[Letter to the Attorney]
Dear Attorney,
I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to seek your professional advice regarding an issue that involves sending demand letters. Specifically, I would like to know how many times a person should send a demand letter in order to protect their interests and comply with legal standards, while also ensuring that they do not appear to be harassing the other party. As I understand it, these matters can be sensitive, and I want to make sure I follow best practices under Philippine law. For context, I am a concerned individual who wishes to resolve a dispute as amicably and lawfully as possible. Any guidance you could provide on the appropriate number of demand letters, their timing, content, and the strategic considerations behind them would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
A Concerned Individual
[Legal Analysis and Discussion Under Philippine Law]
Introduction
Demand letters serve as crucial preliminary steps in asserting one’s rights, signaling an intention to seek legal redress, and possibly engaging in settlement negotiations before resorting to formal litigation in the Philippines. While there is no absolute fixed number of times a demand letter must be sent under Philippine law, various practical, jurisprudential, and strategic considerations must be examined. Generally, demand letters are dispatched to remind or inform a debtor or respondent of their obligation, to invite compliance or settlement, or to provide notice prior to instituting legal action. Failure to issue a demand may, in certain instances, affect the accrual of interest, the cause of action, or the possibility of instituting a particular type of legal remedy.
This legal article aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of what a demand letter is under Philippine law, the reasons for sending it, relevant statutory and jurisprudential underpinnings, and how many times one may consider sending such a letter. It will likewise discuss the balancing act between sending multiple demands to preserve a party’s rights and avoiding the impression of harassment or unnecessary repetition. The goal is to assist parties and their counsel in making well-informed decisions about the timing, frequency, and necessity of multiple demand letters in the Philippine legal context.
Nature and Purpose of the Demand Letter
General Definition and Purpose:
A demand letter is a written correspondence sent by one party (usually the creditor, aggrieved party, or claimant) to another (usually a debtor or alleged wrongdoer), calling upon the latter to perform a certain action—commonly the payment of a sum due, the fulfillment of an obligation, or the cessation of a wrongful act. The letter’s purpose is to provide notice, fix a period for compliance, and afford the other party a chance to rectify the situation without immediate litigation. In many cases, the demand letter sets the tone for possible settlement negotiations and can be a powerful tool to avoid lengthy, costly, and time-consuming court battles.Legal Significance Under Philippine Law:
The significance of a demand letter in the Philippines can be gleaned from several legal provisions and jurisprudence. For instance, Article 1169 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines discusses the concept of “delay” (mora) in the performance of obligations and how it can arise only after a demand (unless demand is not necessary). Also, certain laws governing negotiable instruments (e.g., bouncing checks under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22) or obligations often require formal notice or demand before legal interest can accrue or before a cause of action can be considered ripe for litigation.Condition Precedent to Filing Suit:
In some instances, sending a demand letter is a condition precedent to the institution of legal proceedings. For example, if the obligation in question is a simple loan that is due and demandable, failure to send a formal demand may affect the starting point for interest computation. Similarly, in cases involving dishonored checks, a written demand is often required by law or by prevailing jurisprudence to establish a cause of action for violation of B.P. 22. Although not every legal action requires a prior demand letter, doing so typically strengthens one’s legal position and demonstrates good faith and willingness to settle.
How Many Times Should a Party Send a Demand Letter?
No Strict Legal Requirement on the Number of Demand Letters:
There is no statute or Supreme Court ruling that prescribes a strict number of times a demand letter must be sent. The decision ultimately depends on the factual circumstances, the complexity of the issue, the response (or lack thereof) of the other party, and the strategic approach of the demanding party. Many attorneys will recommend sending at least one formal demand letter. Often, a single well-crafted demand suffices to either prompt a settlement discussion or clarify that litigation may ensue should the other party fail to comply.Common Practice and Reasonableness Standard:
Although not mandated by law, it is common practice to send one clear and unequivocal demand letter, giving the other party a reasonable period to comply (e.g., 15 days to 30 days) before proceeding with further action. If there is no response or the response is unsatisfactory, sending a second letter may be warranted. This second letter may serve to reiterate the demands, show seriousness of intent, and remind the other party that failure to comply may lead to legal proceedings. However, sending an endless stream of demand letters can be counterproductive, as it may be perceived as harassment, can waste time, and does not necessarily improve the legal standing of the claimant.Strategic Considerations in Sending Multiple Letters:
When deciding whether to send multiple demand letters, consider the following factors:- Nature of the Obligation or Claim: If it is a straightforward matter (e.g., a sum certain owed under a promissory note), one or two letters might suffice. If it’s a more complex situation—perhaps involving multiple parties, contractual ambiguities, or conditions precedent—additional reminders or clarifications might be warranted.
- Potential for Amicable Settlement: If the other party engages in negotiations or shows willingness to settle after receiving the initial demand, sending a follow-up letter or letters that gradually narrow down the settlement terms may be beneficial. Each subsequent letter can reflect ongoing negotiation efforts.
- Legal Timing Requirements: Certain causes of action might require demands before interest accrues or before certain legal rights attach. In such cases, sending a properly timed second or third letter might be helpful if the initial demand’s timeframe has expired or circumstances have changed.
- Building a Paper Trail: Multiple demands can help establish a record of good faith efforts to settle. Should the matter go to trial, a series of demand letters can demonstrate that the claimant attempted to resolve the dispute amicably and provided the respondent with ample opportunity to comply.
Risk of Harassment Claims and Bad Faith Allegations:
While sending multiple demand letters might seem thorough, one must guard against sending so many that the conduct could be interpreted as harassment or intimidation. Although Philippine law does not explicitly define a threshold number of letters that constitutes harassment, it is wise to avoid sending repetitive demands too frequently (e.g., daily or weekly) without any new developments. Courts might look unfavorably upon excessive repetition if it appears to serve no legitimate purpose other than pressuring or annoying the other party. Professional counsel from a lawyer is essential in determining a balanced approach.
Practical Guidelines on the Frequency of Demand Letters
First Demand Letter as the Essential Notice:
Start with a clear, concise, and well-drafted first demand letter. State the obligation, the factual and legal basis for the claim, the amount or remedy sought, and the deadline for compliance. Ensure that this letter is specific, references relevant provisions of law or contract if appropriate, and is delivered in a verifiable manner (e.g., registered mail, courier with return receipt).Second Demand Letter for Follow-Up:
If there is no response or compliance after the deadline set in the first letter, consider sending a second demand. This follow-up can restate the original claim, note the failure to comply, and provide one final opportunity to settle before initiating legal action. The tone may be firmer, but still professional and solution-oriented. This second letter can also address any partial or inadequate response by the other party.Further Letters—A Case-by-Case Basis:
If, after the second demand letter, the other party remains noncompliant or continues to delay, further letters could be sent. However, a third or fourth demand letter is less common unless there are evolving circumstances—such as ongoing negotiations, partial payments, or attempts at mediation—that justify continued correspondence. Beyond two or three letters, it may be more effective to commence legal proceedings, file a complaint, or pursue other remedies rather than rely solely on repeated written demands.Legal Counsel and Settlement Discussions:
Before sending multiple letters, it may be best to consult with a qualified attorney who can advise on strategy, timing, and content. The lawyer can also help assess whether sending another letter will bolster your position or is simply delaying the inevitable need for litigation. Sometimes, formal mediation or arbitration, if contractually required or agreed upon, can follow after one or two demand letters. The presence of legal counsel in the negotiation process can add credibility to the threats of legal action contained in the demand letters.
Legal Provisions and Jurisprudence Relevant to Demand Letters
Civil Code Provisions:
Under the Civil Code of the Philippines, demands are often essential to place the debtor in delay. Once in delay, the debtor could be liable for damages or interest. Article 1169 states that, in obligations to do or not to do, the debtor shall be put in default only from the time the creditor has demanded performance. Thus, the sending of at least one effective demand letter is crucial for these obligations.Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (B.P. 22) Cases:
In cases involving the issuance of bouncing checks, the payee typically sends a demand letter to the issuer before filing a complaint for violation of B.P. 22. Although it may suffice to send just one demand letter, it is not prohibited to send a second follow-up if circumstances require clarification or if the issuer requests additional time to settle. Nevertheless, after a reasonable demand and waiting period, pursuing legal action might be more appropriate than repeatedly sending demands.Insurance Claims and Other Special Contracts:
For certain types of contracts—like insurance claims—Philippine law and the insurance policy terms might require a formal written claim or notice within a certain period. Subsequent letters may be useful if the insurer fails to respond or denies the claim without sufficient justification. Still, repetitive, identical demands beyond what is reasonable would likely not change the insurer’s stance and may simply prolong the dispute.Jurisprudential Guidance:
While there is no single Supreme Court decision prescribing a fixed number of demand letters, the jurisprudence underscores the importance of a demand in establishing default and justifying the subsequent filing of a complaint. In some cases, the Supreme Court has looked favorably on creditors or claimants who made good-faith attempts to settle before resorting to litigation. Though not explicitly stated, this suggests that at least one or two well-drafted demands can strengthen a plaintiff’s standing in court.
Balancing Efficiency and Good Faith
It is essential to weigh the costs and benefits of sending multiple demand letters. More letters do not necessarily translate to a stronger legal position. Instead, quality, clarity, and strategic timing matter. A single, well-prepared demand letter can often achieve the desired result, while a few follow-up letters may further protect your interests if the other party requires more time or negotiation. On the other hand, sending a barrage of letters may yield diminishing returns and could even harm the claimant’s credibility.
If the other party remains unresponsive despite one or two letters, it may be time to consider filing a formal complaint, initiating arbitration or mediation (if contractually agreed upon), or pursuing other legal remedies available under Philippine law. Another factor is the nature of the claim: if the amount involved is small and the other party appears intractable, resorting to the courts or to barangay conciliation proceedings (if applicable) may be the next logical step rather than issuing repetitive demands.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
The Philippines encourages the use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, such as mediation, conciliation, and arbitration, to resolve disputes more efficiently and amicably. After sending a demand letter and receiving no satisfactory response, the claimant might consider referring the matter to a mediator or the barangay justice system, depending on the nature and amount of the claim. Engaging in ADR can sometimes achieve better results than sending a string of letters. This approach demonstrates good faith, willingness to settle, and a proactive attempt at conflict resolution.
Practical Tips for Drafting and Timing Demand Letters
Content is Key:
Ensure the demand letter is straightforward, cites relevant law or contractual provisions, states the facts accurately, and includes a clear deadline for compliance. Being specific reduces the need for subsequent clarifications or restatements.Set Reasonable Deadlines:
Demanding immediate compliance within an unrealistically short time frame may not be seen as fair. Providing a reasonable grace period—often 15 to 30 days—gives the other party time to respond, gather funds, or consult counsel.Maintain Professional Tone:
Even when sending multiple demands, remain courteous and professional. Avoid language that could be interpreted as defamatory or threatening. The tone should be firm but respectful. This can help preserve a constructive environment for settlement.Document Everything:
Keep copies of all letters, proof of service (registered mail receipts, courier tracking, email delivery confirmations if appropriate), and any responses. This record will be invaluable if the dispute escalates.Adapt Based on Responses:
If the other party requests more time, consider sending one additional letter acknowledging their request and granting an extension, if reasonable, before taking further steps. If they show willingness to discuss terms, tailor subsequent letters to reflect proposed compromises.
Conclusion
The question of how many times to send a demand letter under Philippine law does not have a one-size-fits-all answer. Philippine statutes and jurisprudence do not prescribe a specific number. Instead, it depends on the nature of the obligation, the complexity of the dispute, the other party’s responsiveness, and the strategic judgment of the demanding party and their counsel. Typically, one or two well-crafted letters will suffice to put the other party in default and demonstrate good faith before filing a legal action. If the other party is nonresponsive or uncooperative, rather than sending multiple repetitive letters, it may be more prudent to escalate the matter through formal legal proceedings, alternative dispute resolution, or direct negotiation. Ultimately, the goal is to strike a balance between preserving one’s legal rights, demonstrating sincerity in seeking an amicable resolution, and avoiding unnecessary or harassing communications.