Quick answer

To start an estafa case, file a sworn complaint-affidavit with the Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor that has territorial jurisdiction over the place where the fraud—or any essential part of it—occurred. Attach your witness affidavits and all available proof of the false representation, transfer or entrustment of money or property, resulting loss, identity of the respondent, and relevant dates and places.

A police blotter, NBI report, demand letter, or bank complaint can help build the case, but ordinarily does not replace the complaint-affidavit required by the prosecution office. If the prosecutor finds the required evidence, the prosecutor—not the complainant—files the Information in court.

For an ongoing online scam, immediately notify the bank or e-wallet provider and report to the PNP or NBI cybercrime unit before accounts, messages, subscriber information, or transaction records disappear.

Check first: is it estafa or only an unpaid obligation?

Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code punishes specific forms of fraud. Calling someone a “scammer” or proving that money remains unpaid is not enough. The facts must establish a legally recognized form of deceit or abuse of confidence and resulting damage.

Common forms include:

Estafa by false pretenses or deceit

This generally requires proof that:

The respondent made a false pretense, fraudulent representation, or similar deceit.
The deceit occurred before or at the same time the victim parted with money or property.
The victim relied on it.
The reliance caused measurable damage.

Examples may include falsely claiming to own property, possess authority or qualifications, operate a real business, have available inventory, or conduct a genuine investment or transaction.

A promise that was honestly made but later broken is not automatically estafa. The evidence must indicate that the material representation was false when made and was used to obtain the victim’s money or property. The Supreme Court distinguishes criminal fraud from a contractual breach: nonperformance alone does not prove deceit. See Sy v. People.

Estafa by misappropriation or conversion

This usually involves money, goods, or other personal property received:

in trust;
on commission;
for administration; or
under an obligation to deliver or return the same property,

followed by misappropriation, conversion, or denial of receipt, to another person’s prejudice.

The nature of possession matters. A simple loan generally transfers ownership of the money to the borrower and creates an obligation to repay, which is not automatically estafa by conversion. Likewise, failure to return entrusted funds does not by itself prove misappropriation without evidence of the other elements. See Villanueva v. People.

A demand is not always a formal element of this form of estafa, but failure to account after a provable demand can be important circumstantial evidence of conversion.

Estafa involving a dishonored check

A bad check does not automatically establish estafa. Under Article 315(2)(d), the check must form part of the deceit used to obtain the money, property, or obligation at the time of the transaction. A check issued merely to pay a pre-existing debt ordinarily does not establish the required prior or simultaneous deceit.

Article 315 provides that failure to fund the check within three days after receipt of notice of dishonor is prima facie evidence of deceit for this form of estafa. Keep the original check, bank return slip or advice, written notice, and reliable proof of when the issuer received it.

The same check may also raise a separate issue under the Bouncing Checks Law, but BP 22 has different elements. For BP 22, written notice of dishonor and failure to pay or arrange full payment within five banking days from receipt are critical. See Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 and Domagsang v. Court of Appeals.

How the amount and circumstances affect the procedure

For most Article 315 forms other than bad-check estafa, Republic Act No. 10951 provides these amount-based penalties:

Proven amount of fraud	Prescribed penalty	Usual DOJ-NPS investigation track
₱40,000 or less	Arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods	Summary investigation
Over ₱40,000 up to ₱1,200,000	Arresto mayor maximum to prisión correccional minimum	Expedited preliminary investigation
Over ₱1,200,000 up to ₱2,400,000	Prisión correccional minimum and medium	Expedited preliminary investigation
Over ₱2,400,000	Prisión correccional maximum to prisión mayor minimum, subject to increases for larger amounts	Regular preliminary investigation

Article 315(2)(d) imposes a separate, substantially higher penalty scale for estafa through a bad check. Even when the amount does not exceed ₱40,000, the prescribed penalty begins at prisión mayor minimum, so a regular preliminary investigation is generally required.

These classifications can also change when:

the fraud was committed through information and communications technology;
syndicated estafa or another special law may apply;
several legally distinct transactions constitute separate counts;
the alleged acts fit another offense, such as computer-related fraud, identity theft, falsification, illegal recruitment, securities fraud, or an offense involving financial accounts.

The controlling penalty provisions appear in Section 85 of Republic Act No. 10951.

Online or technology-assisted estafa

Section 6 of the Cybercrime Prevention Act covers Revised Penal Code offenses committed by, through, or with ICT and raises the penalty by one degree. Cybercrime cases fall within Regional Trial Court jurisdiction. Consequently, online estafa normally requires a regular preliminary investigation even when the amount would otherwise fall within a shorter DOJ-NPS process.

The same facts may also involve computer-related fraud, identity theft, or offenses under the Anti-Financial Account Scamming Act. The final charge depends on how the account, device, data, and communications were used. See Republic Act No. 10175 and Republic Act No. 12010.

Where to file

File with the prosecution office responsible for the city or province where the offense was committed or where an essential ingredient occurred. In an estafa case, that may include the place where the deceit was communicated, the property was delivered or entrusted, or the legally relevant damage occurred—but the correct venue depends on the particular form of estafa and the documents.

Venue is jurisdictional in criminal cases. A contract signed or negotiated in one location does not necessarily make that location the proper venue if none of the offense’s essential elements occurred there. The governing rule is Section 15, Rule 110 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Use the DOJ prosecution-office directories to identify the appropriate office. If more than one place appears possible—especially for online, interstate, or overseas transactions—consult the prosecutor’s receiving section or a lawyer before filing.

Do you need barangay conciliation first?

Possibly, but only in a limited class of lower-penalty cases.

Prior Katarungang Pambarangay proceedings may be required when:

the complainant and respondent are individuals actually residing in the same city or municipality;
the offense’s maximum prescribed imprisonment does not exceed one year and its prescribed fine does not exceed ₱5,000; and
no statutory exception applies.

This can affect an ordinary Article 315 case involving ₱40,000 or less. It generally does not apply to higher-penalty estafa, bad-check estafa, or cybercrime-qualified estafa.

Exceptions include disputes involving the government, official acts of public officers, parties residing in different non-adjoining cities or municipalities, an accused already in detention, an action requiring an urgent provisional remedy, and a case that may otherwise prescribe. If conciliation is required, obtain the proper Certificate to File Action before proceeding.

Because classification errors can cause delay, ask the receiving prosecutor or a lawyer whether barangay conciliation applies to your exact charge. The governing provisions are Sections 408–412 of the Local Government Code.

Step-by-step filing process

1. Stop further loss and preserve accounts

For unauthorized bank or e-wallet activity:

Contact the institution through its official fraud channel immediately.
Ask it to secure the affected account and record the disputed transactions.
Change compromised passwords using a safe device.
Preserve confirmation and reference numbers.
Do not continue communicating through links or numbers supplied by the scammer.

The BSP advises consumers to report suspicious transactions immediately to the bank or e-money issuer. See the BSP fraud-reporting guidance.

2. Report conduct requiring investigation

Report online or technically complex fraud to the PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group or the NBI Cybercrime Division. The NBI maintains an online complaint page and a service for investigative assistance to computer-crime victims.

Law-enforcement reporting is especially important when:

the offender’s legal identity is unknown;
subscriber, device, IP, account-opening, or platform records are needed;
multiple mule accounts or victims are involved;
records may require preservation or a cybercrime warrant; or
the suspect may still be moving the funds.

3. Prepare a transaction chronology

Create a clear table or numbered timeline showing:

exact or approximate date and time;
place or communication channel;
person or account involved;
representation made;
why it was false;
amount or property transferred;
transfer method and reference number;
promised purpose or obligation;
demand and response; and
resulting unpaid loss.

Separate distinct transactions. Do not combine several payments into a vague total without identifying when, why, and to whom each payment was made.

4. Draft the complaint-affidavit

The affidavit should state, in numbered and chronological paragraphs:

Your full name, address, and capacity to complain.
The respondent’s name and address, if known.
The date and place of each material event.
The exact representation, entrustment, or obligation involved.
How you know the representation was false or the property was converted.
Why you relied on the representation.
What you transferred and how.
The damage you suffered.
Your demands and the respondent’s response, if relevant.
The evidence attached and what each attachment proves.

State facts within your personal knowledge. Identify information learned from records or other witnesses instead of presenting it as something you personally observed.

The affidavit must be subscribed and sworn to before a prosecutor or another government official authorized to administer oaths, or, when they are unavailable, before a notary public. Do not sign it in advance unless instructed by the official who will administer the oath.

5. Attach complete supporting evidence

Useful attachments may include:

contracts, purchase orders, receipts, invoices, acknowledgments, or delivery records;
bank statements, transfer confirmations, deposit slips, and e-wallet transaction records;
the original check, bank dishonor record, notice of dishonor, and proof of receipt;
advertisements, listings, proposals, business permits, titles, certificates, or claimed credentials;
full chat and email threads, not only selected screenshots;
account handles, profile URLs, telephone numbers, email addresses, and platform transaction IDs;
photographs, audio, video, or call records lawfully obtained;
demand letters and courier, registry, email, or personal-service proof;
affidavits from witnesses with personal knowledge;
proof that you own or were authorized to deliver the affected property; and
corporate authority documents if a company is the offended party.

Bring originals or reliable source copies for comparison. Keep an untouched backup. Electronic evidence must eventually be shown to be authentic and reliable, so preserve the original device, files, metadata, URLs, headers, export files, and account access records where possible. Avoid cropping, editing, annotating, or repeatedly forwarding the only copy.

6. Prepare the required number of copies

Under the 2024 DOJ-NPS rules, the filing generally consists of:

the original complaint-affidavit;
two duplicate copies for the official file; and
one additional copy for each respondent.

Complete the NPS Investigation Data Form supplied or required by the prosecution office. Confirm locally whether the office requires matching sets of all attachments, particular folders, electronic copies, or identification documents.

7. File and keep proof of filing

Submit the complete set to the docket or receiving section. Obtain and preserve:

the stamped receiving copy;
NPS or investigation-service number;
filing date;
official receipt, if any;
assigned prosecutor’s details when available; and
every subsequent order, subpoena, resolution, and proof of service.

Update the office promptly if your address, telephone number, or email changes.

What happens after filing?

The DOJ currently applies three investigation tracks.

Summary investigation

This applies to offenses punishable by one day to one year, a fine regardless of amount, or both. It is generally an ex parte evaluation: the prosecutor may dismiss the complaint or prepare an Information based on the complainant’s records without first requiring a counter-affidavit.

The investigating prosecutor must resolve the case immediately upon receiving the complete records. No motion for reconsideration is entertained under this track.

Expedited preliminary investigation

This generally applies to offenses punishable by one year and one day up to six years that fall exclusively within first-level court jurisdiction.

The assisting prosecutor initially evaluates form and completeness. If case build-up is required, the rules provide a 20-calendar-day period for it. If a hearing is necessary, the respondent is directed to submit a counter-affidavit. No reply or rejoinder is ordinarily allowed, although the prosecutor may conduct a clarificatory hearing.

After docketing and any case build-up, the investigating prosecutor has 20 calendar days from receipt of the complete records to resolve the case. An aggrieved party may move for reconsideration within 10 calendar days from receipt of the resolution.

Regular preliminary investigation

This applies to offenses carrying at least six years and one day and to cases that are legally cognizable by Regional Trial Courts, including cybercrime cases.

The respondent must receive the complaint and supporting evidence and ordinarily has at least 10 days from receipt of the subpoena to submit a counter-affidavit. The prosecutor may call a clarificatory hearing and, when necessary, require a reply and rejoinder.

The investigating prosecutor generally has 60 calendar days from assignment to resolve the complaint, with a maximum 30-day extension for specified complex situations. A motion for reconsideration must be filed within 15 days from receipt of the resolution.

These are prosecution-office timelines, not guarantees that the entire criminal case will finish within those periods. Incomplete evidence, service problems, case build-up, motions, review, court proceedings, and appeals can extend the process.

The governing issuances are DOJ Department Circular No. 015, series of 2024 and DOJ Department Circular No. 028, series of 2024. The Supreme Court upheld the DOJ’s authority to issue the 2024 preliminary-investigation rules in Meking v. Remulla.

Filing deadlines and prescription

Do not delay. Estafa’s prescriptive period depends on the penalty prescribed by law, which in turn may depend on the amount, the particular paragraph of Article 315, use of ICT, and any qualifying circumstances.

Under Articles 90 and 91 of the Revised Penal Code:

crimes punishable by arresto mayor generally prescribe in five years;
those punishable by a correctional penalty generally prescribe in 10 years;
those punishable by other afflictive penalties generally prescribe in 15 years; and
those punishable by reclusion temporal or reclusion perpetua generally prescribe in 20 years.

The period ordinarily runs from discovery by the offended party, authorities, or their agents and is interrupted when the legally recognized proceedings are instituted. Special-law offenses such as BP 22 can have different periods and interruption rules.

Never calculate prescription from the amount alone. Seek immediate legal advice when several years have passed, the discovery date is disputed, the offender was outside the Philippines, proceedings were previously dismissed, or a bad check or special law is involved.

Common mistakes that weaken a complaint

Treating nonpayment or business failure as automatic proof of criminal fraud.
Failing to identify the false statement that induced the payment.
Omitting where an essential element occurred.
Filing in the location most convenient to the complainant without checking venue.
Giving only a total loss without transaction-by-transaction details.
Naming company officers solely because of their positions, without stating their personal participation.
Attaching cropped screenshots while deleting the source conversations or device data.
Omitting the respondent’s last known address, preventing service of subpoena.
Failing to prove receipt of a demand or notice of dishonor.
Waiting for a platform account to disappear before requesting investigative help.
Assuming an affidavit of desistance or repayment automatically erases criminal liability.
Posting accusations, private information, or threats online instead of preserving evidence.
Missing the 10-day or 15-day reconsideration period after an adverse resolution.

When legal help is urgent

Consult a Philippine lawyer immediately when:

the prescriptive period may be close;
the loss is substantial or involves many transactions or victims;
online accounts, cryptocurrency, overseas actors, or mule accounts are involved;
the respondent’s identity or location is unknown;
a check has been dishonored and written notice has not been properly served;
the parties signed a settlement, novation, waiver, or affidavit of desistance;
the transaction may instead involve securities, illegal recruitment, falsification, cybercrime, or corporate liability;
the prosecutor dismisses the complaint or issues an adverse resolution;
the suspect threatens a witness, destroys evidence, or continues taking money; or
you must choose between, coordinate, or reserve criminal and civil remedies.

A lawyer is not legally required merely to submit a complaint-affidavit, but professional review can prevent a fatal error in the charge, venue, evidence, or deadline. Qualified individuals may seek advice from the Public Attorney’s Office or contact the Integrated Bar of the Philippines legal-aid service.

Frequently asked questions

Can I file even if I know only the scammer’s username or account number?

You can report the incident to the PNP or NBI and provide every available identifier. Law enforcement may need lawful process to obtain subscriber or account information. A prosecutor will still need evidence linking an identifiable person to the offense before a sustainable Information can be filed.

Is a demand letter always required?

No. It is not a universal element of estafa. It can nevertheless prove failure to account, establish the respondent’s response, and support an inference of conversion. Written notice and proof of receipt are particularly important when a dishonored check is involved.

Does repayment automatically dismiss estafa?

No. Estafa is a public offense, and compromise, repayment, or desistance does not automatically extinguish criminal liability. Payment may satisfy or reduce civil liability and may affect the evidence or other legal consequences, depending on when and why it was made.

Can I recover my money through the criminal case?

Generally, the civil action to recover liability arising from the offense is deemed instituted with the criminal action unless it was waived, reserved, or filed earlier. Recovery is not guaranteed, and a separate contractual or independent civil claim may require different proof. Tell the prosecutor and your lawyer about any civil case, demand, settlement, insurance claim, or prior payment.

Can I file directly in court?

The usual current route is to file the complaint-affidavit with the proper prosecution office under the DOJ-NPS investigation rules. If probable cause and the required evidentiary standard are established, the prosecutor files the Information in the appropriate court. Warrantless-arrest cases follow the separate inquest process.

What if the prosecutor dismisses the complaint?

Read the resolution immediately. The available remedy and deadline depend on whether the case underwent summary, expedited, or regular preliminary investigation. Summary-investigation resolutions do not allow reconsideration under DC 028; expedited cases allow 10 calendar days; regular preliminary-investigation cases allow 15 days. Further review may be available in qualifying cases under DOJ rules, so obtain counsel without waiting.

How strong must the evidence be at filing?

The current DOJ standard is prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction. The prosecutor assesses whether the evidence is admissible, credible, preservable, capable of proving every element, and sufficient—if uncontroverted—to support conviction beyond reasonable doubt. A detailed accusation unsupported by trial-usable evidence may be dismissed.

Official references

This article provides general legal information, not legal advice or an assessment of any specific complaint. The proper charge, venue, evidence, procedure, and deadline depend on the complete facts and documents. Laws, rules, and official guidance were checked through August 1, 2026.