Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
_______________
* SECOND DIVISION.
600
_______________
601
VOL. 462, JUNE 30, 2005 601
Development Bank of the Philippines vs. Arcilla, Jr.
2
tional Sale over a parcel of land, as well as the house to be
constructed thereon, for the price of P160,000.00. Arcilla
borrowed the said amount from DBP for the purchase of
the lot and the construction of a residential building
thereon. He obliged himself to pay the loan in 25 years,
with a monthly amortization of P1,417.91, with 9% 3interest
per annum, to be deducted from his monthly salary.
DBP obliged itself to transfer the title of the property
upon the payment of the loan, including any increments
thereof. It was also agreed therein that if Arcilla availed of
optional retirement, he could elect to continue paying the
loan, provided that the loan/amount would be converted
into a regular real estate loan account with the prevailing
interest assigned on real estate loans,
4
payable within the
remaining term of the loan account. 5
Arcilla was notified of the periodic release of his loan.
During the period of July 1984 to December 31, 1986, the
monthly amortizations for the said account were deducted 6
from his monthly salary, for which he was issued receipts.
The monthly amortization was increased to P1,468.92 in
November 1984, and to P1,691.51 beginning January 1985.
However, Arcilla opted to resign from the bank in
December 1986. Conformably with the Deed of Conditional
Sale, the bank informed him, on June 11, 1987, that the
balance of his loan account with the bank had been
converted to a regular housing loan, thus:
_______________
602
_______________
603
VOL. 462, JUNE 30, 2005 603
Development Bank of the Philippines vs. Arcilla, Jr.
604
_______________
605
_______________
606
_______________
18 Records, p. 202.
19 CA Rollo, p. 16.
607
608
_______________
609
610
_______________
611
_______________
(i) „Simple annual rate‰ is the uniform percentage which represents
the ratio, on an annual basis, between the finance charges and the
amount to be financed.
In the case of a single payment upon maturity, the simple annual rate
in percent is determined by the following method:
( amount to be financed ) ( 12 )
R = --------------------------- x ------------------------------- x 100%
( finance charge ) ( maturity period in months )
In case of the normal installment type of credit of at lease one year in
duration, where installment payments of equal amounts are made in
regular time periods spaced not more than one year apart, the simple
annual rate (R), in percent, is computed by the following method:
( finance charge ) (number of payments in a year)
R= 2 x ------------------------- x ----------------------------- x 100%
(amount to be financed) (total number of payments plus one)
In cases where the credit matures in less than one year (e.g.,
installment payments are required every month for six months), the
same formula will apply except that: the number of payments in a year
would refer to the number of installment periods, as defined in the credit
contract, if the credit matures in one year. For example, the number of
payments a year would be twelve for this purpose in cases where six
monthly installment payments are called for in the credit transaction.
In cases where credit terms provide for premium or penalty charges
depending on, say: the timeliness of the debtorÊs payments, the annual
rate to be disclosed in writing shall be the rate for regular payments, i.e.,
the premium and penalty need not be taken into account in the
determination of the annual rate. Such premium or penalty charges
shall, however, be indicated in the credit contract.
612
increases
22
thereof, even if stipulated in the promissory
note. However, such failure shall not affect23the validity or
enforceability of any contract or transaction.
In the present case, DBP failed to disclose the requisite
information in the disclosure statement form authorized by
the Central Bank, but did so in the loan transaction
documents between it and Arcilla. There is no evidence on
record that DBP sought to collect or collected any interest,
penalty or other charges, from Arcilla other than those
disclosed in the said deeds/documents.
The Court is convinced that ArcillaÊs claim of not having
been furnished the data/information required by R.A. No.
3765 and CB Circular No. 158 was but an afterthought.
Despite the notarial rescission of the conditional sale in
1990, and DBPÊs subsequent repeated offers to repurchase
the property, the latter maintained his silence. Arcilla filed
his complaint only on February 21, 1994, or four years after
the said notarial rescission. The Court finds and so holds
that the following findings and ratiocinations of the CA are
correct:
After a careful perusal of the records, We find that the appellee had
been sufficiently informed of the terms and the requisite charges
necessarily included in the subject loan. It must be stressed that the
Truth in Lending Act (R.A. No. 3765), was enacted primarily „to
protect its citizens from a lack of awareness of the true cost of credit
to the user by using a full disclosure of such cost with a view of
preventing the uninformed use of credit to the detriment of the
national economy‰ (Emata vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, 174
SCRA 464 [1989]; Sec. 2, R.A. No. 3765). Contrary to appelleeÊs
claim that he was not sufficiently informed of the details of the
loan, the records disclose that the required informations were
readily available in the three (3) promissory notes he executed.
Precisely, the said promissory notes were executed to apprise
appellee of the remaining balance on his loan when the same was
converted into a regular
_______________
613
_______________
614
··o0o··