Dear PAO,
I have been cheated by a dealer because I was able to
buy a vehicle which he represents to have a certificate of public
convenience. I later found out that the franchise does not exist.
I was advised to file a case for estafa but I do not want to be
involved in such a lengthy proceeding. I just want my money back. What
may be the best solution to my problem?
Pablo
Dear Pablo,
Estafa
is a crime which may be committed by means of false pretenses or
fraudulent acts. One of the false pretenses or fraudulent acts
constituting estafa is the use of fictitious name, or falsely pretending
to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency,
business or imaginary transactions, or by means of other similar
deceits. There may be sufficient ground to hold the seller of the
vehicle for estafa because he has fraudulently declared that the vehicle
he was selling has a certificate of public convenience knowing that
such is not existing and that you were induced to buy the said vehicle
because of the declaration causing damage on your part (Article 315 par.
[2][3], Revised Penal Code). The penalty for estafa depends upon the
amount defrauded upon the victim, but the same shall not exceed
imprisonment of twenty (20) years, which shall be imposed only upon his
conviction in court.
Considering that you do not wish to pursue a
criminal case for estafa against the seller of the vehicle, you may
just send a demand letter to him for the refund of the price paid. You
may also be assisted by the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) in a
conference/mediation which may be conducted between you and the seller
in the PAO District Office of the place where you are residing. Upon
request for conference, the assisting Public Attorney, after
determination of your qualification as client, shall send an invitation
to the seller for such a conference to discuss your problem and possibly
settle your dispute amicably (Section 4, Rule X, Public Attorney’s
Office Operations Manual). You may also claim your refund through the
filing of small claim case under A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC (Rule of Procedure
for Small Claims Cases) if it does not exceed P100,000. The proceeding
under this rule is expedient because the court shall immediately set the
hearing. A postponement of the hearing therein may be granted only upon
proof of the physical inability of the party to appear before the court
on the scheduled date and time, but said party may avail of only one
(1) postponement. Moreover, you will not need the assistance of a lawyer
since the same is prohibited by the Rules and the Petition/Pleadings
are readily available at the Office of the Clerk of Court. After the
hearing, the court shall render its decision on the same day, based on
the facts established by the evidence and such decision shall
immediately be final and unappealable (Sections 17, 19, and 23, A.M. No.
08-8-7-SC).
source: Manila Times' Column by
No comments:
Post a Comment