Harassment from Lending Agents and Legal Remedies in the Philippines: A Comprehensive Guide

---

Letter to a Lawyer

Dear Attorney,

I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing to seek your legal advice regarding an ongoing issue I am facing with a lending company I borrowed money from. The due date for my loan is October 3, 2024, which has not yet passed. However, agents from this lending company have been continuously harassing me through text messages, even though I am still within the grace period for payment. What is particularly alarming is that they have begun contacting my family members, some of whom I did not list as my loan references, falsely accusing me of being a scammer and stating that I stole their money.

I believe these actions constitute harassment and defamation, and I am deeply concerned about the legality of their conduct, both for me and for my family. I seek your legal advice on how to proceed in dealing with these agents, and what legal steps I can take to protect myself and my loved ones from further harassment.

Thank you for your guidance on this matter.

Sincerely,
A Concerned Borrower

---

Comprehensive Legal Response: Harassment from Lending Agents in the Philippines

In the Philippines, the lending industry is subject to various laws and regulations designed to protect both the lenders and borrowers. However, situations like the one described above—where borrowers are harassed by agents of lending companies—have become increasingly common. This guide aims to provide a thorough understanding of the legal context surrounding such issues, particularly regarding loan harassment, privacy violations, defamation, and potential remedies for borrowers.

Legal Context: Loan Agreements and Due Dates

At the core of this issue is the fact that the borrower’s loan is not yet due; the due date is clearly stated as October 3, 2024. Under Philippine law, particularly the Civil Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 386), a loan agreement is a contract that binds both parties to the terms therein. If the loan agreement specifies a due date, the lender has no right to demand payment before that date. Therefore, any attempts by the lender to compel repayment before the agreed due date may be considered premature and could even constitute a violation of the contract terms.

However, what complicates this situation is not just the premature demand for payment but the behavior of the lending agents, particularly the harassment and false accusations they have made.

The Right to Privacy: Republic Act No. 10173 (Data Privacy Act of 2012)

One of the key legal protections borrowers can invoke in such cases is the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (RA 10173). This law aims to protect individuals' personal data from misuse or unauthorized processing. Specifically, lenders are legally required to handle a borrower’s personal information with confidentiality and care. Under RA 10173, the borrower has the following rights:

• Right to be informed about how personal data will be processed and who will have access to it.
• Right to object to the processing of personal data, especially if the borrower did not consent to its use in that manner.
• Right to access and rectification to ensure that only accurate information is processed.
• Right to damages in cases where personal data is mishandled.

In this particular case, if the borrower did not provide consent for their family members to be contacted regarding the loan, such actions may constitute a violation of the Data Privacy Act. Lending companies are required to secure the borrower’s consent before using their personal information, including disclosing it to third parties. Furthermore, contacting individuals who were not listed as references may be a breach of privacy, as this involves sharing personal information with unrelated parties.

Harassment and Defamation Under Philippine Law

In the described scenario, the lending agents' behavior can be classified as harassment. According to Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, any form of unjust vexation is a criminal offense. "Unjust vexation" refers to acts that are annoying, irritating, or distressing to another person without legal justification. Continuous harassing text messages, especially those containing false allegations, can qualify as unjust vexation and can be grounds for a criminal complaint.

Additionally, the false accusations being made by the agents—calling the borrower a "scammer" and alleging theft—may also constitute defamation under Philippine law. Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code defines defamation (libel or slander) as the act of making false and malicious statements that harm another person’s reputation. If these statements are made in writing (such as through text messages), it constitutes libel. If spoken, it is considered slander.

In this case, by labeling the borrower a scammer and a thief, the lending agents may be committing libel, which is punishable by imprisonment or a fine. Furthermore, these false statements could damage the borrower’s reputation and cause emotional distress, thus giving grounds for both civil and criminal actions against the lending company and its agents.

Violation of Lending Regulations: SEC Memorandum Circular No. 18, Series of 2019

Lending companies are also subject to specific regulations issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). One of the most important is SEC Memorandum Circular No. 18, Series of 2019, which establishes guidelines on the proper conduct of collection practices by financing and lending companies.

The SEC Memorandum Circular explicitly prohibits the following actions:

1. Use of threats, harassment, or abusive language in collecting debts.
2. Public disclosure of the borrower’s debt or personal information to third parties who are not involved in the loan agreement.
3. Using false or misleading representations to collect a debt.

Lending companies are required to collect loans in a professional and respectful manner. Harassing the borrower through constant text messages or contacting family members with false accusations of criminal activity clearly violates these regulations. The SEC has the authority to investigate such complaints and impose penalties on lending companies that engage in unlawful collection practices. Borrowers who experience these issues can file a complaint with the SEC.

Remedies for Borrowers: What You Can Do

Given the multiple legal violations present in this case, borrowers have several options to protect their rights and seek redress:

1. File a Complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

Borrowers can lodge a complaint with the SEC if they believe that a lending company has violated the SEC Memorandum Circular No. 18. The SEC can investigate these complaints and impose sanctions on the lending company, which may include revoking the company’s license to operate or imposing fines.

2. Data Privacy Complaint with the National Privacy Commission (NPC)

If the lending company has disclosed the borrower’s personal information to unauthorized third parties (e.g., contacting family members who were not listed as references), the borrower can file a complaint with the National Privacy Commission for violations of the Data Privacy Act of 2012. The NPC can order the lending company to stop processing the borrower’s data and may also impose fines or other penalties.

3. Criminal Complaints for Unjust Vexation or Defamation

Borrowers may also consider filing criminal complaints for unjust vexation under Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code or libel/slander under Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code. These are criminal offenses that can result in fines or imprisonment for the offending parties. Borrowers should consult with legal counsel to determine the best course of action.

4. Civil Action for Damages

In addition to criminal charges, borrowers may also file a civil lawsuit for damages under Article 19 and Article 20 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, which protect individuals from abuse of rights and unlawful acts that cause damage to another person. Borrowers can seek compensation for any emotional distress or reputational harm caused by the harassment and false accusations.

Conclusion

In conclusion, lending companies in the Philippines are required to adhere to strict regulations when it comes to debt collection. Harassment, defamation, and privacy violations are all actionable offenses under Philippine law. Borrowers who experience such treatment from lending agents have multiple legal remedies at their disposal, including filing complaints with the SEC and NPC, pursuing criminal charges for unjust vexation or defamation, and seeking civil damages for any harm suffered.

It is important for borrowers facing harassment to document all interactions with the lending company and seek legal assistance as soon as possible. By understanding their rights and the laws that protect them, borrowers can take the necessary steps to protect themselves and hold lending companies accountable for their misconduct.