legal Free Legal Advice

[moichi]

kailangan muna na sumulat kayo sa kanila na pinapalayas nyo na sila. ang unang sulat kasi ay sinisingil lang sila. bago ka makapagsampa sa korte ng ejectment, kailangan may sulat na pinapalayas mo ang tenant.

 

baka kailangan din na dumaan muna ito sa barangay (altho maaaring di na ito dumaan dun dahil nasa US naman ang may-ari)

 

mangangailangan nga lang ang tatay mo ng SPA mula sa Lola mo na nagbibigay sa kanya ng kapangyarihan upang magsampa ng kaso laban sa mga tenant (kung wala pa kayo nito, dahil nasa America na ang lola mo, kailangan ang SPA ay notaryado sa consulate ng Pilipinas sa America - yung may pulang ribbon at gintong selyo).

 

at kung mga anak ng lola nyo, o di-kaya'y apo, ang nakatira, kailangan din may alegasyon sa reklamong isasampa sa korte, na sinubukan nyong magkasundo pero ito ay di nagtagumpay (Art. 151, Family Code).

 

para siguradong di mabubulilyaso ang pagpapalayas nyo sa mga di nagbabayad, kumunsulta na sa abugado.

 

Note: dahil mababa ang renta, baka bumabagsak din ito sa ilalim ng RA9653 (altho dahil isang taon ng hindi nagbabayad, pwede talaga silang palayasin, pero mas maigi talaga na lumapit na kayo sa abugado, dahil sigurado na magbabanta ang mga yan na irereklamo sa BIR dahil walang resibo, di nagbabayad ng buwis etc. etc.)

 

 

sir!

 

marami pong salamat sa advise!

[Itto Ogami]

greetings, dear GM-lawyer-masters!

 

can my company bind me with a contract to stay with them

for a certain amount of time in exchange for training which

they made me attend?

 

if i refuse such training, can i be charged with insubordination?

 

tia! http://lh6.ggpht.com/_3Lud_9_uocs/TLoRTreBiWI/AAAAAAAAB8w/JzCdZbdX6AE/studyingKucco.gif

[rocco69]

depende. ang test lagi ay ang "test of reasonableness."

 

kung reasonably required ng trabaho mo sa company yang training na ibinibigay sa iyo, at reasonable din naman yung time na nakatali ka sa company, maaari kang ma-charge for insubordination.

 

pero, kung di naman necessary yung training sa trabaho mo (ex. kung for convenience lang)di ka nila mare-require na matali sa corporation; or kung sobrang haba naman yung time na nakatali ka sa company, di ka nila pwedeng pilitin na mag-attend ng training na yan.

 

greetings, dear GM-lawyer-masters!

 

can my company bind me with a contract to stay with them

for a certain amount of time in exchange for training which

they made me attend?

 

if i refuse such training, can i be charged with insubordination?

 

tia! http://lh6.ggpht.com/_3Lud_9_uocs/TLoRTreBiWI/AAAAAAAAB8w/JzCdZbdX6AE/studyingKucco.gif

[zenislev]

ihingi ko lang po ng opinion tong scenario na ito:

 

 

a credit card was stolen and was used to buy 2 units of mobile phones in an Hello Telecom Store in a Mall. The owner of the card, Miss A , accused her colleague Miss B who sits beside her for stealing the card and immediately filed a blotter in two different stations, 1st, near the office and 2nd, near the Mall.

 

Miss B, the accused, said that she "never ever" touched the bag or any personal property of Miss A.

 

The office that Miss A and B occupies has no CCTV Camera installed.

 

The credit card was used at the span of 1830H to 1900H (the actual time was not pinpointed) but the accused claimed that at that specific time, she was alone and on her way home riding a PNR train and she boarded the train at 1835H.

 

The owner of the card Miss A, went to the store where the phones were bought using the card and shown the crew of the store a picture of Miss B and the crew of the store said the girl on the picture was the one who bought the said two units, and signed a document pinpointing Miss B as the person who bought the units using the card but not checking the CCTV camera records nor asking for the personal appearance of Miss B to verify the actual identity.

 

Miss B, was detained in the office where she is working due to the accusations and was not allowed to leave the office for some unknown reason until her mother came to the said office to claim her daughter.

 

questions:

 

1.) was the statement of the Hello Store Crew valid as a proof that Miss B was the one who bought the units even if the Crew only saw the picture?

 

2.) can Miss B, ask the Store to review the CCTV camera records on the night of the crime to check who entered and left the store? what if the store refuse? what if the store says that the CCTV does not make any recording?

 

3.) since PNR does not have any CCTV cameras installed on their stations and the tickets were always collected at the destination station, how can Miss B use the PNR ride as an evidence though she was alone when she boarded the train?

 

4.) can the bag be used as evidence to collect finger prints to check if Miss B ever touched the bag?

 

5.) was it right to detain an employee accused for stealing a personal belonging by its own company?

 

6.) what other move can Miss B take other than seek legal help to clear her name?

 

 

i would appreciate your replies to this inquiry... (this really happened)

[Itto Ogami]

depende. ang test lagi ay ang "test of reasonableness."

 

kung reasonably required ng trabaho mo sa company yang training na ibinibigay sa iyo, at reasonable din naman yung time na nakatali ka sa company, maaari kang ma-charge for insubordination.

 

pero, kung di naman necessary yung training sa trabaho mo (ex. kung for convenience lang)di ka nila mare-require na matali sa corporation; or kung sobrang haba naman yung time na nakatali ka sa company, di ka nila pwedeng pilitin na mag-attend ng training na yan.

 

aray me! http://lh4.ggpht.com/_3Lud_9_uocs/TJF2diBwiwI/AAAAAAAABnE/Gz_w1IlHDIA/ninja-rant.gif

 

seems this would make for a bloody case if ever this is taken to court.

would you consider 1 year of service for every PhP 100,000 worth of

training as reasonable?

 

i think it would have been better, though, if the length of service is

pro-rated to the employee's current salary.

 

tia again!

Edited October 20, 2010 by Itto Ogami

[freelicker]

Yung tali na one year for every 100,000 is reasonable enough, specially for professional companies and multinationals.

 

Please note however that under the labor law, the commitment to work for an employer is not enforceable so technically, they cannot force you to remain employed with them. The best they can do is actually make you liable for the amount they spent on your training (plus some) and usually it is a deterrent for you to resign.

 

Now some companies do pro-rating but then it is more of a policy that may vary from company to company.

[rocco69]

1.) was the statement of the Hello Store Crew valid as a proof that Miss B was the one who bought the units even if the Crew only saw the picture?

 

kung ito ay affidavit/sinumpaang salaysay, maaari itong magamit na ebidensya (altho, kung criminal case ang isasampa, nire-require nila na magpakita yung tao at sumumpa mismo sa harap ng fiscal). kahit picture lang ang nakita, pwede na, basta sinumpaang salaysay, lalo kung sa harap ng fiscal. kung pirmado lang, alang kwenta yun dahil kahit sinong herodes pwedeng pumirma (anong ebidensya na crew nga yung pumirma?)

 

2.) can Miss B, ask the Store to review the CCTV camera records on the night of the crime to check who entered and left the store?

 

yes. pwede siyang mag-request sa store. kahit naman sino, pwede mag-request. ang tanong, pagbibigyan ba siya.

 

what if the store refuse?

 

mangangailangan siya ng court order kung di siya pagbibigyan ng store sa request niya.

 

what if the store says that the CCTV does not make any recording?

 

yari siya. di naman niya pwedeng pilitin ang kumpanyang maglabas ng recording kung walang ganun talaga.

 

3.) since PNR does not have any CCTV cameras installed on their stations and the tickets were always collected at the destination station, how can Miss B use the PNR ride as an evidence though she was alone when she boarded the train?

 

alibi yan, madaling sabihin. mahirap paniwalaan lalo't wala siyang ebidensya na nakasakay nga siya dun nung oras na yun.

 

4.) can the bag be used as evidence to collect finger prints to check if Miss B ever touched the bag?

 

pwede. pero sa tagal ng pangyayari, malabong maging ebidensya na hindi niya ginalaw yung bag.

 

5.) was it right to detain an employee accused for stealing a personal belonging by its own company?

 

hindi. kung walang reklamong kriminal, hindi dapat dine-detain yung empleyado. bawal yan.

 

6.) what other move can Miss B take other than seek legal help to clear her name?

 

makiusap/makipag-areglo sa nagrereklamo.

 

kung gusto niya ng kakaibang move... kuha siya ng manghuhula na magsasabi/magpapatunay na hindi siya ang nagnakaw (kung naniniwala yung nagrereklamo sa manghuhula... bwa ha ha ha)

 

Ultimately, dahil wala namang nakakita nung pagkuha ng credit card, ang tanging ebidensya na nagli-link sa kanya sa krimen ay yung statement ng store crew na siya ang gumamit nung card. without the store crew, walang kaso. kapag nagsampa ng kaso laban sa kanya, kailangang humarap yung crew sa piskalya para ituro siya. kapag walang ganun, walang kaso.

 

 

ihingi ko lang po ng opinion tong scenario na ito:

 

 

a credit card was stolen and was used to buy 2 units of mobile phones in an Hello Telecom Store in a Mall. The owner of the card, Miss A , accused her colleague Miss B who sits beside her for stealing the card and immediately filed a blotter in two different stations, 1st, near the office and 2nd, near the Mall.

 

Miss B, the accused, said that she "never ever" touched the bag or any personal property of Miss A.

 

The office that Miss A and B occupies has no CCTV Camera installed.

 

The credit card was used at the span of 1830H to 1900H (the actual time was not pinpointed) but the accused claimed that at that specific time, she was alone and on her way home riding a PNR train and she boarded the train at 1835H.

 

The owner of the card Miss A, went to the store where the phones were bought using the card and shown the crew of the store a picture of Miss B and the crew of the store said the girl on the picture was the one who bought the said two units, and signed a document pinpointing Miss B as the person who bought the units using the card but not checking the CCTV camera records nor asking for the personal appearance of Miss B to verify the actual identity.

 

Miss B, was detained in the office where she is working due to the accusations and was not allowed to leave the office for some unknown reason until her mother came to the said office to claim her daughter.

 

questions:

 

1.) was the statement of the Hello Store Crew valid as a proof that Miss B was the one who bought the units even if the Crew only saw the picture?

 

2.) can Miss B, ask the Store to review the CCTV camera records on the night of the crime to check who entered and left the store? what if the store refuse? what if the store says that the CCTV does not make any recording?

 

3.) since PNR does not have any CCTV cameras installed on their stations and the tickets were always collected at the destination station, how can Miss B use the PNR ride as an evidence though she was alone when she boarded the train?

 

4.) can the bag be used as evidence to collect finger prints to check if Miss B ever touched the bag?

 

5.) was it right to detain an employee accused for stealing a personal belonging by its own company?

 

6.) what other move can Miss B take other than seek legal help to clear her name?

 

 

i would appreciate your replies to this inquiry... (this really happened)

Edited October 22, 2010 by rocco69

[aswang]

For Adultery case, do you really need to show a video or pictures of actual sexual intercourse to prove they are guilty? What if you only have chat or email exchanges and intimate pictures to prove their affair, would that be enough?

[rocco69]

For Adultery case, do you really need to show a video or pictures of actual sexual intercourse to prove they are guilty? No. direct proof of sexual intercourse is not necessary, circumstantial evidence showing that the parties accused have had sex together is sufficient.

 

What if you only have chat or email exchanges and intimate pictures to prove their affair, would that be enough? No. you have to have a witness saying that he saw the two sleep together, or that the two were living together as husband and wife. the intimate pictures and chat and email messages will corroborate the testimony of the witness.

 

For Adultery case, do you really need to show a video or pictures of actual sexual intercourse to prove they are guilty? What if you only have chat or email exchanges and intimate pictures to prove their affair, would that be enough?

[aswang]

Thank you sir!

[lomex32]

Bearing a child will be prima faci

 

For Adultery case, do you really need to show a video or pictures of actual sexual intercourse to prove they are guilty? No. direct proof of sexual intercourse is not necessary, circumstantial evidence showing that the parties accused have had sex together is sufficient.

[trident16]

hello guys

 

according sa isang call center, nag violate daw ako ng labor code article 282 section a:

 

Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work;

 

they are asking me to explain my side, what do i do? may chance ba kong idemanda nila, hndi kasi ako pumasok on the second day because some reasons

[redblack]

hello guys

 

according sa isang call center, nag violate daw ako ng labor code article 282 section a:

 

Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work;

 

they are asking me to explain my side, what do i do? may chance ba kong idemanda nila, hndi kasi ako pumasok on the second day because some reasons

 

Yes, art. 282a refers to serious misconduct or willful disobedience as a "just cause" to terminate you from your employment. Basically, the company is ordering you to explain your conduct in relation to an incident that may caused you to violate an existing rule or lawful order of your employer which affected your work or caused the company harm. I suggest that you give your answer because if you do not, they can base their decision on what information or evidence they have on hand and you would not have any defense presented to explain the charges being made against you.

 

To explain Art. 282 a of the labor code, if you break down the provision, the following must be present for there to be serious misconduct or willful disobedience:

 

a. there must be a lawful order that had been violated. Note however that a lawful order is not just a verbal order or a written order that is given to an employee during the course of employment but this also covers the employee's manual or a code of conduct for employees which may provide that if you violate it, certain penalties may be imposed. This code of conduct or employee's manual must have been brought to the knowledge of the employee upon engagement or during the course of employment.

 

b. the violation caused detriment to your work or the company. A violation of the code of conduct or employee's manual already presumes detriment to your work, since it was enacted to ensure the smooth operation of the company and for the relationship among management and employee and among the employees themselves run smooth. A violation of an order of a supervisor or manager would be judged based on reasonableness and as to whether or not this is still within the scope of work covered by your employment (ex. you were hired as a waiter but then made to work as a cook, totally unrelated and not covered by your engagement).

 

c. the violation must be serious, meaning it must be grave and aggravated and not merely trivial or unimportant. If there are a series of irregularities that have been committed by an employee, this can also be considered as serious misconduct.

 

Hopefully that explanation guides you on how you answer considering hindi mo naman kinuwento kung ano yong incident that caused the notice to be sent.

[trident16]

Yes, art. 282a refers to serious misconduct or willful disobedience as a "just cause" to terminate you from your employment. Basically, the company is ordering you to explain your conduct in relation to an incident that may caused you to violate an existing rule or lawful order of your employer which affected your work or caused the company harm. I suggest that you give your answer because if you do not, they can base their decision on what information or evidence they have on hand and you would not have any defense presented to explain the charges being made against you.

 

To explain Art. 282 a of the labor code, if you break down the provision, the following must be present for there to be serious misconduct or willful disobedience:

 

a. there must be a lawful order that had been violated. Note however that a lawful order is not just a verbal order or a written order that is given to an employee during the course of employment but this also covers the employee's manual or a code of conduct for employees which may provide that if you violate it, certain penalties may be imposed. This code of conduct or employee's manual must have been brought to the knowledge of the employee upon engagement or during the course of employment.

 

b. the violation caused detriment to your work or the company. A violation of the code of conduct or employee's manual already presumes detriment to your work, since it was enacted to ensure the smooth operation of the company and for the relationship among management and employee and among the employees themselves run smooth. A violation of an order of a supervisor or manager would be judged based on reasonableness and as to whether or not this is still within the scope of work covered by your employment (ex. you were hired as a waiter but then made to work as a cook, totally unrelated and not covered by your engagement).

 

c. the violation must be serious, meaning it must be grave and aggravated and not merely trivial or unimportant. If there are a series of irregularities that have been committed by an employee, this can also be considered as serious misconduct.

 

Hopefully that explanation guides you on how you answer considering hindi mo naman kinuwento kung ano yong incident that caused the notice to be sent.

 

 

 

thank you so much for replying

i dont remember signing anything about being awol or if i did whats the worst thing that i can expect?

[pacey]

my dear mtc lawyers, i hope you can help me with this.

 

see, our neighbor has a small lechon business. he does the roasting on another neighbor's nearby open lot, with neighbor's permission. however, lately, he's been bring LIVE pigs/piglets, keeps them on said open lot for a day or two, and then slaughters them there. =S

 

we already approached our village association, but was basically stonewalled, as the neighbor who does the slaughtering is, in the vernacular, a "bata ni mayor." meanwhile, the neighbor owns the open lot is one of the board members of the village association AND is one of the owners of the village.

 

does this leave us with no recourse?!?! jack-ass neighbor isn't even a home owner. =/