes void ab initio upon final decision
Quickly freeze assets	Civil action for attachable claims + criminal case (to justify P.D. 911 hold-departure watchlist)	Prevents dissipation while the case is pending
Quietly recover money without public prosecution	Demand letter → civil action for accion in personam (sum of money, damages, rescission)	May settle faster; lower burden of proof (preponderance, not “proof beyond reasonable doubt”)

4. Step-by-step procedure for a criminal complaint

(Barangay conciliation applies if both parties live in the same city/municipality and the offense is not one of the exceptions under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law.)

Assemble documentary evidence Screenshots of chats, bank transfers, remittance slips, emails, photos showing misrepresentation, copies of fake IDs, sworn affidavits of friends who witnessed the deception, psychological assessment if claiming VAWC psychological violence, etc.
Draft and notarize an Affidavit-Complaint State personal circumstances, narrate facts in chronological order, specify value of money/property lost, invoke the applicable penal law.
Barangay referral or direct filing If VAWC, Online crime, or parties live in different cities, barangay conciliation is not required. Otherwise, request a Certification to File Action after mediation fails.
File with the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor (OCP/OPP) Attach – Affidavit-Complaint + Annexes; IDs; barangay certification (if required). Pay filing fee (≈ ₱ 50). Ask for receiving copy/stamp.
Pre-investigation “clarificatory” stage Prosecutor may subpoena respondent for Counter-Affidavit. Prepare a Reply, if necessary. Non-appearance can lead to waiver.
Resolution and filing of Information If probable cause is found, Information is filed in the proper court (usually RTC if estafa amount > ₱ 1.2 M; otherwise MTC).
Issuance of warrant / bail Estafa is generally bailable; amount depends on DOJ Bail Bond Guide (e.g., ₱ 24,000 per ₱ 40,000-₱ 120,000 defrauded; cyber-estafa is one degree higher).
Arraignment and Pre-trial Opens opportunity for plea-bargain and restitution-based settlement under R.A. 10707’s probation reforms.
Trial proper – Presentation of evidence in chief; cross-examination; offer of exhibits.
Decision, restitution, damages, accessory penalties If convicted, respondent can be ordered to return the amount plus interest and pay moral/exemplary damages. RPC likewise imposes perpetual special disqualification from public office if the penalty exceeds prisión correccional.

5. Civil action track

You may file a civil case separately or reserve your right within the criminal case (Rule 111, Rules of Criminal Procedure). The prescription is generally four years from discovery for actions based on quasi-delicts and fraud (Art. 1391, Civil Code).

Common civil theories:

Acción in personam for recovery of sum + damages
Rescission or annulment of contracts vitiated by fraud (Arts. 1390-1391)
Unjust enrichment (Art. 22)
Independent civil action under Art. 33 for “defraudation” (separate from the criminal estafa)

6. Key jurisprudence to cite

Case	G.R. No.	Gist
People v. Balasa	131926 (Apr 14 1999)	Romance-style estafa; deceit must be prior to or simultaneous with delivery of money
Chua-Quimco v. Court of Appeals	133250 (Nov 28 1996)	Misappropriation requires demand, but written demand is not indispensable if circumstances show conversion
Tanchanco v. People	233486 (July 30 2018)	Estafa can coexist with R.A. 8799 securities fraud—illustrates multiple statutes on one deceit
AAA v. BBB	212448 (Apr 21 2014)	Fraud as ground for annulment of marriage; fraud must be causa causans of consent
Sarah Jane Elcano v. PP	234040 (Oct 5 2021)	Cyber-crime jurisdiction lies where content originated or first accessed

7. Penalties at a glance

Offense	Basic penalty	Aggravations
Estafa (Art. 315, RPC)	Prisión correccional – reclusión temporal depending on amount (scale in Art. 315)	One degree higher if computer system (Sec. 6, R.A. 10175)
VAWC economic abuse (R.A. 9262)	6 mos. & 1 day – 6 yrs. (prisión correccional)	Up to reclusión temporal if acts are severe; mandatory protection orders
Annulment ground (fraud)	Not criminal; cost is litigation + possible support pendente lite	Spouses restored to unmarried status; legitime of children preserved

Note: Penalties also carry civil indemnity and interest at the court-established rate (currently 6% per annum from demand until fully paid).

8. Evidence tips (what Philippine courts like to see)

Chain of custody for digital records – Use NBI or private e-forensics to hash chat archives, screenshot metadata, and server logs (Rule 4, A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC & Rule 11, A.M. No. 17-11-03-SC on Cyber Evidentiary Rules).
Bank certification / subpoena duces tecum – Show actual fund transfers.
Psychological Impact Report – Bolsters VAWC claim for psychological violence.
Demand letter – For misappropriation-type estafa, demand is best proven by registered mail with registry return card or personal delivery with signature.
Comparative photo IDs – If the scammer used a fake profile; secure NBI Clearance prints and Bureau of Immigration travel records to impeach alibi.

9. Jurisdiction & venue quirks

Estafa (traditional): RTC or MTC depending on value; venue is where all elements occurred or where the money was received.
Cyber-estafa: RTC Cybercrime Division sits in Manila, Cebu or Davao concurrently with the RTC of the place where the offense was committed or where any computer was used or accessed.
VAWC: Either RTC or first-level court with criminal jurisdiction where the victim resides or where the offense occurred, at the victim’s option.
Annulment: Exclusive original jurisdiction is with the RTC Family Court of the province/city where the petitioner resides for at least six months prior to filing.

10. Prescriptive periods

Cause of action	When clock starts	Period
Estafa (Art. 90, 91 RPC)	Date of commission OR last overt act of concealment	15 yrs. if penalty ≥ prisión correccional
Cyber-estafa	Same as above but follows underlying estafa period	15 yrs.; Sec. 6 R.A. 10175 does not extend the prescriptive term
VAWC	Date of last act of violence	20 yrs. (R.A. 9262 §24)
Civil fraud / annulment	Four years from discovery (Civil Code Arts. 1391, 1397)

11. Possible defenses the respondent may raise

No prior or simultaneous deceit – If love affair was genuine then money was borrowed, it may reduce to civil loan (People v. Frei, G.R. 191566, June 13 2012).
Money given was a gift – Show chats or witnesses of intention to donate.
Prescription – Lapsed filing window.
Forum shopping / litis pendencia – Civil case already filed on same cause.
Illegally obtained electronic evidence – Violates the Cybercrime law’s privacy provisions; can move to suppress.

12. Practical timeline & cost (typical Metro Manila scenario)

Stage	Approx. duration	Typical cash outlay
Gathering docs, affidavit, notarization	1 – 2 weeks	₱ 1,000 – ₱ 5,000
Prosecutor preliminary investigation	4 – 6 months	Filing fee ₱ 50; lawyer’s fee varies
Court trial (if no plea)	2 – 5 years	Filing fees (civil damages) ₱ 10k +; bail ₱ 20k – ₱ 600k depending on amount defrauded
Execution / collection	6 months + after finality	Sheriff’s fees ≈ ₱ 5k + 3% recovered amount

Tip: Mediation through the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC) can be requested once the case is in court; settlement results in lower docket fees and immediate restitution.

13. Alternative dispute remedies

Demand Letter → Small Claims Court (if amount ≤ ₱ 400,000). No lawyers required; judgment within 30 days.
Punong Barangay mediation (amount ≤ ₱ 200,000) – inexpensive, preserves relationships.
Accredited Conciliator (NCMB) or SEC mediator – if fraud involves investment scheme.
Private criminal complaint withdrawal conditioned on restitution – allowed pre-arraignment under Rule 119 §1(b).

14. Sample outline of an Affidavit-Complaint

Heading & Title (“AFFIDAVIT-COMPLAINT FOR ESTAFA, Art. 315, RPC”)
Personal circumstances of complainant
Personal circumstances (known) of respondent
Statement of competent personal knowledge & oath
Chronology of events with dates & amounts
Screenshots/Annex marking (Annex “A”, “B” …)
Demand and non-compliance
Invocation of pertinent law (“…thus violating Article 315 §2(a) … in relation to Section 6 of R.A. 10175…”)
Prayer for restitution, issuance of warrant, inclusion in watch-list
Signature, jurat, and ID details

Final reminders

Act quickly. Screenshots can be deleted and bank histories archived after five years.
Keep communications polite; threats or harassment can boomerang under the Safe Spaces Act or Grave Threats.
Coordinate with the Anti-Cybercrime Group or NBI if online transactions exceed ₱ 500,000―they can assist in digital forensics and cross-border subpoenas.
Consult a lawyer early. Technical missteps (e.g., filing in the wrong venue, incomplete demand) can doom an otherwise strong case.

This guide synthesizes existing Philippine statutes, Supreme Court rulings, DOJ circulars, and procedural rules as of June 20, 2025. It is not a substitute for personalized legal advice. Laws or jurisprudence issued after this date may modify some points above.