Scribd
Upload
282 views4 pages

Plaintiff,: Regional Trial Court

1) Min A. Chin, owner of Brainy Kids Montessori, filed a complaint against Security Bank - Kalentong Branch for encashing nine forged checks totaling PHP 782,600 that were stolen and filled out by their former auditor, May B. Calocojan. 2) Calocojan admitted to stealing the blank checks and forging Chin's signature. She filled in the checks and encashed them at Security Bank from 2015 to 2018. 3) Chin is seeking reimbursement of PHP 782,600 plus damages and attorney's fees from Security Bank for failing to verify the forged signatures and encashing the stolen checks.

Uploaded by

lucky
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
282 views4 pages

Plaintiff,: Regional Trial Court

1) Min A. Chin, owner of Brainy Kids Montessori, filed a complaint against Security Bank - Kalentong Branch for encashing nine forged checks totaling PHP 782,600 that were stolen and filled out by their former auditor, May B. Calocojan. 2) Calocojan admitted to stealing the blank checks and forging Chin's signature. She filled in the checks and encashed them at Security Bank from 2015 to 2018. 3) Chin is seeking reimbursement of PHP 782,600 plus damages and attorney's fees from Security Bank for failing to verify the forged signatures and encashing the stolen checks.

Uploaded by

lucky
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION


REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Mandaluyong City, Branch No. 23

Brainy Kids Montessori


represented by Min A. Chin, President/ Owner
Plaintiff,

- versus - Civil Case No. 31


For: Collection of Sum
of Money

Security Bank – Kalentong Branch,


Defendant.
x----------------------------x

COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT

Plaintiff MIN A. CHIN, by counsel, after having been duly sworn


according to law hereby depose and say:

1. That PLAINTIFF Min A. Chin is of legal age, single, Filipino citizen


and a resident of 143 New Era St., Mandaluyong City where she can
be served with summons and other court processes;

2. That DEFENDANT Security Bank – Kalentong Branch is a domestic


corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of
Philippine laws with principal address at 78 Kalentong St.,
Mandaluyong City where it may be served with summons and other
court processes;

3. That Plaintiff is the proprietor of Brainy Kids Montessori (hereafter


referred to as “Montessori”), a sole proprietorship formed under the
laws of the Philippines with DTI Registration No. 00849744, as
evidenced by “ANNEX A”;

4. That the Plaintiff is the holder and authorized signatory of


Montessori’s check(s) under Current Account No. 0291-0081-01 of
Security Bank-Kalentong Branch, as evidenced by “ANNEX B”;

5. That in behalf of Montessori, Plaintiff is filing a formal complaint


for Recovery of Sum of Money against “Security Bank –
Kalentong Branch” [herein “Defendant”], for the encashment of
forged check(s) in violation of Sec. 23 of Negotiable Instruments
Law which provides that:

Page 1 of 4
“When a signature is forged or made without the
authority of the person whose signature it purports to
be, it is wholly inoperative, and no right to retain
the instrument, or to give a discharge therefor, or to
enforce payment thereof against any party thereto, can
be acquired through or under such signature,
unless the party against whom it is sought to enforce
such right is precluded from setting up the forgery or
want of authority.”

6. That sometime during the 2nd quarter of 2018, Mr. Makasair A.


Alvarez of LBCC, Montessori’s external auditor, while conducting
audit, had discovered that nine (9) check(s) issued by Defendant
bank, under Montessori’s Current Account No. 029-0081-01, with
check numbers 839700, 839459, 839609, 839549, 839569,
729149, 729129, 839684 and 729034, all bearing Plaintiff’s
signature, had been encashed by a certain Magna Nacao since 2015
in the total amount of Seven hundred eighty two thousand and six
hundred pesos (Php 782,600.00) (see “ANNEX C”);

7. That the check(s) described in Annex C were actually blank and


unsigned check(s), and were neither delivered nor intended to be
delivered to one Magna Nacao, nor did the plaintiff authorize the
latter to fill up the material particulars of the check(s);

8. That the aforementioned check(s) were unlawfully taken from the


possession of the Plaintiff by one “Magna Nacao”, whose true
identity was later identified as Ms. May B. Calocojan;

9. That Ms. Calocojan a.k.a. “Magna Nacao” was the external auditor of
Montessori inclusive of Fiscal Years 2014 to 2018;

10. That on 14 July, 2018, Plaintiff proceeded in the place of residence


of Ms. Calocojan in 21 Annex St., Mandaluyong City in order to
obtain her explanation regarding the stolen check(s); that then and
there, Ms. Calocojan personally admitted that she stole the
check(s) and voluntary made a statement in writing explaining
the circumstances of how the check(s) came in her possession and
the reasons thereof thru her letter of apology (see “ANNEX D”);

11. That Ms. Calocojan drawn herself as the payee of the said check(s),
filled up the material particulars without authority, forged the
signature of the Plaintiff (as evidenced by the findings of PNP Crime
Lab, “ANNEX E”, in support of Ms. Calocojan’s admission), and
presented the checks for encashment on the dates incorporated in
Annex C, at the Defendant’s bank, to her own benefit and to the
prejudice of the Plaintiff;
Page 2 of 4
12. That Defendant bank accepted and encashed the said forged
check(s) upon the presentment for payment, and debited such
amounts from the account of Montessori;

13. That under “Annex E,” the PNP Crime Lab report, the questioned
signatures of Ms. Min A. Chin appearing in the checks marked “Q-1”
to “Q-9” and the standard signatures submitted for comparison
marked “S-1” to “S2” inclusive, were written by two different
persons;

14. That Defendant bank, who was in a better position to determine the
genuineness of the check presented before it, failed to exert the
required due diligence and care in the prevention of such faulty
discharge, as stated in the case of Samsung Construction
Company Philippines, Inc. v. Far East Bank and Trust
Company, Inc., G.R. No. 129015, August 13, 2004, 436 SCRA
402, 421:

“It is well-settled that banks are engaged in a business


impressed with public interest, and it is their duty to
protect in return their many clients and depositors who
transact business with them. They have the obligation
to treat their clients account meticulously and with the
highest degree of care, considering the fiduciary nature
of their relationship. The diligence required of banks,
therefore, is more than that of a good father of a
family.”

In addition, in Republic Bank vs. Court of Appeals, 196 SCRA


100, G.R. No. 42725 April 22, 1991), it was stated that:

“Every bank that issues a check for the use of its


customers should know whether or not the drawers
signature thereon is genuine, whether therein sufficient
funds in the drawers account to cover the checks
issued, and it should be able to detect alterations,
erasures, superimpositions or intercalations thereon,
for these instrument prepared, printed and issued by
itself, it has control of the drawers account, and it is
supposed to be familiar with the drawers signature. It
should possess appropriate detecting devices for
uncovering forgeries and/or alterations on these
instruments.”

15. That on 24 July 2018, upon learning of such external audit report,
the Plaintiff immediately proceeded to the Defendant bank and
made known to the bank’s Branch Manager - Leilane C. Cabras that
she neither prepared the said check(s) nor attached her signature
Page 3 of 4
thereto; that her purported signature therein was forged and that
reimbursement should be made. The bank’s Branch Manager
promised to credit back the amount but only after it had completed
its own investigation;

16. That on 16 November 2018, the Plaintiff, through counsel, made a


formal demand from the Defendant bank the amount of Seven
Hundred Eighty Two Thousand Six Hundred Pesos (Php782,600.00)
plus interest thereto, however, such demand was unheeded;

17. That the Plaintiff spent Php100,000.00 for attorney’s fees for the
filing of this complaint-affidavit.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed unto
this Honorable Court that judgment be rendered in favor of the Plaintiff and
that after judgment:

a. The Defendant be ordered to reimburse Plaintiff the principal amount


of Php782,600.00, plus damages to be computed from date of the
filing of the herein complaint;

b. The Defendant be ordered to pay Php100,000.00 for the Attorney’s


Fees;

c. The Defendant be ordered to pay for the litigation expenses; and

d. The Defendant be ordered to pay for the costs of suit.

Such other reliefs and remedies under the said premises are likewise
prayed for.

City of Mandaluyong, this 26th day of November, 2018

______________________
Atty. Jennifer A. Lopez
Counsel for the Plaintiff
PTR No. 18909595:1-04-07:B.C.
IBP No, 693095:1-04-07:B.C.
Roll No. 42481:5-10-97:
Rm. 4 2/F Rockwell Center
180 Lacson, Mandaluyong City
th
5 MCLE Compliance No.IV-0025415

Page 4 of 4

You might also like