COUNCILOR Danilo Dayanghirang said the Davao City Council has already conducted a committee hearing on his proposed ordinance seeking to penalize customers who maliciously refuse or fail to pay delivery riders.
Dayanghirang said he is coordinating closely with the Department of Trade and Industry because the proposed measure also involves consumer education and training concerns.
He explained that food delivery transactions involve both buyer and seller rights, especially in cases where customers refuse payment after an order has already been delivered.
“On the part of the one that would refuse to pay, nadugay niabot ang nideliver, it has something to do with consumer rights, so there are also pieces that it has something to do with the cyber communication site (For customers who refuse to pay because the delivery arrived late, the issue also involves consumer rights, and some aspects may also fall under online or cyber communication concerns),” Dayanghirang said during the Pulong-Pulong sa Dabawenyos on May 12 at the Sangguniang Panlungsod.
The councilor also cited incidents involving the use of another person’s identity to place fake food delivery orders.
Dayanghirang said crafting the ordinance remains complicated and still requires further study. He added that city officials plan to hold more discussions with the DTI regarding the proposal.
He said the DTI, delivery platforms, and delivery riders have already been consulted and generally welcomed the proposed measure.
Dayanghirang first proposed the ordinance in a privilege speech on Dec. 9, 2025, following a social media post from a rider whose delivery order was rejected by a customer.
The proposed ordinance would cover customers in Davao City who place orders through online delivery platforms, independent riders, app-based riders, and delivery services contracted by local establishments.
The measure identifies several prohibited acts, including refusing to pay after confirming an order, intentionally avoiding riders, providing false information, canceling orders without a valid reason, and harassing or insulting delivery personnel to avoid payment.
The proposal also establishes a presumption of malice for repeat offenses, such as repeatedly refusing deliveries, blocking contact numbers while orders are in transit, providing fake delivery addresses, or leaving riders waiting for at least 15 minutes without communication. RGP
RGP
