Notes on Bouncing Checks Law (BP-22)

Introduction

• Topic: Crime of issuing a bouncing check
• Law discussed: Batas Pambansa Bilang No. 22 (BP-22)
• Purpose: Educational, not legal advice

Overview of BP-22

• BP-22 penalizes the issuance of checks without sufficient funds.
• It does not violate the constitutional provision against imprisonment for debts (1987 Constitution, Article 3, Section 23).
• BP-22 punishes the act of issuing a bouncing check, not the non-payment of a debt.

Nature of Offense

• Malum Prohibitum:
  • Offense is not inherently immoral, but defined as a crime by law.
  • Good faith is not a defense against BP-22 violations.

Two Ways to Violate BP-22

1. First Manner of Violation

• Conditions for Violation:
  1. Person issues a check while knowing they lack sufficient funds or credit.
  2. Check is issued for value (goods/services) and is subsequently dishonored for insufficient funds.
  3. Knowledge of insufficient funds must be at the time of issuing the check.
  4. Check must be dishonored by the bank or would be dishonored if not stopped for a non-valid reason.
• Important Notes:
  • Non-payment for a pre-existing obligation still results in BP-22 violation if the check bounces.
  • A stop payment order is not a valid defense unless it was for a legitimate reason (e.g., error in payee name).

2. Second Manner of Violation

• Conditions for Violation:
  1. Person has sufficient funds at the time of issuing the check.
  2. Fails to maintain sufficient funds for 90 days after issuing the check.
  3. Check is dishonored within this period.
• Key Concept:
  • The drawer must maintain sufficient balance in their account for at least 90 days.

Duties of Drawee Bank

• Bank must provide written reasons for dishonoring a check (e.g., DAIF - drawn against insufficient funds).
• Failure to do so affects the prosecution's case.

Presumption of Knowledge

• Prima Facie Evidence:
  • Dishonor of the check creates a presumption that the drawer knew of insufficient funds.
• Exceptions to this presumption:
  1. Check presented after 90 days.
  2. Drawer pays the amount within 5 banking days after dishonor notice.
  3. Drawer arranges payment with the bank within 5 banking days.
• Wong v. Court of Appeals:
  • Establishes that the drawer must maintain sufficient funds for 180 days, not just 90 days.

Notice of Dishonor

• Must be written and personally served to the drawer.
• Lack of written notice is fatal to the prosecution's case.
• Courts have allowed alternative methods of notice in certain cases.

Penalties

• Courts prefer fines over imprisonment if the offender shows good faith or clear mistakes.
• Possible penalties include:
  • Fine (potentially double the value of the check)
  • Imprisonment (discretionary based on the court's decision)

Conclusion

• A person may be liable for both BP-22 and Estafa due to the differing elements involved in each crime.
• Estafa includes elements of deceit and damage, while BP-22 focuses solely on the act of issuing a bouncing check.
• Encourage further learning and understanding of the law.