(A practical legal article in Philippine context)

1) What “Scamming” Means in Philippine Criminal Law

In Philippine practice, “scamming” is not a single crime label. Most scam cases are prosecuted under one or more of these:

Estafa (Swindling) under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), Article 315
Other Deceits (RPC Article 318) for certain deceptive acts that don’t squarely fall under Article 315
Bouncing Checks Law (B.P. Blg. 22) if payment was made using a worthless/dishonored check
Cybercrime Prevention Act (RA 10175) if the scam was committed using ICT (online platforms, messaging apps, websites, emails), which may (a) create separate cyber offenses or (b) affect penalties/venue depending on the charge
Access Devices Regulation Act (RA 8484) if credit card/access device fraud is involved
Securities Regulation Code (RA 8799) and related SEC rules if the “scam” is an investment solicitation involving unregistered securities or fraudulent sales
Illegal recruitment laws if it’s a job-placement/recruitment scam
Falsification provisions (RPC Articles 171–172) if fake IDs, fake receipts, fake documents, or forged signatures were used

Your first task is to classify the scam fact pattern, because the elements of the offense determine what evidence matters and where/how to file.

2) Common Scam Patterns and the Most Likely Charges

A. Online selling scams (payment sent, item not delivered / fake tracking)

Often: Estafa (deceit + damage + reliance)
Possible add-ons: Falsification (fake receipts/IDs), Cyber-related considerations if purely online

B. “Investment”/Ponzi-style schemes

Often: Estafa, possibly Syndicated Estafa (if done by a group and/or large-scale)
Possible add-ons: SEC-related violations (unregistered securities/fraud), Cyber-related considerations if solicited online

C. Phishing / OTP / account takeover leading to unauthorized transfers

Often: Computer-related fraud and related offenses under RA 10175, plus possible RA 8484 (if cards/access devices)
Also: Estafa or other property crimes depending on how money was obtained

D. Sextortion (threat to expose intimate content unless paid)

Often: Grave threats/coercion, extortion-like fact patterns, plus relevant special laws depending on content
If intimate images are involved: other specific statutes may apply

E. Fake “loan assistance,” “processing fee,” “release fee” scams

Often: Estafa

F. Recruitment scams (fees paid, fake deployment/job)

Often: Illegal recruitment (and Estafa can be filed alongside depending on facts)

G. Checks as bait (buyer issues a check that bounces)

Often: B.P. 22 and/or Estafa (they are different offenses; both may be available depending on circumstances)

3) Estafa (RPC Article 315): The Core Theory in Many Scam Cases

Most “scammer” cases live or die on proving estafa. The essentials commonly revolve around:

Deceit (false pretense, fraudulent act, misrepresentation)
Reliance by the victim (you were induced to part with money/property)
Damage/Prejudice (actual loss or measurable injury)
A clear link between the deceit and the loss

Practical translation: It’s not enough to show “I paid and they didn’t deliver.” You want to show fraudulent intent—e.g., fake identity, repeated pattern, false claims, fake proofs, refusal to refund, blocking after payment, multiple victims, impossible promises, fabricated documents, etc.

4) Where You File: The Usual Government Pathways

A. Law enforcement support (for identification, documentation, cyber tracing)

PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group (ACG) – commonly approached for online scams
NBI (Cybercrime Division or relevant units) – also commonly used for online scams and evidence handling
Local police – can take blotter reports and refer you appropriately

These offices can help package the complaint, identify respondents, and guide preservation of electronic evidence.

B. Formal filing of the criminal complaint

For most cases that require a preliminary investigation, you file with the:

Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor (the prosecutor’s office)

The prosecutor conducts the preliminary investigation and decides whether there is probable cause to file an Information in court.

C. Courts involved (after prosecutor finds probable cause)

Typically Regional Trial Court (RTC) or Metropolitan/Municipal Trial Court depending on the offense and penalty
Many cyber-related cases are heard in designated cybercrime courts (special RTC branches), but the entry point is still usually the prosecutor

5) Venue and Jurisdiction: Why “Where to File” Can Be Tricky

Scams often involve different locations: the scammer is in City A, the victim is in City B, the bank is in City C, the platform is everywhere.

General practical rules:

Estafa can often be filed where any essential element occurred—commonly where you paid/sent the money, where you were deceived, or where you suffered the damage (fact-dependent).
Cyber-related cases can have broader venue considerations because the “place” of commission can include where the system/device was used or where damage was felt.

Practical approach: Start with the prosecutor’s office or cyber unit in the place most connected to your loss (often where you sent payment or where you reside), and let them evaluate venue based on your documents.

6) Before You File: Evidence Preservation (This Is the Make-or-Break Part)

A. Preserve the communication trail

Screenshots including account name/handle, profile link/URL, timestamps
Screen recording scrolling through the conversation (helps show continuity)
Emails with full headers (if email scam)
Export chat data if the platform allows it

B. Preserve the money trail

Bank transfer receipts, e-wallet transaction details, reference numbers
Deposit slips, remittance receipts
Screenshots of the recipient account details
Any invoices, order forms, delivery promises, tracking numbers (especially if fake)

C. Preserve identity and platform identifiers

Profile URL, username, display name changes
Phone numbers, email addresses used
Payment account name, bank/e-wallet account number
Shipping details used (pickup points, rider details if any)

D. Keep originals clean

Don’t edit screenshots (cropping out key details weakens authenticity)
Keep the original files (images, PDFs, chat exports)
Create a simple timeline: date, time, platform, what was said, what you paid, what happened after

7) Immediate “Damage Control” Actions (Parallel to Legal Filing)

These don’t replace criminal complaints, but can matter:

Report to the bank/e-wallet immediately to attempt a hold/recall/flagging (success varies, speed matters)
Report the account to the platform (Marketplace, social media, messaging app)
If there are multiple victims, coordinate—pattern evidence strengthens fraud inference and may support more serious charging theories

8) Identifying the Scammer: What If You Only Have a Dummy Account?

You can still initiate action with:

The account handle/profile link
Transaction recipient details (bank/e-wallet account)
Phone numbers/emails used
Any delivery address or pickup details used

Often, law enforcement assistance is crucial for tracing, preservation, and lawful acquisition of subscriber/account information. You can file against a respondent identified by known identifiers even if the “real name” is uncertain at the start, then refine identification as the investigation progresses.

9) The Criminal Complaint Process (Step-by-Step)

Step 1: Prepare the complaint-affidavit package

A standard filing includes:

Complaint-Affidavit (sworn statement)
- Who you are and how you transacted
- What the respondent represented
- Why it was false/fraudulent
- How and when you paid
- How you were damaged
- What happened after payment (non-delivery, excuses, blocking, threats, etc.)
Annexes/Exhibits
- Chat screenshots/recordings
- Receipts and transaction records
- IDs or profiles used by the respondent (even if fake—still useful)
- Any demand messages and responses
- Timeline summary
Witness affidavits (if someone saw the transaction, helped you communicate, or is a co-victim)
Proof of identity (your valid ID) and sometimes proof of address depending on local requirements

Step 2: Notarize affidavits

Complaint-affidavits and witness affidavits are typically sworn before a notary or authorized officer.

Step 3: File with the Prosecutor’s Office (for preliminary investigation cases)

Submit the complaint-affidavit and attachments. The prosecutor’s office will:

Docket the case
Determine if it’s proper for preliminary investigation
Issue a subpoena to the respondent (if identified/summonable)

Step 4: Preliminary Investigation (PI) proper

This is a paper-based process:

Respondent submits counter-affidavit and evidence
You may submit a reply-affidavit
Prosecutor evaluates probable cause

Possible outcomes:

Dismissal (insufficient evidence / wrong charge / civil dispute characterization)
Filing of Information in court (probable cause found)

Step 5: Court phase (after Information is filed)

Once in court:

The judge may issue warrant of arrest (depending on circumstances) or proceed by summons
Arraignment, pre-trial, trial
Restitution/civil liability is commonly pursued within the criminal case unless reserved

10) Special Track: If the Scam Involves a Check (B.P. 22)

If the scammer issued a check that bounced:

Key practical requirements in B.P. 22 cases

You generally need proof of dishonor (bank return memo)
A proper written demand/notice of dishonor is typically critical
Timelines and documentation matter a lot

Important distinction:

B.P. 22 punishes the act of issuing a worthless check under defined conditions.
Estafa punishes fraud/deceit causing damage. Both can arise from the same transaction but require different proofs.

11) When It Becomes “Syndicated Estafa” (Heavier Consequences)

Large-scale scam operations involving a group and systematic defrauding can qualify for Syndicated Estafa under a special decree used in Philippine practice. This is significant because penalties can become extremely severe compared to ordinary estafa.

What usually strengthens a syndicated/organized theory:

Multiple coordinated offenders (not just one)
Many victims, repeated pattern
Centralized scheme (investment pooling, organized fake selling operations, coordinated money mules)

Even if you’re a single victim, evidence that others were defrauded in the same scheme can materially affect how authorities view the case.

12) Electronic Evidence: Making Screenshots and Chats “Court-Usable”

Philippine courts accept electronic evidence, but authenticity is frequently attacked. Helpful practices:

Include the full context (timestamps, profile identifiers, continuity)
Keep original files (don’t just paste screenshots into a document and discard originals)
Use screen recordings to show the chat thread unbroken
Keep a record of how you captured the evidence (device used, date captured)
If available, obtain platform-generated logs or exports

13) Demand Letters, Refund Requests, and “Desistance”

A. Sending a demand letter

A demand letter can:

Clarify your position and the amount demanded
Help show bad faith if ignored
Support civil liability and sometimes elements of fraudulent intent

B. If the scammer offers to pay

Restitution can help you recover funds, but note:

Payment does not automatically erase criminal liability in many cases
Desistance does not always compel dismissal once the State takes up prosecution, though it can affect dynamics and discretion depending on facts

14) Possible Additional Remedies (Alongside Criminal Case)

Civil action for damages (often impliedly included with the criminal case unless reserved)
Small claims (civil-only, for recovery of money, no jail; useful when the “fraud” proof is weak but the debt is clear)
Administrative complaints (e.g., SEC complaints for investment-related solicitations; platform complaints; bank/e-wallet reports)

These can run parallel, but avoid inconsistent statements across filings.

15) Practical Checklist: What to Bring When Filing

Valid ID(s)
Complaint-affidavit (sworn)
Printed exhibits labeled clearly (Annex “A,” “B,” etc.)
USB or digital copy of key files if the office accepts it (screenshots, recordings)
Transaction details: reference numbers, account numbers, dates, amounts
Profile links/usernames/phone numbers/emails used by the scammer
Names/contacts of other victims (if any), with their consent to be contacted

16) Mistakes That Commonly Get Scam Complaints Dismissed

Treating a purely breach of contract dispute as “scam” without showing deceit at the start
Missing proof of payment or missing proof that the respondent received it
Cropped/edited screenshots that remove identifiers and timestamps
Filing the wrong charge (e.g., forcing cyber libel when the issue is estafa, or vice versa)
Waiting too long until accounts vanish and transaction records are harder to secure
Not organizing the narrative and annexes (prosecutors need a clear, element-by-element story)

17) A Clean Narrative Template for the Complaint-Affidavit (Structure)

Background: where you found the offer/person (platform, date)
Representations made: what was promised and why you believed it
Your reliance: what action you took because of the representations
Payment: how much, how sent, to what account, proof attached
Breach + indicators of fraud: excuses, fake tracking, blocking, multiple accounts, contradictions
Damage: amount lost and other harm
Relief requested: filing of appropriate criminal charges and recovery of civil liability

Conclusion

Filing a criminal complaint against a scammer in the Philippines is fundamentally an evidence-driven process: identify the correct criminal theory (most often estafa, sometimes B.P. 22, cybercrime-related offenses, or specialized statutes), preserve communications and payment trails in a form prosecutors can evaluate, and file a sworn complaint with supporting annexes for preliminary investigation at the prosecutor’s office. The stronger the proof of deceit, reliance, and damage—and the cleaner the documentation linking the respondent to the transaction—the higher the likelihood that the case advances from complaint to formal prosecution in court.