Executive summary

Can a demand letter sent through Facebook Messenger (or similar chat apps) be valid in the Philippines? In many contexts, yes—especially for ordinary civil obligations where the law doesn’t prescribe a particular mode of demand. Philippine law broadly recognizes electronic “writings” and messages. However, there are important carve-outs (e.g., laws that require registered mail, personal service, or notarization), and evidentiary steps you must take to prove sending, receipt, and integrity of the message. This article explains the governing rules, when a Messenger demand works, when it doesn’t, and how to do it properly.

1) What is a “demand letter” and why does delivery method matter?

A demand letter is a creditor’s notice to a debtor to comply with an obligation (pay money, deliver property, vacate premises, etc.). The form and delivery matter because:

Default (mora): Many obligations require demand to put the debtor in delay and trigger interest or damages.
Prescription: A written extrajudicial demand can interrupt the running of prescriptive periods.
Statutory prerequisites: Some statutes require prior written notice by a specific mode before penalties or causes of action arise (e.g., certain consumer, banking, lease, or check-law contexts).
Evidentiary weight: In court, you must prove the existence, content, sending, and receipt of the demand.

2) Legal framework for electronic demands

2.1 Electronic documents and signatures

The Electronic Commerce Act (ECA) and the Rules on Electronic Evidence (REE) grant legal recognition to electronic data messages and electronic documents. If a law requires a document to be “in writing,” an electronic document generally meets the writing requirement provided its integrity and reliability are shown.
Electronic signatures (typed names, clicks, scanned signatures, platform-provided marks) can be valid if they identify the signer and indicate intent to authenticate.

2.2 Ephemeral electronic communications (chat, SMS)

The REE specifically covers ephemeral electronic communications, which include chat messages and texts. These are admissible if properly proven by testimony of a participant or by system records/printouts, subject to authentication and relevance.

2.3 Service vs. evidence

A demand letter is not a pleading or court paper; thus, the strict court-rule provisions on service of pleadings don’t directly apply.
The key legal questions are:
1. Does the substantive law require a particular mode of demand?
2. Can you prove the demand’s content, sending, and receipt?

3) When Messenger demand letters are generally valid

3.1 Ordinary civil obligations

For contracts and obligations where no specific mode of demand is required, a Messenger demand can validly:

Constitute extrajudicial demand to put the debtor in delay.
Interrupt prescription (because it is a “written” demand in electronic form, assuming integrity/authentication are established).
Support claims for interest, liquidated damages, or attorney’s fees where prior demand is a prerequisite (unless the contract or law requires a particular mode).

3.2 Contractual flexibility

If the contract says notices may be sent by electronic means or broadly permits “any method reasonably calculated to give actual notice,” then Messenger fits—especially where parties have previously communicated through the same channel.

3.3 Practical acceptance

Courts routinely receive screenshots, exports, and platform logs for chat communications, provided you can authenticate them (see Section 6).

4) When Messenger is not enough or is risky

Even with the ECA/REE, some laws or contracts impose stricter requirements. In such cases, Messenger alone may fail:

Statutes that specify mode (e.g., registered mail or personal service) or require a notarized notice/cancellation.
- If a statute expressly says “by registered mail or personal delivery,” you must follow that mode. A Messenger message won’t substitute.
Negotiable instruments / bad checks contexts (B.P. 22): The notice of dishonor requirement is traditionally in writing and served personally or by registered mail. Using Messenger without also doing the prescribed mode is dangerous and can be fatal to prosecution or penalties.
Real property rescissions, cancellations, or forfeitures where the governing statute requires notarized or registered notice.
Labor/HR discipline where company policy or regulations require written notices served personally, by courier, or email. Messenger may be supplementary but could be challenged if not in policy.
Where the debtor denies receipt and your Messenger proof is weak (no “seen” indicator, no reply, no export/logs).

Rule of thumb: If a specific law, regulation, or contract clause prescribes the form or channel, follow it exactly. Use Messenger in addition, not as a substitute.

5) Content requirements for an effective demand (applies to Messenger too)

Regardless of channel, include:

Clear identification of parties and the obligation (contract/invoice/reference).
Specific breach and amount or act demanded.
Definite deadline (date & time) and place/method of compliance.
Legal basis (contract clause/statute) and consequences of non-compliance (e.g., interest, acceleration, rescission, filing suit).
Sender identity and authority (law firm letterhead image/PDF attached; position; bar roll no. for counsel if desired).
Reservation of rights and without prejudice language.
Data privacy notice (short clause stating lawful basis and limited use, see Section 9).

Where prescription or contractual timelines matter, state exact dates (e.g., “Pay on or before 15 December 2025”).

6) Proving a Messenger demand in court

To succeed, you must prove (A) content, (B) sending, (C) receipt, and (D) integrity/authentication.

6.1 Capture & preserve

Full-thread screenshots: Include the profile, timestamps, and message details; avoid partial crops.
Export/chat download (if available): Export the conversation with metadata (dates, participant names, IDs).
Hash and store: Keep a read-only copy and compute a hash (MD5/SHA-256) for integrity tracking. Maintain a chain-of-custody log.

6.2 Authentication options (REE-consistent)

Witness testimony: From the sender (and ideally the recipient) identifying the account, the device, and the message’s contents.
System/metadata evidence: Platform export showing sender account, recipient, timestamps, and message IDs.
Business records: If sent by a company, present IT/email/chat records policy, retention logs, and device control procedures.

6.3 Proving receipt

“Seen”/read indicators with timestamp.
Recipient replies acknowledging the message or its content.
Subsequent conduct indicating awareness (partial payment, proposal to settle).
Service to multiple channels (same message via Messenger and email/registered mail) to bolster proof.

6.4 Printouts vs. native files

Courts accept printouts of electronic messages if properly authenticated; still, bring native exports and, if feasible, a forensic image of the device or a custodian ready to testify.

7) Best-practice playbook: Sending a demand via Messenger (and making it stick)

Check governing law/contract first for any mode or notarization requirement.
Draft the demand in a formal PDF on letterhead.
Send through multiple channels:
- Upload/attach the PDF in Messenger, with a concise cover message;
- Email the same;
- If statute/contract requires, send registered mail or personal service.
Ask for acknowledgment in-app (“Please reply ‘RECEIVED’”).
Follow up: If no reply, send a reminder and note the deadline.
Preserve evidence: Take screenshots, do a chat export, and store server notices/receipts.
Log the timeline: When sent, by whom, via which accounts, and any responses.
Respect data privacy: Limit recipients (avoid group chats unless necessary and authorized).
If sensitive or high-stakes (e.g., B.P. 22, rescission, cancellation, ejectment): Do the prescribed mode (registered mail/personal service/notarized) even if you also use Messenger.

8) Special contexts

8.1 B.P. 22 (bouncing checks)

The notice of dishonor has strict jurisprudential requirements: written notice served personally or by registered mail to the issuer’s correct address.
Messenger alone is unsafe; use Messenger only as supplementary evidence of actual notice while strictly following personal service/registered mail.

8.2 Lease and real estate cancellations

Many contracts or special laws require notarized notices and/or registered mail. Send via Messenger only in addition to the required mode.

8.3 Employment discipline

Follow company policy and regulatory guidance (notice to explain, hearing, decision). Messenger can expedite delivery, but mirror by email/courier as policy dictates.

8.4 Consumer and banking notices

Statutes/regulations or terms and conditions may mandate specific channels (e.g., statement address, email on file). Use those primary channels, with Messenger as extra.

9) Data Privacy Act (DPA) considerations

Lawful basis: Processing personal data to enforce a contract, protect lawful rights, or establish/defend legal claims is typically justified.
Minimization: Include only what’s necessary; avoid sharing the demand in group chats unless contractually authorized or strictly needed.
Security: Use official accounts/devices, enable two-factor authentication, and avoid public Wi-Fi.
Retention: Keep records only as long as needed for the claim, litigation, or statutory retention.

A short footer you can add: “This message and any attachment constitute a formal demand relating to our agreement dated [date]. We process personal data solely for purposes of contract enforcement and legal claims, consistent with the Data Privacy Act of 2012.”

10) Practical template for a Messenger cover message

Hello [Name], Please see the attached Demand Letter dated [date] regarding [obligation/contract reference]. We demand [specific performance/payment amount] on or before [exact date, time, time zone]. Failure to comply will result in [interest/penalties/acceleration/legal action] as stated in [clause/statute]. Kindly reply “RECEIVED” upon viewing. — [Full name, position/law firm], [mobile/email]

(Attach the signed PDF letter. Then follow up using the prescribed statutory mode if applicable.)

11) Checklist: Will a Messenger demand work here?

Does a specific statute/contract prescribe registered mail/personal service/notarization?
- Yes → Use that required mode; Messenger is only supplementary.
- No → Messenger can validly serve as written demand if authenticated.
Can I prove receipt (seen, reply, follow-up conduct) and integrity (screenshots + export + logs)?
Do I need to interrupt prescription? Ensure the demand is written, dated, specific, and provably sent/received.
Have I preserved evidence and respected DPA?

12) Key takeaways

Messenger demands are generally valid for civil obligations if no special statutory/contractual mode is required.
They can place a debtor in delay and, if properly authenticated, interrupt prescription as written extrajudicial demands.
Don’t rely on Messenger alone where the law demands registered mail/personal service/notarization (e.g., B.P. 22).
Proof and preservation make or break your case: capture content, sending, receipt, and integrity.
Use multiple channels in high-stakes matters and add a short DPA notice.

Final word

Sending a demand via Messenger is a useful and often valid tool in the Philippines—if you respect special statutory modes where they exist and take evidence and privacy seriously. Combine good drafting, redundant delivery, and meticulous preservation to make your electronic demand stick.