Criminal Lawyers in Internet Fraud

Internet fraud is the fastest-growing statistical modality of contemporary Economic Criminal Law and constitutes a specific manifestation of the offences of Arts. 248 and 249 CP. It punishes defraudations committed through digital media —fake online stores, deceitful listings on marketplaces (Wallapop, Vinted, Milanuncios), non-existent holiday rentals, identity impersonation on social media, fictitious contests and prizes— in which the author uses the digital sphere both as a deception medium and as infrastructure for mass victim recruitment. The protected legal interest is the victim's patrimony and, mediately, the collective trust in electronic commerce, essential for the digital economy. Consolidated case-law has clarified that the sufficiency of deceit in digital environments must be assessed by the reasonable diligence standard of the average user, not of the cybersecurity expert. Unlike computer fraud (Art. 249.1.a CP) —where a system is manipulated without deceiving a person—, internet fraud always involves deception directed at a person.

The methods of commission in internet fraud are extraordinarily varied. Fake online stores clone recognised brands (Nike, Apple, Zara, Amazon) with similar domains, offer irresistible prices and charge without shipping the product or shipping imitations; they frequently concur with document forgery and offences against industrial property. Marketplace second-hand fraud operates through attractive listings on Wallapop, Vinted, Milanuncios or Facebook Marketplace, inducing the buyer to operate outside the platform's secure system (payment by Bizum or bank transfer). Non-existent holiday rentals use photographs stolen from legitimate portals to advertise fictitious apartments, especially in tourist areas and high season. Fraudulent contests and prizes resort to the digital version of the classic Nigerian scam. Social media impersonation through fake profiles and romance fraud (catfishing) complete the most recurrent catalogue.

The penalties are the general fraud penalties: 6 months to 3 years' prison and fine in the basic offence (amount between €400 and €50,000); 1 to 6 years' prison and 6 to 12 months' fine in the aggravated modality of Art. 250 CP when some circumstance concurs (amount over €50,000, abuse of business credibility, multiple victims configuring mass crime of Art. 74.2 CP); and 4 to 8 years' prison in the hyper-aggravated type of Art. 250.2 when the amount exceeds €250,000. If the total defrauded amount does not reach €400, qualification as minor offence applies with 1 to 3 months' fine (Art. 249.2 CP). Collateral consequences include civil liability ex delicto for the full damage with legal interest, criminal record with effects on employment and regulated professions, and possible concurrence with money laundering (Art. 301), identity usurpation (Art. 401) or document forgery (Arts. 390-395). International prosecution is usual given the cross-border nature of many digital frauds.

The procedural action against internet fraud demands speed and method. First, urgent measures within the first 24-72 hours: immediate contact with the bank to request chargeback on card payments (approximate 120-day period according to payment scheme rules), precautionary blocking of receiving accounts, immediate preservation of digital evidence (timestamped screenshots, notarial certification when feasible, preservation of URLs, metadata and conversations). Second, criminal complaint before the Technological Investigation Brigade of the National Police or the Telematic Crimes Group of the Civil Guard, with exhaustive documentary contribution and request for precautionary measures of domain blocking and telematic account seizure. Third, claim to the intermediary platform when appropriate (Wallapop, Vinted, Airbnb have internal reimbursement protocols). Fourth, civil claim against the bank under Payment Services Act 4/2020 when there is negligence in diligence duties or absence of required anti-fraud alerts. Consolidated Supreme Court case-law on electronic evidence demands robust technical chain of custody.

In current forensic practice, internet fraud presents specific procedural challenges: speed of fund movement, geographical dispersion of authors (frequently outside the EU), use of shell companies in opaque jurisdictions and technical difficulty of tracing. Organic Law 1/2025 on Justice Service Efficiency, the Digital Services Act Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 on digital platform obligations, the NIS2 Directive on cybersecurity and Act 4/2020 on Payment Services have reinforced both prosecution mechanisms and victim guarantees. At Alonso Sala, with 15+ years' experience and a multidisciplinary team of criminal lawyers and forensic cybersecurity experts, we undertake full victim representation in online fraud: urgent action in the first 24-72 hours, articulation of criminal complaint with precautionary measures, coordination with intermediary platforms, civil claim against the bank when appropriate and international judicial cooperation to identify and seize the fraudster's assets.