A romance scam (also called romance fraud or sentimental fraud) is a fraud in which the offender feigns an emotional relationship with the victim in order to obtain successive transfers of money. The relationship usually begins on a dating platform or social network. Spanish law has no specific offence for it: it is a way of committing ordinary fraud under Article 248.1 of the Spanish Criminal Code, and what sets it apart is the kind of deceit used.
It is part of the wider growth of online fraud. According to figures released by the Spanish Ministry of the Interior, 464,801 cybercrime offences were recorded in Spain in 2024, of which 412,850 were computer-related frauds. The Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court has itself noted that these cases recur. In its judgment (STS) 602/2025 of 30 June, it observed that it was not the first time it had heard appeals concerning frauds in which the deceit consists in gaining the victim's trust through an emotional relationship begun on a social network. In the Court's words, that relationship serves as a "simulated romantic setting for enrichment".
This guide explains how Spanish criminal law treats romance fraud: why it is fraud, why the argument that the victim should have been more careful rarely succeeds, which penalties apply and what victims should do. For the general framework of the offence, see fraud under the Spanish Criminal Code: offences and defence.
How a romance scam works
Unlike other online frauds, the deceit in a romance scam is not exhausted in a single act. It is built up over time, and the cases tried by Spanish courts show a fairly stable sequence.
- A fictitious profile. The offender creates an attractive and credible identity, often with a prestigious profession that explains the distance and why an immediate meeting is impossible.
- Building the bond. Weeks or months of constant messages, voice notes and calls create trust, emotional attachment and often the expectation of a life together.
- The first request. Once the bond is consolidated, a request for money appears, always linked to an exceptional emergency (a customs hold, bail, medical treatment, a blocked account or an investment opportunity) and framed as a temporary loan between partners.
- Escalation. The requests are repeated and grow. When the victim hesitates, they come with promises of repayment or new emergencies that supposedly require one last payment to recover what has already been sent.
- The end. The relationship ends when the victim discovers the deceit or when the offender stops getting anything from it.
The means used can be very sophisticated. In the facts examined in STS 924/2016 of 13 December, the offender superimposed a dubbed voice on the real image of the prime minister of a foreign State during video calls, and the coordination of voice and image made the ruse impossible to detect. Today's generative AI tools make fabrications of this kind considerably cheaper and easier.
Why a romance scam is fraud under Article 248.1
Article 248.1 punishes anyone who, with intent to profit, uses sufficient deceit to cause another person to make a mistake, inducing them to dispose of assets to their own detriment or that of another. Romance fraud generally meets every element of the offence, although some of them have particular features.
Deceit
The deceit is the simulation of a non-existent relationship, sustained by a fictitious identity, life story and needs. It is not an isolated lie but a performance kept up over time, so its suitability must be assessed as a whole.
Mistake
The victim pays in the belief that they are helping a partner with a genuine need. The mistake must result from the deceit and cause the transfer, which requires proof of a causal link between the offender's story and each of the payments.
Transfer of assets and loss
The transfer usually takes the form of bank transfers, Bizum payments or cash handovers. It may also consist in the victim taking out loans or signing documents that allow their funds to be disposed of. The loss normally falls on the victim, but it may fall on third parties, such as relatives who lent the victim money. This does not affect the offence, since Article 248 expressly covers loss to another.
Intent to profit
The intent to profit hides behind the appearance of need or of a temporary loan. A promise of repayment does not exclude it when the promise is itself part of the deceit.
Fraud or a civil dispute: intent from the outset
The most delicate line separates fraud from the mere breach of a civil obligation. When a genuine relationship breaks down and one partner does not return money received, the dispute is, in principle, civil. There is fraud when the fraudulent purpose comes before the relationship and the relationship is conceived from the start as a tool for obtaining money (dolus antecedens).
That initial intent is usually proven by circumstantial evidence. Relevant indicators include:
- A false identity.
- Several victims approached with the same script.
- A systematic impossibility of meeting in person.
- The offender's disappearance after the last payment.
In STS 602/2025, the trial court based its conviction on the complainants' statements and on the defendant's admission that the relationships existed, how long they lasted and that he accepted the payments. That evidence was corroborated by the bank records in the court file.
The victim's duty of self-protection: does it matter that the victim was naive?
The central issue in these cases is whether the deceit was sufficient. The defence usually argues that the victim could and should have detected the ruse, so that their lack of care breaks the objective link between the offender's conduct and the loss.
What the Supreme Court requires
The Criminal Chamber defines sufficient deceit as deceit that is adequate and proportionate to achieve its aim and serious enough to work, in ordinary social life, as an effective stimulus for the transfer of assets. Its suitability is assessed both by objective standards and by the personal circumstances of the victim (STS 304/2025 of 2 April).
On that basis, the Supreme Court has significantly narrowed the self-protection argument. STS 919/2022 of 24 November, citing STS 969/2021 of 10 December, describes as "reiterated and by now settled" the case law holding that responsibility should not be improperly shifted onto victims where the intention to deceive is manifest and the offender has achieved their aim. Relying on STS 228/2014 of 26 March, it adds that only crude deceit, that is, deceit anyone could see through, rules out the offence.
The same judgment, following STS 1036/2003 of 2 September, recalls that the deceit need not be neutralised by diligent conduct on the victim's part, because it "is measured by reference to the deceptive activity set in motion by the perpetrator, not by the victim's perceptiveness". It also warns that, pushed to its extreme, the opposite argument would mean that no fraud could ever be completed. STS 304/2025 likewise reserves acquittal for deceit so crude, gross or grotesque that it could not mislead anyone of minimal intelligence or care.
Three consequences for romance fraud
- The victim's education does not exclude fraud. In STS 924/2016, the defence argued that the victim, a doctor, was obliged to be distrustful because of her training. The Supreme Court rejected the argument: the set-up was so perfect that, "precisely because of the education and intelligence of the defrauded woman", it never crossed her mind that she was dealing with a computer manipulation.
- Emotion is part of the deceit, not the victim's fault. The same judgment stresses that the messages of affection "follow one another in order to weaken and overcome the victim's resistance".
- The deceit is judged as a whole and over time. A request that might seem implausible in isolation looks different after months of relationship and within a coherent story. Its capacity to cause a mistake must be judged in that context.
Where the argument may still have room
The question is not entirely closed. As these scams gain public exposure, it could be argued that certain stories have become socially recognisable as fraudulent, and cases of manifest implausibility will continue to raise doubts about whether the deceit was sufficient. The prevailing case law, however, is restrictive when it comes to ruling out fraud because of the victim's lack of self-protection.
Penalties for romance fraud in Spain
Sentencing ranges
- Basic offence (Art. 248.2): six months to three years in prison. If the amount defrauded does not exceed 400 euros, a fine of one to three months.
- Aggravated fraud (Art. 250.1): one to six years in prison and a fine of six to twelve months.
- Highly aggravated fraud (Art. 250.2): four to eight years in prison and a fine of twelve to twenty-four months where the amount exceeds 250,000 euros or certain qualifying circumstances apply.
How these ranges are applied in practice is explained in aggravated fraud in Spain: sentencing and the 2026 reform.
Continuing offence: why many cases exceed 50,000 euros
Repeated payments by one victim, or a single plan carried out against several victims, are ordinarily treated as a continuing offence (Article 74). In property offences, the penalty is based on the total loss caused. That is why many romance scams reach the 50,000-euro aggravating threshold (Art. 250.1.5) even though no single payment exceeds it. Case law avoids counting the total twice: if the total triggers Article 250, the increased penalty under Article 74.1 does not also apply.
Other aggravating circumstances
The aggravating circumstance of special gravity (Art. 250.1.4) looks at the size of the loss and the financial situation in which the victim or their family is left. It is common in these cases, where victims put their savings at stake or fall into debt.
Abuse of personal relationships (Art. 250.1.6) is more doubtful. According to the line of case law we have been able to identify, it requires a pre-existing relationship of trust, separate from the one created by the deceit itself, so that the same fact is not counted twice. In a typical romance scam, trust arises precisely from the deceit, so this aggravating circumstance does not naturally fit.
Other offences that may be charged
- Forgery. If the offender forges documents or signatures to obtain the money, document forgery is charged alongside fraud, as in STS 602/2025.
- Money laundering. Channelling the funds through third-party accounts and moving them abroad can lead to a conviction for money laundering, as in STS 924/2016.
There is a less visible risk for victims themselves. If the offender asks the victim to receive money from third parties and forward it, the victim could be investigated for money laundering, even in its negligent form (Article 301.3). We explain how these intermediaries are treated in money mules in Spain.
Limitation periods
The basic offence becomes time-barred after five years and the aggravated forms under Article 250 after ten years (Article 131.1). In a continuing offence, the period runs from the day of the last act (Article 132.1). In STS 602/2025, the Court applied the ten-year period because the maximum penalty in the abstract exceeded five years.
What victims of a romance scam should do
Preserve the digital evidence
The evidence in these cases is mostly digital: conversations on messaging apps, dating profiles, image and audio files, and bank records. Its value depends on keeping the original media unaltered. If the other side challenges the authenticity of the messages, a computer forensic expert may be needed to prove their origin and integrity.
Report quickly and join the proceedings
Speed in filing the complaint is decisive. Only within judicial proceedings can banks be ordered to disclose the destination accounts, and balances be frozen or attached before the money is moved on again.
By joining the proceedings as a private prosecutor (acusación particular), the victim can request investigative measures and bring the civil claim arising from the offence, which covers restitution and compensation for damage and loss (Articles 109 and following of the Criminal Code). In practice, recovery often depends on whether the offender is solvent and whether the money has already left Spain.
Can the bank be held liable?
In a romance scam, the victim orders and authorises the transfers. That distinguishes it from impersonation schemes such as phishing or vishing, where transactions are carried out without the account holder's consent. The liability regime for unauthorised payment transactions under Royal Decree-Law 19/2018 of 23 November therefore does not, in principle, apply, and the prospects of a claim against the bank are considerably more limited.
Cross-border cases
Offenders often operate from abroad and the money leaves Spain quickly. Within the European Union, the European Investigation Order, regulated by Law 23/2014 of 20 November on the mutual recognition of criminal decisions in the European Union, makes it easier to gather evidence across borders. Outside the EU, cooperation depends on letters rogatory and on bilateral or multilateral treaties, with considerably longer timeframes.
Rights of foreign victims
Law 4/2015 of 27 April on the Statute of the Victim of Crime grants rights to every victim of an offence committed in Spain, whatever their nationality. These include the right to file a complaint in a language they understand, to free translation and interpretation, to be informed of the course of the proceedings and to take an active part in them.
Key points
- No specific offence: a romance scam is fraud under Article 248.1, and the feigned relationship is the instrument of the fraud, not a mitigating factor.
- Fraud, not a civil dispute, when the profit motive comes before the relationship and explains it.
- The self-protection argument rarely succeeds: a ruse built up and sustained over months can hardly be called crude, whatever the victim's background.
- Penalties often reach the aggravated range, because the payments are added together as a continuing offence and frequently exceed 50,000 euros.
- The real challenge is procedural: reporting quickly, preserving the evidence and acting before the money leaves the country.
If you have been the victim of a romance scam in Spain, or are under investigation in connection with one, our team handling fraud and misappropriation and cybercrime can review your case. Request a consultation in English, Spanish or German.
