(General information in the Philippine legal context; not a substitute for advice on a specific case.)

1) What “fraud” usually means under Philippine law

In everyday use, “fraud” covers many deceptive schemes. In Philippine criminal law, the most common charge is Estafa (Swindling) under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), Article 315, but the correct offense depends on how the deception happened, what was taken, and what evidence exists.

Common fraud-related criminal offenses

A. Estafa (RPC Art. 315) — frequent categories:

False pretenses / deceit to obtain money or property (e.g., pretending to sell something, fake investment, fake documents, impersonation).
Abuse of confidence / misappropriation (e.g., money given in trust or for a specific purpose that is diverted).
Fraudulent acts in property transactions (e.g., double sale with deceit, misrepresentation of ownership).

B. Other offenses often paired with (or used instead of) estafa

BP 22 (Bouncing Checks Law) — issuing checks that bounce (distinct from estafa; both can be filed in many scenarios).
Theft / Qualified theft (RPC) — taking without consent (no voluntary handing over).
Falsification (RPC) — falsified documents, IDs, public or commercial documents.
Forgery / use of forged documents — depending on facts.
Securities/investment-related violations — when soliciting investments in a way covered by special laws and regulatory rules (often reported to the SEC; criminal prosecution may still be possible depending on the case).
Cybercrime-related offenses — when committed via computer/online systems. RA 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act) can affect procedure and, in certain cases, the treatment of crimes committed through ICT.
Identity-related / card-related fraud — may involve special laws (e.g., access device or payment-card misuse).

Key practical point: “Fraud” is not always one crime. The same incident can support multiple charges (e.g., estafa + BP 22 + falsification), and the charging decision depends on provable elements.

2) First response: what to do immediately when you discover fraud

Fraud cases are evidence-driven. The earliest steps often determine whether the case succeeds.

A. Preserve and organize evidence (do this before “confronting” the suspect)

Create a folder (digital + printed) with:

Timeline (dates, times, places, how you met, what was promised, how payment was made).
Proof of payment: bank transfer slips, deposit slips, remittance receipts, e-wallet transaction IDs, screenshots showing reference numbers.
Communications: chats, emails, SMS, call logs, voice notes.
Identity/Account details used: profile links, usernames, phone numbers, email addresses, bank account names/numbers, delivery addresses, device IDs if available.
Contracts/receipts/invoices: signed papers, order forms, acknowledgments.
Screenshots/videos: include the URL and date/time if possible. Keep originals; avoid editing.
Witness information: names, addresses, numbers, what they personally know.

Tip: Keep the original files and export conversations where possible. Courts value authenticity; edited screenshots are easier to attack.

B. Make a demand (often helpful; sometimes critical)

For many fraud scenarios, a written demand letter helps prove:

you demanded return/delivery, and
the other party refused or ignored, supporting intent and damage.

Send via a method you can prove: registered mail with return card, courier with proof of delivery, email with headers, or personal service with acknowledgment.

C. If there’s ongoing risk (more victims, funds moving)

Notify the platform/provider (bank/e-wallet/marketplace/social platform) to flag accounts; providers may require law enforcement requests for deeper action, but early reporting can help.
If you suspect broader scam operations, report quickly to the relevant enforcement unit (see Section 4).

3) Understanding the Philippine criminal process (big picture)

A typical fraud case goes through:

Complaint filing (you submit a sworn complaint-affidavit + evidence).
Preliminary investigation (usually at the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor): respondent submits counter-affidavit; prosecutor decides probable cause.
Information filed in court if probable cause exists.
Court process (arraignment, trial, judgment).
Civil liability is commonly included with the criminal case unless reserved/waived.

Important: Many fraud cases start directly with the prosecutor, not the police, although police/NBI help with evidence, identification, and cyber leads.

4) Where to report fraud (which office to go to)

Choose based on the scam type, location, and whether it was online.

A. For criminal prosecution (core venues)

1) Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor (OCP)

This is the main office for filing a criminal complaint for most fraud/estafa/BP 22 cases.
You file where the offense occurred or where any essential element happened (e.g., where you paid, where deceit occurred, where you received communications, depending on facts).

2) Philippine National Police (PNP)

Local police stations can take a blotter and assist.
For online scams/cyber-enabled fraud: PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group (ACG) is commonly approached for cyber leads, preservation, and coordination.

3) National Bureau of Investigation (NBI)

NBI can investigate fraud, help identify suspects, secure technical evidence, and assist in building the case.
For cyber-enabled cases, the NBI cyber units are often used.

B. Regulatory/consumer channels (often parallel, not a substitute for prosecution)

These can help stop the scheme, freeze licenses, compel compliance, or mediate refunds—while you pursue criminal remedies:

SEC — investment scams, unregistered solicitation, suspicious “investment” offerings.
DTI — consumer complaints, deceptive sales, online seller issues (administrative/consumer angle).
BSP — bank/financial institution complaints (especially if the issue involves a bank’s handling, not just a scammer’s act).
NPC (National Privacy Commission) — misuse of personal data, identity theft aspects.
IC (Insurance Commission) — insurance-related scams involving entities under its regulation.
CDA / other sector regulators — if the entity is a cooperative or sector-regulated entity.
LGU/barangay — mainly for certain disputes subject to conciliation; many fraud cases are not covered (see Section 8).

Best practice: For serious fraud, file with the prosecutor (criminal track) and also report to the relevant investigative unit/regulator for faster disruption.

5) How to file a criminal complaint for fraud (step-by-step)

Step 1: Identify the most appropriate charge(s)

You don’t need perfect legal labeling, but your narrative should prove the elements:

Deceit or abuse of confidence
Damage or prejudice
Causal link (you paid/parted with property because of the deceit/trust)

If checks were involved, consider BP 22 in addition to (or instead of) estafa, depending on facts.

Step 2: Prepare the core documents

A. Complaint-Affidavit (Sworn Statement) This is your main pleading. It should include:

Caption (Office of the Prosecutor; city/province; “Complaint-Affidavit”)
Your identity (name, age, civil status, address)
Respondent’s identity (name and address if known; otherwise “John/Jane Doe” with identifiers)
Statement of facts in chronological order:
- how you met/learned of the offer
- what representations were made
- what you relied on
- what you gave/paid and how
- what you received (or didn’t)
- demands made and responses
Why it is fraudulent (point out specific lies, contradictions, misuse, refusal)
Damages/amount involved
Evidence list (mark as Annex “A”, “B”, etc.)
Prayer (request for investigation and filing of Information in court)

B. Annexes / Supporting Evidence Attach and label:

proof of payment (bank/e-wallet)
chat/email printouts (with metadata where possible)
IDs/profile pages used
contracts/receipts
demand letter and proof of receipt
any affidavits of witnesses

C. Witness Affidavits If others have direct knowledge (not hearsay), get them to execute supporting affidavits.

D. Certification of Non-Forum Shopping Some offices request this depending on local rules and if there are related filings; comply with OCP requirements.

Notarization: Complaint-affidavits and witness affidavits must be sworn before a prosecutor-administered oath or a notary public, depending on the office’s practice.

Step 3: File with the proper Office of the Prosecutor

Go to the OCP that has territorial jurisdiction. Bring:

multiple sets of documents (often 2–4 copies)
valid IDs
storage device if requested for digital copies
enough funds for copying/certification and any filing-related fees required by local practice

You will receive a docket number and notice of the next steps.

Step 4: Serve/notify the respondent (through the OCP process)

The OCP will issue a subpoena or notice directing the respondent to submit a counter-affidavit.

Step 5: Preliminary Investigation (PI) proper

Respondent files counter-affidavit and evidence.
You may file a reply-affidavit to address defenses.
The prosecutor evaluates probable cause; sometimes there are clarificatory hearings.

Step 6: Resolution and next remedies

If probable cause is found:

an Information is filed in court. If dismissed:
you may pursue remedies such as motion for reconsideration at the OCP level and/or appeal/review (commonly up the prosecutorial chain), subject to rules and timelines.

6) Police/NBI reporting vs. Prosecutor filing: what’s the difference?

Reporting to police/NBI is usually for:

identifying suspects (real names behind accounts)
technical tracing (IP/data requests, device handling)
case build-up and coordination
immediate incident documentation (blotter)

Filing with the prosecutor is for:

formally initiating the criminal case via preliminary investigation
moving toward court filing

Many victims do both:

report to PNP ACG/NBI for investigation support, then
file (or strengthen) the complaint at the OCP.

7) Online fraud and cyber-enabled scams: special considerations

A. Evidence authenticity matters more

Save original files, not only screenshots.
Export chat logs when possible.
Preserve URLs, profile IDs, transaction IDs.

B. Expect data access limits without legal process

Banks/e-wallets/platforms typically need:

subpoena/court order or
law-enforcement request under lawful process

A report to PNP ACG/NBI helps initiate lawful requests, but you still need a prosecutable narrative and proof of your loss.

C. Venue can be tricky

Online acts can “occur” in multiple places. In practice, prosecutors look at:

where you were when deceived/paid,
where respondent operated,
where accounts were received/withdrawn,
where communications were accessed, and other connecting factors.

8) Is barangay conciliation required before filing?

Under the Katarungang Pambarangay system (Local Government Code framework), certain disputes between individuals in the same city/municipality may require barangay conciliation before court action.

However, many fraud-related cases are not subject to barangay conciliation because:

the penalty may exceed thresholds for covered cases,
the matter may not be a purely neighbor-to-neighbor dispute,
the respondent may not reside in the same locality,
urgent legal action or public interest concerns may apply,
the case involves government offices or officials in certain ways, or other statutory exceptions.

Practical approach: If the prosecutor’s office requires a barangay certification for your specific situation, comply; otherwise, proceed directly with the OCP filing, especially for serious estafa/cyber scams.

9) Civil recovery: getting your money back while pursuing criminal charges

A. Civil liability is often implied with the criminal case

For many crimes (including estafa), the criminal action generally includes civil action for restitution and damages unless you:

reserve the right to file separately, or
waive civil action, or
file civil action first in certain contexts (subject to rules).

B. Separate civil options

Depending on amount and facts:

Civil case for collection/damages
Small claims (if it fits the rules and the defendant can be served; note that small claims has limits and specific coverage)

Civil routes can be faster for recovery when identity and address are known and the case is more contractual than criminal—yet fraud facts can still support both.

10) BP 22 vs. Estafa when checks are involved

If the fraud involved checks:

BP 22 focuses on the act of issuing a bouncing check and requires compliance with notice requirements and timelines in practice.
Estafa may apply if the check was used as part of deceit to obtain money/property, but the elements differ.

It is common to file both when facts support it, but strategy depends on evidence (e.g., proof of issuance, dishonor, notice, purpose, and the surrounding deceit).

11) Practical drafting guide: what makes a strong complaint-affidavit

A. Write for the elements

Prosecutors look for:

What exact lie/false pretense was made?
When and where was it made?
What did you do because of it?
What did you lose?
What proves these points?

B. Avoid common pitfalls

Hearsay-heavy narratives without documents or personal knowledge
Missing payment proofs
No clear demand when relevant
Unclear respondent identity (address/identifiers missing)
Purely civil breach dressed as fraud (you must show deceit or misappropriation, not just non-performance)

C. Make annexes easy to review

Use an index of annexes.
Put key exhibits first: payment proof, admissions in chat, demand and refusal.

12) What happens after filing: realistic expectations

A. Timelines vary widely

Factors include subpoena service issues, respondent delaying tactics, docket congestion, and complexity of cyber evidence.

B. Common defenses respondents raise

“It’s a civil case, not criminal.”
“No deceit—just business loss.”
“Identity was stolen / account hacked.”
“You knew the risks / you consented.”
“Payment was for something else.”

Your documentary trail and clear narrative are how you beat these.

C. If the respondent is unknown or uses fake identities

You can:

file against John/Jane Doe with identifiers,
seek investigative help to match accounts to real persons,
strengthen the case through lawful data requests once the case is underway.

13) Special situations

A. If the suspect is a public official and fraud is tied to official duties

There may be additional avenues involving oversight bodies and anti-corruption frameworks, depending on the specific facts and office involved.

B. If there are many victims

Group complaints can:

show pattern/intent,
reduce “he said, she said” issues,
help investigators prioritize the case.

C. Cross-border scams

You may still file locally if key elements occurred in the Philippines (victim location/payment/communications), but enforcement and identification can be harder and may require coordination.

14) Quick checklist: “minimum viable” fraud case file

Complaint-affidavit with a clear timeline and amounts
Proof of payment (most important exhibit)
Communications showing representations and admissions
Identity/account details used by the respondent
Demand letter + proof of receipt (when applicable)
Witness affidavits (if any)
Annex index and labeled attachments

15) Where to start, depending on scenario

Marketplace / online seller scam (paid but no delivery): Preserve evidence → demand → report to platform → file at OCP; consider PNP ACG/NBI if identity is unclear.
Investment scam / “guaranteed returns”: Report to SEC + enforcement unit; file criminal complaint for estafa as facts warrant.
Bounced check transaction: Preserve check + bank return memo → document notice/demand → file BP 22 (and possibly estafa if deceit is provable).
Misappropriation by agent/employee/collector: Document entrustment purpose + proof of receipt + refusal/ diversion → estafa (abuse of confidence).
Fake documents / forged IDs: Include falsification/forgery angle; attach document comparisons and provenance.