Prosecutors are investigating payments by a company in Kostrena to two foreign accounts. The alleged loss is 8.99 million euros. The decision to investigate is not a conviction.

01

What has been officially announced

The County State Attorney’s Office in Rijeka has opened an investigation into a Croatian citizen on suspicion of abuse of trust in business dealings. According to the statement, as chair of the management board of a company based in the Kostrena area, she allegedly approved and ordered seven transfers in March to two bank accounts outside Croatia.

The allegation is that this was contrary to internal rules and without adequate prior checks. Unidentified persons are then alleged to have transferred the money onward. The authority puts the suspected financial loss at 8,988,860 euros. It names neither the person nor the company in this statement.

02

Suspicion, the payment trail and guilt are different questions

The publication of 12 October describes the status of an investigation. It is not a judgment and does not conclusively explain who the subsequent recipients were or whether any money was recovered. The accused is presumed innocent.

A transfer abroad does not in itself imply wrongdoing. In the allegation described, the crucial issues are approval, verification and the alleged disregard of internal rules. Nor should the news be taken to mean that the company is generally unable to meet its payment obligations.

Symbolic image of a telephone query while checking a payment request
Golden Beach / OpenAI ImageGen · AI-generated symbolic image, not a real transaction or person involved
03

A practical look at payment instructions

Separately from this case, Croatian police distinguish several familiar types of fraud: in so-called CEO fraud, perpetrators pose as senior managers; in invoice fraud, for example, they pose as suppliers requesting new bank details. These general warnings do not establish which method was actually used in the Kostrena case.

The government information portal recommends confirming payment requests and changes to bank details through already known contacts. A telephone number in the change notification just received is not an independent verification channel. For larger payments, the recipient and account should be verified separately; clear internal procedures help prevent unusual time pressure becoming a reason to take shortcuts.

04

Relevant to small businesses too

A holiday rental manager, a charter business or a restaurant does not need to transfer millions to be affected by a false payment instruction. Anyone who routinely approves invoices should therefore know in advance who may confirm changes and how to query them if in doubt.

The value of this news is not in rushing to assign blame. It is a reminder that a convincing message and a properly verified payment are two different things. The specific criminal-law assessment remains a matter for the proceedings.

Evidence

Sources & date

Sources support the facts. Planning notes and recommendations are Golden Beach editorial assessments.

  1. Doneseno rješenje o provođenju istrage protiv hrvatske državljanke zbog zlouporabe povjerenja u gospodarskom poslovanjuŽupanijsko državno odvjetništvo u Rijeci / DORH · 12 October 2026Decision to investigate, allegation, seven payments and suspected loss; no official identification by name or conviction
  2. Internet prijevareRavnateljstvo policije · Prevention information; checked on 13 October 2026General distinction between CEO and invoice fraud, not a resolution of this individual case
  3. Računalne prijevaregov.hr · Prevention information; checked on 13 October 2026Independent contact checks, confirmation of changed accounts and internal payment procedures
Time-sensitive information may change. Please check the linked primary source before travelling.