legal Free Legal Advice

[muffin]

Hi Maesters, just wanted to ask about Promisory Notes. The phrase "We Promise to pay..." of 2 persons, is this 50-50 liability to the creditor? Thanks saers!

[rocco69]

Yes, that would give rise to joint liability (or 50-50, in your terms) only. Kaya lang, kailangan mo ring basahin yung buong Promissory Note, kasi baka naman me nakalagay dun na "joint and solidary" ang obligasyon. Kapag ganun, hindi na 50-50 yun, pwede nang kolektahin ng buo yung utang sa alin man sa kanila

 

Hi Maesters, just wanted to ask about Promisory Notes. The phrase "We Promise to pay..." of 2 persons, is this 50-50 liability to the creditor? Thanks saers!

[muffin]

Yes, that would give rise to joint liability (or 50-50, in your terms) only. Kaya lang, kailangan mo ring basahin yung buong Promissory Note, kasi baka naman me nakalagay dun na "joint and solidary" ang obligasyon. Kapag ganun, hindi na 50-50 yun, pwede nang kolektahin ng buo yung utang sa alin man sa kanila

 

Thanks maester. Wala naman ako nakitang words na "joint and solidary". So far yung "We" lang talaga qualifier nung terms of liability. Thanks saer..so ang need lang worry is 50% of the total amount.

[dekimasen]

Sino ang unang namatay, ang tiyuhin mo o ang lolo at lola mo?

 

Pangalawa, may anak ba ang tiyuhin mo at ang asawa niya?

 

Nauna pong namatay ang lolo't lola ko.

 

Wala pong anak ang tiyuhin ko.

[rocco69]

1. may share pa po ba ang asawa nya sa mga mamanahin na lupa ng magulang ko dahil ang isang land title ay nakapangalan sa magulang ko, sa tiyuhin ko at sa iba pa nilang mga kapatid?

 

dahil kasal pa sila ng mamatay ang tiyuhin mo (sabi mo, nagpakasal lang yung babae matapos mamatay yung tiyuhin mo), isa sa mga tagapagmana ng tiyuhin mo ang asawa niya. dahil dun, ang mangyayari dun sa lupa na nakapangalan sa magulang mo, tiyuhin at iba pa nilang kapatid ay hahatiin ito kung ilan sila (halimbawa, lima sila, hahatiin ito sa lima) at yun ang magiging parte ng bawat kapatid.

 

ang parte na napunta sa nasirang tiyuhin mo ay hahatiin sa dalawa, ang kalahati nun ay mapupunta sa asawa, at yung naiwang kalahati ay mapupunta sa mga kapatid. ito ay naaayon sa Art. 1001 ng Civil Code na nagsasabi:

 

Art. 1001. Should brothers and sisters or their children survive with the widow or widower, the latter shall be entitled to one-half of the inheritance and the brothers and sisters or their children to the other half. (953, 837a)

 

 

2. sa isang namang land title, pangalan pa na lolo at lola ko ang nakasulat. pwedi kayang paghati-hatian na lang ng mga apo ang lupa na walang ibibigay sa naiwang asawa ng tiyuhin ko na sa ngayon ay may asawa na rin?

 

hindi ang mga apo ang maghahati-hati rito kundi yung mga magulang nila (assuming na buhay pa ang mga ito) dahil walang karapatan ang mga apo sa mana habang buhay pa ang magulang nila.

 

ayon sa batas, may parte ulit ang asawa ng tiyuhin mo dun sa lupang yan, ganun din ang parte niya (kalahati ng parte na dapat napunta sa tiyuhin mo). ito ay dahil minana agad ng tiyuhin mo ang lupa na yan ng mamatay ang magulang niya, at ang parteng minana niya ay minana din agad ng asawa niya ng mamatay ang tiyuhin mo.

 

maaring paghatian ng mga kapatid yung lupa ng di isinasama yung asawa, pero maari silang habulin later on (kapag nalaman niya ito). isa pa, magsisinungaling sila dahil sasabihin nila na sila lang ang tagapagmana ng tiyuhin mo, na hindi naman totoo. nasa kanila yun kung gusto nilang sumugal – 1/2 ng parte ng kapatid nila laban sa kasuhan at posibleng pagkakulong

 

 

Nauna pong namatay ang lolo't lola ko.

 

Wala pong anak ang tiyuhin ko.

[spikelao]

Sir Rocco,

 

Hi sir,

 

i sent you a private message last July 6. Have you received it?

 

Hope you can answer my legal queries as you are the only one i can count on with my legal problems.

 

Thank you so much

[mastertorero]

hi attorney,

 

i'm just curious anong magiging liability ng isang company who is caught to be spying or eavesdropping on their employee's internet usage. i know employees are suppose to use the internet for official or business-related function only, but actually monitoring a personal use?

[Dr_PepPeR]

hi attorney,

 

i'm just curious anong magiging liability ng isang company who is caught to be spying or eavesdropping on their employee's internet usage. i know employees are suppose to use the internet for official or business-related function only, but actually monitoring a personal use?

 

The employee is using the company's internet line during office hours for personal use? Don't you think the company has the right to monitor this?

[rocco69]

And it is THE COMPANY'S INTERNET LINE. the best thing to do is: DO NOT USE COMPANY INTERNET FACILITIES for personal use. Especially if you have "quirky" preferences you do not want exposed to others.

 

The employee is using the company's internet line during office hours for personal use? Don't you think the company has the right to monitor this?

[mastertorero]

The employee is using the company's internet line during office hours for personal use? Don't you think the company has the right to monitor this?

 

 

had the same question when this was raised, thank you for your response sir

 

 

And it is THE COMPANY'S INTERNET LINE. the best thing to do is: DO NOT USE COMPANY INTERNET FACILITIES for personal use. Especially if you have "quirky" preferences you do not want exposed to others.

 

 

got it, thank you rocco

[vicaner]

Dr. Pepper I am directing this query to you as I know you are familiar with the question I am asking although bro rocco may respond as well (appreciated sir!)

 

I have been reading some posts about raids being conducted in MP and establishments where ES sometimes is availed. IMHO there is no cause for holding/detaining a "client" if caught in such establishment if not caught in the act as one can state that the person had no knowledge whatsoever of wrongdoings occuring. but in the event that the person is caught engaged in a "compromising position" what legal action can be taken against him and the corresponding penalty or so have you? Is there cause for detaining such person if just caught in the premises without actual wrongdoing per se?

[rocco69]

Section 11, Republic Act No. 9208

 

Section 11. Use of Trafficked Persons. - Any person who buys or engages the services of trafficked persons for prostitution shall be penalized as follows:

 

(a) First offense - six (6) months of community service as may be determined by the court and a fine of Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00); and

( Second and subsequent offenses - imprisonment of one (1) year and a fine of One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00).

 

Note that under Section 4(e) of the same law, it is considered "trafficking in persons" "to maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or pornography." Engaging the ES of a masseuse could be construed as falling under Section 11.

 

If one is not caught in the act, you could argue that you were not engaged in wrongdoing (pero makikipag-debate ka pa ba o aareglo na lang para di na lumabas pangalan mo?)

 

 

Dr. Pepper I am directing this query to you as I know you are familiar with the question I am asking although bro rocco may respond as well (appreciated sir!)

 

I have been reading some posts about raids being conducted in MP and establishments where ES sometimes is availed. IMHO there is no cause for holding/detaining a "client" if caught in such establishment if not caught in the act as one can state that the person had no knowledge whatsoever of wrongdoings occuring. but in the event that the person is caught engaged in a "compromising position" what legal action can be taken against him and the corresponding penalty or so have you? Is there cause for detaining such person if just caught in the premises without actual wrongdoing per se?

[noknok79]

atty. tanong ko lang po uli, pano kung umabot sa litigaton at ipa-blacklist po ang pangalan ko. totoo po bang sa kahit anong bangko kapag nag try akong mag loan, denied na?

 

pano po sa katagalan at nagbago ang economic status ng tao, at balikan nya yung mga dati nyang obligasyon at nabayaran na nya. totoo po bang di pa rin matatanggal ang pangalan sa blacklist kahit binalikan at inaayos po ang obligasyon? di pa rin ba talaga makakapag loan?

 

anong movement po ba kapag ganon ang sitwasyon? anong dapat gawin kung sakaling gustong magloan, pero nailagay sa blacklist at binalakan at inayos ang obligasyon?

 

 

 

 

ang masasabi ko lang - makiusap sa bangko. lahat kasi yan, nakalagay naman sa kontrata na pinirmahan mo (o sinang-ayunan mo) ng kinuha mo yung credit card.

 

pag di mo nabayaran yan, lolobo ng lolobo yung utang mo. tapos, kapag di mo binayaran, ipapasa nila sa collection agency yang utang mo, aaraw-arawin (at minsan kahit gabi) kang kukulitin ng mga yan sa sulat, pananakot at tawag, pati mga kaibigan mo, kukulitin din.

[rocco69]

kahit hindi umabot sa litigation, kung di ka good payer, sa pagkaka-alam ko, ililista ka na nila as a bad credit risk.

a bank which learns of your previous record will be hard-put to lend you money (pero depende rin yun sa bangko, yun lang mahihirapan ka).

 

pero ang pagkakaalam ko, pag binayaran mo na yung mga dating utang mo, na-cle-clear naman yung pangalan mo.

 

therefore, tama yung plano mo na balikan at ayusin ang mga pending n aobligasyon mo (na lumobo na dahil sa interes).

 

atty. tanong ko lang po uli, pano kung umabot sa litigaton at ipa-blacklist po ang pangalan ko. totoo po bang sa kahit anong bangko kapag nag try akong mag loan, denied na?

 

pano po sa katagalan at nagbago ang economic status ng tao, at balikan nya yung mga dati nyang obligasyon at nabayaran na nya. totoo po bang di pa rin matatanggal ang pangalan sa blacklist kahit binalikan at inaayos po ang obligasyon? di pa rin ba talaga makakapag loan?

 

anong movement po ba kapag ganon ang sitwasyon? anong dapat gawin kung sakaling gustong magloan, pero nailagay sa blacklist at binalakan at inayos ang obligasyon?

[noknok79]

isa pa pong atty. totoo po ba na kapag may utang ka sa metrobank at blacklisted ka don. kahit sa ibang bank kapag nagtry ka mag loan denied ka rin? kahit good credit standing ka sa ibang bank, denied ka pa rin kapag magloan ka? makaka-apekto po ba yon?

 

 

kahit hindi umabot sa litigation, kung di ka good payer, sa pagkaka-alam ko, ililista ka na nila as a bad credit risk.

a bank which learns of your previous record will be hard-put to lend you money (pero depende rin yun sa bangko, yun lang mahihirapan ka).

 

pero ang pagkakaalam ko, pag binayaran mo na yung mga dating utang mo, na-cle-clear naman yung pangalan mo.

 

therefore, tama yung plano mo na balikan at ayusin ang mga pending n aobligasyon mo (na lumobo na dahil sa interes).