Globe Asiatique tries to talk unit buyers into suing Pag-Ibig

5:49 am | Sunday, August 12th, 2012

Delfin Lee. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines—Lawyers of Globe Asiatique owner Delfin Lee urged complainants to turn the tables on the Home Development Mutual Fund (HDMF), or the Pag-Ibig Fund, by offering them a continuous stay in their condominium units at GA Tower 2 on Edsa in Mandaluyong City, documents obtained by the Inquirer showed.

In a recent meeting between the complainants and Lee’s lawyers led by Willie Rivera, which was attended by the Inquirer, a letter addressed to condominium unit buyers was distributed by the realty firm employees.

Wrongful advice

Attached to the letter was a prepared affidavit with the names of the complainants on it accusing Pag-Ibig of giving wrongful advice.

The letter stated that in exchange for the signed affidavits of the complainants against Pag-Ibig, the realty firm would desist from further action against them.

“Please sign the attached affidavit so that we can remove your name from the list of delinquent buyers who are due for ejectment and peaceably remain in possession of the unit that you are presently occupying until our issues with HDMF are cleared,” the letter said.

The letter also advised unit buyers to coordinate with the realty office to forward the petition against Pag-Ibig to the Housing Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB).

“We advise you further to coordinate with our office as soon as possible so that we can help you petition the HLURB for the consignation of your monthly amortization which is rejected by HMDF to protect your interest over the condominium unit which you proposed to purchase from our company,” the letter added.

During the meeting where the documents were handed out, Rivera also announced that those who would join the lawsuit against Pag-Ibig would receive free legal assistance from the realty firm.

However, he said, those who had hired their own lawyers, could still file a case against Pag-Ibig Fund and promised that GA would reimburse their legal expenses.

“Pag-Ibig is stupid to reject your payments to them and told you to stop paying to Globe Asiatique and you should file a case against them before the HLURB,” Rivera said.

But according to the complainants who attended, the meeting did not provide them with any answers and left them even more confused.

“We attended the meeting hoping that we could be enlightened on the status of our investments, but the more we are now confused,” a unit owner who asked not to be named for fear of further harassment from the realty company told the Inquirer.

Rivera said that GA was allowed by law to engage in the replacement buyer scheme which they applied to GA 2.

Double selling

GA 2 Tower unit owners in Mandaluyong City had complained of double selling by Lee and its realty company.

Lee, his son Dexter, and other company officials have been charged with fraud and are the subjects of warrants of arrest.

The unit owners received notices of cancellation of their contracts and were being evicted after they stopped payment of their amortization when they found out from Pag-Ibig that their units were not in their names and had been sold twice.

Vice President Jejomar Binay, who also chairs the Pag-Ibig Board of Trustees, had earlier directed the HLURB to broaden the scope of its cease-and-desist order (CDO) slapped on the realty firm and directed Pag-Ibig to issue certifications to complainants that Pag-Ibig now had jurisdiction over the GA property.

Recent Stories:

Complete stories on our Digital Edition newsstand for tablets, netbooks and mobile phones; 14-issue free trial. About to step out? Get breaking alerts on your mobile.phone. Text ON INQ BREAKING to 4467, for Globe, Smart and Sun subscribers in the Philippines.

Short URL: http://business.inquirer.net/?p=76383

Tags: Delfin Lee , GA Tower , Globe Asiatique , Pag-IBIG , Pag-IBIG fund

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FPVUYCML46QCAJM5N2O4GNID24 tony

Bakit hindi hulihin yung mga abogado ng GA at pitpitin yung mga logits nila para sabihin nila kung saan nagtatago yung kliyente nila

http://profile.yahoo.com/VE7FOU3LEDDIOOB2GN2LQF2MGE Al

panay pa-pogi lang kasi si Nognog…pa-cute lang kulang sa gawa…!

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XQIPMGHIKFLIQX2GYRZPEV2VIY floydelyn

very creative talaga yung mga corrupt na tao, this time from the ranks of the developers. di dapat pumayag ang pag-ibig na mag-solicit ng loan applications ang mga developers. imagine, for each applicant solicited and processed, ang laki ng pera tatanggapin ng developer so how can you expect them to stick to the strict screening of applicants. what happened was worse – they submitted fake loan documents just to collect on loan proceeds. trabaho ito ng pag-ibig, bakit nila ipinasa sa developers.
undoubtedly, the developers must have lobbied hard and used influence and funds to get the arrangement approved/implemented. seeing the developers do this, pag-ibig executives should have been more cautious in their decisions. pag-ibig had adequate funds for loans before this agreement with the developers. and if you had valid documents and qualifications, you certainly could take out a loan; just go thru the process which was normal. this was your house, you work on it.
the developers offered to take away all this spadework and the screening tasks for pag-ibig people – and sucked pag-ibig funds dry. delfin lee should be punished in public – fast. pag-ibig executives should be brought to trial – also in public. just think of the deterrent effect of swift, decisive punishment done in broad daylight. those would-be thieves in government will think twice or they would be next.
jga94

seems to me that GA and people from Pag-Ibig were in collusion….dapat ituloy reklamo sa developers at imbestigahan pati Pag-Ibig….
dingestraza

I don’t think there is a fault on the part of Pag-ibig on this issue. First of all there is a legal document that bind the 3 parties, the Buyer (unit owner), Assignor (GA) and the Assignee(HDMF) which is called “DEED OF ASSIGNMENT WITH SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY”. This document binds the three parties. In case there is a default on the part of the Buyer and the Assignor fails to buy-back the unit, the Assignee will automatically appointed as an “ATTORNEY IN-FACT”. It means that PAG-IBIG is authorized to cause the cancellation of the contract. Pag-ibig has the exclusive right to sell, convey and deliver and in any manner dispose the unit covered by the title certificate and for this purpose sign, execute and deliver the Deed of Absolute Sale or any documents to the Buyer.

In view of the aforesaid, since the name of the Buyer is indicated at the back of Certificate of Title of the Unit, there would be no confusion of who is the real buyer of the Unit. I think this would clear the confusion on this issue. I myself is one of the parties of this condo unit transaction a living witness of this issue.

http://profile.yahoo.com/45JYBDVWBJ3QNFJQ6NGUCRWL7I Noree

In view of this legal document that you said binds the three 3 parties, I read that a Makati RTC court has made a decision early this year compelling the HDMF to honor and restore its various agreements with GA. Meaning, GA can now do its obligations in the previous agreements like pay the defaulting loans, replace the defaulting buyers and other measures to protect the buyers. Unfortunately, this decision is still under appeal by the HDMF. In the meantime, yung mga buyers ang naiipit dahil ayaw nga tanggapin ng Pagibig ang monthly amortizations nila. May kasalanan din ang Pagibig sa pangyayaring eto. Ika nga, it takes two to tango. At sa laking halaga na yan imposibleng ordinary clerk lang ang may alam.

dingestraza

Noree, I am not convinced with your narrated facts that GA appears to comply with its obligations with HDMF following the court decision to compel HDMF to honor its obligation. First of all the primary complainants here it’s either the old original buyer who are apparently in default or the new buyer who appears to be paying to HDMF but was declined. We don’t what transpired on the court proceedings. Unless I have a fact that the complainant are the new buyers who are in cooperation with GA, the case might be take a long time since the original DEED OF ASSIGNMENT with SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY has to be honored. That’s is why there are some confusion. Until we received the clear promulgation of the court on this case, This issue will still linger. This is not a simple case where we can simply discuss on this venue. I don’t have the luxury of time to explain to you all the legal intricacies involving this kind of transaction. In my opinion, I see some bad faith on the part of GA, were it not for his decision to offer the unit to other buyer, even the original buyer was in default, there would be no scandal like this.
http://profile.yahoo.com/45JYBDVWBJ3QNFJQ6NGUCRWL7I Noree

I think the Makati case is the civil case filed by GA against Pagibig for specific performance to compel the latter to restore and honor its various agreements like the funding commitment agreement. GA won but the case is still under appeal.

sorbetero

There is a simple solution to those buyers who are confused,rightly or not, as to which entity they should tender their payment… the solution is a court action for CONSIGNATION otherwise known as judicial deposit which they can pursue individually or collectively (better to save on legal expense).Payments are deposited to the courts during the pendency of the suit between GlobeAsiatic and Pag-Ibig. For details , consult a legal practitioner you trust. The Courts will provide you with a blanket protection against harassment/threats of eviction.Try it.

http://profile.yahoo.com/45JYBDVWBJ3QNFJQ6NGUCRWL7I Noree

Thanks for the advice.

Rolly257

malamang na kikita na naman si Binay dito, saka ang Supreme Court, pag nakarating dito ang kaso.

Globe Asiatique tries to talk unit buyers into suing Pag-Ibig

News

Sports

Lifestyle

Entertainment

Business

Technology

Opinion

Global Nation