SC finds BDO liable over unauthorized withdrawal of P8.1M

The Supreme Court (SC) has affirmed with modification a Court of Appeals (CA) decision and ruled that Banco de Oro (BDO) is solely liable to one of its depositors over unauthorized withdrawals amounting to over P8 million.

In a 19-page decision promulgated in February but released Monday, the SC Third Division ruled that BDO alone must pay the depositor P7.4 million as actual damages with an interest of 6% per annum from March 2009, or the date when the extrajudicial demand was made, until finality of judgment.

BDO was also ordered to pay the depositor P100,000 as moral damages, P100,000 as attorney’s fees, and costs of suit.

"To reiterate, banks are required to exercise the highest degree of diligence, along with high standards of integrity and performance in view of its significant role in commercial transactions," the SC said.

"Since their business and industry are imbued with public interest, banks are required to exercise extraordinary diligence in handling their transactions. Anything that falls short of this required standards of care constitutes negligence in the performance of the banks’ obligations to their depositors." 

The case stemmed from the instant case for collection of sum money filed by the depositor against BDO and the other respondents after she discovered unauthorized transactions in the amount of P8.1 million made by her long-time friend and chief operating officer.

In 2017, a regional trial court held that BDO, through its employees, failed to fulfill its obligation to treat the accounts of its customers with meticulous care and extraordinary diligence. It ordered BDO and its employees to pay the depositor over P8 million in actual and moral damages, among others.

In 2020, the CA affirmed with modification the ruling of the RTC and ruled that BDO and its employees are jointly and severally liable to the depositor for actual damages in the amount of P4.4 million.

This prompted the petitioners to file a petition before the SC where they argued that the actual damages awarded by the CA should be reduced because the depositor failed to prove forgery in the withdrawal slips and manager’s checks.

However, the SC said that the depositor's failure to prove the forgery of her signature is irrelevant to the negligence of BDO in fulfilling its obligation to her as a depositor.

"The records show… that BDO did not practice the highest degree of diligence required of it in taking care of [depositor's] bank accounts," the high court said.

"Primarily, BDO actually failed to comply with its own rules and regulations regarding withdrawals made through a representative. Specifically, BDO allowed [the representative] to personally transact the unauthorized withdrawals without confirming from [depositor]," it added.

The SC stressed that spaces provided for withdrawal through the representative were also not filled in.

GMA News Online has reached out to BDO for its comment, but the bank has yet to give one as of posting time. —KBK, GMA Integrated News