The Tinder Swindler, Sydney edition: when “romance scams” become fraud, intimidation and even AVO trouble in NSW

You do not need to be catfished by a stranger overseas to end up in a criminal case.

That is what makes romance-scam stories so commercially powerful and so legally relevant right now. The cultural frame is instantly recognisable: dating apps, “love bombing”, fake emergencies, fake investment opportunities, pressure for money, then silence. But in NSW, the law does not care whether the story feels like a Netflix documentary, an ugly breakup, or “just a private relationship issue”. If money was obtained by deception, false documents were used, or threats and harassment followed, the matter can become a real criminal brief.

This is not a niche problem. The AFP said in February 2026 that $28 million was reported stolen by romance scammers in Australia in 2025, with 2,437 reports, and that 71% were reported after online contact. The ACCC separately said romance scams caused about $28.7 million in losses in 2025, while the new National Anti-Scam Centre’s 2025 report said romance scams and investment scams continue to contribute disproportionately high losses because they often target retirement savings and emotionally vulnerable victims.

For National Criminal Lawyers®, we are at the service of readers and potential victims or accuseds searching for:

• “romance scam lawyer Sydney”
• “dating app fraud NSW”
• “financial advantage by deception relationship”
• “can I go to jail for taking money from a girlfriend”
• “criminal lawyer near me”.

Indeed, we are one of the first firms to explore this issue and have even already written a highly relevant article on it.

Why this is such a live topic right now

It is not just that Australians are losing money. It is that the public now recognises the pattern. Dating apps have normalised fast intimacy with strangers. AI and fake profiles have made persuasion easier. And mainstream media is full of stories where what looked like messy private conduct ended up looking a lot like deception.

Just days ago, the Daily Telegraph reported allegations that a Sydney man used Bumble, Hinge and Tinder to persuade several women to transfer him more than $100,000, with victims describing intense “love bombing”, promises of commitment and requests for money. He has denied wrongdoing, but the story itself shows why this issue now cuts through culturally: readers immediately recognise the behaviour, even if the legal line is not always obvious.

That legal line matters. Under Australian law, asking for money is not automatically criminal. But obtaining money through deception can be. There have been calls to make romance scam laws harsher, but this article will deal with what the law currently is.

What is the actual NSW offence?

The main NSW fraud provision is section 192E of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). The Judicial Commission’s Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book explains that a person commits fraud if, by any deception, they dishonestly obtain property belonging to another, obtain a financial advantage, or cause a financial disadvantage. Critically, the Judicial Commission stresses that “deception” and “dishonestly” are separate elements and the prosecution must prove both.

That is hugely important in romance-scam style cases. Why? Because these matters are rarely just about whether money changed hands. Money often did change hands. The real issue is usually:

• Was there a lie?
• Was there manipulation amounting to deception?
• Was there genuine consent to a gift?
• Was there authority to use a card or account?
• Was the accused actually dishonest, or was it an ugly but non-criminal personal arrangement?

That is exactly why you should not assume either “this is obviously criminal” or “this is obviously just relationship drama.” The facts matter, and so does how they are framed.

What are the penalties?

Fraud under s 192E is serious. The maximum penalty is 10 years’ imprisonment when dealt with on indictment. The Judicial Commission’s sentencing material says courts look closely at factors such as the amount involved, planning, duration, sophistication, breach of trust and victim impact. In other words, a months-long dating-app deception involving repeated requests for money will usually be viewed very differently from a single impulsive lie.

And yes, real cases do attract heavy charging. In one 2025 Sydney matter reported by the Daily Telegraph, a man was charged with multiple counts of dishonestly obtaining financial advantage by deception, alongside false-document and carriage-service offences, over allegations he had scammed a woman out of about $300,000 over several years. He was refused bail.

That should get any reader’s attention. Romance-scam fact patterns do not always stay in the soft-focus world of “dating gone wrong”. They can become fraud, document, cyber and bail matters very quickly.

What if it was not a stranger, but someone you were actually dating?

This is one of the reasons this topic is so interesting and so useful for NCL.

Many people imagine “romance scam” means a fake offshore profile. But some of the most difficult cases involve a real person, a real relationship, and genuine intimacy. That does not prevent fraud charges. If the prosecution says the relationship was used as the vehicle for deception, the emotional context may make the case more complicated, not less.

National Criminal Lawyers®’s article, “The Lure of Romance Scams”, discusses a Sydney-based woman allegedly involved in a romance-scam syndicate that extracted $9.7 million from men looking for love, and it already helps readers see how old-fashioned fraud law intersects with modern dating-app conduct. That internal link is valuable because it shows NCL is already speaking to this issue in a reader-friendly way.

What other offences can arise besides fraud?

A romance-scam style case can also spill into:

• using false documents
• identity-related offences
• using a carriage service to menace, harass or offend
• blackmail
• stalking or intimidation
• AVO proceedings, especially after a breakup or if threats and harassment follow.

That overlap is not theoretical. The 2025 Sydney matter mentioned above included allegations of false documents and carriage-service offending alongside deception charges.

And if the contact becomes obsessive, threatening or coercive after the money dispute, domestic-violence law may enter the picture too. The Judicial Commission’s domestic violence material makes clear that NSW now treats technology-facilitated abuse, stalking and intimidation very seriously. In the right factual setting, a relationship-based fraud allegation can evolve into an ADVO application, a breach issue, or a stalking/intimidation charge.

This issue is not just about money. It is about fraud, cyber evidence, police interviews, AVO overlap and bail.

What does the evidence usually look like?

Usually, it is not a smoking gun. It is a pattern.

• Screenshots.
• Voice notes.
• Wire transfers.
• Dating-app chats.
• Bank records.
• Promises of repayment.
• Messages about emergencies, investments or travel.
• Sometimes false screenshots of accounts, jobs or balances.
• Sometimes fake identities or multiple profiles.

This is one reason readers need proper legal advice early. These cases are often won or lost by how the evidence is organised and explained. A prosecution may say the accused ran a deliberate deception campaign. The defence may say the payments were gifts, support, consensual transfers, or part of a complicated personal relationship. A bad police interview can collapse that distinction in minutes.

In romance-scam or deception matters, people often worsen the case by trying to sound helpful before they understand what police are really investigating.

Why this is also a victim-side story

The topic turns heads because the public instantly identifies with the shame and confusion of these cases. Victims often do not report early because they are embarrassed. The AFP has explicitly warned that romance scammers target people who may be vulnerable after retirement, separation or life upheaval. It also said a national prevention campaign in February 2026 was aimed especially at those groups.

That has two consequences.

First, the problem is larger than people think because underreporting is built into it.
Second, when matters finally do reach police, the complainant may have a long paper trail of transfers, pleas, promises and emotional manipulation.

For a defence firm, that means these matters are often far more prepared and document-heavy than a defendant expects.

How the law is actually applied

The most useful thing to say to the reader is this: romance-scam style allegations are not charged because police dislike bad behaviour. They are charged where the evidence suggests deception plus dishonesty plus money or property.

• That is why two similar-looking cases can end very differently.
• One may stay a civil or personal dispute.
• Another may become fraud with bail refusal.

The Judicial Commission’s fraud material helps explain why. Courts care about amount, duration, planning, victim vulnerability and breach of trust. If the prosecution says the accused deliberately used emotional pressure to obtain money over time, the case becomes much more serious.

And because so many of these allegations are now online, there can also be federal or cyber dimensions where carriage services, impersonation or identity misuse are involved. NSW Police’s fraud page also stresses that modern fraud spans romance scams, identity theft and online deception.

Contact Us

If you are being investigated for dating-app fraud, romance-scam allegations, obtaining a financial advantage by deception, or a related AVO, stalking or cyber offence, do not assume it is “just a relationship issue” that will sort itself out. These matters can become criminal very fast, and what you say or do in the first few days can shape the entire case.

At National Criminal Lawyers®, we understand how modern fraud allegations actually arise: through relationships, phones, screenshots, transfers, pressure and police narratives. We know how to challenge overcharging, manage interviews, analyse digital evidence and protect your position early.

Call us at 1800 CRIM LAW for a free consultation. Help us help you understand your situation and get you the best outcome possible.