Republic of the Philippines

Office of the President

HOUSE AND LAND USE REGULATORY BOARD
Central Visayas Region, Cebu City

JOSEPH D. ALCE,
Complainant,

-versus- HLURB CASE NO.

For: Breach of Contract, Non-
Development, Refund, and
Damages

MONARES AND SONS REALTY &

DEVELOPMENT, INC. AND
NUNILON S. MONARES, JR.
Respondents.
x------------------------------------------/

COMPLAINT

Complainant JOSEPH D. ALCE, by counsel, to this Honorable Court,

most respectfully states that:

PARTIES

1. Complainant Joseph D. Alce is of legal age, Filipino, single, and

a resident of H. Labra Sandayong, Guadaupe, Cebu City, Philippines. He may
be served with notices, orders and processes of this Honorable Office at the
address of the undersigned counsel hereunder indicated.

2. Respondent Monares and Sons Realty & Development, Inc. or

MSRDI is a domestic corporation duly organized and existing under and by
virtue of the laws of the Republic of the Philippines, with office address at
COMPLAINT Page 2 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

Unit III OPRRA Village, Kalunasan, Cebu City, Philippines. On the other
hand, defendant Nunilon S. Monares, Jr. is the President and CEO of
MSRDI.

ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are repleaded herein by

reference.

3. On May 17, 2016, respondent MSRDI obtained a License to Sell

1
No. 029558 from this Honorable Office to sell lots/units/lots with units in
Villa Monares Subdivision (Economic Hoousing -156 Lots/Units) located at
Upper Kalunasan, Cebu City, Philippines. From its license to sell, this
Honorable Office obligated respondent MSRDI to strictly comply with the
following:

“1. Complete the project in accordance with the approved development

plan therefore not later than May 2017 and advise buyers in writing
of such time frame for development;

2. Maintain the common facilities until their turnover is authorized

pursuant to PD 1216;

3. Register the instrument relative to any sale with the Register of

Deeds, whether or not the price is fully paid; within 180 days from
execution;

4. Deliver the title free from the liens and encumbrance to fully paid
buyers or, if mortgaged redeem and deliver the same within six
months from full payment;

5. Secure clearance prior to any mortgage, alteration of plans,

advertisement or change of name of ownership;

1
Certified True Copy of the License to Sell No. 029558 dated May 17, 2016 is attached herewith as Annex A
COMPLAINT Page 3 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

6. Pay the real estate tax/assessment on the lot/unit until the year the
title is transferred to or actual possession/occupation is taken by the
buyer;

7. Refrain from forfeiting payments made by the buyers who suspend

amortization after due notice to owner or developer on ground of
incomplete development or non-development;

8. Submit a report showing the extent of project development and

changes in corporate officer within sixty days after each semester;

9. Sell only at the maximum selling price of P1,700,000.00 H & L;

10. Display the registration certificate of home/unit owners;

11. Initiate the organization of home/unit owners;

12. Refrain from levying any fee for an alleged community benefit upon
the buyers; and,

13. Comply with the other provisions of the pertinent laws, rules and
regulations.”

4. Complainant later entered into a Contract to Sell with

respondents to purchase a brand-new house and lot (Lot No. 18, Block 6 with
a Lot Area of Seventy Five (75) square meters more or less) at Villa Monares,
Upper Kalunasan, Cebu City. A Certified True Copy of the Contract to Sell
is attached herewith and made an integral part hereof as Annex B.

5. On June 11, 2018, in accordance with the Contract to Sell,

complainant completed the payment of the 20% equity of the total contract
price, amounting to Four Hundred Seventy One Thousand Eight Hundred
Fifty Five Pesos and Eighty Eight Centavos (Php471,855.88). A Certified True
Copy of the Official Receipt acknowledging full payment of the 20% equity
COMPLAINT Page 4 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

for model unit Nimfa, Lot 18, Block 6 is attached herewith and made an
integral part hereof as Annex C.

6. In the payment of the thirty-six (36) monthly amortization of the

20% equity, complainant was not once delinquent as shown in the lack of any
penalty in his statement of account. A Certified True Copy of the Statement
of Account of Joseph D. Alce is attached herewith and made an integral part
hereof as Annex D.

7. According to Section 4.a of the Contract to Sell (Annex B), the

owner or developer shall have to commence construction of the contracted
house unit on the thirtieth (30th) month in the case of thirty six (36) months
equity settlement period provided there is no delinquency in the monthly
amortization payment of the equity, thus:

“4. COMMENCEMENT OF HOUSE CONSTRUCTION

a. That on or at the Eighteenth (18th) month in the case of 24 months equity

settlement period as usually being the case at Phase 1-a units and thirtieth (30th)
month in the case of Thirty Six (36) months equity settlement period provided
there is no delinquency in the monthly amortization payment of equity as herein
above provided, the Owner/Developer shall have to commence construction of the
Contracted Housing Unit under this agreement.”

8. However, until the present time, the brand-new house unit

complainant purchased from respondents has not yet begun construction.

9. To make matters worse, complainant found out that although

the license to sell indicates that respondents have until May 2017 to complete
the project (See Item 1 of the License to Sell No. 029558), yet respondents
failed to complete the project within the given time. Not only that, they never
even obtained an extension of time to complete the development of the
project as certified to by this Honorable Office. The Certification dated
COMPLAINT Page 5 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

October 22, 2019 is attached herewith and made an integral part hereof as
Annex E.

10. Complainant made several follow ups regarding the construction

of his brand-new house, yet these were all met with excuses. As a result,
complainant decided to get a refund of the equity payments made in
accordance with Section 9.a of the Contract to Sell (Annex B), but his oral
demands fell on deaf ear.

11. Thus, on September 23, 2019, undersigned counsel sent

respondents a final demand letter to refund complainant the amount of Four
Hundred Seventy One Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Five Pesos and Eighty
Eight Centavos (Php471,855.88) representing the total equity payments made
by complainant to respondents. A Certified True Copy of the Letter dated
September 23, 2019 is attached herewith and made an integral part hereof as
Annex F. But, just the same, it went unheeded.

12. These despicable scheme of developers in siphoning money from

hapless innocent buyers only for them renege on their obligation to develop
the project is precisely what is being frowned upon by PD 957 otherwise
known as the “The Subdivision and Condominium Buyers' Protective
Decree”. As in fact, it not only imposes administrative fines on the wrongdoer
developer2, but also imposes a criminal liability on the responsible officers of
the developer, in case of a corporation such as respondent MSRDI.3

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are repleaded herein by

reference.

2
Section 38 of PD 957
3
Section 39 of PD 957
COMPLAINT Page 6 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

To refund complainant the total

equity he paid to respondents for
failure of the latter to deliver on their
contractual obligation as well as for
violation of Section 20 of PD 957

13. Section 4.a of the Contract to Sell (Annex B) provides that:

“4. COMMENCEMENT OF HOUSE CONSTRUCTION

a. That on or at the Eighteenth (18th) month in the case of 24 months equity

settlement period as usually being the case at Phase 1-a units and thirtieth (30th)
month in the case of Thirty Six (36) months equity settlement period provided
there is no delinquency in the monthly amortization payment of equity as herein
above provided, the Owner/Developer shall have to commence construction of the
Contracted Housing Unit under this agreement.”

14. Despite complainant’s full payment of the thirty-six (36) months

monthly amortization of the equity, the construction of his brand-new house
has not yet begun.

15. Respondents failure to construct complainant’s brand new house

not only violates the Contract to Sell4, but also Section 20 of PD 957, which
provides that:

Section 20. Time of Completion. Every owner or developer shall

construct and provide the facilities, improvements, infrastructures
and other forms of development, including water supply and
lighting facilities, which are offered and indicated in the approved
subdivision or condominium plans, brochures, prospectus, printed

4
See Annex B, Supra
COMPLAINT Page 7 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

matters, letters or in any form of advertisement, within one year

from the date of the issuance of the license for the subdivision or
condominium project or such other period of time as may be fixed
by the Authority.

16. In its License to Sell, respondent MSRDI was only given until
May 2017 to finish the development of the project. However, until the
present time, it has not completed development of the project. And, as
certified to by this Honorable Office, it never gave MSRDI extension to
develop Villa Monares Subdivision.5

17. With such non-development and failure of respondents to

deliver to complainant his brand-new house, complainant is entitled to a full
refund of the equity payments made with interest from filing of this
complaint until full payment thereof is made.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are repleaded herein by

reference.

Respondents have undoubtedly

committed unsound real estate
business practices. Thus, they must
not only be administratively
penalized, but also a criminal suit
against respondent Nunilon S.
Monares, Jr., the president and
responsible officer of respondent
MSRDI, must be instituted by

5
See Annex E, Supra
COMPLAINT Page 8 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

referring this matter to (Task Force

Subdivision and Condominium) the
City Prosecutions Office

18. Having callously disregarded their obligation under the law and
willfully violated the law, respondents should be assessed with administrative
fines. Likewise, with the serious nature of the violations committed by
respondents, this Honorable Office through its task force should refer this
case to the City Prosecutions Office for filing of the necessary criminal case
against Mr. Nunilon S. Monares, Jr., the president and responsible officer of
respondent MSRDI (Task Force Subdivision and Condominium), in line with
Section 3 of Department Circular No. 27, thus:

“Section 3 – Whether the criminal cases are directly filed or through

the HLURB Task Force, the preliminary investigation shall be conducted in
accordance with the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure and when
warranted, the proper information shall be filed in court.”

19. Only through the strict enforcement of the law will scheming
developers, such as respondents, learn to stop taking advantage of hapless and
innocent buyers, who are deceived into parting with their hard earn money
with the promise of building for them a shelter.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are repleaded herein by

reference.

20. Due to the illegal acts of respondents in non-development of the

project and failure to deliver the housing unit as well as failing to heed the
demand for refund, complainant has suffered mental anguish, sleepless
nights, and serious anxiety.
COMPLAINT Page 9 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

21. Respondents should, therefore, be made to pay moral damages

to complainant in the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00).

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are repleaded herein by

reference.

22. Cleary, respondents acted in wanton, reckless, oppressive and

malevolent manner. Thus, by way of example and correction for the public
good, and to deter similarly minded persons to do the same hideous acts,
respondents should be made to pay exemplary damages to plaintiff in the
amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00).

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are repleaded herein by

reference.

23. As a result of respondents’ non-development of the project and

failure to deliver the housing unit as well as the failure to heed the demand
for refund, complainant was compelled to engage the services of counsel as
well as incur cost of suit for which respondents should be made liable.

24. Respondents should, therefore, be made to pay the amount

equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the total monetary award, and at least Fifty
Thousand Pesos (Php 50,000.00) as cost of suit.

PRAYER
COMPLAINT Page 10 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of

this Honorable Office that after hearing, judgement be rendered, as follows:

(1) Ordering respondents jointly and severally to refund complainant

the total equity he paid in the amount of Four Hundred Seventy
One Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Five Pesos and Eighty Eight
Centavos (Php471,855.88) plus interest from the time this
complaint was filed until full payment thereof;

(2) Declaring respondents to have performed unsound real estate

business practices and impose the necessary fines and/or penalties
for each violation;

(3) Referring this case to the City Prosecutor’s Office for the filing of
the necessary criminal suit against respondent MSRDI’s president,
Mr. Nunilon S. Monares, Jr.;

(4) Ordering respondents to pay complainant jointly and severally the

amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00), representing
moral damages;

(5) Ordering respondents to pay complainant jointly and severally the

amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00), representing
exemplary damages; and

(6) Ordering respondents to pay complainant jointly and severally the

amount equivalent to 10% of the total monetary award as
Attorney’s Fees and at least Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00),
representing the cost of suit.

Other reliefs, just and equitable under the premises are likewise being
prayed for.
COMPLAINT Page 11 of 11

Joseph D. Alce vs. MSRDI

HLURB Case No. _______
x--------------------------/

Cebu City, Philippines, November 04, 2019.

BADUEL * ESPINA & ASSOCIATES

Counsel for the Movant-Intervenor
Suite 302, 3/F GMC Plaza Bldg.
M.J. Cuenco Ave. cor. Legaspi Extn.,
Cebu City, Philippines
Tel Nos. (032) 254-4626/ 254-8403
Fax No. (032) 254-6717

By:

JESA ANNE CARLA E. BALAHADIA-NUÑEZ

Roll No. 62700
PTR No. 2354091-01.07.19-Cebu
IBP Lifetime No. 012790-Cebu City
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0010700-07.23.18
valid until 04.14.22