May 23, 2008

Bank sold single foreclosed property to two buyers

It was most disgusting to know that even a bank would defraud their client. Finding their error should made the bank make corrections and refunded the amount paid by one buyer in order to observe one contract with the other buyer. but this isn't so. Please read complete text from Susan Antepuesto who is until now under stress and duress because of this transaction.

****

A consumer's nightmare—Susan Antepuesto


Like any other parent, my husband and I try to save part of our earnings for our children's education and future. Times are uncertain and we try to invest our hard-earned peso hoping to secure a better future for them.


We bought a College Assurance Plan (CAP) for our eldest child Chino when he was still a baby. Unfortunately, while still in his 4th year in high school, CAP was experiencing difficulty in fulfilling their obligations to their scholars. We were not able to get anything for his college education.

My husband and I then agreed to invest in a small property for our two younger children's education thinking that it is something tangible and easy to dispose when the need arises. To be doubly sure, we even purchased it from a bank.

And this is where our sorry saga began.

We were offered a foreclosed property by the Bank of Commerce Rizal branch in Davao City in October 2004. It was a restructured loan and we complied with all the requirements by giving a down payment (10% of the restructured loan amount).

We submitted all documents and the bank had 30 days to make a credit viability and background check on us before approving the loan. And on January 2005, we made our first amortization to the bank. Thereafter, we dutifully set aside hard-earned money for the succeeding checks.

On April 2007, we received a call from an irate person claiming the property was his. We were shocked. We compared our contracts of sale and discovered that the property we had been amortizing for almost three years was likewise sold to another party.

Mediation
Isagani Sembrano, the other party, called up the Bank of Commerce's property management group in the Makati head office to complain. When we called the same office, nobody from the bank wanted to talk to us.

Our calls were repeatedly ignored and not one soul from the bank had the decency to apologize or make amends for the fraudulent double sale entered into by the bank. We then filed an administrative case with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas against Bank of Commerce for unsafe and unsound banking practice.

After several months, the BSP summoned the BOC and us for a mediation hearing in Manila last October 9,2007. My husband and I, together with our lawyer, came all the way from Davao City. BOC president Raul de Mesa, or any "duly authorized representative," was summoned to attend.

Sadly, the mediation was terminated, since the bank representatives refused to explain why they entered into the double sale of property and received parallel payments from two buyers for a total of 23 months.

The three bank personnel sent supposedly to represent Mr. de Mesa claimed that "they were not authorized to enter into any agreement to resolve the issue" which was ironical since we were notified of the mediation 30 days before the set date. We set aside precious time and resources just to hear their explanation and come to an amicable resolution.

Enter BSP
They repeatedly claimed that they had already rectified the matter and that the second buyer had already rescinded and was paid back his money plus interest. We later discovered that the other buyer was only partially refunded. He and the BOC entered into an agreement that if we back out of our contract, the Sembranos will continue theirs with the same amount and terms of payment.

The property was sold to the Sembranos eight months after the bank entered into a contract of sale with us. The amount was markedly lower by 20%.

On November 2007, we received a letter from the BSP reiterating that notwithstanding the failed mediation, copies of all pertinent documents related to our complaint was forwarded to the Bank's Central Point of Contact and Examination Departments for their "continued supervisory action and assessment of the bank's overall condition."

My husband and I rested our fate with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, the institution tasked to protect the public's interest.

The BOC, after several months of deafening silence, finally made the move to communicate with us. But we were surprised when we received a letter from the Bank of Commerce last January 2008 proposing to return only half of the total amount we had dutifully paid them. This was in the midst of the BSP examination and investigation of the BOC.

Bank secrecy
We found the proposal brazen and arrogant. We chose not to honor it with a reply. Last April 10, 2008 the bank again sent a notice that they will be depositing the rest of our checks in their possession purportedly to "protect the interest of the bank." They deposited the checks all at one time on the 15th of April. We were under threat of forfeiture of all payments made if we missed two monthly amortizations.

We had always reposed our trust and confidence in banks. We never expected that a bank would enter into practices such as this. They blamed clerical error and records error due to their takeover of the Traders Royal Bank assets and liabilities in 2001.

We are not privy to all of these. The contract we entered into is between BOC and us. Their gross negligence is inexcusable.

The simple and small transaction that we entered into with the Bank of Commerce turned into a nightmare for our family! We were not even accorded the basic respect of an apology and explanation that is supposedly given by businesses to their clients. We were defrauded, rudely ignored, and put under stress and duress.


The BSP, as we found out, is powerless as it is "not allowed to divulge by law any information relative to the findings and recommendations on the bank's operations" because of the restrictions in R.A.7653 or the Central Bank Act Sections 27 and 28.

As a parent, I hope and pray that laws can be crafted to better protect the consumers from unscrupulous business and bank practices. It is extremely difficult especially those like us living in the regions to follow up our cases in Manila.

And it is disheartening when respected institutions we look up to fail us.


http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryID=119277

No comments:

Post a Comment