Tips and tricks on how to prove fraud 100%

Collection of evidence

Fraud is dangerous because the criminal obtains money or other material assets by deception, and it is extremely difficult to prove this fact.
The easiest way to get your funds back is if the borrower agreed to write a receipt. If there is no documentary evidence of the transfer of funds, then it is necessary to look for another way to convince law enforcement agencies of falsification and deception on the part of the accused. Modern technologies open up broad prospects for Russians. Evidence can be obtained in various ways, without the need for a receipt. The investigative authorities will take into account the fact obtained through SMS messages, email correspondence, audio or video recordings

It is important not only to record the fact of communication with the attacker, but also to force him to admit:

• presence and amount of debt;
• the fact of deliberate deception of money;
• return deadlines.

A fairly common way to deal with criminals is to contact collection agencies. These private organizations will try to repay the debt by any means, but we must remember that their actions also do not always meet the standards of the current legislative framework.

Today, fraud can be classified according to the nature and composition of the offense. Among the most common options are Internet scams, telephone scams, street scams, etc.

What is a receipt?

A receipt is a written document confirming the fact of transfer and receipt of money or material assets, as well as the grounds for such actions. A receipt is written in the case of oral agreements, and confirms that the parties to such an oral agreement have fulfilled their obligations.

The receipt may not be notarized. To protect yourself, when transferring and receiving money, you can invite witnesses who will also write on the receipt that they were present during the transfer and receipt of money, and also know why the money was transferred.

How to prove fraud without a receipt, and is it necessary to do so?

And if he categorically denies receiving funds, all that remains is to trace the path of the illegally appropriated money. It is clear that a small amount of money cannot be traced. But with a big one it’s much easier. Surely the scammer used the funds received to purchase something valuable, such as a car, real estate, travel, etc. Most likely, he told you about this. Therefore, as soon as you learn from the investigator that the fraudster does not admit to receiving money, you should ask the investigator to check the recent acquisitions of the fraudster and his close relatives.

What if the receipt was related to the execution of the transaction?

When making oral transactions, receipts are often issued confirming receipt of money for a product or service. The most common fraud in such cases is denial of receipt of funds.

Again, in order to be able to punish the fraudster, you need to oblige your partners to indicate in the receipt the purpose of the funds received. Otherwise, the fraudster can say that this is a loan, return the money and demand the property back. Or that this money relates to a completely different transaction altogether.

But the law in this case is on the side of bona fide counterparties. A receipt is recognized as adequate confirmation of receipt of money even in those transactions where the law prohibits cash payments. For example, between legal entities.

Features of fraud in business activities

• Intentional excess by a manager of permissible capabilities, which consists in signing documents that he is not authorized to endorse or when the conditions of the internal company environment do not allow this to be done, because the obligations cannot be implemented.
• Drawing up an agreement containing in the text features that exempt the entrepreneur from performing duties on pseudo-legal grounds.
• Attribution of work or services not actually performed, or goods and components not actually supplied.
• Fraud in obtaining a loan from a financial institution without valid collateral or at an unreasonably low interest rate.
• Providing loans with hidden fees that significantly worsen official conditions.

Fraud by the defendant on the receipt

Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation defines fraud as the theft of someone else's property, including money, committed by deception or abuse of trust. Thus, the mere fact of taking someone else’s money is not a crime; it is necessary to establish signs of deception or abuse of trust in the actions of the debtor.

When making a loan between citizens, the following actions are performed, which may be important for qualifying fraud:

• all essential terms of the loan are agreed upon - the amount of funds, the transfer procedure (cash or non-cash payment), the repayment period, the amount of interest for the use of borrowed funds;
• agreements of the parties are formalized in the form of an agreement or receipt signed by both parties (if the receipt contains all the essential terms of the loan, it has the force of an agreement);
• For the legal relationship of a loan to arise, the funds must actually be transferred to the borrower.

Deception or breach of trust can be detected at any stage of the loan relationship, including in preparation for the transfer of funds. In this case, the borrower’s illegal actions should be aimed at a deliberate reluctance to repay the debt.

Let's consider typical situations when it is possible to establish a potential risk of fraud when applying for a loan using a receipt:

• the borrower agrees to any terms of the loan, including obviously high interest rates with a short repayment period;
• if, when transferring funds, the borrower asks to issue a receipt to another person not related to the loan;
• if the borrower convinces to do without a receipt, citing friendly or friendly relations.

These facts cannot clearly indicate potential fraud, but they create additional risk for the lender.

The prosecution’s argument that the defendant’s intent to steal someone else’s property through fraud is seen in the fact that the defendant had the opportunity to return to the victim the money received as a loan from the latter, but did not return it, was refuted by the court by the fact that the failure of the debtor to fulfill obligations under a civil contract provides only civil liability.

The fact of the defendant’s alienation of property belonging to him, signs of his fictitious or deliberate bankruptcy, and the defendant’s repeated change of place of residence do not indicate the presence of fraud in the defendant’s actions and do not relate to the subject of proof in a criminal case.

Long-term financial relationships, in which the creditor lent money to the defendant, do not indicate the defendant’s direct intent to steal and abuse of the victim’s trust.

The fact of the transfer of funds to the victims of the defendant, as well as the latter’s ability to repay the debt within the period established by the loan agreement, in the absence of evidence of intent to steal these funds before their transfer, cannot indicate the fraudulent actions of the defendant.

The person is acquitted of the charge of committing a crime under Part 4 of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, on the basis of the absence of this crime in his actions.

The preliminary investigation authorities accuse L. of committing fraud, that is, the theft of someone else’s property through abuse of trust, committed on an especially large scale, namely that he, guided by a selfish motive, for the purpose of illegal enrichment, having the intent to steal someone else’s property on an especially large scale through abuse of trust, at a time not established by the investigation, but no later than November 24, 2010, guided by the criminal motivation described above, being in a place not established by the investigation, he developed a criminal plan, choosing funds as the object of his future criminal attacks, previously belonging to his acquaintance A. So, L., having information that A. has a significant amount of money, assumed, using a trusting relationship with the latter, which arose as a result of long-term friendly relations, as well as previously existing conflict-free financial relations with him, then there is, abusing the trust of the latter, to ask A. for a loan of money for business development, while knowingly not intending to subsequently take actions to return the money received as a loan, indicating at the same time in order to make his actions convincing and misleading A. indicative return period. Further, having convinced A. to transfer funds to him, continuing to abuse A.’s trust, L. intended to receive these funds from him, while assuring A. of their subsequent return, but subsequently, having the financial ability to return the debt, do not return the funds , and will dispose of the funds stolen in this way at his own discretion. At the same time, L. admitted that in order to give the legitimacy of his actions and mislead A., if necessary, he would write a promissory note for the amount of money received from A. In addition, L., in order to avoid property penalties as a result of A.’s actions, when contacting law enforcement agencies, which could be applied to property belonging to him, assumed in this case to make transactions to alienate this property in favor of third parties.

Thus, realizing his criminal intentions aimed at stealing funds on an especially large scale belonging to A., acting in accordance with a previously developed criminal plan, L. during the period no earlier than January 1, 2010 and no later than November 24, 2010, the exact the time was not established by the investigation, being in a place not established by the investigation, using a trusting relationship with A. that arose as a result of long-term friendly relations, as well as previously existing conflict-free financial relations with him, assuming that, given his positive financial reputation, A. will agree to have financial relationship with him, asked A. to borrow money to invest in business, to which the latter agreed. As a result, between L. and A., during the specified period of time, a joint agreement was reached on the transfer of funds by the latter to the former with their subsequent return. At the same time, L. obviously did not intend to return this amount of money to A., but had the goal of stealing it and disposing of it at his own discretion.

Further, acting in continuation of the implementation of his criminal intentions aimed at stealing funds belonging to A., L., abusing A.’s trust, received funds from A. on November 24, 2010, obliging to return the said amount of funds by November 24 2012, having written, in order to convince his actions and give them a legal appearance, a receipt for the receipt of the specified amount of money. L. subsequently disposed of the funds stolen in this way, under circumstances not established by the investigation, at his own discretion.

Further, acting in continuation of the implementation of his criminal intentions aimed at stealing funds belonging to A., L., abusing A.’s trust, on September 6, 2011 received money from A., pledging to return them, writing in order to convince his actions and giving them the legal appearance of a receipt for the receipt of the specified amount of funds. L. subsequently disposed of the funds stolen in this way, under circumstances not established by the investigation, at his own discretion.

Subsequently, L. did not partially or fully return the funds, having the financial ability to do so, since according to research certificate No. 96 dated December 24, 2021, for the period from August 11, 2011 to May 22, 2014, he received temporary financial assistance from the founder as a return cash.

At the same time, in fulfillment of his criminal intent in terms of concealing property that could be used to recover the amount of debt in favor of A., L., on the basis of a gift agreement dated September 10, 2015, re-registered his ownership of a land plot with an area of ​​1490 m² to his mother F., which was registered in her name on September 22, 2015.

Also, in fulfillment of his criminal intent in terms of concealing property that could be used to collect the amount of debt in favor of A., L., on the basis of a gift agreement dated September 10, 2015, re-registered his ownership of a residential building with an area of ​​484 m² to his mother F ., which was registered in her name on September 22, 2015.

Thus, L. is accused by the preliminary investigation authorities of stealing funds belonging to A. on an especially large scale through abuse of trust.

The court, on the basis of the examined evidence presented by the prosecution, came to the conclusion that the conclusions of the preliminary investigation about the proof of L.’s guilt in committing fraud by abuse of A.’s trust are probabilistic in nature and do not meet the requirements of admissibility, since they are based not on evidence, but on assumptions, not being means of proof.

The court's analysis of the evidence in the case allowed us to come to the conclusion that the prosecution did not present indisputable evidence clearly indicating that the defendant L. committed fraud against A., as well as indicating that he intentionally stole property the victim gained his trust and, abusing this trust, took possession of the latter’s funds, since all of the above evidence presented by the prosecution, including the testimony of the victim, prosecution and defense witnesses, as well as expert opinions, the victim’s statement, physical evidence, a study of financial and economic activities the defendant and his companies and other documents do not incriminate L. of committing the act accused of him, but only indicate that during the period of time indicated by the victim and witnesses, a loan agreement was concluded and implemented between A. and L., which provided for only one condition - return the specified amount no later than November 24, 2012. Upon the deadline for the return of these funds, A., until contacting law enforcement agencies on June 8, 2021, did not report the theft of funds committed from him, but exercised his right to judicial protection in civil proceedings, on the basis of the specified loan agreement with L. dated 24 October 2011, having applied in 2015 to the Kuzminsky District Court of Moscow with a claim against L. to collect the debt on the receipt.

By the decision of the Kuzminsky District Court of Moscow dated October 12, 2015, which entered into force on March 22, 2021, A.’s claims against L. for the recovery of funds under the loan agreement were satisfied.

Further, A., exercising his right to protection in civil proceedings in accordance with the requirements of Art. 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, filed a claim with the Kuzminsky District Court of Moscow against L. for the recovery of interest from the latter for the use of other people’s funds for the last three years before the date of filing the claim in court. By the decision of the Kuzminsky District Court dated May 25, 2021, these demands of the victim were also satisfied.

In addition, from the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region dated March 23, 2021, it follows that A. appealed to the arbitration court with an application to declare L. insolvent (bankrupt) and the ruling of the Moscow Arbitration Court dated June 3, 2021, this application was accepted for proceedings, the case was subsequently transferred to the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region for jurisdiction and by the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region dated September 8, 2017, a bankruptcy procedure was introduced in relation to the debtor L. - restructuring of the citizen’s debts. By the indicated decision of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region dated March 23, 2021, L. was declared insolvent (bankrupt) and a bankruptcy procedure for a citizen was introduced against him - the sale of property. Based on the ruling of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region dated March 13, 2019, the deadline for the sale of property was extended until September 19, 2021, A.’s monetary claims were included in the third priority of creditors.

The preliminary investigation authorities did not provide sufficient and convincing evidence that L., receiving funds from A., did not intend to fulfill his obligations related to the conditions for transferring to him the funds specified in the receipt, and that he had intent to steal the victim's money.

According to the testimony of the victim A., the money was taken by the defendant to develop the business, and the loan agreement was secured by the guarantee of the second participant in the company D., against whom the victim does not bring charges of fraud, since he did not lose trust in him until the death of the latter. In addition, L. periodically over a long period of time borrowed money from him for various personal needs of his family, while the loans were never formalized and L. fulfilled his obligations, regularly returning these loans to A. himself or through employees of his company. A. also confirmed that L. has always been a conscientious borrower.

The defense witnesses questioned at the trial confirmed the fact that at one time or another they were personally present and saw how L. met with A. and transferred significant amounts of cash into his hands.

Assessing all the above testimonies of defense witnesses, the court believes that they do not confirm the fact that L. returned the amount of debt to the victim under the loan agreement dated November 24, 2011, since none of the defense witnesses indicates that the money was returned specifically under the specified agreement, and documents, confirming L.’s fulfillment of obligations under this agreement was not presented, however, the testimony of defense witnesses confirms the existence of a long-term financial relationship between A. and L., within the framework of which A. lent money to the defendant, including at interest for business development, that is, he wanted to receive income from the funds invested in the defendant’s business, which was profitable until a certain time.

The prosecution's arguments that L. knew in advance that he was not going to repay the money are not supported by anything; there is no evidence that L. had a criminal intent to steal money when receiving loans, nor was there any evidence presented that the intent was not to repay the funds received arose from L. before they were received.

In accordance with paragraph 3 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated November 30, 2017 No. 48 “On judicial practice in cases of fraud, misappropriation and embezzlement,” abuse of trust in fraud consists of using, for personal gain, a trust relationship with the owner of property or another person authorized make decisions on the transfer of this property to third parties. Trust can be conditioned by various circumstances, for example, the official position of a person or his personal relationship with the victim. Abuse of trust also occurs in cases where a person assumes obligations when he obviously has no intention of fulfilling them for the purpose of gratuitously using someone else’s property for his own benefit or for the benefit of third parties or acquiring the right to it. However, the court did not establish such circumstances indicating that L. obviously did not intend to repay the debt and, having received the funds, disposed of them at his own discretion.

An analysis of certificates and extracts from the Unified State Legal Entity allows the court to conclude that during the period of receiving funds from A. under the loan agreement dated November 24, 2011, he conducted active financial and economic activities and deposited large sums of money into company accounts. This evidence from the prosecution does not refute L.’s testimony that the funds received from A. were used by him to develop his business. These circumstances contradict the conclusions of the investigation about the use by L. of the funds received from A. under the loan agreement dated November 24, 2011 at his own discretion, as well as the fact that, by accepting obligations to use the funds received as a loan for business development and return subsequently, these funds with interest, L. obviously did not intend to fulfill them, with the goal of turning these funds into his favor free of charge.

The prosecution's assertion that the receipt for receipt of funds from A. and the loan agreement with the latter were drawn up by L. in fulfillment of his criminal intentions aimed at stealing funds belonging to A., in order to convince his actions and give them a lawful appearance, contradict the requirements of Art. 808 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which stipulates that a loan agreement between citizens must be concluded in writing, if its amount exceeds ten thousand rubles, a receipt from the borrower or another document certifying the transfer of a certain amount of money to him by the lender may be presented in confirmation of the loan agreement and its terms or a certain number of things. Drawing up A. and. L. of these documents does not indicate the intention of the parties to avoid liability for their obligations.

The fact that L. completed transactions in September 2015 for the alienation of two residential buildings, two plots of land and an apartment owned by him does not indicate the presence in L.’s actions of a crime (fraud) committed in the period from January 1, 2010 to January 14 2011, and cannot indicate that the defendant had criminal intent to steal property received from the victim in 2011. The conclusions of the investigation that these actions were committed by L. in order to avoid property penalties from A. when contacting law enforcement agencies, which could have been applied to property belonging to L., also do not correspond to reality, since A. only contacted law enforcement agencies 8 June 2021, and do not indicate the presence of fraud in the actions of the defendant.

The prosecution's argument that the defendant's intent to steal other people's property through fraud is seen in the fact that L. had the opportunity to return to A. the money received from the latter as a loan, since, according to certificates on the study of financial and economic documents of a closed joint-stock company, the defendant received as the return of borrowed funds from a closed joint-stock company in the amount of several million rubles, but did not repay A.’s debt, in the opinion of the court, is not justified, since L.’s failure to fulfill obligations under a civil contract, which was established during the trial, provides for civil liability (Articles 395, 405 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), implemented through the decision of the Kuzminsky District Court of Moscow dated October 12, 2015, by which funds were recovered from the borrower in favor of A., on whose initiative the bankruptcy procedure of L was subsequently initiated . in the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region and the procedure for the sale of the debtor’s property is currently underway, as well as by the decision of the Kuzminsky District Court of Moscow dated May 25, 2021, A.’s claims were satisfied and a penalty was collected from L. for the use of other people’s funds.

In connection with the above, analyzing all the above evidence, the court comes to the conclusion that all relationships between the defendant and the victim related to the loan agreement dated November 24, 2011 are exclusively of a civil nature and the existence of a civil transaction between L. and A. is excluded theft of funds through breach of trust.

Due to the fact that, by virtue of Art. 15 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the court is not a criminal prosecution body and cannot act on the side of the prosecution or defense, but creates the necessary conditions for the parties to fulfill their procedural duties and exercises the rights granted to them, the court has taken all measures provided for by law to summon to court hearings the persons specified in list of those subject to subpoena, and the court believes that all possibilities for obtaining and providing evidence by the parties have been exhausted.

In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 14 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a crime is recognized as a socially dangerous act committed guilty of guilt, prohibited by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation under threat of punishment.

Disposition part 4 art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes liability, among other things, for theft by a person of someone else’s property through abuse of trust on an especially large scale. At the same time, the established circumstances of L. receiving money from the victim A., the goals and motives of his actions allow the court to come to the conclusion that there were no signs of fraud in the defendant’s actions. The court, based on the results of an examination of all the evidence presented by the parties, established that the funds were received by L. from the victim in the course of a civil transaction concluded between them, on the basis of a loan agreement concluded between them, the consequences of non-fulfillment of which were resolved by making decisions by the Kuzminsky District Court of Moscow , by which funds and interest for the use of funds were recovered from L., as well as by the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region, which declared L. bankrupt and introduced bankruptcy proceedings.

The court believes that, in accordance with Art. 302 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, a conviction cannot be based on assumptions, and all doubts about the guilt of the accused that cannot be eliminated are interpreted in his favor, as provided for in Art. 49 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Art. 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation on the presumption of innocence.

Due to the fact that during the judicial investigation, on the basis of the examined evidence, it was not reliably established that in L.’s actions there was a crime under Part 4 of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, that is, fraud, namely theft by abuse of trust of A. of funds in an especially large amount belonging to the latter, L. is subject to acquittal on charges of committing a crime under Part 4 of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, on the basis of the absence of this crime in his actions.

The Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Second Court of Cassation, in a cassation ruling dated May 19, 2020, indicated that in accordance with the legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, set out in the ruling dated January 29, 2009 No. 61-O-O, criminal liability for fraud , committed under the guise of a lawful civil transaction, is possible only if it is proven that, in concluding such a transaction, the person acted intentionally, pursuing the goal of stealing property or acquiring the right to someone else’s property. In this case, the criminal intent of the person is included in the subject of proof in a criminal case.

Having checked and assessed the evidence collected in the case, the court of first instance came to a reasonable conclusion that the prosecution’s arguments about L.’s criminal intent to steal A.’s money before receiving it under the loan agreement dated October 24, 2011 during the judicial investigation were not found confirmation and, in essence, are based on assumptions that, by virtue of Part 4 of Art. 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation exclude the decision in the case of a guilty verdict.

The fact of transferring funds to A. to the acquitted person, as well as the latter’s ability to repay the debt within the period established by the loan agreement, were not refuted by the court, however, these circumstances themselves, in the absence of evidence of intent to steal these funds before their transfer, cannot indicate fraudulent actions acquitted.

Other circumstances referred to by the author of the complaint (L.’s execution of transactions for the alienation of property belonging to him, signs of his fictitious or deliberate bankruptcy, repeated changes of the justified place of residence) are not related to the act of which L. was accused, which took place in 2010 —2011.

Verdict of the Cheryomushkinsky District Court of Moscow dated October 14, 2019 in case No. 1-358/19.

Legal advice

Committed fraudulent actions at the request of the head of the department. The damage to the employer's company amounted to about 300,000 rubles. Will having children be a mitigating factor?

Yes, the presence of young children is a mitigating circumstance, according to Art. 61 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. You can also voluntarily come to the police and admit your guilt. Active repentance will also be the basis for release from liability.

The social worker gained the trust of the grandmother, and she transferred the apartment to her through a deed of gift. Now the social worker is kicking the grandmother out onto the street. Can such actions be considered fraud and how to cancel the deed of gift?

Yes, this is a fact of fraud based on abuse of trust of the victim. You need to contact the police with a statement. If the grandmother has health problems (for example, with memory), this will also help win the case and invalidate the contract on the basis that the donor was incompetent.

How to apply

There is no established form that the appeal must comply with in criminal procedure legislation. At the same time, practice and norms regulating the procedure for considering reports of crimes have developed approximate criteria that statements of this nature must meet:

1. The name of the police department, indicating its chief. In the duty room of any public office there is a stand on which there are sample statements intended for use by citizens as examples. If, however, there is no such stand, you can ask the police officer on duty for the name and surname of the head of the department.
2. Applicant details – full name, place of residence (actual), telephone number.
3. The essence of the appeal. Here are all the important circumstances that you regard as fraud. That is, the so-called objective side of the crime must be indicated - who (if known), what they did, what damage, where and when the events occurred.
4. Evidence – information from witnesses, written or other information media that can be used to confirm what you have written.
5. Indication of a warning about liability for knowingly false denunciation under Art. 306 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
6. Signature, number.
7. List of attached documents.

From theory to practice

However, in practice, proposals from private investors turn out to be a trap for borrowers. Enterprising businessmen try to recruit a person for an advance payment literally at the very first communication. Usually they start by imposing intermediary services to obtain an extract from the credit history. It turns out quite quickly that the lender still needs the borrower’s credit history. The average price for a statement from “generous” investors is 600-800 rubles, sometimes they ask for 2000 rubles. Those who send the requested amount are left without a statement or credit.

The second way online scammers make money is by luring out money for a bank transfer of a promised loan. Most ad authors live not in Moscow, but in Siberia or St. Petersburg. They cannot come to the capital for a transaction, which is supposedly why they need money to send the transfer.

Banks do indeed charge a fee for transferring money. Sometimes you even have to spend money on transfers between branches of one financial institution. But no real investor will ask to transfer the commission in advance. He will simply take into account all the costs associated with applying for a loan and include them in the annual percentage.

Some so-called creditors go even further: they ask to transfer money to them for loan insurance and, of course, in the form of an advance payment. Moreover, the requested amount can reach 10% of the total loan.

Which law enforcement agencies should you contact in case of fraud?

If a person has become a victim of fraud, then you should immediately contact the following government agencies:

1. Police. This government agency will be responsible for identifying violators, as well as searching for and capturing them. This body will prove the criminal’s involvement in this or that fraud.
2. Prosecutor's office. It will connect if the process suddenly reaches a dead end. The prosecutor's office will assist the police by all means in exposing the criminals.
3. Court. Here the process of exposing and assigning a term or fine for the offense committed is carried out.

It is worth remembering that a fine is issued only if the person has not committed major fraud.

How to prove the fact of fraud and the involvement of the perpetrators

Questions arise: fraud on trust, how to prove it? How to prove fraud using a receipt? How to properly prove fraud without a receipt? How to properly prove intent in fraud?

First you need to try to come to an agreement peacefully, and not run to contact law enforcement agencies. In most cases, debtors ask for a deferment; in this situation, you will be able to reach an agreement. When the debtor does not make contact, you should contact the relevant authorities.

If the fraudulent borrower is not hiding, then communication with him can be recorded on audio or video. In it, the suspect must clearly articulate that he actually committed any actions against you.

During the conversation the following phrases should be spoken:

1. Amount of debt.
2. The purpose to which the borrower is subordinate.
3. Deadline for returning money.

The more information is reflected in the recorded conversation, the easier it will be for law enforcement agencies to prove the fact of a crime. This issue most often becomes difficult due to the fact that victims of scammers are not prepared for such an outcome of events and do not leave the necessary evidence that could prove the crime.

Most often, scammers rely on the victim’s fear and take advantage of this situation. The attackers understand perfectly well that the victim is not ready for such turns of events and brazenly carry out their machinations.

In order to prove a crime, you need to collect evidence.

Article 74 lists what information may be evidence:

1. Testimony of a suspected person. No one is obliged to testify against themselves. But confessions may appear if you want to reduce your sentence, since a sincere confession provides many advantages.
2. Testimony from a victim of fraud. Victims of deception by unscrupulous people should think in advance about how the facts that relate to the crime committed against them will be presented. Words must coincide with real events.
3. Physical evidence of fraud. These are, as a rule, funds that are directly related to the crime. They can be of different kinds: starting from any thing and ending with material means. Items such as a telephone, voice recorder, notepad, and receipt help the investigation.

It is easy to become a victim, but it is much more difficult to prove the involvement of one or another person. To win these types of cases, you need to use the help of a specialized lawyer, look for as much material evidence as possible, or entrust the case to the police.

Repayment of debt without a receipt if there is evidence

Finally, you managed to obtain the necessary evidence, and now you need to act. First, go to the police and write a statement to initiate a criminal case for fraud.

If we refer to Art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it says that fraudulent actions include the theft of funds through abuse of trust or deception of a person. Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation No. 736 dated August 29, 2014 established the procedure for filing and resolving applications.

Next, the application is considered by officials and a decision is made to initiate a criminal case (or to refuse to initiate a case). If a negative decision is made during the consideration of the application, then the applicant must be sent a decision to refuse to initiate a criminal case within three days; you have the right to appeal it.

Although, having in hand a refusal to initiate a criminal case, the applicant is still endowed with the legal right to file a civil lawsuit in court in order to return his money. In addition, if the refusal was caused by a lack of information about the amount of the debt, but the fact that the culprit acknowledged the debt is present, this circumstance can play the role of evidence in civil proceedings. And the victim of fraudulent actions no longer needs to seek the initiation of a criminal case.

You must understand that initiating a criminal case in such cases is a rare occurrence, but in practice it does happen. And if luck smiles on you, then this will greatly simplify the solution to the problem. Art. 44 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation states that within the framework of a criminal case, the victim may file a civil claim before the completion of the judicial investigation. In this case, the applicant does not have to pay the state fee, which in a regular civil claim is:

Where to apply

Before considering this issue, we draw the attention of readers to the fact that the application must be submitted as quickly as possible, immediately after you discover a violation of your rights, even if you are not sure of the qualifications of the offense.

So, you can submit your application:

1. To the territorial police department at the place where the crime was committed. If there were several episodes of illegal actions, choose the area where the last crime or the majority of those committed was committed. You can submit an application in person or through the official website of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Based on practice, they will begin consideration faster if you submit your application in person to the duty station. There, your written request must be registered in the message book and you must be given a so-called coupon indicating the assigned number. Under no circumstances refuse to take this ticket, keep it carefully - in case of red tape and negligence on the part of the police, this document will be needed.
2. To the prosecutor's office. As a general rule, such applications are not submitted to this organization. But, by virtue of the job descriptions of this department, its employees are obliged to accept and register any application from citizens. Therefore, your statement regarding fraud will be accepted by the prosecutor’s office and sent to the police department within three days, with instructions to conduct a procedural check. The disadvantage of contacting the prosecutor's office can be considered, taking into account the referral under jurisdiction, a longer period of consideration (sometimes this is very important, the clock can count). One of the advantages is the unconditional implementation of the instructions of prosecutors by police officers, so there is a high probability that the consideration of an application received from the prosecutor’s office will be treated more carefully and promptly.

Please note that if damage is caused as a result of fraudulent actions on the part of representatives of any legal entities, you can, in parallel with the statement of crime, submit to the district prosecutor's office an application for the need to check the activities of the organization in general.

How to prove fraud without a receipt

Often, when we trust someone, we lend money and do not ask for a receipt. It may happen that our trust is abused, and after borrowing money they are not going to return the money or material assets taken. How to get a refund in this case?

Proving fraud without a receipt is not easy, but it is possible. Witnesses who were present at the transaction and are ready to give evidence or set it out in detail in writing will help us. Considering each individual case of fraud, we can say that there is always a chance of success.

If a large sum of money was borrowed, it was probably used for a large acquisition, which can be proven by sending requests to the relevant authorities - cadastral registers, tax office, etc.

It is also necessary to attach information about the property of the debtor’s relatives if, after taking out a cash loan, they made large purchases. In this case, the property of the debtor and his relatives can be used to pay off the debt. As we can see, it is possible to repay the debt with a little effort.

Peace negotiations

First of all, the most reasonable way is to try to reach an agreement peacefully. Perhaps the person has forgotten about the obligations he has accepted, is experiencing difficulties and is embarrassed to talk about them. You can contact the debtor, find out all the circumstances and secure, at a minimum, a promise to repay the monetary debt.

It would be a good idea to confirm this promise with a receipt, albeit late, indicating a clear deadline for returning the money. It is necessary to convey information that if the issue is refused to be resolved amicably, criminal prosecution will be carried out. In most cases, the issue can be resolved in this way, peacefully.

Filing a police report

If peace negotiations do not bring the desired result, what to do and how to prove fraud? In this case, you must contact the police.

The submitted application must detail:

• information about the borrower;
• the exact amount of debt and the purpose for taking it out;
• agreed return periods;
• witness statements;
• receipt, if available.

The application can be written when the loan repayment period has expired. The expiration date for the return period is indicated in the receipt.

It is important to provide the collected documents to the police. Based on the statement you wrote, investigative measures will be taken to establish the crime

If you are refused to initiate a criminal case, request a written refusal, and you can only apply to the court with it. You can also write a written claim, enter an incoming number and, again, go to court with this document. We'll talk about this below.

If your application is not put into action, or the paperwork is delayed, you should contact higher authorities or write a complaint to the supervisor of the employee who accepted the application. This way things will move faster.

Collection of evidence

When writing an application, you must provide evidence that the transaction was completed at all, money or valuables were transferred. Confirmation is provided by eyewitness accounts, negotiations and correspondence with the debtor (dictaphone recordings, screenshots of messages, emails, call details certified by the telecom operator’s office) regarding the transaction being made. The information must contain data on the amount, terms of return, place and time of transfer of money. Documents are provided in a common file and are registered as attachments when your application is accepted.

Going to court

Going to court is initiated after you have tried all preliminary measures to influence the debtor - peaceful negotiations, contacting the police. The court, as the final authority, will consider all the facts and hold the debtor accountable.

You will need all the documents prepared and collected during the pre-trial resolution of the issue - copies of statements, receipts, witness statements, correspondence, recordings of negotiations, details of calls and other evidence that the debtor’s obligations were not fulfilled in full.

Depending on the amount of this debt, a decision will be made to initiate proceedings for an administrative or criminal offense, and the debtor will be held accountable under the law for failure to fulfill obligations.

Liability for fraud

Fraud is a property crime, and its goal is to take possession of the victim's property or funds without resorting to covert or overt theft or violence. Key differences between fraud: deception and use of the victim’s trust for personal gain.

According to the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 48 of November 30, 2021, fraud may consist of providing false information and forged documents, concluding a transaction that the fraudster is obviously unable to complete, omission and concealment of significant data.

Note! The result of fraud is the voluntary transfer by the owner of property or rights to it to the fraudster, without impeding access to the property and rights to it.

The law provides for two types of liability for fraud, depending on the amount of “revenue” of the attackers:

• administrative – within 2.5 thousand rubles;
• criminal – the damage is caused in large amounts or the crime is related to a certain area of ​​activity.

Documents to be presented in court if your debt is not repaid

• statement;
• passport;
• proof;
• a certificate from the police confirming the refusal to open a case of fraud.

In your application, you must provide complete information about your case. You should note the amount lent, the step-by-step actions taken to repay the loan, and the conditions under which you repaid the funds. You must also explain why you gave the loan without asking for a receipt. If you wrote this statement to the police, then the employees will definitely conduct a conversation with the defaulter; if this does not work, then, most likely, they will open a case of fraud.

If you decide to file a lawsuit, in this case you need to do it according to the law until another 3 years have passed from the date of the loan.

And one moment. According to existing laws, if a document, in our case a receipt, was not drawn up according to the rules, then the case will not be won in court. The court has the right to declare this transaction invalid. Witness testimony, or more precisely, an oral agreement, will not be considered evidence.

When returning funds, a receipt is also issued.

Every person sometimes experiences difficult times in life. When you are asked to borrow a sum of money, be sure to think through all the consequences of such an action in advance. There are situations when the court will not be able to solve the problem. It seems like the case has been won, but your debtor doesn’t have a penny to his name. No method will help here, so be careful and try to understand the person before dealing with him.

There is no need to be good-natured and blindly believe in human honesty. Observe all the smallest formalities when drawing up the above-mentioned receipt. Also be careful when paying back the funds you borrow. Failure to comply with such basic rules may subsequently result in you having to pay twice.

What is evidence of loaning money?

If you have evidence of the transfer of money as a loan, then this is great news and good prospects for getting the money back even without a receipt, but what is evidence of the transfer of money as a loan? We list the possible options:

1. Correspondence with the debtor by email - correspondence via email can be notarized, which will be evidence of the transfer of money on debt. It will be necessary to involve an appropriate expert who will conduct an examination and confirm the reality of the correspondence between the borrower and the debtor.
2. Correspondence with the debtor on social networks - similarly with electronic correspondence via email, in the case of communication via social networks (VKontakte, Odnoklassniki, Moy Mir Mail.ru, Facebook, ...) you can attract an expert, as in the case of correspondence by email, who will conduct an examination confirming the authenticity of the correspondence and subsequently notarize it.
3. Correspondence via SMS - If you have SMS correspondence with the debtor, it must be copied to a personal computer and printed on paper. In order for this printout to have more weight in court, you must notarize the SMS correspondence with the debtor. Additionally, you can make a request to the mobile operator in order to establish the fact of information transfer between subscribers. But keep in mind, the defaulting debtor may claim that the phone with his SIM card was in use by another person, and he has nothing to do with the presented correspondence. Therefore, ideally, it is better to take care of obtaining several types of evidence.
4. Audio recording - If you managed to record a conversation with the debtor acknowledging the existence of a debt (its size, as well as confirming the timing of the return of money) using a voice recorder, then it is imperative to indicate under what circumstances the recording was made, by whom, when. These points are spelled out in Art. 77 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. A transcript in text form must be attached to the audio recording. The court may require expert confirmation that there are no traces of editing in the audio recording, as well as confirmation of the debtor’s voice, be prepared to provide the recording (be sure to leave a copy for yourself).

What if there is no such evidence? In this case, you should get them. How to do it? Use the following tips:

• Organize personal contact with the debtor and record communication with him, for example, on a voice recorder;
• An important nuance will be the recognition by the dishonest debtor of the debt itself and its size. It would be a good idea to fix the repayment terms and additional loan terms;
• Use modern technical means to record the debtor's confession. Evidence may include: correspondence via SMS, correspondence on social networks, voice recording;
• The more evidence you obtain of the existing debt, the higher the chances of its return. When considering such cases, the court evaluates the evidence in its entirety.

From the above, the question logically arises: the evidence has been obtained, how can we dispose of it further?

How to prove fraud without a receipt

It is much more difficult to repay the debt if the parties have not formalized the transfer of funds in writing. Even if there are long-standing friendly or friendly relations between the parties, it is recommended that the transfer of funds be carried out in the presence of witnesses (mutual friends, acquaintances, colleagues, etc.).

In addition, the following evidence may be presented to confirm the debt obligation:

• personal correspondence with the borrower, in which he directly or indirectly confirms the transfer of funds;
• documents confirming significant expenses of the borrower in the absence of his own funds (this indirect evidence may be important if there are other grounds for making claims);
• avoiding responding to a written claim or oral requests from the lender.

For any option of transferring funds as a loan, we recommend drawing up a written agreement or receipt. Using illegal methods of debt repayment may result in criminal liability for the lender himself.

Amount of damage for initiating a criminal case

Theft amount to initiate a criminal case 2018

What is the amount of theft to initiate a criminal case?

Thus, there will be no criminal liability for simple forms of fraud, theft, embezzlement or misappropriation of someone else’s property in the amount of less than 5 thousand rubles.

Legislators will replace it with an administrative one.

However, criminal liability will be established for petty theft or embezzlement committed repeatedly.

At the same time, repeated means theft committed repeatedly within a year in the amount of 1 thousand to 5 thousand rubles.

Minimum amount to initiate a criminal case

Theft of someone else's property is considered petty if the value of the stolen property does not exceed one minimum wage established by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

try to resolve the issue with the victim and the police so that it does not lead to the initiation of a criminal case.

Evaluate the lawyer's answer: This amount should not exceed 1000 rubles.

Amount of damage for initiating a criminal case

The amount of minimum damage caused to initiate a criminal case

“Less than a percentage of those under investigation are hiding, so there is no need to be afraid of releasing them on bail.

And there is no point in keeping those accused of economic crimes in jail at all. The maximum bail in criminal cases for serious and especially serious crimes is proposed to be set at 30 million rubles.

A list of amounts and definitions of the concepts “major damage”, “significant damage”, “especially large” are in Section VIII “Crimes in the Economic Sphere”, but specifically in Chapter.

Amount of damage to initiate a criminal case 2021 in Russia

At the same time, repeated means theft committed repeatedly within a year in the amount of 1 thousand to 5 thousand rubles.

158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation follows from the notes to Art. 7.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, which provides for liability for petty theft as an administrative offense.

The note sounds like this: “Note. Theft of someone else's property is considered petty if the value of the stolen property does not exceed one thousand rubles.

“Thus, up to 1,000 rubles is an administrative offense, over a criminal offense. As a result, the door was damaged.

I really need to find out. What is the minimum amount of damage to initiate a criminal case under Art. 158 and Art. 165 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation? Is it possible to get by with a fine under the Code of Administrative Offenses for petty theft and what will be its amount?

December 26, 07:14, question No. 33682 Igor,

Novosibirsk And my friend too.

Answer the question. 1) What is the minimum amount of damage when filing a statement with the police in case of fraud? Article 140.

Reasons and grounds for initiating a criminal case.

Areas and examples of evidence of fraudulent activities

In 2012, a number of articles differentiating liability for fraud were introduced into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

This is due to the specifics of certain types of activities and the emergence of new ways of committing crimes. The following legal norms were introduced:

• Article 159.1 fraud in the field of lending;
• Article 159.2 fraud in receiving payments;
• Article 159.3 fraud using electronic means of payment;
• Article 159.4 fraud in business activities (deleted);
• Article 159.5 insurance fraud;
• Article 159.6 fraud in the field of computer information.

1. Article 159.1 provides for criminal liability in relation to borrowers who provide the lender with knowingly false and unreliable information: fictitious constituent documents, agreements with a shell company, dummies, etc. Liability is based on deception. The presence of shell companies and fictitious commercial documents is not difficult to prove. It is necessary to conduct a small audit, examination, identify and interrogate witnesses.
2. Under Article 159.2, liability has been introduced for receiving various social payments and benefits using fictitious documents. Fraud is often committed in relation to pensions. False information about work experience or documents about fictitious disability are provided. Intent is proven by the testimony of witnesses, the fraudster himself, and various examinations.
3. Article 159.3 provides for liability for fraud in the field of electronic payments. These are telephone scammers who ask close relatives to deposit money to pay for the phone or make other payments. Bank card fraud is common. It is difficult to prove a crime, but it is possible with the help of testimony, examinations, videos and photographs.
4. Article 159.5 provides for liability for insurance fraud. For example, deception regarding the occurrence of an insured event. There are many known facts when an insured car is stolen and the property insured against fire burns down. An inspection is underway. If there was no theft, but the wrong property was burned, then this is a reason to initiate a case under Article 159-5 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. During the investigation process, any standard evidence is used: witness statements, photo and video recordings, etc.
5. Article 159.6 establishes liability in the field of computer information. The fraud is committed by entering, changing and erasing the victim's computer data. The information obtained in this way forms the completed crime. It can be proven with the help of video and photographic recordings or with the help of ordinary evidence: witness testimony, seizures, searches, inspection.

Entrepreneurial activity

Entrepreneurship is impossible without concluding agreements with business partners. A party to a transaction assumes obligations. If they are not fulfilled, the other party bears losses. The fact of causing harm is the subject of investigation . If it is proven that the entrepreneur had no intention of fulfilling his obligations, intent and corpus delicti are established.

When collecting evidence, the contract is examined for amendments. Through questioning witnesses and audits, the possibility of its implementation is established.

The totality of the collected evidence confirms criminal intentions and is the basis for criminal prosecution.

Proof of fraud

1. Investigate the signs of a crime, which the Criminal Code will help with. This is important when drawing up an application.
2. Various documents must be attached to the application, for example, payment receipts, a bank account statement, an agreement, a receipt stating that the money was lent, etc., everything that can be available in this case.
3. If the identity of the fraudster is established and the victim has the opportunity to meet with him, it is necessary to use a recording device for meetings, where conversations are secretly recorded. Moreover, one should deliberately initiate communication on the topic of lost property or fabricated documents. By provoking the interlocutor to clarify his actions, clarify some points, and make suggestions for a return. In this way, you can record not only the emotional reaction, but also the responses. You can use a hidden video camera by asking someone close to you to be the video operator during meetings with the scammer.
4. You should also record telephone conversations, provide law enforcement agencies with mail correspondence and everything that is relevant to the case and may shed light on the crime.
5. If possible, when making transactions or in other cases, write down the details of people (full name, phone numbers, address, car number, etc.) with whom you are in contact, make a photocopy or photo of suspicious documents, and collect other information.

Types of fraud

There are many types of scams. But we will focus on those frauds that occur most often. After all, anyone can become a victim of these “popular” methods of taking property.

With bank cards

Skimming takes pride of place among bank card fraud. The principle of theft is simple, but its implementation requires advanced devices.

A skimmer is a device that is installed by fraudsters in an ATM card reader and reads information from the magnetic strip of the card. But for theft you also need a PIN code. Therefore, criminals install a micro-camera on an ATM to record the code numbers, and sometimes an overhead keyboard is used for the same purpose. When the attackers have received the necessary information, they make a copy of the credit card and withdraw money from it.

Another simple way is to check your card. An SMS message is sent to the victim’s phone informing them that their bank card has been blocked. The same message indicates a phone number to call to sort out the situation. Particularly gullible citizens call this number, provide card details at the request of a person who introduces himself as a bank employee, and lose money from the account.

With real estate

The so-called “black” realtors are engaged in turning to the elderly or people who have problems with alcohol and fraudulently re-registering the victims’ real estate to themselves or to dummies.

Such “realtors” are not shy in their choice of funds. To achieve their goal, they can use psychotropic drugs to cloud the mind of a lonely person and deprive him of his property. Sometimes notaries also work together with such realtors to draw up an agreement.

Also, no one is immune from fraud in the primary housing market. It happens that people buy an apartment in a “building under construction” and contribute some part of its cost. But in reality it turns out that nothing is actually being built and a respectable person - a representative of a construction company - is a simple fraudster who forged documents;

Debts

Sometimes it is better to turn to a relative or friend than to a microfinance organization to borrow money.
We understand such people very well, and most importantly, we trust them. But they can enjoy our trust. We only need a verbal promise that the debt will be repaid with the salary, and it’s inconvenient to take a receipt from a colleague.

But there are other types of loans with receipts, when someone you know asks you to issue a loan for them. At the same time, he undertakes to pay the money strictly on time and even confirms the fact of the loan with a receipt. But after a while this person disappears from sight and does not answer calls.

Perhaps this person is not a fraudster, perhaps he has financial difficulties. But from the point of view of the law, such actions are regarded as fraudulent. And the fact remains - your credit history is ruined, you have lost a friend and you are facing litigation. Let's talk about them.

Lawyer's opinion

According to lawyer Hrant Kazaryan, a real private investor is a moneylender who gives money at a high interest rate (much higher than the bank interest rate). Such people agree to pay a large sum, usually only on bail. Usually, when applying for a loan, moneylenders take a receipt, enter into a loan agreement and a collateral agreement.

You need to understand that usury is illegal in our country. Such activities are classified as illegal entrepreneurship. Only banks and microfinance organizations (MFOs), that is, legal entities registered with the relevant authorities, have the right to engage in lending.

Therefore, people who decide to deal with moneylenders cannot count on the protection of law enforcement agencies in the event of a conflict situation. It is quite problematic to complain about criminals in whose illegal activities you decide to take part.

Types and schemes of fraud

Now the interests of scammers are focused on several main areas. Here is a list of them (short!).

Fraud in the sale of apartments

Scammers are improving their schemes every day. Real estate is sold using fake passports, contracts are concluded with a person who does not have authority from the owner, dummies and unscrupulous notaries are involved.

Fraud in the real estate market is often difficult to prove. Therefore, the help of an experienced lawyer will come in handy.

Fraud using payment cards

Since non-cash payments are replacing cash payments at an increasing speed, it is not surprising that the number of those who want to receive undue benefits at the expense of bank card holders is growing.

And here, too, the attackers got their own space for imagination.

For example, special devices are inserted into ATMs that allow the PIN code to be read from a customer’s card. In addition, an unscrupulous seller or waiter can write off the same amount twice.

Money Fraud

Exchange currency for counterfeit money and vice versa. Helping a relative who is in a difficult situation. A banal debt under a loan agreement and receipt.

These are the common schemes that are now in the arsenal of scammers.

Internet fraud

Here, attackers have a huge scope for imagination. It’s even difficult to put the entire list of tricks into a separate article. Making payments using fictitious details, failure to deliver goods, receiving items of inadequate quality.

Loan application fraud

Often a person does not know that a loan is issued in his name. Trouble arises when calls from the bank or debt collectors begin to annoy you. In this case, legal assistance is vital.

mobile connection

Fraudsters have also mastered modern technologies.

For example, a user receives a message on his smartphone that he has won a big prize. However, there is one “but”. You need to debit a certain amount from your mobile account. Naturally, at the same time, money and winnings became an illusory dream.

We have described only a partial list of techniques used by modern hunters for other people’s money. Each area of ​​their actions will be covered in our separate article.

How to prove fraud

This issue is complicated by the fact that often the victim of a crime is not prepared for such a turn of events, and therefore may not have sufficient evidence against the fraudsters. What is accepted by law enforcement agencies as evidence?

Article 74 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation lists possible evidence of criminal activity. They may be:

• Testimony of the suspect, accused. No one will testify against himself of his own free will and without apparent benefit. The motive can only be a desire to mitigate the punishment due to a sincere confession, which happens extremely rarely with scammers.
• Testimony of the victim, witness. The victim of deception must think in advance about how he will present the facts regarding the crime. The same applies to the witness. Testimony must be clear and logical; any discrepancy in facts will make this evidence insignificant
  .
• Conclusion and testimony of an expert (specialist). If fraud was committed using modern technical means, or it is necessary to confirm the authenticity of a document, then you can obtain a written opinion from a specialist in this matter. This will remove all the court's doubts about the evidence presented. Also, the court itself can contact an expert if necessary.
• Evidence. These are, first of all, the means by which fraud was prepared and committed. They can be anything from a regular typewriter to a personal computer. Money or any material assets that the attackers took possession of are also recognized as material evidence. You can also present to the court audio and video recordings, SMS messages, contractual documents and receipts, recordings of telephone conversations and much more, which will help prove the theft of property.

Important! The collection of evidence of fraud must be approached with all responsibility, because the outcome of the case depends on good preparation for the trial. . It is not so difficult to become a victim of scammers as to prove their guilt

This issue is best resolved together with a professional lawyer. He will definitely tell you which evidence can influence the court’s decision and which cannot, determine the law enforcement agency where to file the application, and help you draw it up correctly.

It is not so difficult to become a victim of scammers as to prove their guilt. This issue is best resolved together with a professional lawyer. He will definitely tell you which evidence can influence the court’s decision and which cannot, determine the law enforcement agency where to file the application, and help you draw it up correctly.

ATTENTION! Due to recent changes in legislation, the information in this article may be out of date! Our lawyer will advise you free of charge - write in the form below. .

How can the fact of intent be confirmed?

Fraud is a crime that is committed with direct intent. The criminal’s actions are based on selfish interest. The fraudster acts either by deception or by breach of trust. Therefore, in order to prove intent, it is necessary to prove the fact of deception or the fact of abuse of trust.

Fraud is not difficult to prove. It is proven through the testimony of the victim, witnesses, seizures, inspections, and, if necessary, examinations are carried out. Let's remember the example of a house for sale, where a fraudster takes a deposit for the house he is supposedly selling. To prove intent, you must do the following:

1. Request to the Rosregister about the ownership of the house.
2. Questioning the owner to see if he handed over the keys to the house to anyone.
3. Interrogation of the victim about the appearance of the citizen to whom the money was transferred.
4. Identification of this citizen by the victim.
5. Interrogation of the conductor of the carriage in which the victim and the fraudster were traveling.

The collected evidence will be enough to find the “seller” guilty. The scammer’s position – “I didn’t take any money” – is unlikely to “work”.

Example 3 . The fraudster acted by breach of trust. Citizen “B” was engaged in the sale of used cars for a long time. Many motorists knew him personally and entrusted him with the sale of their cars without drawing up the appropriate contracts. Powers of attorney were issued. However, they no longer saw their cars and the money from the sale either. The seller himself also disappeared. He was detained in another city.

Intent was proven by:

• Interrogation of victims.
• Copies of powers of attorney seized from the notary.
• Information on the re-registration of sold vehicles with the traffic police.
• Interrogation of witnesses - new owners.

The fraudster was found guilty of fraud by breach of trust and convicted. He actually sold cars, and he was not accused of deception.

How to prove fraud

Money is not easy to earn, and it is even more difficult to keep it. Natural inflation processes and economic crises can still be somehow calculated and your capital can be protected in advance. It is much more difficult when people with a rich imagination, financial literacy and basic psychology lay claim to other people’s funds and property. The factor of surprise plays a huge role here, when a person or even a group of people does not expect deception. It is better not to give attackers a chance to carry out their plans in advance, but if a crime does occur, then a difficult question arises: how to prove fraud?