CONSUMER RIGHT

Hi, I would like to check if i have legal liability on this and if the principle of unjust enrichment applies.
I paid my gasoline bill using a card and the Cashier actually incorrectly punched the amount. She should punch higher versus lower. What i Signed (invoice) is only lower bill. Now they are chasing me saying that they need to punch more. Do you think i have legal liability?

P.S My initial impression is really no on the ground of their negligence. and in addition to that, Had i used cash they would not be able to contact me whatsoever. Lucky them that i used my card and they had retained my email address on file.

Your thoughts please

if you don't pay, the poor cashier will have to shoulder it, and you get away with free gas. IMO, that is unjust enrichment.

principle of unjust enrichment applies.
You enjoyed the gas, you ought to pay them.

hahah, thanks i did pay it.

i know sometimes it seems it's unfair. if you had over paid, they'd make you go through hoops to get a refund. but let's not stoop to 'panlalamang'.

Atty Not to argue with you but maybe you just missed a piece of info to give the right comment. hindi ako nanlamang. i didnt even know that the card was underpunched until they call me. what happens is that the invoice that i signed commensurates to the amount that was credited to my account only to find out that they havent punched the whole amount and i this was not made known to me. My additional comment is also the fact that they are asking me to go back just becase they wanted to punch the transaction again. .This is very inconvenient and considering this is at the cashier's negligence. hope this gives the 360 view of the situation

@richard i think you are a law student. please ensure that the situation merits the two criteria that is required for the principle of unjust enrichment to be applicable here. please let me know thanks!

hello cypher. sorry if you found that offensive, but i did not intend to mean that you were already nanlalamang; but IMO it would be panlalamang if you had decided not to pay. and sorry to say, but from your post, i believe you were very tempted not to pay.

nevertheless, you don't have to agree to go back and you can make them pick up the payment though you'd lose the privelege of using your card. you don't have to do it immediately as long as it's done within a reasonable time such as a week. talk to the manager or the cashier. hopefully, their appreciation for your honesty and apology will make it worthwhile.

There is unjust enrichment "when a person unjustly retains a benefit to the loss of another, or when a person retains money or property of another against the fundamental principles of justice, equity and good conscience." The principle of unjust enrichment requires two conditions: (1) that a person is benefited without a valid basis or justification, and (2) that such benefit is derived at the expense of another

Indeed and the good aura pays off thanks atty:)

HELLO SIR CYPHER:

I'm sorry for the delayed reply. I thought im out of the picture already when Atty. LLL took over.

I admit i wrote the answer on impression only. Your advice really made me re-examine the facts and my knowledge of unjust enrichment. When we meet in class sir and you will ask us to give our opinion on the same facts, at least i can confidently answer again that indeed there was unjust enrichment and the three elements are present.

The fundamental doctrine of unjust enrichment is the transfer of value without just cause or consideration. The elements of this doctrine are: 1)enrichment on the part of the defendant; 2)impoverishment on the part of the plaintiff; and 3)lack of cause. The main objective is to prevent one to enrich himself at the expense of another. This is a doctrine based on equity and it is commonly accepted that this doctrine simply means that a person shall not be allowed to profit or enrich himself inequitably at another's expense.

In the problem formulated, 1) the buyer had free gas and that is considered enrichment on his part; 2) the unpaid gas would be an impoverishment though the amount may be negligible on the part of the gas station owner (attendant if made to shoulder the loss); and 3) there is no legal cause for the station to give the motorist free gas. The good faith of the motorist or the negligence of the attendant are beside the point and shall be considered only in the determination of damages, if any.

+++++++++++
Thank very much sir for giving me a taste of the possible opinion writing part of the exam.
Sir Atty LLL and Sir Cypher6 - I look forward and would appreciate your comments. I'll be checking them out in 3 days and the coming days thereafter. Thank you.

PS: The amount of gas that comes out of the gas funnel (?) and the amount that should be paid by the customer, should have tallied with what is shown on the screen of the cashier's computer monitor and the print-out of the amount due and collected. Di po ba?

Hi Richard:

Yes you're answer makes sense and is justly tenable. although, the loophole here is the evidence. what is the cashier's evedince that i was unjustly enriched whereby the invoice that i signed indicated that the gasoline the i consumed is only this much (you get my point). their claim that i was unjustly enriched that i have more gasoline than what i have paid cannot be substantiated simply becuase i did not sign any documents supporting this. pero out of the goodness of my hear, i just gave them what they asked

He he he. Yes, based on the receipt as their evidence, they wont be able to prove that you received more gas than what you paid. The amount paid and the volume of gas should match because the computer is programmed to adjust the figures as the gas flow from their hose to your tank. If the receipt says you were charged 1000, the receipt would also show that the machine released the amount of gas for that amount.

It would be different however if the the station still operates underthe old style where attendant loads the gas, yells the amount or the liters to the cashier, cashier punches what he heards in the tinker box then peeps through the hole and say "Sir, wan tawsan lang Apo."