should i use a damme for land and 50 year lease?

Rye, here is the case:

Quote: “An interesting case decided by the Supreme Court was that of Spouses Chua vs. Soriano, GR 150066 promulgated on April 13, 2007, about the use of falsified Special Power of Attorney (SPA), how it affects an innocent buyer, in good faith and for value. In that case, the registered owner of a titled property entrusted another person for safe-keeping of the title. The trusted person executed a Special Power of Attorney and forged the signature of the owner, making it appear that he was authorized to sell the property. A third person then purchased the property.

The Supreme Court ruled that the buyer was in good faith. Although the signature in the SPA was subsequently declared by the trial court to have been falsified, it would not revoke the title subsequently issued in favor of the third-party buyer. The reliance by the buyer on the duly notarized SPA presented is sufficient evidence of good faith. Buyer need not prove anything more for it is already the function of the notarial acknowledgment to establish the appearance of the parties to the document, its due execution and authenticity.

This case was a shock to many foreign-based landowners, a reality check on whether they should leave the original owner’s copy to someone, or to think about issuing power of attorney to anyone. Also, a frequent problem is the issue of selling a property in installment, where the buyer who does not pay in full and obtains an SPA creates a problem on the title of the owner.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Mr. Rye, In my case, we purchased a lot for 1M pesos in 2004 from a family whose members apparently had a disagreement; I guess some members expected to share in the capttsl gain and received nothing. Anyway my spouse got title in 2005 and on 2010, a disgruntled family member attached an adverse claim to that title. We weren’t aware of that since at the time we still lived in the US. We found a buyer for the land and that is where we first saw the adverse claim which essentially made the lot unsalable. We moved here as planned, found a good attorney who determined the adverse claim was frivolous and without merit. For the price of a new Yamaha motorcycle we hired the attorney, went to the RTC and sued to remove the adverse claim, we won the lawsuit and obtained a court order commanding the RID to remove the adverse claim annotation from the TCT, with a certificate if finality from Manila and now had (have) a clean title (at a high cost). Then we cut down some banana plants on my wife’s lot and he, not accepting the court order, went to the Barangay Hall accusing us of trespassing and destruction of his property. Worse, the Barangay captain did not know how to deal with the court order and such and scheduled a formal lupong hearing. At that point we were on the hook for trespass, possibly criminal trespass and destruction of property, he wasn’t sure! The lupong FORTUNATELY DID know what he was doing, told the complainant to go pound sand in so many visayan words, recommended we hire a neighbor as caretaker (which we did), put up no trespassing sides and guve the caretaker written authorization, with a cc to the Barangay secretary to call the police if the guy comes onto our land again; he had been putting up signs saying “ under litigation”, which was untrue, but making the land impossible to sell. I had been sweating it out because the Barangay captain at the first hearing was not even sure if I could not be charged with criminal trespass on our own land! But justice prevailed in no uncertain terms at the second “lupong” hearing. Still, the guy is harassing us to this day, calling my wife, asking for documents, saying his attorney will call us (no Attorney has called us because I assume he has no case), saying that they are initiating a “cadastral proceeding” which makes zero sense to me but so far he has not defaced the professional signs we put up on our property. Our paid neighbor caretaker monitors for his trespassing. The guy will not go away,
I believe property disputes are a national sport here. Frankly, I have to admit I am having fun with this now and am actually in no hurry to actually sell the land anymore. We enjoy winning (so perverse lol) and I am really interested in this “cadastral” thing this person is threatening us with. That person is not an attorney and regardless, we will never give them any certificates or documents from Barangay hearings, court orders or anything else. He can pay his so-called “attorney” to dig up those records lol. I don’t think any attorney will rep him on any additional lawsuit because our documentation is so strong. He would have to pay several hundred K pesos and would likely lose. Cadastral proceedings must be initiated by government; there is no plaintiff or respondent, it is in rem and simply would clarify that the initial survey for the ICT was correct I suppose. I cannot figure out what else a cadastral proceeding could do for them...sounds like made-up BS but it makes life interesting lol. Now I am having fun which is a rather absurd form of entertainment, admittedly. I think we are of similar minds when it comes to these things; it would be great to get together some time and trade stories about the insanities of purchasing land in a place where title insurance is not available.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Of course we have thought of that and people tend to bring that up all the time. It is an obvious exposure in this country. If the guy was so inclined to do that, it would happen whether I am personally “having fun with this” or not so I don’t understand that part of what you are saying. Even the excellent security we have established cannot absolutely guarantee full protection; at the same time, we cannot and will not allow fear to rule our lives and we refuse to do that in our older years. People who would allow fear and intimidation to rule their lives should not live in this country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Here is my type of logic. Enough said:



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Thanks for the input ... I find myself corrected on something I had believed for a number of years. It fortunately does not affect me because when we bought and developed our property we were already married and I trusted my wife to do the right thing which she has for the past 20 years or so. I wonder how many titles to property are registered with the Titles Office in Duma, with SPA's included, permitting husbands and companies "control" of those properties.

 

On reflection, and I do apologise but I think I have confused two different mechanisms. The SPA, I now remember was referenced in something I saw as a challenged method of registration as it sought to overturn a matter of the constitution, namely foreign ownership of property and was challenged successfully on that basis. I think what I was trying to pull to mind was the leasing of property to a foreigner. This is permitted on a 50 year lease and perhaps should be considered as a means of protection in the case being discussed here. Any comment? Sorry for the confusion but put it down to old age. Thanks.