Thursday, February 28, 2019

Tweet Scoop: Pasig Prosecutor Dismisses Case of Qualified Theft of Kris Aquino Against Nicko Falcis




Images courtesy of Twitter: mikenavallo

78 comments:

  1. Ano ka ngaun Kris???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I've posted here before sa Makati decision pa lang #Trending na yan lahat ganyan magiging desisyon!

      Delete
    2. Both karma and justice prevailed. Agree with the resolution of the case. No card was stolen and card itself was voluntarily issued.

      Delete
    3. Fyi. This is a corporate card. KCA (company) owned the card . Bank billed KCA and KCA is obligated to pay the balance. If not paid, its KCA who will be the one to be charged the interest, penalty and will harm KCA’s credit standing not Nicko’s! BDO in the first place will not grant a huge credit limit if its not KCA who applied for it, Nicko is merely and assignee. All his credit card transactions should therefore be authorized. If not, he is actually robbing his employer of great sum of money..

      Delete
    4. No Anon 12:31 if you read the Makati decision, the card is in Nicko’s name and the bank billed Nicko, but KCA pays for the expenses. There was no assignment or any agreement between KCA and Nicko. The prosecs even explained that in case of non payment, BDO will go after Nicko and not KCA.

      Delete
    5. 12:31 The KCAP card is owned by the company. Wala namang binago sa fact na yun. Nakalimutan lang ni Kris na pinangalan niya kay Nicko yung company card. Kaya nga sa resolution ng both cities, Nicko is only liable to the BANK and not to Kris Aquino. INTIENDES? You cannot merely rob your company if the credit card is named after you. And dude basically its a credit card. You borrow credit to the bank, not to your boss. If someone has to file something, it should be BDO against Nicko if Nicko fails to pay all the expenses. That is how you establish a probable case! Kasi dapat walang lulusutan yung defendant. In this case, hindi matibay ang evidence and claims.

      Delete
    6. I agree. I think when it’s a corporate card the corporation is solidarity liable with it’s assignee/cardholder. It goes without saying that when you are issued a corporate card, you are to take pains in NOT using said card for non-official transactions. Not particularly fond of Kris but I think she’s right here, otherwise companies and other juridical entities would not have a say in the event an employee entrusted with a card decides to use it for unauthorised purchases.

      Delete
    7. 12:31 - UHM. IT'S ACTUALLY THE COURT THAT SAID IT'S NOT THEFT. WHAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND? MAS MAGALING KA SA COURT?

      Delete
    8. @12:31. If you own a credit card, you’ll know how it works. Yes, it’s under KCAP BUT Nicko’s name is on it. If nagbabasa ka ng terms and condition, you’ll know na walang paki si BDO kung personal ang transactions. Unfortunately, that’s how credit card works. Ethically, mali si Nicko if he indeed used the card for perosnal reason pero by law, wala talagang habol si Kris. Same goes pag may supplementary card ka. Kung sinagad ng card holder yung limit sa kung saan saan lang, you have no choice but to pay for it. Walang paki ang bangko kung luho lang ang transactions..

      Delete
    9. It doesn't make sense coz Kung ganyan desisyon di paano ang MGA companies Sa Pinas iauauthorize corporate cc Sa employees? Ano pwede Pala all the time gumastos Sa personal tapos bayaran? Maling Mali kahit ano pang angulong tingnan.

      Delete
    10. 12:53 - CAN YOU READ MORE? IF THERE'S A WRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EMPLOYEE AND THE EMPLOYER, THAT'S THE TIME NA MAY HABOL ANG EMPLOYER SA EMPLYADO.

      Delete
  2. the truth will sets you free

    ReplyDelete
  3. Vindicated tlaga si nicko! Yay!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ayan na sunod sunod na maiistress na naman si madamdamin nito. Hahaha

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sana tung ibang courts or piskalya madaliin na rin ang pagbasura ng charges at di na talaga aabot sa korte. Mas marami pang mahalagang dapat asikasuhin ang korte kesa sa ka prechuhan ni kris

    ReplyDelete
  6. Things are BACKFIRING on Kris big time.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I thought Kris has the best lawyers. Kris should just fire Nicko and ask him to pay what she thought was unauthorized and he did. But she has to do this all out drama.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kahit pa she has the best lawyers eh wala naman talagang maikakaso?

      Delete
    2. Whether they win or lose this frivolous case, they still earn premium rate. Win-win for humoring their client and able to earn big bucks too without much effort at a short period of time

      Delete
    3. Dear, the way it works is si nicko parin magbabayad sa credit card company ng lahat ng charges sa cc. Tapos he will expense it to kcap. Kcap can approve or reject his itemized expenses. Entonces ka pag ni reject ng kcap ang lahat ng nasa expense report si nicko ang magbabayad ng lahat ng expenses sa cc. Pg Hindi magbayad hahabulin siya ng Bangko at labas ang kcap. At walang utang si nicko Kay kcap. Sa bangko yes.

      Delete
    4. 4:39, I don’t think that is how a corporate card works. Yes, the card is issued in the name of the employee (else how is he/she going to use it if it’s not issued in his/her name??) The liability however is in the company, kaya nga in this case, si KA ang nagbayad ng cc bill.

      Delete
    5. 8:15 clear as day ang resolution. hindi liable si kris nor ang company niya for any expenses incurred on the card. clear na clear yan oh. sabi pa nga, si nicko ang hahabulin ni bdo pag hindi nabayaran.

      Delete
  8. Sino ba abogado ni kris at di naisip yan. Magaapela tapos papatagalin lang.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pag nag apela, panibagong gastos ulit kay kris yun. Why do i feel like no one from her family and closest circle is looking after her welfare? Walang pumipigil sa kanya kahit na mali mali na mga ginagawa.

      Delete
    2. Baka di nagpapapigil si madam.

      Delete
    3. 2:10 am hindi mo mapipigilan si kris sa gusto nya kaya hinahayaan na lang sya ng mga taong nakapaligid sa kanya.

      Delete
    4. 2:10, kapag may pumigil na nakapaligid sa iyo sa gusto mong gawin, magpapapigil ka ba?

      Delete
    5. Sa tingin mo hindi nila sinabi yan kay Kris? Baka siya nagpumilit niyan. More than one court pa talaga sinampa yung kaso. Patunay na power tripper talaga.

      Delete
    6. 2:10 naku sis. kung alam mo lang. malalang pagpipigil ang ginagawa sa kanya ng mga kapatid nya at kamaganak nya. matigas tlga ang ulo nya at sya lang may gusto nito

      Delete
  9. Nicko F - 2 pts; Kris A - 0 pt. Popcorn please!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ngayon sunud-sunod talo niya sa courts, tignan natin kung kaya ni Kris panindigan na hindi na naman dalhin sa social media yung away niya.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Congrats for fighting back Falcis family. Kitang kita naman na frivolous noh.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Sorry Krissy, olats na naman tayo.

    ReplyDelete
  13. What a big embarrassment for Kris. Yun tantrum nya nag backfire sa kanya.

    ReplyDelete
  14. yown! 4 cities to go

    ReplyDelete
  15. Oh, how the mighty have fallen!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Kris lawyers should have filed different case instead of q theft,since cc was issued to Nicko,iam also hurting for kris im not used to seeing her na luhaan,but im sure in the end makakabawi ka im sure of that!#krisalltheway

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Korek ka jan.

      Delete
    2. Anong different case pinagsasabi mo? Emotional abandonment ba dapat?

      Delete
    3. Should have filed estafa against Nicko pero mahirap walang written agreement between Kris and Nicko. At mukhang wala ring estafa dahil yung mga investments sa Thailand under Nicko’s name as trustee ay intact pa rin hindi naman nagalaw

      Delete
  17. ma humble na kaya si madam niyan? di laging panalo madam krissy.. ayan na ang katapat mo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's ingrained in her being. Yaan mo na sya.

      Delete
  18. sa san juan and qc panalo yan...just wait and watch

    ReplyDelete
  19. Kahit dismiss sa lahat pareho silang libre. At least nadaan sa korte di sa socmed.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Wala nmang kasing kaso at feeling ko ayaw din ng korte at piskalya yan,kasi magiging circus lang yan. Nakakahiya sa law community kpag pinabayaan nila yan

    ReplyDelete
  21. Kunwari lang siguro yung away nila for publicity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. juicecolored! OK ka lang 1:57?... Who in the right mind would willingly allow to go through all these stresses if it just for publicity.... I just hope u're just being sarcastic with your comment....

      Delete
  22. oh my gas, the Crazy Rich Krissy has fallen, but let us not underestimate Kris, for sure may malaking pasabog /drama na naman siya one of these days.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Siguro ma huble sya for a few days tapos balik ulit sa old ways nya.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hindi mo nmn kasi pwedeng kasuhan ng pagnanakaw ung tao na sya mismo may ari ng cc may liability si nicko sa bangko and di mismo kay kris aquino kaya tama lang ung desisyon ng korte masyado lang pinalaki ni kris vindicated tuloy si nicko sana pinag isipin ng mabuti ng lawyer ni kris kung anong kaso isasampa nila

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nakakahiya ito para kay Kris.

      Delete
    2. Sii Nicko may liability sa bangko pero si Kris nagbayad ng cc? Pano naging liability ng employee ang isang corporate card?

      Delete
    3. Basahin mo ulit ung inissue ng court walang ebedensya ng pagnanakaw and base sa bdo agreement ng card holder si nicko ang nagbabayad nun nagkaissue lang ng si mismong kris na ung nagbayad sa credit card ni nicko kung ako kay kris di ko babayran yun kasi ung bangko si nicko nmn sisingilin nun since sa kanya nakapangalan ung creditcard

      Delete
  25. Mag tatantrum na naman si madam! Learn to be humble tetay!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Sa galing ng nga lawyers nya, wala bang nag-advise sa kanya na may tulog ang kaso nya??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kumita sila. Period. Hahahaha!

      Delete
  27. Wait, iisa-isahin ba nila yung courts ng lahat ng cities ng Metro Manila?

    ReplyDelete
  28. 2-0 Kainis talo na nman tayo Kristeta.

    ReplyDelete
  29. K should better withdraw all her cases for her peace of mind binayaran na pala check but she took it to the court naku gastos lang yan. She better rest instead of fighting a lost war.

    ReplyDelete
  30. may work out in kris’ favor in the end. if the courts established that it’s falcis account, kris company does not have to pay any of them kahit na corporate card sya. tapos kung binayaran naman ni kris, pwede pa rin nya habulin.....bili pa ng madaming kropek please, hindi pa tapos, may dance number pa!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. she paid for them na and falcis has shown receipts for those company expenses which kris should rightly pay

      Delete
    2. 8:35, I think yun na nga lang ang mainam gawin. Singilin si Nicko for all the charges in the cc which KA paid for

      Delete
  31. I don’t get the celebratory mood for this. If ako yung may ari ng small company or business owner and I issued a company card tas ginamit lang for personal use luging lugi ako. Ethics lang not to use the company card for personal use. Walang kaso oo pero di dapat cinecelebrate to. Mamaya mga may company issued card umabuso dahil sa ganito.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. where did you get your notion that it was for personal use? falcis showed proof na the expenses were for kris and her staff

      Delete
    2. Personal use ka dyan. Sabi lang yon ni madame. Completo receipts ni falcis.

      Delete
    3. 3:22, sa IG account mismo ng kapatid niya may screenshot ng liquidation of expenses charged to the credit card and may mga expenses na nakalabel “PERSONAL”
      9:31, I agree with your sentiments. In fact this is no exceptional case. Meron na akong na-encounter na ganitong issue dati sa isang company na pinasukan ko. The person involved was a C-level executive pa.

      Delete
  32. Hindi talaga mananalo kung wla naman tlgang dapat naikaso. Nauna kasi putak ni kris o ayan tuloy. Nag aksaya ka lang ng pera sa justice league mo kris.. 2-0

    ReplyDelete
  33. Team Nicko all the way! Stay humble and on course. You’re very lucky to have your loving and supportive family.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Dapat magkaroon ng batas para sa mga employer n ginastos ng employee na nakapangalan sa kanya ay d dapat gamitin para sa personal niyang pangangailangan.Pero dapat mahiya ang gumamit ng d nauukol sa kumpanya.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Meron naman. Kulang lang napresent na documentary evidence ng side ni Kris to prove na may restrictions yung card. Like an actual contract between them. Kaya di talaga naestablish yung allegations ni Kris.

      Delete

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...