DECISION NO.

2021-256
October 7, 2021

Subject: Request of Engr. Isidro V. Butaslac, Jr., Port Manager, Philippine Ports Authority-Port
Management Office, Misamis Oriental/Cagayan de Oro City, for relief from property
accountability for the loss/damage (total wreck) of one unit Toyota HiLux Pick-up
2.5LF with Plate No. AAQ 1378 and Engine No. 2KDS366404, with acquisition cost of
P974,000.00, due to road accident on February 14, 2016

DECISION

FACTS OF THE CASE

Before this Commission is the request for relief1 from property accountability of Engr. Isidro V. Butaslac, Jr., Port Manager,
Philippine Ports Authority (PPA)-Port Management Office (PMO), Misamis Oriental/Cagayan de Oro City (MOC), for the
loss/damage (total wreck) of one unit Toyota HiLux Pick-up 2.5LF, with Plate No. AAQ 1378 2 and Engine No. 2KDS366404, and
with acquisition cost of P974,000.00, due to road/vehicular accident on February 14, 2016.

The Toyota HiLux Pick-up was a pay item of the contract for the Construction of a Back-up Area and Widening of
Causeway, Port of Catagbacan, Loon, Bohol, which was awarded by the PPA to Luck-Well Construction, the registered owner of
the subject vehicle. After the completion of the project, the vehicle, in accordance with the contract, was transferred to PPA. A
PPA Special Order (SO) No. 713-2015 dated August 19, 2015 3 was issued assigning the subject vehicle from the Motorpool,
Administrative Services Department (ASD) to PMO-MOC. Thereafter, on August 20, 2015, an Invoice Receipt for Property (IRP), 4
in the amount of P974,000.00, was issued to Engr. Butaslac, Jr.

According to Engr. Butaslac, Jr. although the subject vehicle was not yet transferred in the name of PPA, it was already
recorded in the books of accounts of PPA-PMO, MOC as Land Transportation Equipment, and prayed that his request for relief be
granted.

On February 14, 2016 at around 10:20 a.m., Engr. Butaslac, Jr. was riding in the subject vehicle driven by Mr. Bertito I.
Abaquita, on their way to Davao City to attend an Orientation Seminar on International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
pursuant to PPA SO No. 95-2016 5 and PMO-MOC Travel Order (TO) No. 032-16. 6 They engaged in a vehicular accident with an
Isuzu mini dump truck with Plate No. RKB 170, driven by Mr. Teddy C. Abello. The accident caused irreparable damage and
wreckage to the engine and body of the Toyota HiLux Pick-up and physical injuries to the passengers of the vehicles.

In the Traffic Accident Investigation Report (TAIR) dated February 15, 2016, 7 Mr. Abaquita, the driver of the Toyota
HiLux Pick-up, stated that the Isuzu mini dump truck suddenly swerved to the left and went to the opposite lane, blocking their
driveway. The driver of the mini dump truck stated that before the collision, he was following an unidentified single motorcycle,
which suddenly stopped, and to avoid contact, he abruptly pedaled the brake to stop, but his driven vehicle swerved to the left and
went out of the traversing lane. In the investigation report, it was stated that it was possible that the driver of the mini dump truck
failed to observe safety precautionary measures and was driving inattentively.

Engr. Butaslac, Jr. furnished a copy of the TAIR of the Philippine National Police, Station No. 6, Cagayan de Oro City
Police Office, which investigated the incident to the General Manager of PPA, Manila, under Memorandum dated February 23,
2016. On May 17, 2016, Engr. Butaslac, Jr. formally requested for relief 8 from property accountability for the damage/loss of the
subject vehicle and the adjustment of the corresponding Motor Vehicle account in the books of PPA-PMO, MOC. In his affidavit,
Engr. Butaslac, Jr. stated that despite exercising extraordinary diligence and observing traffic rules and regulations on his part,
the vehicular accident happened beyond his control because the driver of the Isuzu mini dump truck failed to observe safety
precautionary measures and was driving inattentively.

In her 1 st Indorsement dated May 26, 2016,9 the Audit Team Leader (ATL) recommended to grant the request for relief
from property accountability of Engr. Butaslac, Jr. Likewise, in her Memorandum dated January 10, 2017, 10 the Cluster Director
(CD), Corporate Government Sector (CGS)-Cluster 3, this Commission, recommended that the request for relief be granted
pursuant to Section 73(1)11 of Presidential Decree (PD) No. 1445,12 considering the favorable recommendation of the ATL, the
extent of damage sustained by the vehicle, and there being no fault or negligence on the part of the accountable officer (AO).

In addition to the documents submitted with his request for relief from property accountability, Engr. Butaslac, Jr., in his
5 th Indorsement dated June 9, 2017,13 submitted the following documents:

1) Deed of Transfer, executed by and between Luck-Well Construction, represented by Mr. Ronald V. del Rosario,
and the PPA, represented by Mr. Carlito M. Castillo, transferring a Toyota HiLux 2.5LF 4x2 Diesel M/T-2B with
Plate No. AAQ 1378 from Luck-Well Construction to PPA;

2) IRP issued by Mr. Antonio C. Ignacio, Manager, ASD, PPA, to Engr. Butaslac, Jr.;

3) Assignment of PPA Vehicles; and

4) Certificate of Registration and Official Receipt of the aforementioned vehicle.

ISSUE
ISSUE

The issue to be resolved is whether or not the instant request for relief from property accountability may be given due
course.

DISCUSSION

After a careful evaluation of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Commission finds the request meritorious.

A request for relief from property accountability may be given due course pursuant to Section 73(1) of PD No. 1445, viz.:
When a loss of government funds or property occurs while they are in transit or the loss is caused by
fire, theft, or other casualty or force majeure, the officer accountable therefore or having custody
thereof shall immediately notify the Commission or the auditor concerned and, within thirty days or
such longer period as the Commission or auditor may in the particular case allow, shall present his
[application] for relief, with the available supporting evidence. Whenever warranted by the evidence
credit for the loss shall be allowed. An officer who fails to comply with this requirement shall not be
relieved of liability or allowed credit for any loss in the settlement of his accounts.

Likewise, Section 105(1) of PD No. 1445 provides that:

Every officer accountable for government property shall be liable for its money value in case of
improper or unauthorized [use] or misapplication thereof, by himself or any person for whose acts he
may be responsible. He shall likewise be liable for all losses, damages, or deterioration occasioned by
negligence in the keeping or use of the property whether or not it be at the time in his actual custody.
(Underscoring supplied)

The foregoing provisions of PD No. 1445 lay down the following requirements before an AO may be absolved from
liability for loss of government property:

1) Filing of a notice of loss immediately with the Commission on Audit (COA) or the auditor concerned after the
discovery of the loss and application for relief to be filed within 30 days or such longer period as may be allowed
by the auditor.

2) Absence of fault or negligence on the part of the AO in the keeping or use of the property.

Engr. Butaslac, Jr. formally filed his request for relief from property accountability on May 17, 2016, or more than three
months after the occurrence of the loss on February 14, 2016. However, Section 73(1) of PD No. 1445, which requires immediate
notification to the auditor when a loss of government property occurs, has been complied with by Engr. Butaslac, Jr., the AO,
when he furnished the Office of the ATL, PPA-PMO, MOC , a TAIR on February 23, 2016. The act of Engr. Butaslac, Jr. in giving
early notice of the incident to the auditor allowed the latter to conduct his independent investigation of the road/vehicular
accident involving the government property.

An AO shall be held liable for the loss of government property due to negligence. Thus, for a request
for relief from property accountability to be granted, the AO must satisfactorily prove that he exercised the diligence of a good
father of a family or the conduct of a prudent man in the safekeeping of government-issued property and overcome the presence
of negligence.

The concept of negligence was explained by the Supreme Court in the case of Bulilan vs. COA,14 in this wise:

Negligence is defined as “the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those
considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or the
doing of something which a prudent man and reasonable man could not do.” Stated
otherwise, negligence is want of care required by the circumstances.

Negligence is therefore a relative or comparative concept. Its application depends upon the situation
the parties are in, and the degree of care and vigilance which the prevailing circumstances reasonably
require. Conformably, the diligence which the law requires an
individual to observe and exercise varies according to the nature of the situation in which he happens
to be, and the importance of the act which he has to perform. (Italics, underscoring and emphasis
supplied)

In this case, there is no showing of fault or negligence on the part of Engr. Butaslac, Jr. when the road/vehicular accident
occurred involving the property issued to him. As borne by the records, the subject vehicle was used in transporting Engr.
Butaslac, Jr. to Davao City to attend an Orientation Seminar on ISO which was duly authorized under PPA SO No. 95-2016 and
PMO-MOC TO No. 032-16. As narrated in the affidavit of Engr. Butaslac, Jr. they have exercised extraordinary diligence in
observing the road/traffic rules and regulations. In fact, it was the driver of the opposing vehicle who failed to observe the safety
precautionary measures which resulted in the accident. The absence of negligence on the part of Engr. Butaslac, Jr. was
corroborated by the TAIR prepared by Police Officer 3 Julius Callo Nacional, of Cagayan de Oro City Police Station No. 6, when
he stated that the accident happened because of the inattentiveness of the driver of the opposing vehicle.

Considering the favorable recommendations of the then ATL and the CD, CGS-Cluster 3, this Commission, and the
substantial compliance with the documentary requirements under COA Memorandum No. 92-751 dated February 24, 1992, 15 the
request for relief from property accountability filed by Engr. Butaslac, Jr. is hereby granted. Thus, Engr. Butaslac, Jr. is relieved
from liability for the loss/damage of Toyota HiLux Pick-up 2.5LF, with Plate No. AAQ 1378 issued to him under an IRP.
RULING

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the request of Engr. Isidro V. Butaslac, Jr., Port Manager, Philippine Ports Authority-
Port Management Office, Misamis Oriental/Cagayan de Oro City, for relief from property accountability for the loss/damage of
one unit Toyota HiLux Pick-up 2.5LF, with Plate No. AAQ 1378 and Engine No. 2KDS366404, with acquisition cost of
P974,000.00, is hereby GRANTED. Accordingly, a Journal Entry Voucher may now be drawn to drop the value of the damaged
vehicle from the agency’s books of accounts.

(SGD.) MICHAEL G. AGUINALDO

Chairperson

(SGD.) ROLAND C. PONDOC

Commissioner

Attested by:

(SGD.) BRESILO R. SABALDAN

Director IV
Commission Secretariat

Copy furnished:

Engr. Isidro V. Butaslac, Jr.

Port Manager
Philippine Ports Authority-Port Management Office
Misamis Oriental/Cagayan de Oro City
Port Area, Macabalan, Cagayan de Oro City

The Audit Team Leader

Philippine Ports Authority-Port Management Office
Misamis Oriental/Cagayan de Oro City
Port Area, Macabalan, Cagayan de Oro City

The Regional Supervising Auditor

Corporate Government Sector-Cluster 3
Commission on Audit Regional Office No. X
Cagayan de Oro City

The Directors
Commission on Audit Regional Office No. X
Information Technology Office, Systems and Technical Services Sector

The Assistant Commissioners

Local Government Sector
Commission Proper Adjudication and Secretariat Support Services Sector

All of this Commission

EDS/JAT/RCL/LRP/GLE
ESZ/EDS/LRP/GLE
CPCN 2016-1242

1 Section 4, Rule VIII, 2009 Revised Rules of Procedure of the Commission on Audit.
2 Rollo, p. 16.
3 Rollo, p. 17.
4 Rollo, p. 8.
5 Rollo, p. 50.
6 Rollo, p. 7.
7 Rollo, p. 5.
8 Rollo, p. 11.
9 Rollo, pp. 22-23.
10 Rollo, pp. 38-39.
11 When a loss of government funds or property occurs while they are in transit or the loss is caused by fire, theft, or other casualty or force majeure, the officer accountable
therefore or having custody thereof shall immediately notify the Commission or the auditor concerned and, within thirty days or such longer period as the Commission
or auditor may in the particular case allow, shall present his [application] for relief, with the available supporting evidence. Whenever warranted by the evidence credit
for the loss shall be allowed. An officer who fails to comply with this requirement shall not be relieved of liability or allowed credit for any loss in the settlement of his
accounts.
12 Ordaining and Instituting a Government Auditing Code of the Philippines.
13 Rollo, pp. 82-83.
14 G.R. No. 130057, December 22, 1998.
15 Documentation on Petitions/Requests for Relief from Accountability.