Scam Victim Recovery in Singapore: What You Can Do

Being scammed is distressing, and the internet is full of confident promises that lost money can be clawed back. The honest picture in Singapore is more limited. This guide sets out what to do immediately, what the police can do, and the two very different frameworks people confuse: bank reimbursement under the Shared Responsibility Framework, and the new police restriction-order power.

This is general legal information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate and solicitor about your situation.

Information last verified on 23 July 2026. This page provides general legal information about Singapore law and is not legal advice in an individual case.

Do this first

Speed matters more than anything else, because money moves quickly through scam networks. Two steps come first, in parallel.

Contact your bank immediately through its official fraud or scam reporting channel, and ask it to try to stop or recall the transfer and to secure your account. Then report to the police. The simplest route is the 24/7 ScamShield Helpline on 1799, which the police and ScamShield operate for scam reports and for checking whether something is a scam. You can also make a police report through the usual channels, covered on the how to make a police report guide.

Keep everything: transaction records, the scammers messages, phone numbers, website links and any reference numbers. This evidence is what a bank or the police can act on.

How the police recover funds

Fund recovery in Singapore is led by the Singapore Police Force through the Anti-Scam Command (ASCom). ASCom works directly with local banks to identify and freeze bank accounts that scam money has been routed through, and in some cases funds are seized and returned. In one operation reported in November 2025, the police worked with banks to freeze more than 180 accounts and seize over S$486,000.

This is a genuine, government-run process, not a marketing claim. But it has hard limits. Once money has been moved out of the local banking system, converted, or sent overseas, there is often nothing left to freeze. Recovery is realistic mainly when a report comes in fast enough for the police and banks to intercept funds before they disappear. It is not guaranteed, and you should be sceptical of any private service that promises to recover scam losses for a fee.

When a bank must share the loss: the Shared Responsibility Framework

The Shared Responsibility Framework (SRF) is a set of guidelines issued by the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Infocomm Media Development Authority. It came into effect on 16 December 2024. It is often described loosely as making banks pay back scam victims, which badly overstates it.

The SRF covers only a precisely defined type of loss, which its guidelines call a seemingly authorised transaction. In plain terms, that is a phishing scam where a scammer impersonating a business or government body tricks you into entering your account credentials on a fake website or app, and then uses those stolen credentials to make a transfer you did not intend. If a bank, or a telco, failed in specific anti-scam duties, it may have to bear part of the loss under a set order of responsibility.

What the SRF does not cover

This is the point that matters most, because getting it wrong gives false hope. The SRF only applies where the transaction was one you did not intend, because a scammer used your stolen credentials. It does not cover scams where you were deceived into transferring the money yourself.

That carve-out is large. Most romance scams, most investment scams, and many impersonation scams work by persuading the victim to personally authorise the transfer, however manipulated they were into doing so. Those losses fall outside the SRF, so there is no automatic reimbursement right. Card transactions, such as those on a credit or debit card, are also outside the SRF, because they are covered by a separate banking code. Do not assume that being a scam victim means a bank will pay you back.

The Protection from Scams Act 2025

The Protection from Scams Act 2025 does something different again. In force from 1 July 2025, it gives the police a new preventive power: a specified officer can direct one or more banks to place a restriction order on a scam targets own account. The purpose is to stop a victim, often under live psychological pressure from a scammer, from sending away more of their own money.

A restriction order can be made where the officer has reason to believe the person will transfer money to a scammer, and that the order is necessary to protect them. It lasts up to 30 days at a time, and can be extended, subject to the limits in the Act. The order can be varied to allow the person to withdraw money for daily living expenses. This is a shield placed on the victims own account during an active scam, not a way to recover money already lost, and it is separate from the SRF.

Related scams and next steps

If your situation involves a fake landlord or a rental deposit taken by a scammer, see the rental scams in Singapore guide, which covers how to check a listing and a landlords right to let. For the general reporting process, including online reporting and what a false report can lead to, see the how to make a police report guide. The wider consumer picture is on the consumer rights in Singapore section page.