BAGUIO CITY – A local court restrained the management of the Bank of the Philippines (BPI) Burnham branch represented by its branch head Nemia M. Villalba and all persons acting under her from allowing any withdrawals from the account of the Benguet Electric Cooperative (BENECO) under the name of Engr. Melchor S. Licoben for a period of twenty days unless a contrary order is used.
In a 2-page order, Judge Cecilia Corazon C. Dulay-Archog of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 7 stated that that BENECO under general manager Licoben will be exempted from posting a bond it appearing that no pecuniary damage would be suffered by BPI Burnham branch.
Further, the court pointed out that the bank is restrained from allowing any withdrawals by non-signatories from the BENECO-Licoben account which is the subject of the case.
The issuance of the 20-day temporary restraining order stemmed from the compliant of breach of contract filed by BENECO represented by its Board of Directors lawyer Esteban Somngi, Mike Maspil, Peter Bosaing, Jeffred Acop, Josephine Tuling, Robert Valentin, Fr. Jonathan Obar and general manager Engr. Licoben.
Aside from the issuance of the temporary restraining order, the complainants also prayed for the court to issue the requisite writ of preliminary injunction, writ of preliminary mandatory injunction and damages.
BPI as one of the depository banks of BENECO where its account was opened for various transactions, such as payroll of BENECO employees, payment for power bills to TEAM Energy and the National Grid Corporation (NGCP), payment of loan obligations and payment of obligations to payees to whom it issued checks drawn from its account.
Moreover, the authorized representative of BENECO is lawyer Esteban A. Somngi in his capacity as the chairman of the board, Engr. Licoben in his capacity as the general manager, Engr. Ricardo S. Pallugan in his capacity as the department manager of the Non-Network Services Department and Josephine B. Tuling in her capacity as secretary of the board.
The complainants claimed that BPI breached its contract when it decided to stop honoring checks and other bank transactions signed by Engr. Licoben and Atty. Somngi starting in October 2021 after it stated that it received conflicting claims upon BENECO’s bank account.
Worst, BPI started to freeze BENECO’s account due to the claim of embattled former Project Supervisor Omar Mayo that he was then appointed as BENECO project Supervisor and the National Electrification Administration (NEA) aside from the fact that NEA appointed a new general manager in the person of a certain Ana Marie Paz Rafael.
However, Somngi and Licoben assailed the legality of such appointment before the Court of Appeals (CA) since the appointment of Rafael as general manager and the designation of Mayo as Project Supervisor are without legal basis as they are in total violation of NEAs own rules on the appointment of a general manager of an electric cooperative.
Ironically, on June 22, 2022, BPI allegedly released the amount of P8.5 million from BENECO’s account but the same release was not authorized by the supposed signatories in the persons of Atty. Somngi and Engr. Licoben despite its verbal assurances to Licoben that no money will be released from the said account.
Subsequently, BENECO protested the release of the said amount that was reflected on its passbook in a letter dated July 8, 2022. It also demanded BPI to restore the withdrawn amount.
BPI replied to the letter of protest by BENECO in its letter dated July 11, 2022 and claimed that there was no irregularity in the said withdrawal and that it based its actions on the representation made by the supposed new management and the NEA.
The complainants argued that BPI breached its deposit agreement with BENECO by refusing to recognize the transactions signed by Somngi and Licoben; refusal to honor and recognize Licoben and Somngi as the authorized signatories of the account and allowing the withdrawal of P8.5 million without the expressed instruction and conformity of the authorized signatories.
According to them BPI did not categorically mention to BENECO who withdrew the P8.5 million, whoever caused the withdrawal was allowed unauthorized access to and disclosure of its accounts.
BENECO asserted that the services of BPI involve a contract where it is the depositor and BPI is the depositary bank.
BENECO explained that the diligence of a good father of the family required for BPI in relation to its deposits requires that any fund transfer, debit or payment drawn from its deposits must be dealt with strictly and only upon the instruction of the authorized signatories.
“It became incumbent upon the defendant to honor the authorized signatories of the plaintiff Engr. Licoben and Somngi and see to it that it maintains the confidentiality and secrecy of accounts, honor checks drawn from the account of BENECO, pay bills upon the instruction of the authorized signatories, act accordingly pursuant to instructions of the authorized signatories and not to release to any other person or entity items or deposits without the expressed instruction of the authorized signatories,” the complaint stressed.
The complaint explained that BPI violated its contract with BENECO when it stopped recognizing Engr. Licoben and Atty. Somngi as the authorized signatories and began to recognize other parties.
