Illegal Dismissal, pwede pang ihain sa loob ng 4 na taon

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | August 3, 2023

Dear Chief Acosta,

Ako ay ilegal na natanggal sa trabaho noong taong 2021. Hanggang ngayon ay hindi pa ako nagsasampa ng reklamo tungkol dito dahil kailangan kong magtrabaho para matustusan ang mga pangangailangan ng aking pamilya. Magiging isyu ba ang pagkaantala sa pagsasampa ng reklamo para sa aking ilegal na pagkakatanggal? - Joeb

Dear Joeb,

Ang sagot sa iyong katanungan ay tinalakay na ng ating Kagalang-galang na Korte Suprema sa kasong “NS Transport Services, Inc. vs. Jose Zaldy N. Zeta” (G.R. No. 158499, 4 April 2007), na isinulat ni Kagalang-galang na dating Kasamang Mahistrado Maria Alicia Austria-Martinez, kung saan nakasaad ang mga sumusunod:

“Anent the nine-month “delay” in filing the Complaint, we find this an insignificant factor. Just recently, in Angeles v. Fernandez, we held that the fact that the filing of the complaint by the employee 20 months after dismissal is a non-issue, thus:

Worth stressing, we find sufficient reason to agree with the appellate court that petitioner failed in this case to prove that respondent abandoned her job. While respondent filed the complaint 20 months after her dismissal, such filing was well within the four-year prescriptive period allowed to institute an action for illegal dismissal. This Court had previously considered a non-issue the lapse of several months, e.g. eight months, nine months, and two years and five months before filing a complaint for illegal dismissal.”

Ayon sa iyong salaysay, kayo ay ilegal na tinanggal sa trabaho noong taong 2021 at hanggang ngayon ay hindi ka pa nagsasampa ng reklamo tungkol dito. Samakatuwid, maaari kang magsampa ng reklamo sa loob ng 4 na taon mula noon o hanggang taong 2025.

Batay sa nabanggit na desisyon, ang pagkaantala sa pagsasampa ng reklamo ay hindi magiging isyu hangga’t ito ay nasa loob ng 4 na taon mula nang mangyari ang ilegal na pagtatanggal.

Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.

Maraming salamat sa inyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.

Gustong paalisin ang tenant sa nabiling lupang sakahan

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | August 2, 2023

Dear Chief Acosta,

Nais ko lamang malaman kung maaari ko bang paalisin ang kasalukuyang tenant sa aking nabiling lupang sakahan sapagkat nais kong ipalit sa kanya ang aking pinsan na mayroong mas malawak na kaalaman sa pagsasaka? -- Ian

Dear Ian,

Para sa iyong kaalaman, ang Section 16 ng Republic Act No. 2263 o mas kilala bilang An Act Amending Certain Sections of Republic Act Numbered One Thousand One Hundred Ninety-Nine, otherwise known as the Agricultural Tenancy Act of the Philippines ang batas na naaangkop sa iyong sitwasyon:

“Section 16. Section forty-nine of the same Act is hereby amended to read as follows:

“Sec. 49. Ejectment of Tenant. Notwithstanding any agreement or provision of law as to the period or future surrender of the land, in all cases where land devoted to any agricultural purpose is held under any system of tenancy, the tenant shall not be dispossessed of his holdings by the landholder except for any of the causes hereinafter enumerated and only after the same has been proved before and the dispossession is authorized by the court.

It shall likewise be unlawful for any third party to dispossess the tenant of his holding except by order of the Court. Any violation of this provision shall be penalized in accordance with section fifty-seven of this Act and/or under the general provisions of law applicable to the act committed.”

Malinaw sa nabanggit na probisyon ng batas na maaari lamang paalisin ng isang third party na tulad ng nakabili ng lupang sakahan ang tenant nito kung ito ay ipag-uutos ng korte. Ang paglabag sa nasabing probisyon ay mayroong karampatang kaparusahan sang-ayon sa Section 21 ng parehong batas, kung saan nakasaad na:

“Section 21. Section fifty-seven of the same Act is hereby amended to read as follows:

“Sec. 57. Penal Provision. Violation of the provisions of subsections one and three, section twenty-seven and of sections thirty-nine and forty-nine of this Act shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both, in the discretion of the Court. Any person who in bad faith shall induce or cause anybody to violate the aforesaid sections of Republic Act numbered one thousand one hundred ninety-nine shall be punished with a fine not exceeding four thousand pesos or imprisonment not exceeding two years, or both, at the discretion of the court.

In case of juridical persons, the manager or the person who has charge of the management or administration of the property or, in their default, the person acting in their stead, shall be liable under this section.”

Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.

Maraming salamat sa inyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.

Mga bawal gawin ng lending company sa paniningil

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | August 1, 2023

Dear Chief Acosta, Ako ay nangutang sa isang online lending company. Nawalan ako ng trabaho at hindi nakapagbayad sa buwanang hulog. Ngayon, laging may tumatawag sa akin mula sa lending company kahit anong oras at pinagbabantaan pa ako na ipapupulis o aarestuhin kapag hindi ako makapagbayad. Ganoon din na tinatawagan lahat ng may numero sa phonebook ko at sinasabihan sila na kumbinsihin ako na magbayad.

Mayroon bang nilalabag na batas ang lending company at ano pa ba ang mga hindi nila dapat gawin? -- Jessa Dear Jessa, Ang nasabing lending company ay mayroon nang nilalabag dahil sa pamamaraan nito sa pangongolekta ng iyong pagkakautang. Ang mga ipinagbabawal na gawain ng nagpautang ay nakapaloob sa Section 1 ng SEC Memorandum Circular No. 18 Series of 2019: “FCs, LCs, and TPSPs 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. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing conduct and shall constitute unfair collection practices, which shall be subject to the penalties provided herein:

a. The use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person;

b. The use of threats to take any action that cannot be legally be taken;

c. The use of obscenities, insults, or profane language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the borrower and/or which amount to a criminal act or offense under applicable laws; d. Disclosure or publication of the names and other personal information of borrowers who allegedly refuse to pay debts, except as may be allowed under Section 2 hereof;

e. Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person loan information, which is known, or which should be known, to be false, including the failure to communicate that the debt is being disputed, except as may be allowed under Section 2 hereof;

f. The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a borrower;

g. Making contact at unreasonable/inconvenient times or hours, which shall be defined as contact before 6:A. M., or after 10 P.M., unless the account is past due for more than fifteen (15) days, or the borrower has given express consent that the said times are the only reasonable or convenient opportunities for contact.

Such consent which shall be evidenced by written, electronic or recorded means, may be given prior to, during, or after the execution of the loan agreement; h. Notwithstanding the borrower’s consent, contacting the persons in the borrower’s contact list other than those who were named as guarantors or co-makers shall also constitute unfair debt collection practices.” Ang pagtawag sa iyo anumang oras na gusto nila, pagbabanta na ikaw ay aarestuhin o ipapupulis kung hindi ka makapagbayad at pagtawag nila sa mga numerong nasa iyong phone book na wala kang pahintulot ay maituturing na mga unfair collection practices. Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay. Maraming salamat sa inyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.