REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES PHILIPPINES DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR La Trinidad, Benguet
_____________________, Complainant Complainan t -versus _____________________, Accused
NPS No. for RIR in Damage to Property Property
COMMENT AND OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO RELEASE IMPOUNDED VEHICLE
COMES NOW, the complainant in the above-entitled case, through legal counsel, most respectfully asseverates that: 1. On ___, an Isuzu elf canopied-truck described below, owned and operated by one ___, was recklessly driven by ___, the accused named herein, thereby causing the bumping of said truck with a ___ under the name of __ its registered owner, in the possession and used by the latter’s agent and attorney-in-fact, __, the above-named complainant, which incident occurred at Camp 1, Tuba, Benguet; 2. Said motor vehicle was duly apprehended and impounded by the Philippine National Police stationed at Tuba Municipal Police Station; 3. The registered owner and operator of the said motor vehicle used in the commission of the offense filed a Motion to Release Impounded Vehicle with the Honorable Provincial Prosecutor’s Office for the release of the subject motor vehicle; 4. The complainant, with all due respect, implores upon the good discretion of the Honorable Prosecutor’s Office for the denial of the said Motion, stressing upon the materiality of said motor vehicle as evidence that the court should have eventual preservative control over, and that the subject motor vehicle need be prudently withheld and placed in custodia legis for the material consideration in the trial of the proper case(s) the Honorable Prosecutor’s Office would ultimately find probable cause to file in the proper court(s); 5. The complainant further stresses on the bad faith on the part of the registered owner to evade any liability on his part arising from the reckless act of his employee and from his
own negligence in the management of his operations and in the selection and supervision of his employees, and more importantly, his unworthiness of the trust reposed upon him, which bad faith and unworthiness were clearly and evidently shown in the following circumstances, to wit: a.) That he failed to prudently, conscientiously, judiciously and timely appear at the site of the incident despite promising to come when he was contacted right after the incident by his employee/driver at complainant’s behest for the immediate settlement of the incident. Two hours later, another phone call revealed that said registered owner had not left his residence yet. Complainant still patiently waited in good faith for the registered owner, this time at the PNP Tuba Municipal Police Station but a third call at about 7:00 PM revealed that she has not made any move at all and that time his son took the call and said he could not come as no one would take care of his son. b.) Finally, after learning that we had formally filed our complaint, the truckowner’s son was forced to come only 3 hours later from the last call made or at about 10:00 PM when the complainant’s side has already left.
c.) Said truck owner had the complainant and the latter’s family waiting f or him for an astoundingly 6 long hours or from 2:00 PM to 8:00 in the evening; d.) Such contemptible excuse of the registered owner that there was no one to take care of his child finds no merit in the dealings of a fair and prudent man who honors his words knowing that his and his employee’s acts already caused damaged to another man. On the contrary, by letting the complainant and the latter’s family wait in vain, said registered owner even aggravated the damage he and his employee have caused. More importantly, such ineffectual reason as to why the registered owner made the complainant wait pales in comparison when placed side by side with the reason why the complainant had to come up to Baguio from Pangasinan- complainant’s son was hospitalized due to some illness which even doctors could not diagnose. Imagine the agony of a mother who had to wait for 6 hours in the hope that the incident be fixed e.) That despite the fact of the express amenability from the plaintiff’s side to settle and compromise the case right after the incident, the registered owner who filed the opposed claim persistently showed a total lack of good faith in making reparations, remedying, or at least reducing the damages, hurt and afflictions-both physical and mental, which his and that of his employee’s acts caused to the complainant’s side, with said registered owner displaying a hard countenance during talks to settle his liability, treating the plaintiff’s side as if it is the latter’s fault why the incident occurred
and as if he were the one being inconvenienced by the plaintiff’s showing of good
faith in attempting to settle the case as promptly and judiciously as possible; f.) That days after the incident, said registered owner made the plaintiff’s side incur additional and unnecessary costs and expenses when he made complainant’s side believe that he would give an agreed amount to prevent further litigation and put an end to any more controversy, making them travel from Pangasinan to Baguio and make them miss their work just to wilfully and irreverently renege on his promise. 6. The foregoing acts of the registered owner illustrate why the registered owner, movant in the opposed claim, is not worthy of even an iota of belief and credence in the promises he made in his Motion and in the Affidavit of Undertaking attached therein where he promised to present said vehicle and not to transfer or otherwise dispose of the subject motor vehicle when needed by this Honorable Office.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, MANIFESTATION AND PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable Provincial Prosecutor’s Office that the Motion to Release Impounded Vehicle be denied and the subject motor vehicle be retained under the custody of the Phil ippine National Police stationed at Tuba, Benguet and subsequently under Custodia Legis of the courts. Such other reliefs and remedies just and equitable are respectfully prayed for. Dagupan City, Philippines. December __, 2017
_____________________________ agent As Attorney-in-fact for ____
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ___day of December at Dagupan City.
Counsel for Complainant
Doc. No. __________; Page No.__________; Book No. _________; Series of 2017.
