Co-Maker Liability on Motorcycle Loan Default Philippines

Co-Maker Liability on Motorcycle Loan Default in the Philippines (An in-depth legal guide for lenders, buyers, and accommodation parties)

---

1. Background: Why “co-makers” exist in motorcycle financing

Motorcycles are frequently purchased in the Philippines through sale-on-installment contracts secured by a promissory note with chattel mortgage (PN-CM). Because the asset is movable and depreciates fast, dealers and financing companies typically ask the buyer to present an additional party—popularly called a co-maker—whose signature provides an extra layer of assurance that the installment stream will be paid.

---

2. Legal foundations

Subject	Key Statutes / Rules	Salient Points for Co-Makers
Civil Code	• Art. 1216 (solidary liability) • Art. 2047–2059 (guaranty & suretyship)	Creditors may sue any solidary debtor for the whole obligation. A “co-maker” is treated in practice as a surety, not a mere guarantor, so the benefit of excussion does not apply.
Negotiable Instruments Law (Act 2031)	• § 29 (accommodation party) • § 60–66 (defenses)	A co-maker who signs a negotiable promissory note without consideration is an accommodation party and is “liable to a holder for value.” Personal defenses of the principal debtor usually do not release the accommodation party.
Chattel Mortgage Law (Act 1508)	Governs registration and foreclosure of the mortgage over the motorcycle.
Recto Law (Civil Code Art. 1484)	If the seller/financier elects to foreclose and seize the motorcycle, it generally waives further action for any deficiency. BUT Supreme Court jurisprudence has recognized exceptions when the loan is governed by the Financing Company Act.
Financing Company Act (RA 8556, amending RA 5980)	Allows deficiency actions after chattel mortgage foreclosure provided proper notice and public auction rules are followed. Co-makers are answerable for that deficiency.
Truth in Lending Act (RA 3765) & BSP Regs	Finance charges, default interest, and all “other fees” must be clearly disclosed to both debtor and co-maker; hidden charges may be void.
Credit Information System Act (RA 9510)	Default by the principal or co-maker is reportable to the Credit Information Corporation and affects credit scores of both.

---

3. Who exactly is a “co-maker”?

1. Contract terminology Financing documents often say “co-maker,” “co-signer,” “surety,” or “solidary debtor.” Despite the label, Philippine courts look at substance over form. When the instrument contains the clause “I/we jointly and severally promise to pay…,” each signatory is solidarily liable.

2. Accommodation party under § 29 NIL Signing “for the purpose of lending his name” makes the co-maker an accommodation party; no separate consideration is required.

3. Surety vs. guarantor

   • Guarantor → secondary liability; may invoke benefit of excussion (creditor must first exhaust principal’s assets).
   • Surety / co-maker → primary & direct liability with the debtor; no need for prior demand on the debtor before suing the surety.

Courts routinely construe a co-maker as a surety, especially where the printed PN-CM already specifies solidary obligation (e.g., Industrial Finance Corp. v. Ramirez, G.R. L-32658, 30 Apr 1979).

---

4. Life-cycle of a motorcycle loan and the co-maker’s exposure

Stage	Event	How Co-Maker Is Affected
Approval	Signing PN-CM	Becomes solidary debtor; credit record is created.
Performing	Timely installment payments	No immediate risk; but late fees, extensions, restructuring usually require co-maker’s consent.
Default (typically ≥ 3 missed installments)	Creditor issues demand letters to debtor and co-maker.	Under Art. 1169, delay begins upon demand unless waived by stipulation; most PN-CMs waive need for demand.
Foreclosure & seizure	Creditor forecloses the chattel mortgage and repossesses the motorcycle.	Recto Law choice: (a) exact fulfillment, (b) foreclose, or (c) rescind. If foreclosed, co-maker may still face a deficiency suit if RA 8556 applies and auction was proper.
Deficiency action	Creditor sues for unpaid balance plus costs and interest.	Co-maker can be sued alone, together, or before the principal debtor (Art. 1216). Wage garnishment, bank levy, property attachment are possible.
Payment by co-maker	Co-maker pays claim or judgment	Gains right to reimbursement (Art. 2066) and may sue principal debtor; also acquires mortgagee’s rights by subrogation.
Credit reporting	Default flagged	Remains on CIC file for at least 3 years after settlement.

---

5. Creditor’s remedies and co-maker liability

1. Direct suit on the PN Because the PN is a negotiable instrument, the financier (or any holder in due course) may file a sum-of-money action within 10 years (written contract prescriptive period).

2. Chattel mortgage foreclosure – Extra-judicial under Act 1508 through a notary and sheriff; or – Judicial foreclosure. Under Art. 1484 (3) (Recto Law) the election to foreclose usually bars a deficiency claim.

   Important nuance: Spouses Abalos v. CA, G.R. 103756 (18 Apr 2002), held that financiers governed by RA 5980 (now RA 8556) may still recover the deficiency if foreclosure followed the statute’s notice & public auction requirements. Thus a co-maker can be made to pay the balance after sale of the motorcycle.

3. Small claims / regular court If the remaining debt falls within the Rules on Expedited Procedures in First Level Courts, the suit can proceed quickly; co-maker must appear or risk default judgment.

4. Demand letters and extrajudicial settlement Because litigation is costly, many financiers pressure co-makers with collection letters, calls, or blacklist notices. Settlement agreements may impose new terms; co-maker’s written consent is crucial.

---

6. Defenses available to a co-maker

Class	Examples	Availability
Real / absolute defenses (go to validity of the instrument)	Forgery, fraud in factum, lack of delivery, material alteration, minority, complete absence of consideration	Valid vs. all holders; co-maker may invoke if proven.
Personal defenses	Failure of consideration between principal & payee, unauthorized completion, conditional delivery, set-off	Not good against a holder in due course; co-maker usually cannot rely on the principal’s personal defenses.
Statutory defenses	Recto Law election (if creditor foreclosed and law bars deficiency), prescription, usury (if interest > 6% without agreement or > legal cap if agreement exists), violation of RA 3765 (non-disclosure)	Valid provided facts support them.
Notice & auction irregularities	Inadequate notice of foreclosure (Act 1508 § 14), chilling the sale, grossly inadequate price	Can defeat deficiency claim or reduce amount.
Extinguishment	Novation that releases co-maker, condonation/remission, merger, confusion, payment	Depends on evidence and explicit release language.

---

7. Rights of a co-maker after paying

1. Reimbursement (Art. 2066) – Co-maker may recover everything paid plus interest from the principal debtor.
2. Subrogation (Art. 1302 & 2067) – All mortgage rights and securities of the creditor pass to the paying co-maker.
3. Contribution (Art. 1207) – If there is more than one co-maker, each shoulders proportionate share unless agreed otherwise.
4. Possibility of criminal action – If principal’s default involves falsified documents or estafa, the co-maker may file a criminal complaint, but this does not bar the civil reimbursement suit.

---

8. Impact on credit & future borrowing

• The Credit Information Corporation collects both negative and positive data. A default reported under the co-maker’s name lowers his CIC score, affecting future loan approvals.
• Banks may require explanation letters; some offer “rehabilitation” of a tarnished record after 2–3 years of consistent payments.

---

9. Practical guidelines

For would-be co-makers

1. Assess the borrower’s capacity (income documents, work tenure).
2. Demand copy of all loan papers—especially the PN-CM, disclosure statement, and schedule of charges.
3. Negotiate limited liability, e.g., a guaranty instead of a surety (rarely granted).
4. Secure collateral or indemnity agreement from the borrower (post-dated checks, real estate lien, post-dated deed of sale).
5. Monitor payments: ask the financier for duplicate receipts or online access.

For creditors / dealers

1. Clear disclosure to co-makers avoids voiding of undisclosed finance charges.
2. Observe Recto Law vs. RA 8556: choose remedy wisely; prepare deficiency evidence.
3. Send separate notices to co-maker to interrupt prescription and prove demand.

For principal debtors

1. Default hurts your co-maker’s credit and may expose them to suit.
2. Voluntary surrender does not automatically cancel the debt; get a written quit-claim or dacion en pago releasing co-maker.

---

10. Frequently-litigated issues & leading cases

Issue	Sample Ruling	Take-away
Is co-maker solidarily liable?	Industrial Finance Corp. v. Ramirez (1979)	Yes—wording “jointly and severally” makes signatories solidary debtors.
Can creditor sue for deficiency after foreclosure?	Spouses Abalos v. CA (2002)	Yes, if financier is covered by RA 8556 and foreclosure complied with notice & auction rules.
Is Recto Law still applicable to financing companies?	Filinvest Credit Corp. v. CA (1990’s line of cases)	Recto Law still applies, but RA 8556 provides an exception.
Accommodation party liability despite no benefit received?	Metropolitan Bank v. Cabilzo (2006)	Accommodation party liable to holder for value; lack of consideration is not a defense.
Effect of undisclosed charges	Development Bank v. Arcilla (1989)	Failure to disclose finance charges violates RA 3765; courts may void interest and penalties.

---

11. Criminal liability?

Merely failing to pay a civil debt—even as a co-maker—is not estafa or BP 22 (bouncing checks) unless the co-maker issued a check that later bounced or committed fraudulent misrepresentation. However, aggressive collectors sometimes threaten criminal cases; co-makers should know these are empty if no check or fraud is involved.

---

12. Tax and documentary stamp considerations

• Documentary Stamp Tax on the PN-CM is commonly borne by the borrower; co-maker is not separately taxed for signing.
• Any indemnity agreement between principal and co-maker may itself be subject to DST as a loan instrument.

---

13. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR)

Many PN-CMs now contain an ADR clause (PDRCI or PCAF). Co-makers are bound by this clause; arbitration awards are enforceable under the ADR Act (RA 9285) and may still be executed against their assets.

---

14. Conclusion

In Philippine motorcycle financing, a co-maker is more than a friendly reference: he becomes a solidary debtor and surety. Upon the buyer’s default, the creditor may pursue the co-maker directly, repossess the motorcycle, and—subject to the Recto/RA 8556 interplay—recover any deficiency. The co-maker’s best safeguards are due diligence before signing, vigilant monitoring of payments, and prompt action if default looms. For financiers, strict compliance with disclosure and foreclosure rules maximizes recoverability while minimizing litigation risk. Understanding these legal contours protects all parties and promotes responsible credit in the growing Philippine motorcycle market.