Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 20, Manila

WILSON G. CHUA, doing business

under the name and style
WIN MULTI RICH BUILDERS,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 07-568941
-versus-
FOR: SUM OF MONEY and
DAMAGES
SPS. LOWELL and ELVIRA
TANGI,
Defendants.
x------------------------------------------------x

ANSWER
with COUNTERCLAIM

DEFENDANT SPOUSES LOWELL TANGI and ELVIRA

TANGI, through undersigned counsel, to the Honorable Court,
most respectfully avers the following:

1. Defendant spouses are Filipino citizens, of legal ages,

married to each other, and may be served with notices and
other court processes at No. 1569-1571 G. Tuazon Street,
Sampaloc, Manila.
2. Defendants admit that they engaged the services of herein
plaintiff, Mr. Wilson Chua who is doing business under the
name and style of Win Multi Rich Builders for the purpose of
the construction of their 3 storey with deck residential
house located at No. 1569-1571 G. Tuazon Street,
Sampaloc, Manila where defendants are now residing. The
agreement was reflected on the Service Contract dated
March 17, 2006 entered into by the parties hereto attached
as Annex “1”.
3. Defendants likewise admit that the initial quotation for the
said construction given by plaintiff to the defendants was in
the estimated amount of Two Million Eight Hundred Fifty
Thousand Pesos (Php2,850,000.00) which is payable thru
progress billing and with a down payment of 30% of the
aforesaid contract price. The construction was agreed to be
completed within 150 working days which the plaintiff
affirmed to be possible. Copy of said quotation dated March
30, 2006 is hereto marked as Annex “2”.
4. After defendant spouses secured all the required permits
and paid all government fees and after the tender of the
 30% agreed down payment to the plaintiff, the latter
commenced the aforesaid construction upon the issuance of
a Building Permit with No. 98645654 (Annex “3”) and
Official Receipts (Annexes “4” to “4-J”). The construction
started on April 12, 2006 and expected to be complete and
ready for occupancy on the second week of September.
5. Due to some defects in the construction, sometime in July
2006, defendants requested for additional finishing works
for additional contract price of One Million Four Hundred
Seven Thousand Pesos & 10/100 (Php1,407,007.30) and
plaintiff again furnished the defendants a copy of the
aforesaid quotation is hereto marked as Annex “5”.
6. Defendant likewise admits that sometime in August 2006,
they again requested for additional ground floor extension
for an additional contract price of Two Hundred Thirty-One
Thousand Three Hundred Sixty-Four & 95/100
(Php231,364.95) as reflected on the quotation furnished by
the plaintiff to the defendant and hereto attached as Annex
“6”. This request of additional ground floor extension was
due to the defect in the construction done by the plaintiff
and his workers for non-compliance with the project plan
previously agreed by the parties.
7. It is also worth noting to raise the observation that despite
the short duration of time frame left to finish the
construction, the progress of construction is not in
accordance with the scheduled accomplishment as the work
progress is very slow.
8. On the second week of September 2006, the expected
period of completion of the project and its supposed
occupancy capability, the construction is still unfinished
with defects in its construction as it did not confer to the
project plan and architecture preferred by herein
defendants.
9. Despite the repeated demands by the defendant to the
plaintiff to fully complete the construction according to the
plan, plaintiff refused to do so and in fact have abandoned
the construction sometime in the second week of December
2006 along with his laborers. The defective and unfinished
construction is evidenced by photographs with encrypted
dates and hour of their capture which were marked as
Annexes “7” to “7-BB”.
10. As there is a dire need for the defendants to transfer
their residence on the newly constructed house, sometime
on February 2007, defendants decided to avail the services
of Engr. Bryan Mancile and his laborers to complete and
satisfy the pending construction according to the agreed
project plan as evidenced by a Service Contract dated
February 18, 2007 herein attached as Annex “8”. Finally on
April 15, 2007, the new group of workers completed the
construction of the house in accordance with the plan. The
finished newly constructed house is evidenced by
 photographs with encrypted dates and hours of their
capture marked as Annexes “9” to “9-M”.
11. During the construction of the second group of
workers, it was discovered that the first group used
substandard quality of materials on the construction and did
not actually applied all the materials listed on the receipts
submitted by the plaintiff to the defendant in supporting the
progress billings as reflected on the construction
assessment made by Engr. Mancile duly approved by the
City Engineers’ Office marked as Annex “10”.
12. Defendants admit that they in fact received demands
from the plaintiff to pay the balance of Seven Hundred Forty
Eight Thousand Four Hundred Sixty-Six Pesos and 76/100
(Php748,466.76) which the defendants refused to pay as
they believe that the claimed amount by the plaintiff is still
not enough to compensate the former of all the damages
the latter caused them due to the abandonment of the
construction of the house and non-compliance to render
quality service as stated in the contract and defrauding
them in the items reflected on the billing.
13. To complete the construction and repair all the defects
in the construction made by the plaintiff, the defendants
incurred an expense in the total amount of One Million and
Forty Two Thousand Pesos (Php1,042,000.00) with the
receipts and accounting attached as Annexes “11” to “11-
KK”.
14. To compensate defendants from all the damages
caused by the plaintiff, the latter should be ordered to pay
the defendants One Million and Forty Two Thousand Pesos
(Php1,042,000.00) as the total actual damages caused by
plaintiff’s breach of contract plus Two Hundred Thousand
Pesos (Php200,000.00) as moral damages and One Hundred
Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00) as attorney’s fees.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is hereby prayed
that, after hearing, judgment be rendered ordering the following:

1. Dismiss the complaint.

2. Ordering the plaintiff to pay the defendants the following:

a. One Million and Forty Two Thousand Pesos

(Php1,042,000.00) as the total actual damages;
b. Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php200,000.00) for
each defendant as moral damages; and
c. One Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php100,000.00) as for
attorney’s fees and litigation expenses.
 FURTHER RELIEFS, just and equitable, are likewise prayed
for.

Manila, Philippines, June 12, 2007.

ALOVERA-AGBAYANI and ASSOCIATES

LAW OFFICES
Counsel for the Defendants
Unit A, 88 San Marcelino Street,
Ermita, Manila 1000

By:

CHARMAINE MALLARI ALOVERA

ROLL NO. 54321
PTR NO. 7120209-08/07/2009-MANILA
IBP LIFETIME MEMBER NO. 12345

Copy Furnished:

ATTY. MARLOU PLEÑA

PLEÑA LAW OFFICE
Counsel for the Plaintiff
Golangco Building
426 J. Nepomuceno Street
San Miguel, Manila

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATE OF NON-FORUM

SHOPPING

We, LOWELL TANGI and ELVIRA TANGI, of legal ages,

Filipino, married to each other, and with postal address at No.
1569-1571 G. Tuazon Street, Sampaloc, Manila, after being duly
sworn in accordance with law, depose and state, that:

1. We are the defendants in the above-entitled case;

2. We filed this Answer with counterclaim in connection with
the complaint for sum of money and damages filed against
us by plaintiff Mr. Wilson Chua;
3. The allegations herein are true and correct based on our
own personal knowledge and existing records and
documents;
4. We further certify that we have not heretofore commenced
any other proceeding involving the same issues in the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal
 or agency, that to the best of our knowledge, no such action
or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals or any other tribunal or agency, that should it be
learned that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or
is pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals
or any other tribunal or agency, we undertake to report that
fact to this Honorable Court within five (5) days therefrom.

LOWELL TANGI ELVIRA TANGI

Affiant Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 12th day of

JUNE, 2007 at Manila, Philippines, affiants exhibited to me
their Community Tax Certificates with Nos. 15697862 and
15687925 both issued at Manila on February 15, 2007.

NOTARY PUBLIC
Doc. No. __________
Page No. __________
Book No. __________
Series of __________