I am wondering if I have a case against my buyer. I own a pig farm and sell pork meat as well. On the other hand, the latter has been purchasing from me for over two years.

Our usual transaction happens, as follows: he would place orders for pork meat. Thereafter, he would pick up the said orders and pay the corresponding bill by issuing check payments.

However, these past three months, the checks paid for the booked orders were dishonored after being deposited due to being “closed account.” The total value amounted to P250,000.

And so, demand letters were given to the buyer, but they were left unheeded. What can be my solution to redress my grievance against my buyer? All the best to you, sir.

Marco

Dear Marco,

Your buyer can be charged for two separate crimes: a) one for violation of Article 315, paragraph (2)(d) of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), otherwise known as “Swindling” or “Estafa”; and b) violation of Batas Pambansa No. 22 (BP22) or also known as the “Bouncing Checks Law”.

Article 315, paragraph (2)(d) of the RPC states: Any person who shall defraud another by any of the means mentioned hereinbelow…

2) By means of the following false pretenses or fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud:

d. By postdating a check, or issuing a check in payment of an obligation when the offender had no funds in the bank, or his funds deposited therein were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check. The failure of the drawer of the check to deposit the amount necessary to cover his check within three days, from receipt of notice from the bank and/or payee or holder that said check has been dishonored for lack or insufficiency of funds shall be prime facie evidence of deceit constituting false pretense or fraudulent act.

In the case of Lucia Manuel Y Cadiz vs People, the Court explained that the elements of Estafa under the foregoing provision, are as follows:

1) The offender has postdated or issued a check in payment of an obligation contracted at the time of the postdating or issuance;

2) At the time of postdating or issuance of said check, the offender has no funds in the bank or the funds deposited were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check; and

3) The payee has been defrauded.

Furthermore, the Court also reiterated that in the crime of Estafa by postdating or issuing a bad check, deceit and damage are essential elements of the offense and have to be established with satisfactory proof to warrant conviction while the false pretense or fraudulent act must be committed prior to, or simultaneous with, the issuance of the bad check. In other words, the issuance of the check must have been the inducement for the surrender by the party deceived of his money or property which applies to your case.

On the other hand, the mere issuance of a bad check, without making arrangements within five banking days after receipt of a written notice of dishonor, is already tantamount to a violation of BP22.

Section 1 of the said law provides:

Section 1. Checks without sufficient funds — Any person who makes or draws and issues any check to apply on account or for value, knowing at the time of issue that he does not have sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the payment of such check in full upon its presentment, which check is subsequently dishonored by the drawee bank for insufficiency of funds or credit or would have been dishonored for the same reason had not the drawer, without any valid reason, ordered the bank to stop payment.

Applying the foregoing to your situation, it can be inferred that your buyer committed both Estafa under Article 315, paragraph (2)(d) of the RPC as well as violation of BP22.

According to the abovementioned facts, the dishonored checks are considered in violation of BP22 as they were drawn from “closed accounts.” As for the crime of Estafa, there is a showing of deceit and damage when your buyer used such bad checks while simultaneously booking orders, such that the issuance thereof became the means to obtain your property which was the pork meat.

A pork supplier may pursue both estafa and BP 22 charges against a buyer whose checks totaling P250,000 were dishonored from a closed account, subject to proving the required legal elements.

Atty. Nico Antonio