Responsive Pleading

Al Dino N. Macavinta

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Trade and Industry Pampanga
OFFICE OF THE CONSUMER ADJUDICATION
City of San Fernando, Pampanga

SHERYL DIWA,
Complainant,
ADM Case No. 321
- versus -

HONDA CARS PAMPANGA, INC.,

Respondent.

x ------------------------------------------------ x

ANSWER

Defendant HONDA CARS PAMPANGA, INC., (Honda for brevity) hereby

responds to the complaint filed by Plaintiff SHERYL DIWA
(Complainant for brevity) and admits, denies and alleges as follows:

Admissions/Denials

1. Admits the contents of paragraph 1 only insofar as Hondas

personal circumstances is concerned.

2. Referring to paragraphs 2 to 4, Honda admits the facts

stated therein but with affirmative defenses as stated below.

3. Referring to paragraph 5, Honda admits the facts stated

therein.

4. Referring to paragraph 6 to 10, Honda admits the facts

stated therein but with affirmative defenses as stated below.

5. Referring to paragraph 11, Honda specifically denies the

allegations therein.

6. Referring to paragraph 12, Honda specifically denies the

allegations as to the applicability of Republic Act 10642 or the Philippine
Lemon Law, in this complaint of the Complainant. Honda alleges that:
Responsive Pleading
Al Dino N. Macavinta

a. In order to avail the rights under the Lemon Law, it provides that:

SEC. 5. Repair Attempts. At any time within

the Lemon Law rights period, and after at least
four (4) separate repair attempts by the same
manufacturer, distributor, authorized dealer
or retailer for the same complaint, and the
nonconformity issue remains unresolved, the
consumer may invoke his or her rights under
this Act.

The repair may include replacement of parts

components, or assemblies.

Under Section 3, the law clarified the lemon law rights period,
to wit;

SEC. 3. Definition of Terms. As used in this Act:

xxx

(h) Lemon Law rights period refers to the

period ending twelve (12) months after the
date of the original delivery of a brand new
motor vehicle to a consumer or the first
twenty thousand (20,000) kilometers of
operation after such delivery, whichever
comes first. This shall be the period during
which the consumer can report any
nonconformity, as defined in paragraph (k)
herein, to the standards and specifications of
the manufacturer, authorized distributor,
authorized dealer or retailer, and pursue any
right as provided for under this Act;

Thus, in order to invoke the right under the lemon law, the
following requisites must concur:

First, that at any time within the Lemon Law rights period;

Second, after at least four (4) separate repair attempts by the

same manufacturer, distributor, authorized dealer or retailer
for the same complaint; and
Responsive Pleading
Al Dino N. Macavinta

Third, the nonconformity issue remains unresolved

As stated in the Annexes A and B of the complaint, the Honda

Jazz 1.5V AT with Plate Number WNQ523, colored Taffeti White,
was

a. Purchased on January 2014.

b. Repair Attempts (Hard Starting) made within the
lemon law period were only three (3) as follows:

First Attempt June 19, 2014

Second Attempt November 11, 2014
Third Attempt December 22, 2014

The fourth attempt was made on February 26, 2015, or

forty-two (42) days after the lemon law right period expired.

The second requisite that there MUST be AT LEAST four (4)

separate repair attempts was not met in this case. Thus, the
Complainant cannot immediately invoke her rights unless, at
any time within the Lemon Law rights period, there must be
AT LEAST four (4) separate repair attempts. The law is clear.
Only when the nonconformity issue remains unresolved
after four SEPARATE repair attempts within the lemon law
rights period can the complainant invoke her rights.

b. Assuming arguendo that the four (4) separate repairs are

within the lemon law rights period, the Complainant cannot
immediately file a complaint because the same law requires
that the Complainant must give the manufacturer,
distributor, authorized dealer or retailer a NOTICE to avail
the lemon law rights:

SEC. 6. Notice of Availment of Lemon Law

Rights. Before availing of any remedy under
this Act and subject to compliance with the
provisions of Section 5 hereof, the consumer
shall, in writing, notify the manufacturer,
distributor, authorized dealer or retailer of the
unresolved complaint, and the consumers
intention to invoke his or her rights under this
Act within the Lemon Law rights period.

Again, in the instant complaint, nowhere can be found that

the Complainant (Sheryl) notified, in writing, Honda of her
Availment of the Lemon Law Rights. Thus, Honda was not
apprised of the Complainants intention to invoke her rights
Responsive Pleading
Al Dino N. Macavinta

under the law. Only in the complaint that such invocation of

right was known for the first time by the Defendant. This is
not the kind of notice that the law requires. Such notice is a
condition precedent before ANY complaint can be filed
before this honorable tribunal.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

7. Defendant reiterates, repleads and incorporates by reference

all the foregoing insofar as they are material and additionally submit that
the Complaint should be dismissed because:

a. Complainant failed to state the law as legal basis in her

Complaint and prayed relief.
b. That all the complained repairs by the complainant were
attended to as shown in the Motor Vehicle Information and
the letter dated September 23, 2015 as certification for the
satisfactory solutions made to address the repairs (Hard
Starting). Attached hereto are the Motor Vehicle Information
and the letter dated September 23, 2015 as Annex A and
Annex B, respectively.

COUNTERCLAIM

8. Defendant reiterates, repleads and incorporates by reference

all the foregoing insofar as they are material and additionally submit that
he is entitled to relief arising from the filing of this malicious and baseless
suit, as follows:

a. Moral Damages amounting to One Million Pesos

(PHP1,000,000.00) because Hondas name and reputation
were besmirched by this malicious and baseless suit;

b. Attorneys Fees amounting to One Hundred Thousand Pesos

(PHP100,000.00) because Honda was compelled to secure
services of counsel to vindicate his legal rights.

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully prays that judgment be

rendered in his favor by dismissing the Complaint and granting
defendants counterclaim by awarding defendant:

1. One Million Pesos as Moral Damages, and,

2. One Hundred Thousand as Attorneys Fees.

Other just and equitable reliefs are prayed for.

Responsive Pleading
Al Dino N. Macavinta

City of San Fernando, this 13th day of February, 2017.

ATTY. JUAN TAMAD

Counsel for the Complainants
Roll of Attorneys No. 52469
IBP Lifetime Roll No. 9300/Manila II Chapter
PTR No. 1216365/ 01.11.2016 / Pasig City
MCLE Compliance No. V-0010015 / 08.27.2015
Rm. 4 2/F 1108, 69 Esteban Abada St,
Quezon City, 1108 Metro Manila

COPY FURNISHED

ATTY. DONA MAE G. MARQUEZ

San Nicolas, San Fernando City, Pampanga

EXPLANATION: Defendant respectfully manifest that a copy of the

foregoing pleading was served upon the complainants counsel by
registered mail, personal service being impracticable due to the distance
of the counsels office / address.
Responsive Pleading
Al Dino N. Macavinta

Annex A
Responsive Pleading
Al Dino N. Macavinta
Responsive Pleading
Al Dino N. Macavinta
Responsive Pleading
Al Dino N. Macavinta

Annex B