In most business transactions, payment by check is usually preferred since it is more convenient than handing out a large sum of money or going through online bank transactions’ daily limits. However, it is also a convenient way for people to commit fraud since most people think that the issuance of a check is as good as payment for their products or services. In fact, in the year 2017, the National Prosecution Service of the Department of Justice ranked B.P. 22 cases as the second most number of cases filed in court by the prosecution agency next to illegal drugs cases. That is why we have to be aware of how one commits a violation of B.P. 22 or the Bouncing Checks Law.
In every crime, there exist elements that must be proven by the admission of evidence. Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, otherwise known as the “Bouncing Checks Law” punishes a person for making, drawing, or issuing a check to apply on account or for value; with the knowledge that at the time the check was issued, he/she does not have sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the payment of the check in full when presented for payment; the drawee bank then dishonors the check due to insufficiency of funds usually stated as “Closed Account” or “Drawn Against Insufficient Funds (DAIF)” or it would dishonor the check for the same reasons if the issuer did not order the bank to stop payment for no valid reason.
B.P. 22 provides a presumption that the issuer of the bounced check has knowledge of insufficiency of funds in the drawee bank when the check is presented for payment within ninety (90) days from the date of the check. This presumption is overcome if the issuer of the check pays in full the amount of the check within five (5) banking days after receiving a notice of dishonor. Thus, it is the duty of the complainant to ensure that a notice of dishonor must be sent to the issuer of the check, and there must be proof that the issuer received such notice of dishonor because the five (5) days will only start to run upon receipt of the notice of dishonor by the issuer of the check.
It is also important to note that if a check is drawn by a corporation, company or entity, the person or persons who signed the check in behalf of such corporation, company or entity shall be liable for the violation of B.P. 22.
For inquiries and questions, you may send an email to abogado@palmlawoffice.com.
The views stated in this article are merely those of the author. This article is for general informational purposes only. It is not offered as a legal advice or legal opinion.
Atty. Xavier Alexen R. Aseron is a Partner at PALM Law Office. Its office is located at 2/F, MF3 Holdings Building, 138 Sct. Limbaga, Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines.
xra@palmlawoffice.com
