[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’ ABOVE THE LAW ‘ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=” subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=” av-medium-font-size-title=” av-small-font-size-title=” av-mini-font-size-title=” av-medium-font-size=” av-small-font-size=” av-mini-font-size=” admin_preview_bg=”]
BY AYIN DREAM D. APLASCA
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=” av-medium-font-size=” av-small-font-size=” av-mini-font-size=” admin_preview_bg=”]
A FEW WEEKS ago, I had a friend who asked for my legal services. The complaint-affidavit he received was for violation of Batas Pambansa (BP) 22 also known as the Bouncing Checks Law.
The issue that he is now facing is whether or not he is liable for the said crime. According to him, he did not issue the dishonored checks but became part only of the case because he was a party in the transaction.
I will not discuss my counter and position on this matter. Rather, I will discuss what BP 22 is. A lot of people may have an idea about this. However, only few are totally familiar with this, especially when it comes to legal matters.
The purpose of BP 22 is to discourage the issuance of bouncing checks, to prevent checks from becoming useless, and to restore the decency to checks. Also, the purpose is to maintain the commercial value of checks.
Section 1 of BP 22 tells us who and when the law should be applied. The law punishes the making or the drawing of a check to apply on account or for value when the maker or drawer knew at the time of issue that the account against which the check was drawn had no sufficient funds in, or enough credit with, the drawee bank for the payment of such check or when the maker or drawer of the check issues a stop payment order on such a check without any valid reason.
In both cases discussed in the preceding paragraph, the check is dishonored by reason of insufficient funds.
It is also a violation of BP 22 when the maker or drawer of such a check fails to maintain sufficient funds in, or enough credit with, the drawee bank to cover the full amount of the check for a period of 90 days from the date appearing on the check and the check is dishonored for such reason.
The penalty for violation of BP 22 is imprisonment for 30 days to one year or a fine, or both.
There are two developments of this law since it was enacted. The first one is the imposition of a fine only, and not imprisonment only.
The fine is in an amount equal or double the amount of the check that has been deemed issued. In this development, it does not impose that imprisonment is taken away from the picture. Instead, it could only be imposed in very serious cases.
Another development is to establish that a written notice of dishonor was actually received by the maker or drawer of the dishonored check. This may be through personal service upon the issuer or by registered mail. If it is done through the latter, it is established by the registry receipt, the registry return card, and an affidavit executed by the person who mailed the notice of dishonor detailing the circumstances of the mailing.
The law affects and affords the fullest protection to the public and the economy in general. And any person who wishes to step on the smooth flow of commercial transactions must be held accountable.
Remember, the act of writing a bad check is not inherently wrong. However, the lawmakers made it an offense to keep the people free from harm especially in commercial dealings.
***
(Atty. Ayin Dream D. Aplasca practices her profession in Iloilo City. She may be reached thru ayindream.aplasca@gmail.com/PN)
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
