Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES

6th Judicial Region
Branch 9
Iloilo City

TRZ FINANCE CORPORATION

Represented by Civil Case No. R117-17
MARIANNE S. FUENTES,
Plaintiff, FOR:
Collection of Sum of Money
- versus – with Damages

RICO JUNGCO,
Defendant.
x----------------------------------------x

ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

COMES NOW the Defendant, through the undersigned
counsel, files his Answer with Counterclaim to the above-
captioned case, most respectfully avers that:

ADMISSIONS AND DENIALS

1. Defendant has no knowledge or information to form a

belief as to the truth of the averment in paragraph 1;

2. Defendant specifically admit the personal circumstances

in paragraph 2 of the complaint;

3. Defendant specifically denies the genuineness and due

execution of the alleged loan, promissory note, disclosure
statement and to the result thereof in paragraph 3, 4, 5, 7,
9, 11 and 13;

4. Defendant admits the averment in paragraph 8 in so far as

the receipt of demand letter is concerned and not the
contents thereof;

5. Any allegation not expressly and specifically admitted

herein shall be generally denied;

Page 1 of 5
Answer with Counterclaim
For: Collection of Sum of Money with Damages
 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

6. All matters admitted and denied are hereby repleaded

and adopted as part of the affirmative defenses of the
defendant;

7. Contrary to the complainant’s allegation, the Promissory

Note and Disclosure Statement when delivered to the
defendant was not complete in all material particulars
therein including but not limited to the amount of loan,
interest thereof, period of payment, stipulations of payment
of principal and interest, details of the defendant’s ATM
card and assignment of security of loan, date of execution
and others not admitted herein that were not written by the
defendant himself; thus, the defendant was made to sign
such Promissory Note and Disclosure Statement without the
above-mentioned material information;

8. Upon perusal of the Promissory Note and Disclosure

Statement allegedly executed by the defendant would
reveal, even in plain view, was completed by more than
one person.

9. Further, in Ruiz v. Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court

declared a 3% monthly interest imposed on four separate
loans to be iniquitous, unconscionable and exorbitant.
Hence, the stipulated interest in the Promissory Note and
Disclosure Statement is contrary to law;
COUNTERCLAIM

10. Sec. 4 and 6 of RA 3765 otherwise known as the "Truth

in Lending Act." Provides:

“x x x Section 4. Any creditor shall furnish to each person to

whom credit is extended, prior to the consummation of the
transaction, a clear statement in writing setting forth, to the
extent applicable and in accordance with rules and
regulations prescribed by the Board, the following
information:

Page 2 of 5
Answer with Counterclaim
For: Collection of Sum of Money with Damages
 (1) the cash price or delivered price of the property or
service to be acquired;
(2) the amounts, if any, to be credited as down
payment and/or trade-in;
(3) the difference between the amounts set forth
under clauses (1) and (2);
(4) the charges, individually itemized, which are paid
or to be paid by such person in connection with the
transaction but which are not incident to the
extension of credit;
(5) the total amount to be financed;
(6) the finance charge expressed in terms of pesos
and centavos; and
(7) the percentage that the finance bears to the total
amount to be financed expressed as a simple annual
rate on the outstanding unpaid balance of the
obligation.
Having failed to furnish the defendant of the above
information in a clear statement in writing, the complainant
is liable for damages.

11. Art. 19 of the Civil Code States that:

“x x x Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and the

performance of his duties must, act with justice, give
everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.x x
x”

12. The complainant’s failure to furnish the information

required by RA 3765 and the act of letting the defendant
sign an incomplete note and disclosure statement, clearly
manifested the complainant’s bad faith and wanton
disregard of such law, in its dealings with the defendant,
which entitles the latter to damages;

13. Similarly, the plaintiff’s unfounded suit has caused the

defendant mental anguish and suffering and public
humiliation and embarrassment, for which the defendant
claims moral damages of P100,000.00;

Page 3 of 5
Answer with Counterclaim
For: Collection of Sum of Money with Damages
 14. Due to the evident bad faith and wanton disregard
of the provisions of the law, the defendant claims
exemplary damages amounting to P50,000.00.
PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully

prayed of this Honorable Court that, after due hearing,
judgment be rendered ordering to pay the plaintiff:

1. The amount of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS

(P100,000.00) as moral damages; and
2. The amount of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00) as
exemplary damages.
Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

Respectfully submitted.

Iloilo City, Philippines, 06 August 2018.

MARTONI S. SALIENDRA
Associate, Gerochi Law Office
PTR No. 6226391, Iloilo City, 06-25-2018
IBP No. 043209, Manila, 05-29-2018
Attorney’s Roll No. 70861
Exempt from MCLE Compliance as Newly
Admitted to the Bar last 05 June 2018
Copy furnished

CLERK OF COURT
Branch 9
Hall of Justice
Iloilo City
Received by: ____________________ Date: _______________

ATTY. SHERYL D. DELA RAMA

Dela Rama Law Office
2/F Dela Rama Commercial Bldg.,
559 Cudilla St., Estancia,
5017 Iloilo
Reg. Receipt No. ____________________ Date: _______________

Page 4 of 5
Answer with Counterclaim
For: Collection of Sum of Money with Damages
 EXPLANATION

The foregoing Answer with Counterclaim of the Defendant

is being filed and served through mail as evidenced by the Reg.
Receipt on account of distance, and lack of manpower.

MARTONI S. SALIENDRA

Page 5 of 5
Answer with Counterclaim
For: Collection of Sum of Money with Damages