1) Overview: what a demand letter is (and what it is not)

A demand letter in Philippine debt recovery practice is a written notice by a creditor (or the creditor’s representative) to a debtor that:

a debt is due and unpaid,
payment is demanded within a stated period, and
failure to pay may lead to further action (e.g., filing a civil case, or in limited situations, criminal complaints when legally warranted).

It is not a pleading filed in court, not a summons, and not a judgment. It is a pre-litigation or collection communication that can serve important legal and evidentiary functions.

2) Core question: is an attorney’s signature required?

General rule

No. Under Philippine law and practice, a demand letter does not require an attorney’s signature to be valid or effective. A creditor may issue a demand letter personally or through an authorized agent (including a lawyer, a collection officer, or another representative).

Why there is no signature “requirement”

Demand letters are not among the documents that the Rules of Court require to be signed by counsel (such as pleadings, motions, and other papers filed in court). A demand letter is essentially an extrajudicial demand—a private communication—so the formal signing rules for court filings generally do not apply.

3) Who may sign a demand letter in debt recovery

A. The creditor (individual or business)

An individual creditor can sign their own demand letter.
For a company, an authorized officer (e.g., president, finance head, credit and collection manager) may sign, consistent with internal authority.

B. An attorney

A lawyer may sign when:

the creditor wants the communication to come through counsel,
the lawyer is engaged to handle collection/litigation,
the creditor wants the letter to reflect legal escalation and preserve certain positions.

C. An agent or representative

A collection agency or authorized representative may sign, but practical concerns arise:

authority should be clear (avoid misrepresentation),
the letter must not falsely imply it is from a law office if it is not,
statements must be accurate to avoid potential liability.

4) What an attorney-signed demand letter does (and does not) change

What it can change (practical and evidentiary effects)

Credibility and seriousness: It often signals readiness to litigate.
Better framing of legal issues: Counsel can craft precise demands, reserve rights, and avoid admissions.
Cleaner recordkeeping: A well-drafted letter can serve as a strong exhibit later.

What it does not change (legal fundamentals)

It does not automatically make the claim valid.
It does not create a lien, garnish assets, or authorize repossession.
It does not convert a civil debt into a criminal case by mere wording.
It does not exempt the sender from laws on harassment, threats, or unfair collection practices.

5) Legal importance of a demand letter in Philippine debt cases

A. Extrajudicial demand and “delay” (default)

In obligations to pay money, a debtor may be considered in delay (mora) once a proper demand is made—unless demand is excused by the contract or law. In practice, a demand letter is often used to show:

the creditor demanded payment, and
the debtor failed/refused, supporting claims for interest and damages where appropriate.

B. Interest and damages implications

Demand is commonly relevant to:

legal interest computations when the obligation is breached,
attorney’s fees provisions (if contractually stipulated and otherwise reasonable),
claims for damages tied to nonpayment (subject to proof).

An attorney’s signature is not the key factor; the key factor is that a demand was made and can be proven.

C. Prescription (statute of limitations) considerations

A demand letter may affect timelines depending on the legal theory and governing rules (e.g., interruption of prescription in certain contexts). However, whether it interrupts prescription can be technical and fact-specific. The safer practice is to treat demand letters as helpful evidence but not a substitute for timely filing when a prescriptive period is nearing.

D. Conditions precedent in some contracts

Some contracts make written demand or notice a condition before:

acceleration clauses (declaring the entire balance due),
enforcement actions (e.g., foreclosure steps, termination).

If the contract requires notice, the demand letter’s content and method of service may matter more than who signs.

6) When the signature (lawyer vs non-lawyer) may matter indirectly

A. Attorney’s fees and collection costs

If the creditor plans to claim attorney’s fees, a letter from counsel can support the narrative that:

legal services were engaged due to debtor’s default,
fees may be due if there is a contractual basis and the claim is reasonable.

But courts scrutinize attorney’s fees; a lawyer-signed letter alone is not a blank check.

B. Corporate authority and representational clarity

For corporate creditors, a letter signed by someone without authority can invite defenses such as:

“no proof of authority,”
“demand not properly made.”

This is not about being a lawyer; it’s about being authorized.

C. Consumer-protection / harassment risk

An attorney letterhead can increase perceived pressure. If the letter includes threats beyond lawful actions or misstates the law, it can create exposure. Proper tone and accuracy matter.

7) Service and proof: more important than attorney signature

A demand letter’s legal utility often depends on whether the creditor can prove it was sent and received.

Common methods:

Personal service with signed acknowledgment.
Registered mail with registry receipt and return card (or postal certification of delivery/attempt).
Courier with tracking and proof of delivery.
Email when allowed by contract or when prior dealings show electronic notice is acceptable; best supported by logs, acknowledgments, and consistent usage.

Key evidence points:

correct address (contract address or updated known address),
clear date of sending,
proof of receipt or attempted delivery.

8) Content requirements: what a proper Philippine demand letter usually contains

There is no single statutory “template,” but strong demand letters typically include:

Identification of parties (creditor and debtor).
Basis of obligation (loan agreement, invoice, promissory note, purchase order, SOA).
Amount demanded with breakdown:
- principal,
- interest (rate and basis),
- penalties (if contract allows),
- other charges (if valid),
- less payments/credits.
Due date(s) and statement of default.
Demand for payment within a specified period.
Payment instructions (where/how to pay).
Reservation of rights and notice of possible legal action (civil suit, small claims, etc., as appropriate).
Attachments or reference to supporting documents.
Signature block (creditor/authorized signatory or counsel) with contact details.

Attorney signature is optional; precision is not.

9) Common legal pitfalls in attorney-signed (or non-attorney) demand letters

A. Threatening criminal prosecution for mere nonpayment

The Philippine Constitution prohibits imprisonment for debt, and many unpaid debts are purely civil. While some fact patterns can involve crimes (e.g., estafa, bouncing checks under applicable law), a demand letter should avoid blanket criminal threats unsupported by facts or law. Overreaching language can backfire.

B. Defamation and reputational threats

Threats to “expose” the debtor publicly, contact employers indiscriminately, or shame the debtor can create legal risk. Collection should remain lawful and proportionate.

C. Misrepresentation of authority

Non-lawyers should not imply they are attorneys or that a law office is handling the matter if it is not. Even lawyers must avoid misleading statements.

D. Inflated amounts and unconscionable penalties

Claiming amounts not grounded in contract or law can weaken credibility and may be challenged later. Courts can strike down unconscionable penalties and scrutinize liquidated damages.

E. Wrong party demanded

Demand must be directed to the correct debtor(s), including:

solidary debtors/co-makers/guarantors (depending on the instrument),
corporate debtors (proper corporate name),
estates (if debtor deceased; special rules apply).

10) Demand letters in specific Philippine recovery tracks

A. Small Claims cases

Small claims is designed for simpler money claims within jurisdictional limits. A prior demand letter is often practically useful to show nonpayment and to support the timeline, though procedural requirements depend on the specific small claims rules and forms. In many cases, the claimant appears without a lawyer (subject to exceptions), underscoring that attorney signature is not inherently required for demand.

B. Collection suits (ordinary civil actions)

A demand letter is commonly attached as an exhibit to show default and entitlement to interest/damages. Again, signature by counsel is not required, but a lawyer may sign as part of a broader litigation strategy.

C. Bouncing checks / negotiable instruments contexts

Where checks are involved, notice of dishonor and demand may be important; the form and timing can be legally significant. Whether a lawyer signs is less important than whether the correct statutory and evidentiary requirements for notice are satisfied.

D. Secured transactions (e.g., chattel mortgage over the vehicle)

If a vehicle is collateral, enforcement steps may require particular notices and compliance with the governing security arrangements and applicable rules. Demand letters can be part of the process, but proper legal compliance is more important than signature.

11) Should a demand letter be notarized?

Generally, no. Notarization is not required for validity. Notarization may be used in special contexts (e.g., to add formality or for certain documentary purposes), but it is not a standard legal necessity for demand. Proof of service matters more.

12) Can a demand letter be signed “for and on behalf of” the creditor?

Yes, commonly. If signed by someone other than the creditor:

clearly state the representative capacity,
identify the creditor,
avoid ambiguous claims of authority,
be prepared to show proof of authority if challenged (especially for corporate creditors).

13) Best practice conclusions (Philippine context)

An attorney’s signature is not required for a demand letter to be valid or effective in debt recovery.
The most important elements are accuracy, legal basis, clear demand, and provable service/receipt.
An attorney-signed letter is a strategic choice that can strengthen framing and seriousness, but it also demands careful drafting to avoid unlawful threats or misstatements.
For corporate creditors, ensure the signatory is properly authorized; authority is often more critical than professional title.
Preserve evidence: keep copies, attachments, and proof of delivery; these often matter more than who signed.