Title
Supreme Court
Olaguer vs. Domingo
Case
G.R. No. 109666
Decision Date
Jun 20, 2001
NHMFC officers held liable for irregular loan disbursement under CMP due to non-compliance with documentation and lack of due diligence, affirmed by COA and SC.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 109666)

Background of the Community Mortgage Program

The Community Mortgage Program was launched in 1988 as part of the Unified Home Lending Program, providing a mechanism for community ownership of land to assist residents of impoverished areas. Key stakeholders included the NHMFC, Housing and Urban Development Council (HUDC), and the Presidential Commission on Urban Poor (PCUP). The program aimed to help beneficiaries acquire titles to the land they occupied by facilitating low-income financing through accredited organizations.

Purchase and Financial Transactions

On December 19, 1988, an appraisal valued a parcel of land in Angeles City, Pampanga, at P60.00 per square meter. This property later became the subject of a loan application by the Sapang Palay Community Development Foundation, Inc. (SPCDFI) for various mortgage projects, including one significant loan of P34,000,000.00 allocated to the ALPRAC-Alyansa ng Maka-Maralitang Asosasyon at Kapatirang Organisasyon (AMAKO). Subsequent actions included multiple applications and modifications to the loan request submitted by SPCDFI, focusing on acquiring the specified land.

Audit and Findings

An audit conducted by Lakambini Razon revealed irregularities regarding the AMAKO loan disbursement. A Memorandum noted multiple grounds for disallowance, including the lack of essential documentation, misclassification of property usage, excessive expenses, and the dubious valuation of the property in relation to its actual market value. These findings were further corroborated by reports indicating failure to submit pertinent lease purchase agreements and the existence of open spaces on the proposed site, which contradicted earlier representations.

Commission on Audit Decisions

After the NHMFC’s officials initially contested the audit findings, COA affirmed its disallowances in Decision No. 2700 on February 19, 1993. The decision upheld individual responsibilities of the key NHMFC officers, including the petitioners, for the flawed loan disbursement. The audit established that their roles in processing and reviewing loans mandated a high level of care to ensure compliance with established policies and procedures.

Petitioners' Arguments and Refutation

The petitioners challenged the decision on grounds of lack of direct culpability, stating that their actions did not amount to negligence or fraud. They argued they merely executed their duties and contended that the failures in the transaction were attributable to other parties involved in the loan proc

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.