Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Trade and Industry


Region VI
Province of Iloilo
Iloilo City

MA. ELISA DE ASIS and DANILO DE ASIS, DTI CASE NO._____


Complainants FOR:
-versus- Violation of the Consumer
Act of the Philippines
(Consumer Product Quality,
Consumer Product and Service
Warranties, Deceptive, Unfair
And Unconscionable Acts and
Practices)
DEARBORN MOTORS CO., INC.
And FAIRLANE AUTOMOTIVE VENTURES, INC.,
(FAVI)
Respondents.
x--------------------------------------------------------------x

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

COMPLAINANTS, through the undersigned counsel


unto the Honorable Agency, hereby respectfully allege as follows:

1. That, the Complainants are husband and wife, Filipinos, of


legal age and residents of Jalaud Norte, Zarraga,Iloilo, Philippines where
summons and other notices can be served upon;

2. That, the Respondent DEARBORN MOTORS Co. Inc, is a


duly registered Corporation in the Philippines with principal address in
FORD Alabang, Muntinlupa City, Philippines,where summons and notices
can be served by the agency;

3. That, Respondent FAIRLANE AUTOMOTIVE VENTURES,


INC, is a duly registered Corporation under Philippine laws with principal
address at FORD, Iloilo, Barangay Sambag, Jaro, Iloilo City where
summons and Court notices can be served by the agency;

4. That, the Complainants purchased in cash FORD RANGER


pick up with MV FILE No. 1303-00000087014 and ENGINE NO.
P4AT2043195 on July 2, 2015 as evidenced by Certificate of
Registration/ Official Receipt herein attached as Annex “A” and form an
integral part of this complaint;
5. That, after the full amount of the price of the said vehicle was
paid, the Complainants were given owner’s manual, warranty information
and maintenance booklet without the benefit of explanation or information
on the contents of the said booklet particularly how to maintain the car and
the coverage of warranty, since they were in a hurry to turn over to us the
car;

6. That, the complainants had the said vehicle serviced at Ford


Iloilo, Fairlane Automotive Ventures, Inc. (FAVI) at Sambag, Jaro, Iloilo City
at 1, 402 kilometers mileage on August 6, 2015, however no instructions
were given by the service advisor whether the subsequent preventive
maintenance should really be done at FORD service center in order to avail
of the warranty. Even until when the kilometer mileage or age of the vehicle
should be covered by warranty was not explained by the Service Advisor;

7. That, subsequently after 10, 540 kilometer mileage was


reached, the complainants had the said vehicle maintained at NIH Motor
Sales at Tabuc Suba, Jaro, Iloilo City, with fully synthetic oil good for the
next subsequent 10,000 kilometers ( 20,540 kilometers cumulative)
mileage. This is supported by the preventive maintenance record herein
attached as Annex “B” and form an integral part of the complaint;

8. That, in terms of the usage of the car, the Complainants


seldom used it since they have two (2) cars and two (2) motorcycles
standby for short distance travel especially that the husband DAN De Asis
is on board as chief engineer of the maritime vessel. The Complainants
often used FORD FOCUS sedan. This is evidenced by the fact that the
vehicle FORD RANGER pick up subject matter of this case has only 19,
340 kilometers mileage which is very far yet of the 100,000 kilometers
warranty coverage;

9. That, on May 30, 2018, which is still within the warranty period
of three (3) years an unexpected incident happened that fortunately did not
cost the lives of the Complainants. While the Complainants were going to
the Province of Antique, suddenly the car slow down that even if an attempt
of pumping of the gas cannot speed up the velocity and the car stopped
even the driver did not step on the brake;

10. That, as a consequent thereto, the Complainnts were


stranded in the roads of Antique. Thus, they called FORD Iloilo and were
advised to engage the car again on the reverse, but the situation remained
the same, thus, we engaged their towing services and the subject vehicle
was brought to their service office in Sambag, Jaro, Iloilo City;

11. That, upon arrival at their service area in Jaro, Iloilo City,
the technicians checked the vehicle and initially diagnosed it to be a
problem in transmission;
12. That, thereafter, the Complainants were referred to the
Service Maintenance Manager MR. ANUEL BONITE II, who promised the
Complainants that they will try their very best to repair the car with “ZERO
Billing” balance because the car is still under the three (3) year warranty
period;

13. That, thereafter, Mr. Bonite presented to the


Complainants a repair order and Claim Stub form to be signed, but the
Complainant Mrs. De Asis replied “ Ay wala ko antipara indi ko
makabasa mayo kay indi ko ina makita nga kagamay” ( Oh, I have no
reading glass, I cannot read well because I cannot see it well, its very
small). But, Mr. Bonite insisted that I will sign because it is only a claim
stub to be presented to the office when claiming the car. Such that, the
Complainant wife signed it because she trusted Mr. Bonite’ s claim that it
was only a claim stub with an attitude of insistence. A copy of the Repair
Order and Claim Form Stub is herein attached as Annex “C” and form an
integral part of this complaint;

14. That, the car was endorsed to FORD Iloilo for them to
diagnose what is the problem of the vehicle, to inform the complainants of
what are their findings and to apprise the Complainants of their presence
when the car will be opened so that they will really know what is wrong with
the car that has only 19, 340 kilometers mileage;

15. That, it took almost more than one (1) month that FORD
Iloilo informed the Complainants about the problem with the car. From May
30, 2018 until only July 2, 2018 that Mr. Bonite called the Complainants to
visit FORD Iloilo. Thus, on July 3, 2018, the Complainants visited them,
only to be informed that they have dismantled the transmission assembly
without our presence and they showed only pictures of damaged parts and
the expected prices of the broken parts. The picture is herein attached as
Annex “D” and form an integral part of this complaint;

16. That, the Complainants insisted to see the broken or


damaged parts but the Service Manager Mr. Bonite did not show the
accrual damaged parts;

17. That, the Complainants were shocked of their revelations


and told the personnel of Ford Iloilo that why did they open the parts of the
car without the Complainants’ presence to really confirm or validate such
damage?;

18. That, the Complainant husband verbalized why they were


not shown the actual damaged parts and why they were shown the pictures
only showing that the gears were broken or damaged. The Complainant
husband further verbalized that the said vehicle only stopped suddenly
without any warning sign or sound that it broke or any abnormal sound or
sign in the dashboard;
19. That, Mr. Anuel Bonite II responded that “ Ambot man
gani Ma’am and Sir ah,” ( I do not know why Ma’am or Sir ah), “suspect
gid namon sini Ma’am is factory defect” ( our suspicion is, this is a
factory defect Ma’am);

20. That, the Complainants responded that, “ if it is factory


defect then why should you charge us this much?, “ ;

21. That, the Complainants demanded to show to them the


damaged parts, but Mr. Bonite said that it has been sealed already;

22. That, the Complainants employed the expert opinion of


the third party, but the same information was advanced by Mr. Bonite to
their expert mechanic that it was a factory defect and that they have
packed the said parts without showing it to the Complainants;

23. That, upon proper consultation with other mechanical


engineers it was opined that change oil or preventive maintenance
involving transmission and gear change is being done at 40,000 kilometers
mileage but in this case the vehicle was only 19,340, thus there is no
obligation in the part of the owner to have the transmission checked or
change the gear;

24. That, the Complainants on July 8, 2018 wanted to set


appointment with the manager but to no avail. Thus, the complainants
wanted to settle it amicably at mediation, however it failed because the
service manager and the branch manager insisted that it was not their fault
and continue to demand that the Complainants should pay for the repair of
the said car amounting to P 200,000.00 more or less. In addition they will
charge the complainant the storage fee of P 350.00 per day because it was
stated in the Repair and order slip but the said information was too small to
be read by the naked eye, designed to mislead or trick the Complainants;

25. That, the Complainants maintained that the said damaged


part is still under warranty because it has not reached three (3) years and it
has not reached 100,000 kilometers mileage as coverage of warranty.
Moreover the car is not overused as it is only on 19,340 kilometers mileage
and the next preventive maintenance is still due on 20,000 kilometers;

26. That, the Respondents are adamant to repair the said


alleged damage under warranty of the product because they wanted to
charge the Complainants an unconscionable amount that is even enough
to buy a second hand car;

27. Thus , this complaint is filed to prove that the product


vehicle is still covered by warranty, and that anything that has been
damaged and not part of wear and tear should be covered under three (3)
year warranty period;
28. That, the Complainants are entitled to explanation,
orientation and presence when their car is dismantled especially if the
repair order does not authorize the service provider a blanket authority to
just open delicate parts of the vehicle that may be suspiciously damaged as
they dismantle the said car;

29. That, any information when it comes to warranty should


be well explained to the clients because not all can understand technical
terms in mechanical ways avoid maintenance and service warranty;

30. That, any repair order slip or claim stub with small writings
and not well explained to the clients are misleading, fraudulent and done
with tricks and machinations for the client to just sign it without the benefit
of reading or understanding the nature thereof. It is said to be a contract of
adhesion and as such under the New Civil Code, any doubt should be
construed liberally in favor of the client and strictly against the imposing
agency;

31. Thus, the Respondents have violated the Consumer Act


of the Philippines on the aspects of: Consumer Product Quality and Safety,
Consumer Product and Service Warranties and Deceptive, Unfair and
Unconscionable Acts and Practices and as such the Complainants are
entitled to the coverage of warranties and replacement of damaged parts of
the above mentioned vehicles;

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is hereby


respectfully prayed before the Honorable Agency (DTI) and its adjudicator,
that judgment shall be rendered in favor of the Complainants, declaring
that:

1. The Subject vehicle is covered by the product


warranty and shall be repaired or replace accordingly by the Respondents
named above;

2. The Respondents are guilty of violating the product


warranty and shall be meted out with penalty according to the applicable
prevailing laws on product quality and warranty;
3. The Respondents be ordered to repair and replace
the necessary parts without costs whatsoever in any form, without any
storage fee as deemed appropriate;

Other reliefs and remedies deemed just and equitable


under the premises are likewise prayed for.

Iloilo City, Philippines


August 13, 2018

ATTY. SALEX E. ALIBOGHA


Counsel for the Complainant
Roll of Attorney No. 46424
IBP Lifetime No. 657901,1-4-06,Iloilo City
PTR No. 5800999-S,1-3-18, Iloilo City
MCLE EXEMPTION No. V-001152, February 22,2016
Until April 14, 2019

Address of Counsel:

A1 Passers Review Center


nd
2 Floor, Sommerset Building, Panaderia ni Pa-a
Lopez Jena St., Jaro, Iloilo City ,Philippines, 5000
Telephone No. (033)-320-2728
VERIFICATION/CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING

Republic of the Philippines )


Province of Iloilo ) ss.
x------------------------------------x

WE, MA. ELISA DE ASIS and DANILO DE ASIS, of legal ages,


married, and residents of Jalaud Norte, Zarraga, Iloilo , Philippines, after
being sworn to in accordance with law, hereby depose and state, that:

1. We are the Complainants in the above-entitled case;


2. We have caused the preparation of the foregoing Complaint;
3. We have read and understood the foregoing complaint and
all the facts stated therein are true and correct of our own personal
knowledge and/or based on authentic records;
4. We hereby certify that: (a) we have not commenced any
other action or filed any claim involving the same issues with this Court,
Court of Appeals, Supreme Court, or any other tribunal or quasi-judicial
agency and to the best of our knowledge, no such other action or claim is
pending therein; (b) if there is any other pending action or claim with this
Court, Court of Appeals Supreme Court or any other tribunal or quasi-
judicial agency, a complete statement of the present status thereof; (c) if
we should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has been
filed or is pending with this Court, Court of Appeals. Supreme Court, or any
other tribunal tribunal, or quasi-judicial agency, we shall report that fact
within five (5) days therefrom to this Honorable Agency wherein our
complaint or initiatory pleading has been filed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto affixed our


signatures this 13th day of August, 2018 at Iloilo, Philippines.

MA. ELISA DE ASIS DANILO DE ASIS


Complainant/Affiant Complainant/Affiant
Competent Evidence of Identity Competent Evidence of Identity
Driver’s License No: F03-93- Drivers License No: F03-94-
075239 085649
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 13th day of
August,2018 at Iloilo City, Philippines. Affiants exhibited to me their
Competent Evidence of Identity duly indicated below their names. I hereby
certify that I have examined under oath the affiants and that the allegations
in this complaint are true according to their personal knowledge.