Author: BotLex

Good news to all OFWs and Filipino Residing Abroad!

Good news! Under Supreme Court Administrative Matter (AM) No. 20-12-01, Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) and Filipinos residing abroad can now avail of video conferencing to testify in court hearings. PDF copy of AM 20-12-01 can be downloaded from this site: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/16099/?fbclid=IwAR0LWNGwldByYVsQ0zWR2kygpFLirxy9O9tsQTW6iMttTqrjOLG8qoiXhQU.

This makes it convenient and safe for OFWs and Filipinos residing abroad to file cases or testify in pending cases even when they are outside the country.For more information about AM No. 20-12-01, kindly email at causingdelacruzlaw@gmail.com.

All online consultations are free of charge.

0

What if the Credit Collector Harasses You?

Screen Shot 2020-07-30 at 9.10.55 AM
source: Indiatimes.com

It is common nowadays that individuals received over-aggressive messages from credit collection agencies and their collectors.  This is after they missed paying their credit card, mortgage loans or installment payments on purchases with credit card or consumer mortgage financing arrangement.

To curb these incidents of harassments by collection agencies, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued SEC Memo Circular No. 18 Series of 2019.

SEC issues memorandum on unfair debt collection practices

MANILA, Philippines — The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued a memorandum circular preventing unfair debt collection practices such as the use of insults or profane language, violent threats or false representation.

In the new circular, the SEC said that financing companies, lending companies and their third-party service providers could no longer harass borrowers and employ unfair means to collect debt.

“Financing companies, lending companies and third party service providers hired by them may resort to all reasonable and legally permissible means to collect amounts due them under the loan agreement provided that, in the exercise of their rights and performance of their duties, they must observe good faith and reasonable conduct and refrain from engaging in unscrupulous and untoward acts,” the SEC said in the circular issued Aug. 19.

The SEC said such unfair debt practices include the use of obscenities, insults or profane language; publication of the names and other personal information of the borrowers; and the use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a borrower.

Furthermore, the corporate regulator said that making contact at unreasonable or inconvenient times or hours – before 6 a.m. or after 10 p.m. – is not allowed. This is unless the account is past due for more than 15 days or the borrower has given express consent that the said times are the only reasonable or convenient opportunities for contact, the SEC said.

Financing and lending companies found to be violating the circular face penalties ranging from P25,000 for lending companies and P50,000 for financing companies for the first offense to P50,000 to up to P1 million for both for the third offense and possible suspension or revocation of their license.

The SEC issued the circular because it has been receiving numerous complaints against financing and lending companies that allegedly harass borrowers and employ abusive, unethical and unfair means to collect debts. It said the SEC has regulatory and supervisory jurisdiction over these companies by virtue of Republic Act 8556 or the Financing Company Act of 1998 and Republic Act 9474 or the Lending Company Regulation Act of 2007.

Last May, the National Privacy Commission (NPC) said it also looked into 48 online lending applications that allegedly shamed borrowers who failed to settle their obligations on time. The agency has received over 400 complaints from borrowers over alleged misuse of their personal information, including disclosure of their unpaid balances to other people, it said.

Source: Philstar

SEC Memo Circular No. 18 Series of 2019: Prohibition on Unfair Debt Collection Practices of Financing Companies (FC) and Lending Companies (LC)

 

0

Evidence allowed in First Level Courts in Criminal Cases

A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC, or the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases provides that: ” In criminal cases before First Level Courts (i.e. Municipal and Metropolitan Trial Courts, etc.), witness testimonies shall consist of (i) duly subscribed written statements given to law enforcement officers; or (ii) affidavits or counter-affidavits submitted during preliminary investigation; or (iii) if (i) and (ii) are not available, judicial affidavits.”

0

Authority to Prosecute Criminal Cases

 

In cases where only the civil liability is being prosecuted by a private prosecutor, the head of the prosecution office must issue in favor of the private prosecutor a written authority to try the case even in the absence of the public prosecutor. The written authority must be submitted to the court prior to the presentation of evidence by the private prosecutor in accordance with Sec. 5, Rule 110. With this authority on record, the court may set the trial in the case and in other cases tried by private prosecutors with delegated authority on separate days when the presence of the public prosecutor may be dispensed with.

0

What are the requirements for a Special Resident Retiree’s Visa?

by Kia Marie Emanel Pano

The Special Resident Retiree’s Visa (SRRV), is a special non-immigrant visa which entitles the holder to reside in the Philippines.

The basic requirements for the application of SRRV are the following: 1) Original Passport with valid/updated Temporary Visitor’s Visa; 2) Accomplished Philippine Retirement Authority (PRA) application form; 3) Original valid Medical Certificate; 4) Original Valid Police Clearance from country of origin, and an additional National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) clearance if applicant has stayed in the Philippines for over 30 days from last date of entry; 5) Photos (8 pieces, 2×2); 6) SRRV deposit that is inwardly remitted; 7) Processing/Service Fee of US $1,400.00 for the Principal Applicant, and an additional US $300.00 for each Dependent Applicant; 8) Annual Fee of US $360.00 for the Principal and two dependents if there are any.

There are four (4) SRRV options which you can choose from. First is SRRV SMILE which is intended for active/ healthy retirees, who opt to maintain their SRRV deposit of US $20,000.00 in any of the PRA Accredited Banks. Second is SRRV CLASSIC which is for active/healthy retirees, who opt to use their SRRV deposit into active investment such as the purchase of condominium unit or long-term lease of house and lot. The SRRV deposit is US $10,000.00 for 50 years old and above with a pension and US $20,000.00 for those without pension. For those who are 35 to 49 years old, the SRRV deposit is US $50,000.00.

On the other hand, for those ailing retirees who are 35 years old and above and who need or require medical/clinical care, a monthly pension of at least US $1,500.00, a health insurance policy accepted in the Philippines, and an SRRV deposit of US $10,000.00 are required to avail of SRRV HUMAN TOUCH. And lastly, SRRV EXPANDED COURTESY is available for foreign nationals who are 50 years old & above and who are also retired Armed Force officers of foreign countries with existing military ties and/or agreement with the Philippine Government. A monthly pension of at least US $1,000.00 and an SRRV deposit of US $1,500.00 are required. The SRRV deposit includes the principal applicant and 2 dependents. Additional dependent, entails additional SRRV deposit of US $15,000 each (except for former Filipinos). CHILDREN must be legitimate or legally adopted by the Principal Retiree, unmarried and below 21 years old upon joining the program.

Source: Philippine Retirement Authority (pra.gov.ph)

0

When Role Playing can land you in Jail

Edwin and Leah are a young adventurous couple in their mid-20s.

Wanting to add spice to their sex life, they decided to venture into role playing. Enjoying this fetish, the couple took photos and videos of themselves in various state of undress and having sex. In some of the photos depicting sexual intercourse, Leah was presented as a scantily- dressed teenage school girl. These sexual adventures continued until Edwin caught Leah with another man. He was so enraged that he shared Leah’s nude photos and their sexual encounter with his friends: Bobby, Rommel and Jerry via MMS and email. Included were photos of Leah role-playing as a teenage school girl. When Leah knew about that her nude photos were shared and already in the possession of Edwin’s friends, she alerted the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Cyber Crime Division. Soon an entrapment operation was hatched and Edwin and his friends were caught with Leah’s nude photos in their cellular phones and computers.

The public prosecutor charged Edwin, Bobby, Rommel and Jerry with Syndicated Child Pornography as defined by Republic Act 9775 or the “Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009.” In their defense, all the respondents reasoned that Leah was no longer a minor when her nude photos were taken. She was already 24 years old.

Is this a valid defense?

No. Even if the person whose nude photos are subject of the crime, is no longer a minor at the time it was taken, it may still be considered child pornography. This is because Section 3 (a) 1 of RA 9775 provides when a person regardless of age is presented, depicted or portrayed as a child in photos or videos, he or she is still considered a child for intents and purposes of said law. If these photos or videos depicts or shows said person engaged or involved in real or simulated explicit sexual activities like sexual intercourse, these can be considered as child pornography .

As for Edwin, Bobby, Rommel and Jerry, they are liable for child pornography under Section 4 paragraphs c, j and l, for sharing, willfully accessing and possessing child pornography. To make matters worse, since the violation was carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring or confederating with one another, it is deemed syndicated child pornography under Section 5. This carries a penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of not less than Two million pesos (Php2,000,000.00) but not more than Five million pesos (Php5,000,000.00).

 

 

0

We are moving near you

Starting March 2020, Causing and Dela Cruz Law Offices will be transferring its principal office address at Solid Building, Pison Ave. San Rafael Mandurriao, Iloilo City.

It is next door to Kucho Cafe, Sony Service Center and Saladmaster.

The new office has ample parking spaces for its clients and is located at the heart of bustling Ayala Land’s Atria Commercial and Residential District.

0

Website Built with WordPress.com.

Up ↑