You are on page 1of 6

Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
Cagayan de Oro City

LORNA Z. RANIDO and NPS NO. _________________
ALDWIN M. GEMENTIZA,
Complainant,

- versus- FOR: ESTAFA and B.P.22

JESELINE M. GABUCAN,
Respondent.
x------------------------------------------------x

JOINT AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLAINT

WE, LORNA Z. RANIDO and ALDWIN M. GEMENTIZA, both of legal
age, married, Filipino citizen and residents of Poblacion, Binuangan, Misamis
Oriental, after being sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and say:

1. That we are filing a criminal complaint for Estafa or swindling under
section 2(d) of Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code and for seventeen
(17) counts of violation of B.P. 22 against JESELINE M. GABUCAN,
hereinafter referred to as “respondent GABUCAN” for brevity, who is of
legal age, married, Filipino citizen and whose last known address is Zone
1, Bantiles, Bugo, Cagayan de Oro City;

2. That complainant LORNA Z. RANIDO, hereinafter referred to as
“complainant RANIDO” for brevity, started her business transaction with
“respondent GABUCAN” when the latter bought jewelries on credit from
the former’s jewelry business, which purchases over the years have
totaled to about more than P300,000.00;

3. That sometime in February 2014, Respondent, who had then become one
of complainant RANIDO’s valued clients in her jewelry business, pleaded
with the latter to let the former borrow money in order for her to purchase
the needed materials for her projects with certain barangays in Cagayan
de Oro City as supplier of materials and supplies;

4. That as an accommodation to Respondent for being one of the valued
clients in complainant RANIDO’s jewelry business, the latter started
lending the former money with 7% interest beginning that month
onwards for which Respondent simultaneously issued and signed as
drawer and delivered to complainant RANIDO checks payable to cash as
payments thereof;

RANIDO gave all the aforementioned seventeen (17) checks to her son-in-law. That complainant RANIDO. which are marked hereto as Annexes “A-2” to “Q-2”. That during the same period. 9. That Respondent signed all these seventeen (17) checks as drawer. to which demand she responded by promising to deposit her payments thereof in complainant . thereafter. Cagayan de Oro City. respectively. That in each of these transaction. herein Complainant ALDWIN GEMENTIZA. Respondent also issued. and after which. Velez branch. photocopies of which are hereto attached as Annexes “A” to “Q”. That. That from that month up to February 2015. however. That when complainant RANIDO likewise deposited all the aforementioned fourteen (14) checks to her own account in Eastwest Bank. hereinafter referred to as “complainant GEMENTIZA” for brevity. That. 10. she immediately informed Respondent by cellphone call and text messages about them and demanded that she pay their principal amounts and interest thereon at 7%. when complainant GEMENTIZA deposited all the aforementioned seventeen (17) checks to his own account in Banco de Oro. That when complainant RANIDO learned about the dishonor of these fourteen (14) checks. Misamis Oriental.332. 11.265. respectively. totaling P1. Respondent issued the corresponding check and received by complainant in Cagayan de Oro City. 7. on the fact that the checks she issued were all good and honored by their respective drawee banks. Velez Branch. with her signature on each of these checks marked as Annexes “A-1” to “Q-1”. all the checks Respondent issued and delivered simultaneously to complainant RANIDO as payments for her loans from her were all good and honored by their respective drawee banks. all of them were dishonored by the drawee bank for the reason that Respondent’ account is already closed as evidenced by its rubber stamp marks to that effect on the face of each check. signed and delivered to RANIDO fourteen (14) other postdated checks payable to cash with maturity dates starting from 23 June 2015 to 17 July 2015. by personally releasing the cash at Eastwest Bank. 8. 13. RANIDO parted with her money because she relied on Respondent repeated representation that each check represented her income from her business as supplier of materials and supplies to certain barangays in Cagayan de Oro City and for the succeeding transactions. all of them were likewise dishonored by the drawee bank for the reason that Respondent’s account is already closed. 12.60 as payments for each of her subsequent loans from her. Cagayan de Oro City.5. 6. respectively. as investment to their bakery businesses in Binuangan and Gingoog City. Cagayan de Oro City.

Bugo. complainant RANIDO and her daughter went to Respondent’s residence at Zone 1. That on 28 March 2016. Raul Manuel P. RANIDO’s aforesaid bank account in Eastwest Bank. Cagayan de Oro City on 27 February 2016 after giving her a 3-day prior written notice by text messages about such visit and attempted to see her but according to Respondent’s own daughter. formally informing her about the other aforementioned seventeen (17) bounced checks and demanding that she pay or arrange the payment of the full amounts of the checks and interests thereon with him in his law office within five (5) days from .000. Cagayan de Oro City. prepared another demand letter addressed to GABUCAN dated 5 April 2016 and sent it to her by LBC courier. 15. Paayas. That when complainant GEMETIZA informed Respondent about the aforementioned seventeen (17) checks that were also dishonored. Perseverando L..00 with one (1) deposit of P10. thereafter. Raul Manuel P. Paayas. prepared a demand letter addressed to Respondent dated 4 March 2016 and sent it to her by LBC courier. Atty. formally informing her about those fourteen (14) bounced checks and demanding that she pay or arrange the payment of the full amounts of the checks and interests thereon with him in his law office within five (5) days from receipt thereof. 17. acknowledging receipt of such demand letter and alleging that she made cash deposits to her account payments of the amounts of the checks without mentioning how much and that she has in her possession cash deposit slips without attaching any of them. informing her that all the more she will not pay her for those dishonored checks because she allegedly embarrassed her for going to her residence. the latter also made demands by text messages and by cellphone calls to Respondent to pay the amounts of these checks. That. 19. on complainant RANIDO’s request. Arana. consequently. That when Respondent failed to do so and even refused to see complainant RANIDO in person nor talk to her about the payments of all these dishonored checks.00. 14. dated 23 March 2016. 18. Bantiles. he will be constrained to file criminal cases complainant RANIDO’s behalf. 16. Velez branch. the aforesaid lawyer informed complainant RANIDO that he received a letter from Respondent’s lawyer. Atty. Jr.000. A few minutes after informing her daughter that she is there to collect the principal amounts of her dishonored checks. Atty. complainant RANIDO informed Respondent that these deposited minimal amounts represented only the 7% interests of the amounts of the checks. That. That when complainant RANIDO found out that the amounts of Respondent’s deposits to her aforesaid account for the payment of the principal amounts of these fourteen (14) checks and 7% interests thereon were very minimal. otherwise. which were mostly in the amount of P3. she is not at home. complainant RANIDO received a text message from Respondent. on our joint request.

00. That in a letter dated 11 April 2016. Respondent’s lawyer arranged for a meeting between him and Respondent and complainant RANIDO and his lawyer in the latter’s law office for the purpose of amicable settlement.00. receipt thereof. excluding the aforementioned seventeen (17) bounced checks. 25.60 considering that she still has an unpaid liability arising from her jewelry purchases on credit from complainant RANIDO in the total amount of P230. Respondent failed to show up on 31 may 2016 without explaining why.000. respectively. A query by text messages from complainant RANIDO’s lawyer to Respondent’s lawyer on 3 June 2016 whether she is still interested to settle amicably revealed that the latter does not know because she has no longer communicated with him. 21. In fact. a receipt issued by LBC documenting its sending on 6 April 2016 and a transaction history issued by LBC documenting its delivery to Respondent’s daughter. Respondent promised to meet with complainant RANIDO on 31 May 2016 in the law office of the latter’s lawyer to propose the payment of their total in the amount of P1. That after holding two (2) meetings. That. . copy of which is hereto attached as Annexes “U” to “U-2”. Respondent and complainant RANIDO then entered into an amicable settlement only of the aforementioned fourteen (14) bounced checks. despite complainant RANIDO’s subsequent text messages and calls to her to inquire about such promise and her desire to settle amicably. he will be constrained to file criminal cases against her in our behalf. she failed to reply nor communicate with her. That contrary to her promise.000. 24. That with the assistance of their respective counsels.000. thereafter. on 7 April 2016. whereby Respondent acknowledged receipt of the aforesaid demand letters sent to her dated 4 March 2016 (for the fourteen bounced checks) and 5 April 2016 (for the seventeen bounced checks) and arranged for the weekly payment within one (1) year from May 2016 to June 2017 of a small portion of her accountability arising from the fourteen (14) bounced checks in the amount of only P120.090. Respondent’s lawyer acknowledged receipt of such demand letter and again requested for an accounting of her accountability without again attaching evidence of her payments. Respondent and complainant RANIDO agreed that after considering all the total payments by bank deposits of the former to the latter from 2015 to 2016. That as to the aforesaid seventeen (17) bounced checks.00. however. are hereto attached as Annexes “R” to “R-1”. the unpaid balance of the aforesaid fourteen (14) bounced checks is reduced to P1.00 while promising to meet complainant RANIDO again in May 2017 to propose definite terms acceptable to her for the payment of the balance in the amount of P970.879. which Respondent requested to be reduced to P850.000. otherwise. 23. copies of which demand letter.295. copy of which is hereto attached as Annex “T” to “T-1”. “S” and “S-1”.00. Norway Gabucan. 20. 22.000.

wounded feelings. GEMENTIZA Affiant Affiant .295. She also suffered besmirched reputation with a previous good credit standing to her own creditor from whom she borrowed some of such amount. That as a proximate result of her fraud and deceit in making complainant RANIDO part with her money in the total amount of P1.000. 26. GABUCAN with the aforementioned claims for actual and moral damages. That.P. for which she promised to meet her on 31 May 2016 to propose terms for amicable settlement but failed to do so up to this writing despite follow ups from complainant RANIDO and her lawyer. 27. Respondent’s repeated representations that each check she issued to complainant RANIDO is a good check because it represented her income from her business as supplier of materials and supplies to certain barangays in Cagayan de Oro City is indicative of her fraudulent plan to let complainant RANIDO place so much reliance on her aforementioned assurances and past credit standing that complainant RANIDO allowed her to borrow money from her in the bigger total amount of P1. 22 against JESELINE M. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. That we are executing this Affidavit freely. moreover. and related sufferings for which Respondent should be made to pay moral damages to her.00 in exchange with those seventeen (17) worthless checks. Philippines. That Respondent’s continuing failure up to this writing to pay or even arrange for the payment of the full amounts of the aforesaid seventeen (17) bounced checks to complainant RANIDO after she was both informally and formally notified that they were dishonored for the reason that her account with her drawee bank is already closed and after she was given time to arrange for their payment.000. 29. __________________________ ______________________________ LORNA Z. 28. voluntarily and intelligently in order to attest to the truth of the foregoing facts for the purpose of filing a criminal complaint for estafa or swindling under section 2(d) of Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code and for seventeen (17) counts of violation of B. sleepless nights worrying about the legal threats of her own creditor to foreclose her properties for the non-payment of such amount and interest thereon.295. RANIDO ALDWIN M.00 for which Respondent issued the aforementioned seventeen (17) worthless checks. constitutes prima facie evidence of deceit. We have hereunto affixed our signatures this 7th day of April 2017 at Cagayan de Oro City. complainant RANIDO suffered and continues to suffer financial damages in such total principal amount and 7% interests thereon as well as attorney’s fees to her lawyer at 10% thereof as acceptance fee.

D. respectively. with precinct no. GEMENTIZA with COMELEC I. 0005B. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me. LORNA Z. 0006A and COMELEC I. . this ___th day of ______ 2017 at Cagayan de Oro City. RANIDO and ALDWIN M. with precinct no.D. personally appeared to me on the basis of competent proof of identity to be the same persons who executed the Joint Counter Affidavit and acknowledged to me that the same is their voluntary free act and deed.