Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

Republic of the Philippines

Office of the Secretary
Padre Faura St. Ermita, Manila



Under Article
315(b) of the
Revised Penal
Code of the Philippines

MR. X,


COMES NOW, the undersigned Respondent, unto this Honorable Office respectfully
1. That for the information of the Honorable Secretary this case started
sometime around October 2014, the Respondent bought a brand new vehicle from
the Complainant, a black 350e Mercedes Benz model 2015 with Conduction No.
AB 1234, for the amount of (php.3, 500,000.00) three million and five hundred
thousand pesos, in which the Respondent paid full in cash, and included in which
a warranty for the defects of the brand new vehicle for a year from the date of the
1.1 That after only around (3) three months from
purchasing the said Vehicle, somewhere around January 2015, the
Respondent had to come back to the Shop of the Complainant to

have his vehicle checked and repaired because he noticed that there
was a sound emanating from the front wheels of his vehicle every
time he stepped on the breaks;
1.2 That after a few days the Respondent was called by the
Complainants Shop Manager to visit the shop to sign some
documents and papers for the repair of his vehicle.
1.3 That upon the notice that his vehicle was already ok, the
Respondent immediately went to the Complainants shop to check
his car and upon doing so he made sure that it was indeed fixed by
asking to test drive it first and when he realized that it was free
from any defects while driving the vehicle, he excitedly went
1.4 That after a few days, the Respondent received
demands from the Complainant to settle his fees for the repair of
the vehicle. However, due to the extremely busy schedule of the
Respondent those times he never had the chance to talk to the
Complainant to settle their disputes.
1.5 That because of the circumstances mentioned above the
Complainant initiated actions that led to this petition.
2. That on 7 March 2015, the undersigned received the resolution of the
Honorable Prosecutor disposing the case as follows:
After a careful study of the facts of the case, the
undersigned finds that there is probable cause to indict the
respondent for Estafa under Article 315 (b) of the Revised Penal
Code. It is clear that the respondent failed to return the car after
test drive and even failed to fulfil his obligation of paying the
repair of the same.
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully recommended that

information for the crime of Estafa be filed against the respondent,

MR. X.
3. That the undersigned Respondent believes that none of the essential
requisites of Estafa under Article 315(b), or any other crimes mentioned in the
Revised Penal Code of the Philippines were present in the facts mentioned by
both the Complainant and the Respondent.
4. That with due respect to the Honorable Prosecutor, the Respondent
believes that the Honorable Prosecutor erred on the following:
4.1 That the Respondent never knew, nor was informed that
the repair of his vehicle was not covered by the warranty.
4.2 That the Respondent strongly believes that such repair
should have been covered by the warranty because the damage
found on his car was not due to the error of the user.
4.3 That Respondent was hesitant to reply to the messages
of the Complainant because he strongly believed that he was being
intimidated into the paying of such fees when it should have been
covered by the warranty.
4.5 That none of the essential requisites of Estafa were
present or was employed by the Respondent in his actions. The
said essential elements of Estafa under Article 315(b) of the
Revised Penal Code of the Philippines are the following:


that money, goods or other personal property is

received by the offender in trust or on commission, or

for administration, or under any other obligation
involving the duty to make delivery of or to return the


that there be misappropriation or conversion of

such money or property by the offender, or denial on

his part of such receipt

that such misappropriation or conversion or

denial is to the prejudice of another; and


there is demand by the offended party to the


WHEREFORE, the Respondent respectfully prays for the setting aside of the
appealed resolution of Prosecutor Juan Sanchez dated 28 February 2015, and that the
honorable prosecutor be directed to dismiss the filing of information for the crime of
Estafa under Article 315(b) of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, against the
Respondent, Mr. X.
Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for.
City of Makati. 14 March 2015.

Counsel for Private Respondent
PTR No. 1224644-04/20/12-Manila
IBP No. 518284-04/20/12-Manila
Roll of Attorney No. 44369

(be clear and straight to the point use plain English language avoid complicated
words even though it sounds good make it easy for the reader to read your point, be

concise, choose circumstances and facts at best are neutral facts, but of course use
words that can help you, be careful that the other words you use may be used
against you, be consistent with the titles you use)
I, MR. X, of legal age, single and residing at 123 Maginhawa St. Maginhawa
Village, Makati City, after being duly sworn, depose and state; that I am the
Respondent in the above-entitled case: that I have caused preparation and filing of
the Petition for Review to the Honorable Secretary of Justice; that I have read the
same and all the allegations therein, including the documents appended thereto;
that the same are true and correct based on my personal knowledge and copies of
authentic records of the case in my possession.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 14th day of March 2015 at the
City of Makati.

Notary Public

Doc. No. _____;

Page No. _____;
Book No. ____;
Series of 2015.

Copy Furnished:

Counsel for Respondent
Co and Sy Law Offices

12th Floor, Manila One Building

#4321 Bayani Avenue, Manila City
1004 Metro Manila