A local businessman who won a case against the defunct Asiatrust Development Bank for the latter’s mishandling of his US dollar transactions now wants the financial institution’s successor in interest, Asia United Bank, to compensate him according to what the courts have ruled.
More importantly, Chinese-Filipino trader Wilfredo Lua pointed out that AUB has now lost two complete legal cycles— from the Quezon City regional trial court, to the Court of Appeals and all the way to the Supreme Court—in its effort to dodge paying him the court-mandated compensation of $1 million for the trouble that has been brought to him by both AUB and Asiatrust (which AUB bought years ago) since the early 1990s.
Lua, who spoke to Biz Buzz last week to explain his side in the long-running dispute, said the problem began in 1991 when a payment he made to an Israeli supplier was inexplicably rejected by the bank without returning the funds from the transaction to his account.
From $72,000 in his dollar account, he was left with only $27,000 and he sued to recover the missing funds, rejecting Asiatrust’s offer to compensate him partially. The courts sided with him. When AUB acquired Asiatrust in 2012, Lua said the new owners continued the hardline stance of the previous principals and refused to negotiate, choosing instead to continue to legal battle… which Lua won again and again.
Since then, Lua said that no less than the Supreme Court has affirmed the decision of lower courts awarding the businessman with $1 million representing the principal amount he lost, plus an initial interest rate of 12 percent for the cost of money over the years.
“I did not make this figure up,” Lua said, explaining the figure that AUB refuses to accept. “It is the court that ordered it, including the legal interest rate of 12 percent.”
“They are trying to portray me as being greedy,” he added, noting that the bank’s lawyers have now taken to using dilatory tactics to avoid paying him for the legal victory that has been affirmed by the courts overwhelmingly.
Armed with these favorable judgments (which court documents expressly said are “final and executory”), it would appear that Lua’s claims have basis. And he’s no longer in a mood to negotiate. Now the question is: Will this depositor be paid? Abangan. —DAXIM L. LUCAS
Airport franchise
We’ve talked about the potential entry of tycoon Lucio Tan, whose family controls flag carrier Philippine Airlines, in the Solar Group-led consortium All-Asia Resources and Reclamation Corp. (ARRC), which has put on the table a $20-billion unsolicited proposal to construct an airport and seaport in Sangley, Cavite.
Aside from Tan, we heard that the group of investment banker Luis “Buboy” Virata is also interested in the project, a partnership between Solar group’s Wilson Tieng and SM group-led Belle Corp., which is making a lot of money from its interest in integrated gaming resort City of Dreams Manila.
Suffice to say, a deal is being packaged that will bring new investors to the airport project.
Furthermore, the proponents of the Sangley airport project seem to be packaging a deal independent of whether the government would pick Sangley as the new major international gateway in the metropolis (amid a number of options laid on the table like San Miguel’s Bulacan proposal and the Clark Airport option being considered by Metro Pacific, Filinvest-JG Summit and Megawide-GMR groups). Why so? Because there seems to be an option on the table for them to instead go to Congress to apply for a franchise to operate airport facilities.
For some people, going to Congress may turn out to be the faster route than waiting for the government to pick from among the many proposals to roll out a modern aviation system plan for the metropolis.
To recall, no less than House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez had said that since infrastructure facilities like railways and airports were considered public utilities, private companies holding concessions to operate them should apply for congressional franchises. While transportation officials don’t share this view that concessionaires need to obtain congressional franchise, some private sector proponents may be emboldened to try out this formula of going to Congress first. —DORIS DUMLAO-ABADILLA
PLDT to Rocket: I can’t quit you
Recent PLDT Inc. briefings have served as a good venue for company officials to communicate their overall strategy and prospects, while somewhat reconciling past decisions, whether good or bad.
With PLDT’s relatively okay first-half 2017 results—the company’s share price is up more than 6 percent since the announcement—there was some interest in its three-year-old investment in Germany’s Rocket Internet, a company that rose to fame by copying successful startups around the world and deploying these in emerging markets.
When PLDT first acquired a minority stake in Rocket for 333 million euros (the value of its investment is down by half these days), it made some news given the relatively small profile Filipino companies had and still have in the global tech scene. PLDT also saw the partnership as a springboard from which to launch new investments in the digital space.
Fast forward to the present and PLDT chair and CEO Manuel V. Pangilinan had a more sober response to what the group had actually gained through Rocket.
“Very little, I must confess,” Pangilinan said.
That’s not to say PLDT is ready to sell its roughly 6.6-percent stake in Rocket.
PLDT, of course, has been unloading non-core assets, notably its holdings in Manila Electric Co. Pangilinan said that gave management, focused on turning around its core business, comfort through 2017.
After all, why sell an asset that’s below the acquisition price and turn a paper loss into an actual loss? PLDT also took a hit last year in terms of an impairment charge related to Rocket, so the issue on its lower valuation has been dealt with—at least for now.
Lastly, Pangilinan said there was still reason to be optimistic, based on Rocket’s plans, known only to its shareholders.
“It’s good to wait it out,” Pangilinan said. —MIGUEL CAMUS