G.R. No. 105836 March 7, 1994
Lessons Applicable: Promissory notes and checks (Negotiable Instruments Law)
FACTS:
- Spouses George and Librada Moran are the owners of the Wack-Wack Petron gasoline station located at Shaw Boulevard, corner Old Wack-Wack Road, Mandaluyong, Metro Manila.
- They regularly purchased bulk fuel and other related products from Petrophil Corporation on cash on delivery (COD) basis. Orders for bulk fuel and other related products were made by telephone and payments were effected by personal checks upon delivery.
- Petitioners maintained 3 joint accounts, namely 1 current account and 2 savings accounts with the Shaw Boulevard branch of Citytrust Banking Corporation.
- As a special privilege to the Morans, whom it considered as valued clients, the bank allowed them to maintain a zero balance in their current account.
- Transfers from Saving Account to their current account could be made only with their prior authorization
- but they gave written authority to Citytrust to automatically transfer funds from their Savings Account to their Current Account at any time whenever the funds in their current account were insufficient to meet withdrawals from said current account = pre-authorized transfer (PAT) agreement
- December 12, 1983: Librada Moran drew a check for P50,576.00 payable to Petrophil Corporation
- December 13, 1983: Librada Moran, issued another check in the amount of P56,090.00 in favor of the same corporation
- December 14, 1983: Petrophil Corporation deposited the 2 checks to its account with the Pandacan branch of the Philippine National Bank (PNB), the collecting bank.
- PNB presented them for clearing with the Philippine Clearing House Corporation in the afternoon of the same day
- Records shows:
- Current Account had a zero balance
- Savings Account had an available balance of P26,104.30 and Savings Account had an available balance of P43,268.39
- December 15, 1983 10 a.m.: George Moran went to the bank, as was his regular practice, to personally oversee their daily transactions with the bank
- deposited in their Savings Account the amounts of P10,874.58 and P6,754.25
- deposited in their Savings Account No. 1037001372 the amounts of P5,900.00, P35,100.00 and 30.00
- P40,000.00 was then transferred by him from Saving Account No. 1037002387 to their current account by means of a pro forma withdrawal form (a debit memorandum), which was provided by the bank, authorizing the latter to make the necessary transfer.
- P66,666.00 was transferred from Savings Account No. 1037001372 to the same current account through the pre-authorized transfer (PAT) agreement.
- December 15 or 16, 1983: George Moran was informed by his wife Librada, that Petrophil refused to deliver their orders on a credit basis because the 2 checks they had previously issued were dishonored upon presentment for payment due to "insufficiency of funds."
- The non-delivery of gasoline forced them to temporarily stop business operations, allegedly causing them to suffer loss of earnings.
- In addition, Petrophil cancelled their credit accommodation, forcing them to pay for their purchases in cash.
- George Moran, furious and upset, demanded an explanation from Raul Diaz, the branch manager. Failing to get a sufficient explanation, he talked to a certain Villareal, a bank officer, who allegedly told him that Amy Belen Ragodo, the customer service officer, had committed a "grave error".
- December 16 or 17, 1983: Diaz went to the Moran residence to get the signatures of the petitioners on an application for a manager's check so that the dishonored checks could be redeemed.
- Diaz then went to Petrophil to personally present the checks in payment for the 2 dishonored checks.
- May or June, 1984: George Moran learned from Constancio Magno, credit manager of Petrophil, that the he received on January 4, 1984 from Citytrust, through Diaz, a letter dated December 16, 1983, notifying them that the 2 checks were "inadvertently dishonored . . . due to operational error."
- July 24, 1984: Moran, through counsel, wrote Citytrust claiming that the bank's dishonor of the checks caused them besmirched business and personal reputation, shame and anxiety, hence they were contemplating the filing of the necessary legal actions unless the bank issued a certification clearing their name and paid them P1,000,000.00 as moral damages
- CA affirmed RTC's dismissal
W/N: Spouses Moran can sue Citytrust for damages for negligence
HELD: NO. Affirmed
- Spouses Moran had no reason to complain, for they alone were at fault.
- A drawer must remember his responsibilities every time he issues a check. He must personally keep track of his available balance in the bank and not rely on the bank to notify him of the necessity to fund certain check she previously issued
- A bank is under no obligation to make part payment on a check
- actions taken by the bank after the incident clearly show that there was neither malice nor bad faith, but rather a clear intent to mollify an obviously agitated client
- letter was sent by respondent bank to Petrophil explaining that the dishonor of the checks was due to "operational error." - NOT an admission of guilt
- bank may not be held responsible for such damages in the absence of fraud, bad faith, malice, or wanton attitude