REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
La Trinidad, Benguet

_____________________,
Complainant NPS No.
-versus- for

_____________________, RIR in Damage to Property

Accused

COMMENT AND OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO RELEASE IMPOUNDED VEHICLE

COMES NOW, the complainant in the above-entitled case, through legal counsel, most
respectfully asseverates that:
1. On ___, an Isuzu elf canopied-truck described below, owned and operated by one ___,
was recklessly driven by ___, the accused named herein, thereby causing the bumping of
said truck with a ___ under the name of __ its registered owner, in the possession and
used by the latters agent and attorney-in-fact, __, the above-named complainant, which
incident occurred at Camp 1, Tuba, Benguet;

2. Said motor vehicle was duly apprehended and impounded by the Philippine National
Police stationed at Tuba Municipal Police Station;

3. The registered owner and operator of the said motor vehicle used in the commission of
the offense filed a Motion to Release Impounded Vehicle with the Honorable Provincial
Prosecutors Office for the release of the subject motor vehicle;

4. The complainant, with all due respect, implores upon the good discretion of the
Honorable Prosecutors Office for the denial of the said Motion, stressing upon the
materiality of said motor vehicle as evidence that the court should have eventual
preservative control over, and that the subject motor vehicle need be prudently withheld
and placed in custodia legis for the material consideration in the trial of the proper case(s)
the Honorable Prosecutors Office would ultimately find probable cause to file in the
proper court(s);

5. The complainant further stresses on the bad faith on the part of the registered owner to
evade any liability on his part arising from the reckless act of his employee and from his
own negligence in the management of his operations and in the selection and supervision
of his employees, and more importantly, his unworthiness of the trust reposed upon him,
which bad faith and unworthiness were clearly and evidently shown in the following
circumstances, to wit:

a.) That he failed to prudently, conscientiously, judiciously and timely appear at the site
of the incident despite promising to come when he was contacted right after the
incident by his employee/driver at complainants behest for the immediate
settlement of the incident. Two hours later, another phone call revealed that said
registered owner had not left his residence yet. Complainant still patiently waited in
good faith for the registered owner, this time at the PNP Tuba Municipal Police Station
but a third call at about 7:00 PM revealed that she has not made any move at all and
that time his son took the call and said he could not come as no one would take care
of his son.

b.) Finally, after learning that we had formally filed our complaint, the truckowners son
was forced to come only 3 hours later from the last call made or at about 10:00 PM
when the complainants side has already left.

c.) Said truck owner had the complainant and the latters family waiting for him for an
astoundingly 6 long hours or from 2:00 PM to 8:00 in the evening;

d.) Such contemptible excuse of the registered owner that there was no one to take care
of his child finds no merit in the dealings of a fair and prudent man who honors his
words knowing that his and his employees acts already caused damaged to another
man. On the contrary, by letting the complainant and the latters family wait in vain,
said registered owner even aggravated the damage he and his employee have caused.
More importantly, such ineffectual reason as to why the registered owner made the
complainant wait pales in comparison when placed side by side with the reason why
the complainant had to come up to Baguio from Pangasinan- complainants son was
hospitalized due to some illness which even doctors could not diagnose. Imagine the
agony of a mother who had to wait for 6 hours in the hope that the incident be fixed
e.) That despite the fact of the express amenability from the plaintiffs side to settle and
compromise the case right after the incident, the registered owner who filed the
opposed claim persistently showed a total lack of good faith in making reparations,
remedying, or at least reducing the damages, hurt and afflictions-both physical and
mental, which his and that of his employees acts caused to the complainants side,
with said registered owner displaying a hard countenance during talks to settle his
liability, treating the plaintiffs side as if it is the latters fault why the incident occurred
 and as if he were the one being inconvenienced by the plaintiffs showing of good
faith in attempting to settle the case as promptly and judiciously as possible;

f.) That days after the incident, said registered owner made the plaintiffs side incur
additional and unnecessary costs and expenses when he made complainants side
believe that he would give an agreed amount to prevent further litigation and put an
end to any more controversy, making them travel from Pangasinan to Baguio and
make them miss their work just to wilfully and irreverently renege on his promise.

6. The foregoing acts of the registered owner illustrate why the registered owner, movant
in the opposed claim, is not worthy of even an iota of belief and credence in the promises
he made in his Motion and in the Affidavit of Undertaking attached therein where he
promised to present said vehicle and not to transfer or otherwise dispose of the subject
motor vehicle when needed by this Honorable Office.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, MANIFESTATION AND PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is most respectfully

prayed of this Honorable Provincial Prosecutors Office that the Motion to Release Impounded
Vehicle be denied and the subject motor vehicle be retained under the custody of the Philippine
National Police stationed at Tuba, Benguet and subsequently under Custodia Legis of the courts.
Such other reliefs and remedies just and equitable are respectfully prayed for.
Dagupan City, Philippines. December __, 2017

_____________________________
agent
As Attorney-in-fact for ____

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ___day of December at Dagupan City.

Counsel for Complainant

Doc. No. __________;

Page No.__________;

Book No. _________;

Series of 2017.