Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session
House Bill No. 5979

Introduced by ACT-CIS Party-list Representative ROWENA NINA O. TADURAN

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Parking space nowadays, as they say, is a very prized, and, may | add - “priced” commodity. It
has become such a necessity that people are willing to part with their hard-earned money just to
avail of a tiny space for their vehicles.

In many areas, the parking fee is fixed, i., there is a flat rate which is good for one (1) day,
regardless of the number of hours a vehicle is parked in a parking facility. In other places,
however, the fee is fixed for the first two (2) or three (3) hours, and thereafter, a fee is added per
hour for as long as the vehicle is parked.

A person who parks his/her vehicle in a parking facility has the obligation to pay for the space.
Upon receipt of the parking fee, isn't it the natural and concomitant obligation of the
owner/operator/manager of the parking facility to ensure the safety and security of the vehicle?

Unfortunately, that is not the reality in our country. Whenever a vehicle is burglarized or worse,
carnapped, the owner/operator/manager of the parking facility does a Pontius Pilate and denies
any liability. The owner/operator/manager of the parking facility will always point to the provision
in the parking ticket which absolves it from liability in case of loss of or damage to the vehicle or
loss of articles inside the same. Assuming that this proviso is legal, is it however, moral?

To answer these questions, the passage of this bill is respectfully sought.



Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

First Regular Session
House Bill No. _079

Introduced by ACT-CIS Party-list Representative ROWENA NINA O. TADURAN

AN ACT

DEFINING THE OBLIGATIONS AND LIABILITIES OF OWNERS/OPERATORS/MANAGERS,
OF CAR-PARKS OF MALLS, OFFICE/COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, OPEN PARKING
SPACES, AND OTHER SIMILAR ESTABLISHMENTS, AND FOR OTHER RELATED

PURPOSES.

Be it enacted by the House of Representatives and Senate in Congress
assembled:

Section 1. Short Title. — This Act shall be known as the “Parking Area Responsibility for
Automobile Damages Act (PARADA)”

Section 2. Declaration of State Policy. — It is the policy of the State to protect the
interests of the consumers, promote their general welfare and establish standards of conduct for
business and industry.

Section 3. Coverage. — This Act shall cover pay parking facilities for all kinds of motor
vehicles, including parking spaces in shopping malls, restaurants, hospitals, schools or other
similar establishments, including vacant lots and buildings that are solely or partly devoted for use
as pay parking.

Free parking facilities in restaurants, malls, parks and similar commercial establishments
are likewise covered by this Act since the availability of a safe and secure parking area is the
primary consideration of people who patronize these establishments.

Section 4. Responsibilities and Liabilities. - Owners/operators/managers of parking
facilities shall ensure the safety and security of the vehicles parked in their facilities.

(a) _ Each parking facility shall be equipped with such number of CCTV cameras as
may be sufficient to monitor all the vehicles therein. It shall be the responsibility of the
‘owners/operators/managers of parking facilities to see to it that all CCTV cameras are always in
good order. If after investigation of a car burglary or a carnapping, itis found out that there are no
CCTV cameras or that the CCTV camera/s positioned nearest to the subject car is defective or
non-functional, the ownerloperator/manager shall be deemed negligent and be liable for
damages.

Upon the occurrence of a crime, the owner/operator/manager of the parking facility shall,
without delay, render immediate assistance to the victim and allow him/her and the police
authorities access to the crime scene. He/she shall also give the victim and the police authorities,

2)


copies of the CCTV footage/s which captured the incident. Refusal of the
‘owner/operator/manager of the parking facility to allow immediate access andlor give copies of
CCTV footages shall render him/her liable for damages as well as for Obstruction of Justice under
Presidential Decree No. 1829.

(b) Security guards in such number as reasonably sufficient shall man the parking
facility. In the event of a burglary or camapping, the absence of a security guard in the parking
facility shall be prima facie evidence of negligence and shall render the owner/operator/manager
of the parking facility liable for damages.

(c) Damages shall be in an amount not less than TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND
PESOS (PHP 200,000.00). However, if the victim has sufficient proof that the loss is more than
the said amount, the damages shall be in the amount actually proved, but in no case less than
TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (PHP 200,000.00).

Section 5. Separability Clause. — If any provision of this Act or the applicability of such
provision to any person or circumstance shall be held invalid, the validity of the other provisions
of this Act and the applicability of such provisions to other persons or circumstances shall not be
affected thereby.

Section 6. Repealing Clause. — All laws, executive issuances, orders and rules and
regulations contrary to or inconsistent with this Act, or any part thereof, are hereby repealed,
amended and/or modified accordingly.

Section 7. Effectivity. — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days from the date of its
publication in the Official Gazette or at least in two (2) newspapers of general circulation.