tsi ming choi wrote: er claude wrote:Good day! tanong ko lang po kung meron po bang nasasaad sa consumer act natin about employees na sinungaling at tamad? The employee's misconduct led to a verbal agreement na hindi naman tinupad. Meron po ba tayong batas sa ganitong sitwasyon? Salamat po!
Medyo confusing po yung tanong nyo,
Are you refering to the conduct of your employee? If so, labor code will apply and not consumer act.
Or are you refering to the conduct of an employee and you are the aggrieved consumer/customer? If so, consumer act(pertains to goods) or civil code will apply.
Which is which?
Yung second one po. Ang nangyari po kasi I was sending out a package and I used the service of a courier company.
The package got delayed so I called the branch where my package is. I asked where my package was and the person who I was talking to tolf me na andun daw yung package ko, so I asked if baka pwedeng ibukod na niya kasi papupuntahin ko na lang ang consignee ko sa branch nila pero ang sabi niya ganito: "Sir, wala po kasi yung OIC namin kaya hindi ko pwedeng galawin yung package nyo pero andito siya."
Turns out, HE was the OIC. Nalaman ko na siya pala ang OIC pagtawag ko kinabukasan. I was pissed so I asked for the branch manager at ang sabi sa akin, para daw makabawi sila, sila na daw ang sasagot ng susunod kong padala. They acknowledged naman their promise nung magpapadala na ako ulit, and I have documents to prove na alam nila yung kasunduan namin.
Pero now, they won't keep their promise. Actually, mahaba po talaga ang story pero this is the gist of everything. I looked up the civil code and these are what I found. I guess ang concern ko nalang is if I should write a demand letter para dun sa dalawang tao based on the articles below.
Title XVII. - EXTRA-CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS
Chapter 2: Quasi-Delicts
Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter. (1902a)
Art. 2178. The provisions of Articles 1172 to 1174 are also applicable to a quasi-delict. (n)
Art. 2180. The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for one's own acts or omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is responsible.
The owners and managers of an establishment or enterprise are likewise responsible for damages caused by their employees in the service of the branches in which the latter are employed or on the occasion of their functions.
Title XVIII. - DAMAGES
Chapter 3: Other Kinds of Damages
Section 1: Moral Damages
Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases:
(10) Acts and actions referred to in Articles 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, and 35.
Preliminary Title Chapter 2: Human Relations
Art. 27. Any person suffering material or moral loss because a public servant or employee refuses or neglects, without just cause, to perform his official duty may file an action for damages and other relief against the latter, without prejudice to any disciplinary administrative action that may be taken.
Section 5: Exemplary or Corrective Damages
Art. 2229. Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages.
Art. 2231. In quasi-delicts, exemplary damages may be granted if the defendant acted with gross negligence.
Art. 2232. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award exemplary damages if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner.
Message [Page 1 of 1]
Home