Sunday, February 24, 2019

Repost: Makati Prosecutor Dismisses Qualified Theft Complaint vs Nicko Falcis

Image courtesy of www.rappler.com

Source: www.rappler.com

The Makati City Prosecutor's Office has dismissed the qualified theft case filed by Kris Aquino against Nicko Falcis, her former project manager and the former managing director of her company, Kris Cojuangco Aquino Productions (KCAP).

The Makati city prosecutor approved the resolution of Assistant City Prosecutor Paolo Barcelona recommending the dismissal of the case for lack of probable cause.

In October 2018, Aquino alleged that Falcis charged over P1 million to a BDO corporate card under KCAP for personal expenses without her consent. She filed theft complaints against him in 7 cities, including Makati.

In a resolution dated February 18, the Makati Prosecutor’s Office said that in reference to the qualified theft case filed in the city, it "found no probable cause to charge Falcis" with the crime.

This is in relation to the quaified theft case filed by Aquino over 13 transactions amounting to P404,794.34 using the KCAP card in Makati.

"After careful examination of the records of the case, this Office is inclined to dismiss the complaints as there is no sufficient evidence to engender a well-founded belief that Falcis committed the crimes charged," the resolution said.

It noted that “no evidence was presented with regard to any agreement between Aquino and Falcis as regards the use of the subject credit card" which is under Falcis' name.

With his name on the card, Falcis as the cardholder can use it according to the terms imposed by the card issuer, BDO, and using it for personal expenses does not make him liable for theft, the resolution said.

"As cardholder, Falcis is personally liable to BDO for any and all amounts charged to the card. It is for this reason that Falcis’ name appears in the credit cards statement of account. Thus, should Falcis now pay his credit card bill, BDO can directly initiate legal actions against him to compel him to pay," the resolution said.

It added: "Given the foregoing, Falcis’ use of the KCAP card for his personal expenditures would not make him liable for theft. He is only liable to BDO for the card transactions that he had made using the card."

The resolution also noted that "the fact that Aquino paid Falcis’ credit card bill is of no moment."

"This will only make that latter civilly liable to the former as she is entitled to reimbursement for the amount that she has paid," it said.

The legal battle between Aquino and Falcis has escalated to involve other parties, Falcis’ brother, Jesus, who she filed a cyber libel case against in November 2018. – Rappler.com

104 comments:

  1. I concur with the resolution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I WAS THE PERSON WHO SAID IT WOULD BE DISMISSED BECAUSE HE USED A "CREDIT CARD." IT'S NOT THEFT. IT'S UTANG.

      ASAN IYONG NAGSABING "CPA ANG TATAY NIYA AT MANANALO SI KRIS?" HAHAHAHAHAH!

      Delete
    2. Oo nga. Asan na ang nagsasabi na this case will prosper?

      Delete
    3. Y.E.H.E.Y!

      I am sooooo happy for the Falcis brothers. God bless you po. And Congratulations!

      Delete
    4. Huh? Bakit Makati e sa QC sinampa yung kaso?

      Delete
    5. Kasi KA Filed theft cases in 7cities and Makati is one of them. So 6more to go and nauna nang nagdesisyon ang Makati And malamang ganyan na din maging desisyon sa lahat! Trending! Yohohoho!

      Delete
    6. 4:35 Kris filed the case in 7 different cities in Metro Manila. O diba yun pa lang harassment na eh. Why file in 7 different cities? Yung sa QC kanina was for the grave threat case filed against her.

      Delete
    7. 2:32 Grabe Pala batas Sa Pinas di kinoconsider Yung ethics.Kasi Sa abroad guilty na Yan Si Falcis Sa embezzlement.Oo,Ako Isa nagsabi.The credit card holder's name e lagi nasa name talaga Ng employee ng kompanya.Kaya NGA Sa ibang bansa Bawal Yan na ginagamit for personal use para Hindi abusuhin.Wow,so surprised at the decision Dyan Sa Pinas.Kaya ok Lang Pala gamitin ang corporate cc for personal use at bayaran?sobrang wrong.No wonder ibang tingin Ng MGA dayuhan sa atin pinoy pagdating Sa ganyan.

      Delete
    8. 5:25, huh? nakapangalan sa kanya yung card so natural pwede niya gamitin. If it's not a warranted purchase, utang yun. Hindi theft. Wag kami ang linyahan mo ng pa-States States. hindi lang ikaw ang nakapag-states. Ni hindi nga proven na ginamit niya for personal use.

      Delete
    9. 5:25 - TALO SILA SA TECHNICALITIES. "CREDIT CARD" ANG GINAMIT. "CREDIT" MEANS UTANG. HINDI IYON NAKAW KUNG INUTANG MO.

      IT'S ACTUALLY NOT BAWAL TO USE IT FOR PERSONAL REASONS UNLESS THERE IS A WRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COMPANY AND THE EMPLOYEE, AND THIS CASE NGA WALA.

      Delete
    10. Agree with Anon 7:11 PM. Unless there is stipulation that it cannot be used for personal use (like pa spa ka or mani pedi na hindi kasama si Kris), then that is something. And agree with the decision na it was not theft as Kris paid of it. It was utang. She was aware of the payment she made. Parang bumili ka ng shoes tapos paguwi mo sasabihin mo na someone robbed me in the amount of XXX kasi nawalan ka ng pera for something you already paid for. Goodluck Kris sa mga next few cases that will soon be dismissed as well.

      Delete
    11. Sa mga nagtatanong bakit kailangan niya pa magfile sa 7 different cities, kasi sa iba't ibang lugar at establishments yung credit card charges. Sa 1million na inirereklamo ni KA, 400k+ doon ang card charges sa Makati.

      Delete
    12. I concur, too. Just to add, hindi po ito flaw ng batas. Just accept that the arguments were a stretch to begin with. Basic po yan sa criminal law.

      Delete
    13. 5:25 I am sorry but I disagree. Nasa ibang bansa din ako and I have a corp card. Minsan may nasasamang personal expense lalo pag nasa business trip or business related events. Ok lang yan. There's such a thing called Expense Report and you have to sort out your expenses. Syempre hindi mo ichacharge sa company yung personal. Just pay it! Tapos! Anong embezzlement?!? Iba ang tingin ng dayuhan? Pagdating sa ano? Depends on how you conduct yourself. Don't generalize you crab!

      Delete
    14. Is that even necessary 10:49? Pwede pala yun? Akala ko kahit isang RTC lang lahat ng reklamo sapat na. But then again, the fact na nadismiss sa Makati RTC malaking chance na madismiss din sa ibang RTCs na finile-an.

      Delete
  2. Akala ko si Kris ang may pasabog ngyon... sya nasabugan ng post nya nung isang araw... Congrats Falcis Bros.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sa Makati ata to. Di ba sa qc yung post ni K sa ig nya?

      Delete
    2. 3:24 that’s for the grave threat case filed against her

      Delete
    3. 1:58 true. I'm very happy for Falcis. Kris practically gets away with everything. Finally, her spoiled and bratty ways didn't work wonders in this instance. I'm sure those people whom she had stepped on are very very happy with this decision.

      Delete
    4. May announcement pa talaga sya ng hearing ng kaso, with matching dramatics na, "strongest hearts possess the most scars," Dismissed lang pala!

      Delete
  3. Ready na popcorn ko :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. One has to wonder why kris will file a case for 1.2 million pesos when she admitted she already paid millions to her battery of lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Accusing Falcis of fund mismanagement was one of her options to explain their professional separation.

      Delete
  5. Haha sabi ko na nga ba talo si Kris

    ReplyDelete
  6. Inuna kc ang yabang kaya ayan!..
    Congrats sa pamilya falcis!

    ReplyDelete
  7. common sense lang kasi sa tutuusin, meron bang nagnanakaw via credit card, sayo pa nakapangalan ang card? ang labo ni KA... this is really just a tantrum gone bad

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nabigyan din ng katarungan ang pamamahiya sa pamilya nila...na sinira ng taong nagti-trip lng!...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Kung secondary cardholder or authorized user si Nicko nung credit card pwede nya gamitin yon anytime anywhere. Hindi rin pwede idispute yon ni Kris sa issuing bank

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. actually baka sha pa ang ang main owner?

      Delete
    2. Eh sa mismong name pala ni Nicko ang account eh. So where is Kris liability here? eh hindi naman sya ang sisingilin ng BDO.

      Delete
    3. Binayadan ni Kris so ang dapat lang ginawa ni nya singilin yun Nicko na willing namam magbayad di yun tatakutin at agad agad dinemanda walang singilan na naganap agad agad magnanakaw daw sos! Hindi nama umiwas sa ppgbabayad. How can she prove personal ang transaction at di business.

      Delete
    4. Sinabi na ni Nicko na sa kanya naka-pangalan ang credit card. Kaya hindi mae-establish na may pagnanakaw talaga. Kung hindi ni Nicko mabayaran, sa bangko sya may pananagutan at hindi kay Kris.

      Delete
    5. Nicko offered to pay out of goodwill just to appease. So nasaan ang sinasabing intent to gain kung sariling credit card mo ang ginamit mo plus may tender of payment pa. Congrats to the Falcis family

      Delete
  10. Justice has been served

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kahit isang kaso pa lang ang na-dismissed, ang laki na ng impact nyan sa credibility ni Kris. Mahirap na isalba.

      Delete
  11. Hope this will serve a lesson to Kris. Have some humility.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I also don't wish her ill but i just wish she would humble herself. Life is short.

      Delete
  12. Actually wala nmang krimen ang nangyari kasi away mag partners lang tlga. Baka iba ang hugot ni Kris kaya sya nagdemanda.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It still doesn’t mean he didn’t steal just cuz he had access and was using the company business card. He was using it for non-company purchases! That’s still considered stealing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 2:59 the court has decided . There was nothing stolen. Delusional. She had a tantrum that went bad. Everything was accounted for. Go fight it with the prosecutor. . Next is grave threats then libel . Oh boy somebody will be taken to the cleaners!

      Delete
    2. Eh nakapangalan kay Nicko ang credit card. Kung di approved ni Kris edi wag nya bayaran tutal si Nicko ang hahabulin ng BDO. Simple. In short sayang ang oras ng korte.

      Delete
    3. Sa prosecutor's level palang yan ha. Talo na. Wala kasi talagang chance manalo yan. It's the truth na walang ninakaw. Vindicated ang falcis family.

      Delete
    4. Oh my go back to school please, common sense is hard to come by these days. Didnt you understand if he use it for personal he is only liable to the bank if Kris paid for the bill shes then entitled for reimbursements ang tanong siningil ba nya? Theft yun if there was intention to evade payments kaso nga tinakot, intimidate at dinemanda agad agad without demanding falcis to pay. Hay naku po hirap talaga mag explain sa mga walang logic sa buhay. Ayan na nga na dissmiss na diba which means no probable cause. Di mo padin ba ma gets?

      Delete
    5. For all intents and purposes, Walang crime na naganap.

      He used the credit card issued in his name and paid the balance or part of it when due. It’s the norm when you have a credit card. Regardless of whether he bought his own coffee or coffee for the staff is immaterial because the charges simply went toward the “debt” through the credit card, which got paid when the bill was due.

      The commenter in 259 obviously doesn’t know or understand the principle of having credit cards.

      Delete
  14. I disagree on this dcision eh. Truth is, kris doesn't check all transactions before the discovery. Meaning, she paid all the bills and falcis took advantage of her vulnerability and oblivion to his advances. Mali yan. He is still liable but nakak sad na katotohanan ang batas natin walang kwnta. Well, there are other cities. tingnan natin kung ano ang ssabihin ng ibang justices. I still believe they have grounds talaga against this falcis. Otherwise, she will not waste her money for nothing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My dear . Justice has been served. Narcissism and tantrum cases are totally inappropriate use of our justice system. The complaint in itself is one of those. All evidences were presented and she does have an accounting firm that audits for her account s . She thought she could spit on people and their lives and get away with it. Lol!😹

      Delete
    2. E di wag niyang bayaran at nasa pangalan naman pala ni Nicko yong credit card. Mahigit kalahati nga non plane tickets nya no. Halatang halata na exagerrated yong accusations nya

      Delete
    3. Then it's kris' fault why she didn't check.

      Delete
    4. Everything is well accounted for. Up to the last centavo. Check the falsis bros' post.

      Delete
    5. Kasi alam mo papasa lang yun ganyan reasoning sa mga walang common sense fortunately the law was created put in place to give reason and clarity to cases such as this, just mere allegations without basis being used and abused by people to intimidate and coerce and to take revenge on people.

      Delete
    6. Agree 3:16 di Kasi naiintindihan Ng IBA Ang "ethics".Kung Sa abroad Tong case eh guilty Si Falcis.Akalain mo Yan,Ngayon akala Ng MGA Pinoy ok Lang gamitin company card for personal use coz nakapangalan Sa kanila tapos babayaran anytime. PAano kung small to medium sized businesses na kailangan Ng Pera? Makukuha Nila Kung kailan gusto Ng empleyado.Grabe this decision is so unfair and unethical.Say what you want Pero Sana ethical man Lang Yung batas Sa Pinas.

      Delete
    7. Anong personal use pinagsasabi mo? Half of that month's charges were plane tickets of Kris. Umayos ka nga. The rest were Representation charges.

      Delete
    8. 5:34 - TELL THAT TO THE JUDGE THAT DISMISSED THE CASE. LOL

      Delete
    9. Wag niyo po sisihin ang batas dahil hindi yung batas ang may problema.

      Delete
  15. Nakahanap ng katapat si Kris.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As in Meron na hindi sya inatrasan.

      Delete
  16. Wow. I don't know Falcis but I'm so happy for him.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Una pa lang alam ko na na di mananalo si Kris sa kasong ito. Kaya nga credit card dahil eto ay utang, paano mo nanakawin ang utang.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Baka binayaran ni Kris. If ginamit ni Falcis for uses outside of their business ventures and nabayaran ni kris, it's considered theft.

      Delete
    2. 3:34 we are not talking about the function of a credit card here. She did not file “theft on bdo”. She filed “theft on kcap funds”. Ang credit card ay sa KCAP, binigyan ng card itong si Falcis but he was not supposed to use it for personal purchases..

      Delete
    3. hindi ka ba aware sa mga hackers na gumagamit ng credit card ng may credit card? sa case ni kris at falcis, hindi yung UTANG per se ang ninakaw, kundi yung mga pinagbibili gamit yung credit line. kakaloka naman ang iyong reasoning. ang malas lang e binigayn ni kris ng credit card ng kcap si falsis & so, wala syang habol dahil hindi na problem ng bank kung yung authorized card holders at mismong card holders e magmake ng purchasesa against your agreement. walang kinalaman ang bangko sa angreement ng kcap at ni falcis.

      Delete
    4. No probable cause nga diba sabi na mismo ng korte. Ano pa ba ang pinaglalaban nyo?

      Delete
    5. It’s not theft even if that guy used the credit card buying stuff not related to his work because the credit card was under his name. If it was under kris or kcap’s and nicko used it for his own gain then he can be sued for theft. Easy peasy! No need to hire big time lawyers and waste her millions! Unfortunately the power tripper has no brains!

      Delete
    6. 5:34 Ang pinaglalaban yung ethical decision na hindi sang-ayon sa korte. Kahit na ganyan desisyon ng korte,di ibig sabihin na ethical yun.Yun lang.

      Delete
    7. Hahaha true 5:34 😂😂😂 kaya nga me batas eh kasi madaming me sari sariling opinyon

      Delete
    8. The thing is ethics is subjective. The law is objective.

      Delete
  18. I hope e.dismiss rin ng remaining 6 cities. Happy for them.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Logically speaking, it’s not theft if the legal documents including credit card is under someone’s name. If there’s a dispute then KA should release written contract that will forbid the card holder to use the credit card. Unless there’s a legal contract then she can try to appeal.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Actually the grounds for dismissal of the case are very basic and I'm sure the big wig attorneys knew how this case was going to go down.

    -Kris did not present proof to differentiate what was approved talaga or not
    -nakapangalan kay Falcis ang cc so ang hahabulin ay 1) si Falcis or 2)si KCAP the corporation, not Kris the individual.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Nasa pangalan pala ni Nicko ang credit card so sya ang hahabulin kung hindi binayaran ni Kris. Bakit pa kailangang idemanda e wala naman palang liabitity si Kris? No wonder dismisssd ang kaso dahil talagang walang basehan. Tsk tsk

    ReplyDelete
  22. Mali pa din na gamitin mo ang pera na hindi mo naman pinaghirapan. Tinuturo na yan ng mga magulang natin simula ng bata pa tayo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jeez the case was dismissed. There was no theft. Period.

      Delete
    2. Ang kulit ng iba dito. Sinabi na ngang walang ninakaw. Walang matibay na ebidensya na ninakawan sya ni Falcis gamit ang CC. Walang probable cause. Ang hirap maka-intindi. Gusto nila dahil fans sila ni Kris e dapat pabor kay Kris ang hustisya.

      Delete
    3. 4:13 - DO YOU KNOW HOW CREDIT CARDS WORK? PAUTANG IYON NG BANGKO SO HINDI MO TALAGA IYON PINAGHIRAPAN. AT IYONG GINASTOS NI NICKO AY PERA NI BDO, HINDI PERA NI KRIS. OKAY NA?

      Delete
  23. Happy for Nicko!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sos it ever occur to anyone that maybe all of this is their plan all along and they’re just taking us for a ride? Kris being Kris, she loves attention. She craves to be talked about. For all we know, Nicko still works for Kris.

    ReplyDelete
  25. if susundan natin ang logic nung dismissal - this means Kris can go after Falcis for all amounts she paid dun sa credit card. Not only those contested. Mas interesting yun and not sure kung win pa rin ito for Falcis kasi potentially liable sya kay Kris for a bigger amount. Not just what is contested but for everything he charged and Kris paid. This should be easier for Kris to prove in court, kahit civil case for collection lang, kasi she just needs to show she paid for the credit card under Falcis' name

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Talagang hahanap ng anggulo no porket di in favor sa idol mo yung decision? Evidences of both parties have been presented and the court has decided na walang basis ang kaso. Don’t you think lahat ng anggulo eh hindi tinignan ng korte?

      Delete
    2. Good point @ 4:35. Big wig lawyers will not be remiss in seeing this outcome. For all we know, they just needed that dismissal to validate that Falcis is liable for all charges to the card under his name hence, in just enrichment on his side since di Kris magbabayad. She can file and win that civil case.

      @5:14 Note that theft is criminal. Di pa po tapos ang kaso kasi may civil liability pa na automatically instigated if a criminal case is filed (Art. 100 of the Revised Penal Code I think). If I remember correctly, even if the criminal case is dismissed hindi automatic dismissal ng civil case. Wala man kulong pero ang danyos at multa pwedeng mas malaki at hassle pa.

      Delete
  26. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, this is just one of her tantrums that was blown out of proportion. Akala niya siguro nung una the family will succumb to her threats at panggigipit pero lumaban sila, kaya ayan. Feeling ko she was willing to pull out all her cases against Nicko kung papalabasin lang niya (Nicko) na totoo yung accusations. At once nag public apology si Nicko, siya ang lalabas sa publiko na forgiving and compassionate boss. Bida bida syempre. Unfortunately, things didn’t go well as planned by the queen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well this does not mean he did not use the card for his personal expenses. technicality lang nakapangalan kasi sa kanya ang card kaya di pwedeng nakawan nya ang sarili nya. but everyone knows hindi kanya ang card.

      Delete
    2. You've read my thoughts!

      Delete
  27. Since day 1 pa lang, Falcis Brothers na ako. Congrats!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Waiting for the next drama to unfold. Ano naman kaya paandar ni Madam in the cominy days. Ayaw yan patalo!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Win or lose, I will always believe Nicko. Truth will prevail and justice will be served.

    ReplyDelete
  30. It’s not theft when you authorized a credit card extension to another person. Wala ka talagang case unless there is written agreement as what can be purchased with the credit card and if that agreement is violated then may Laban ka otherwise sorry ka na lang.

    ReplyDelete
  31. OMG if i were kris and nicko magkapatawaran na lang kaya sila
    sila nicko bata pa e for sure marami na yan nagagastos at unemployed pa sya
    magkapatawaran na sila tapos sign an agreement na wala ng magsasalita EVER tapos ang issue move on sa life

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unemployed? Dear, madaming personal businesses si Nicko. Akala mo ba empleyado lang siya ni Kris?

      Delete
    2. 12:45 di pwde, wala tayong pag-uusapan ditong mga chismosa hahaha

      Delete
    3. @1245 c Nicko po ay businessman din, hindi lang sya basta julalay gaya ng pinapalabas ni kris.

      Delete
  32. Dunno why but I'm happy for him.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Good for Falcis, & happy for his Mom!

    ReplyDelete

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...