POPULUS LENDING CORPORATION

Exchana curities gn BRENE FINANCING AND LENDING COMPANIES DIVISION IN THE MATTER OF: POPULUS LENDING CORPORATION Certificate of Authority No. 3066), (SEC Registration No. CS201914390 and Respondent. FinLend Case No. 2023-7-32 For: Revocation Authority(CA) Lending Company of to Certificate of Operate a K ORDER justine.c.sablan@val.law; yedda.i.diaz@val.law, arising from multiple complaints lodged by This resolves the administrative proceedings against Populus Lending Corporation ("Respondent"), a registered domestic corporation with SEC Reg. No. CS201914390 and Manila Sapphire Road, Ortigas Center 1600 Pasig City, and email addresses at don@cashrocket.com.ph; coco@cashrocket.com.ph; kiera@cashrocket.com.ph; info@val.law; various individuals, and the motu proprio investigation by the Financing and Lending Certificate of Authority No. 3066, with registered address at 19/F Marco Polo Ortigas Companies Division ("FinLend Division") for various violations of regulations and orders of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). STATEMENT OF FACTS: From September 2022 to March 2023, multiple complaints against Respondent were filed before the SEC, particularly with the "FinLend Division" for alleged violations of SEC Memorandum Circular (MC) No. 18, Series of 2019, otherwise known as the Prohibition on Unfair Debt Collection Practices of Financing Companies and Lending Companies. Relative to this, on 11 April 2023, the FinLend Division ordered the appearance of Luigi Cruz. Respondent and its collecting agency or the Third-Party Service Providers ("TPSPs") in a ZOOM conference which was attended by Respondent's counsel, Atty. Jasmine Sablan, and Ms. Yeddai Diaz of VAL Law Office. Also present is Respondent's Compliance Officer, Mr. from the Respondent's Officers, another conference (4th Conference) was set on 08 June 2023 was held but on the said conference only Compliance Officer Mr. Luigi attended. This caused the third (3rd) schedule of conference which was set on 19 May 2023 and again, Respondent's officers failed to show up. In the pursuit of FinLend Division to hear words 2023 and again, in defiance to a lawful order of FinLend Division, officers did not attend the Respondent's other officers (President and any officers other than the Compliance Officer) failed to attend the above-cited zoom conference. A second (2nd) conference dated 04 May said conference. On 08 June 2023, or during the fourth (4th) conference, Respondent was given a period of fifteen (15) days to submit its Position Paper. On 09 June 2023, the private complainants similarly were required to submit their respective Position Papers. Thereafter, Respondent Page 2 of 3i Populus Lending Corporation e matter of submitted its Position Paper and Answer dated 15 June 2023 and 23 June 2023, respectively. It should be emphasized here that FinLend Division will base this Order solely on Respondent's Answer since its submitted Position Papers bear no signature. MS. JENNY ROSE ARRIOLA (09855616820; 09851791256) NewCash (respondent's registered OLP as per MC 19) on 20 March 2023. "Quoted verbatim": formal complaint before the FinLend Division and alleged that she availed a loan from On 30 March 2023, Ms. Jenny Rose Arriola (the "Complainant" or "Ms. Arriola") filed a kausap kaso nung nakapag bayad ako Ng 500 Ng March 27 and 500 Ng March 28 Marlyn Fe Rabulis pa nga sinsendan ko Ng payment and sa gcash # pa nya at 3500 need ko bayaran sa loob Ng 6 days Kaya Ang due ko Po agad ay March 26 nila na sobrang dami at Kung Anu Anu pagbbintang sinabi nila hanggang March 27 nakakabayad Sabi ko saknila panu nangyari ung kausap ko ung manager nila pinapasa ko pa sa email Ang dami Po sinasabi Hindi daw ako makkipag cooperate at nagbabayad aat makkipag cooperate ako Sabi ko 2k nga Lang nakuha ko sainyo at 3500 sinsingil nyo 6 days Lang tapos ganun pa sila at maayos ako nakkiusap kaso Hindi Po sila matinag nagmemessage padin sakin send ko Po mga proof dito pati mga sinend ko na payment saknila Po at ung apps nila na grabe Po Ang patubo" "Nagloan Po ako sa New Cash nuong March 20 and nakalagay sa apps na pwedeng katapusan need ko Lang Sana for emergency and nakalagay din na maganda Ang interest rate saka months to pay nung nagfill up nako at Natapos ko Po Ang approving nila ay 12,000 15,000 Kaya pinilit ko po ay 12,000 nagulat nalang Po ako at may pagppilian bigla na 5 na 3500 bago sya pumasok sa account pipili ka Ng plan na gusto mo iTake un Kaya pinilit ko ay PLAN K at nagulat ako 3500 nakalagay pero Ang pumasok sa Gcash ko ay 2000 Lang.tapos nung chineck ko sa for payment nagemail ako sa Customer Service nila at nakiusap sa payment plan na Kaya ko para mabayaran sila Ang Sabi ko hulugan ko sila Ng Monday Ng 500 gawan ko paraan and 500 Ng Tuesday and sa Friday ung balance pumayag namn at maayos may mga nagmemessage padin sakin Ng Hindi maganda at Hindi pa daw ako tinatakot ako na iMessage mga contacts and reference ko Sabi ko bakit ganun eh magloan hanggang 20,000 Kaya nagtry ako dahil Ang sahod ko papo ay sa dahil Ang sahod ko Po ay 31 pa Sunday Po March 26 nagmessage na Ang mga agent Respondent allegedly sent messages with threat to Ms. Ariola, some of which are as follows: From 09855616820 MO SA UTANG MO AH!" NAGHIHINTAY NAKAKAPANG INIT KANA NG ULO AH!! SOBRANG KUNAT "ANO NA PAASAHIN MO BA AKO DITO SA UTANG MO? KANINA PA AKO MUKHA AT ID MO NGAYON!!! TIGAS NG MUKHA MO SA UTANG MO AH!!!" "ANO NA BALAK MO SA UTANG MO? GUMAGAWA NA AKO MG (NG) GC SA FACEBOOK SA LAHAT NG KAPALIT LUGAR MO BINABALANDRA KO NA "POTANG INA MO WALA KA NGANG BINABAYAD [H]HAYUP KA!!! Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 3 of 31 "MAGHINTAY KA POTANG INA MO POPOST KO MUKHAA MO NGAYON!!" From 09851791256 SA "SCAMMER PH" MGA HINDI NAGBABAYAD NG UTANG!" "BUKSAN MO FACEBOOK MO BAKA ISA KANA SA NAKA POST NGAYON "MAY PAHABOL PA AKO SAYO TANG INA MO MAYA MAYA MAG CHAT POST SA COMMENT BOX NILA TANGINA MO AYAW MGA FACEBOOK FRIENDS MO BAKIT PURO PAGMUMUKA MO ANG NAKA the persons in her contact list and post her name on Facebook. In response to this Complaint, FinLend Division issued a Show Cause Letter (SCL) dated 17 April 2023 against Respondent for violation of SEC MC 18, specifically by using profane language and insults and threatening Complainant Arriola that the Company would contact coordinated with a fake Facebook Page for her payment (there was no mention if the Respondent filed its Comment on 08 May 2023 admitting that it owns the Online Lending texting, Respondent alleged that the cited numbers are not registered under its account name. Further, upon receiving the Complaint, the Respondent tried to reach the her a Gcash QR Code to settle her account. This is contrary to Respondent' claim that it does have a Social Media Platform. Platform (OLP) the Complainant mentioned. However, on the telephone numbers used for Complainant for clarification. According to the Respondent, Complainant told them that she payment was partial or full payment). Complainant alleged the owner of the web page gave coordinated with. Respondent also presumed that the harassment the Complainant reported might have come from someone not connected with them. Finally, Respondent asked the Complainant to provide prove her payment using the QR Code and her conversation with the person she Pursuant to the FinLend Division directive at the Conference dated 08 June 2023, on 23 June 2023, Respondent submitted its Answer. It refuted the allegations of Complainant Arriola, as follows: 1. The subject messages do not pertain to the subject loan of respondent; neither were the subject messages sent by respondent nor any of its authorized representatives. mention of the loan contract reference number of the complainant with the The Company is in the position that the Compiainant has been transacting with a person not connected with the Respondent nor its representatives. In addition, the that the message was sent under any authority of the Respondent as there was no Respondent, nor the amount of the subject loan even mentioned in the subject mention of "NewCash" from an unknown number (09851791256) does not prove messages. Lastly, the complaint has no basis since the numbers used were not adequately substantiated by the Complainant that it was from the Respondent. 2. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against respondent prior to filing Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. P0ae40f3 complaint before the honorable Commission. It is in the Respondent's position that as stated in the complaint form, the remedies against Respondent before filing the complaint with the SEC. complainant shall provide evidence/proof that the complainant has exhausted all MS. ALYSSA ASHLEY CRUZ (09709390751: 09090662989: 09851794328) On 22 March 2023, a Complaint was filed by Ms. Alyssa Ashley Cruz (The "Complainant" or "Ms. Cruz") against NewCash and Pesocow for an alleged violation of MC 18 s. of 2019. In her complaint form, Ms. Cruz stated that Respondent sent a message reminding her of the due date on past business hours and extremely early in the morning. She also received to the complaint form reads: messages as late as one o'clock in the morning. Some of the attached screenshot messages From 09709390751: (NEW CASH) the CIC CREDIT INFORMATION CORPORATION for blocklisted to avoid being clients who cannot make a payment Today will be automatically forwarded to delinque[nt]..." "TODAY is YOUR DUE DATE! Kindly settle your payment until 12NN! Those dito ng 1l:00AM ha. 2 days palang niremind na kana at wala na kaming PAGKUKULANG SA REMINDERS." "Bakit ka di ka sumasagot sa TAWAG ng AGENT mo? Pakisiguradong bayad ka From 09090662989: "Ikaw nalang hindi BAYAD dito hindi ka special para hintayin ng KUMPANYA na yang pera." pakibilisar ang PAYMENT matatapos na : ang CUT OF TIME 1PM kailangan ko From 09851794328: may kasamang information mo at pictures sa CIC" "Magbayad ka na, wag mo na kameng pilitin na i-report tong account mo na On 29 March 2023, FinLend Division sent a Show Cause Letter against Respondent to show using any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a borrower. Respondent stated that those clients who Corporation (CIC) for blacklisting. cause why it should not be held liable for violation of SEC MC 18 s. of 2019, specifically by cannot make a payment will be automatically forwarded to the Credit Information On 30 March 2023, the Complainant withdrew her Complaint against Respondent. the formal Complaint filed. Consequently, on 03 April 2023, Respondent, in its Answer, requested for the dismissal D0ae5 0f3 In the . matter of Populus Lending Corporation MS. DONNA JANE GAYLON (O9120026501) In a complaint form dated 13 April 2023, Ms. Gaylon (the "Complainant" or "Ms. Gaylon") narrated that her due date falls on 13 April 2023. The Complainant humbly asked for a perceived to be irresponsible and she that should hide. possible option since the latter's obligation cannot be settled on the said due date. The Complainant added that the agent of Respondent seemed to disregard her request. She was The Complainant attached a screen shot of the text messages from 09120026501, the wording says: PLAN D. para magbayad kayo ng utang nyo." "Kaylangan pa ba mag kalkalan tayo ng information nyo dito sa NEw CASH hindi ka magbabayad, aba, wag mo ko subukan, baka sa ibang tao ako mag "Ngayun ka magbayad... ang laki ng halaga na yan, tapos sasabihan mo ko coordinate sa utang mo.." ko (12 NOON) .. mapipilitan na akong makipag cooperate sa ibang tao about sa utang mo,, = NEW CASH PLAN D." "GOOD DAY! Kung hindi po kayo nakapag payment sa tamang oras na binigay In response to the filed Complaint, FinLend Division issued a Show Cause Letter dated 18 April 2023 against Respondent for an alleged violation of MC 18 series of 2019 specifically by Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person loan information, which is known, or which should be known, to be false, including the failure to comi inicate tha the debt is being disputed. latter has multiple accounts with the former with 20 to 24 days overdue. In addition. Respondent denied the ownership of the number used. Moreso, Respondent alleged it did not tolerate such behavior in collecting unpaid accounts. Further, it was alleged they tried to coordinate with the Complainant to check and further clarify on the matter but they On 08 May 2023, Respondent answered stating among others that upon the receipt of the Show Cause Letter, they checked the account of the Complainant and found out that the haven't received any response. Moreover, pursuant to the directive of FinLend Division during the Conferenc June 2023, Respondent submitted its Answer on 23 June 2023. It refuted the allegations of Complainant Gaylon for the following reasons: ce dated 08 1. The subject messages do not pertain to the subject loan of the Respondent; neither were the subject messages sent by Respondent nor any of its authorized representatives. Respondent is in the position that the Complainant has been transacting with a person not connected with the Respondent nor its representatives. In addition, the mention of "New Cash" from an unknown number (09120026501) does not prove mention of the loan contract reference number of the complainant with the Respondent, nor the amount of the subject loan even mentioned in the subje that the message was sent under any authority of the Respondent as there was no Page 6 of 31 Populus Lending Corporation ztter of. adequately substantiated by the Complainant that it was from the Respondent. messages. Lastly, the complaint has no basis since the numbers used were not 2. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against Respondent prior to filing the complaint before the honorable Commission. It is in the Respondent' position that as stated in the complaint form, the complainant shall provide evidence/proof that the complainant has exhausted all remedies against Respondent before filing the complaint with the SEC. MR. JEREMY WILLIAM DANDOY (09852489938; 09631579702) harassed him, his family and peers, sending threats, posting on social media and even On 16 March 2023, Mr. Jeremy William Dandoy (the "Complainant" or "Mr. Dandoy") filed a Complaint before the FinLend Division. The complainant alleged that the Respondent with his family and friends as members. Posted threats and intimidations in said gc (group chat] and FB accounts; and Charged over excessive interest rates and other fees averaging 40% for just a six (6) day payment period with an additional past due penalty charge for late payment beyond 6 days period. created a group chat "AMBAGAN SA UTANG O NINAKAW NG ANAK NI NENETTE DANDOY" As a proof of evidence, the Complainant attached a screenshot of the text messages which states: From 09852489938 UMUTANG KA AT ID. TANGINA HINDI KITA TGILAN IPOST NA MAGNANAKAW PUTANGINA MO KA IKAKALAT KO TONG PAGMUMUKA MO SELFIE MO NUNG KA PUTANGINA MO HA NASAN NA BAYAD MO PUTANGINAMO KA TALAGANG MATIGAS KA HAH!!!! WALA AKONG IDEDELTE SA MUKHA NG PAMILYA MO HANGGAT DI KA BAYAD From 09631579702 MANDARAMBONG KA!! PATAY GUTOM KA!!! A screenshot of the following is attached: 1. Facebook messenger group with a group name "AMBAGAN SA UTANG O NINAKAW 2. Conversation with Louie Delacruz disclosing referencc number PS241254046859 NG ANAK NI NENETTE DANDOY" which was created by an account of Louie Delacruz; 3. An account from Pesocow indicating the same reference number; and and "PLAN G": 4. Facebook comment made by certain Kenneth Dy which reads: "PAKI SABI SA ANAK MONG PALA UTANG MAGBAYAD NA NG UTANG MC Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. PageTof3 PAKIKALA AH KASI ANO YANG ANAK MO GANYAN UGALI MO! KLEPTO!!! YUNG ANAK MONG MANANG MANA SAYO PAKISABIHAN! WAG MASYADO MAG On 28 March 2023, FinLend Division sent a SCL against the Respondent for alleged 2023 denying the Complainant's allegations that it sent harassment messages. Furthermore, the messages did not even specify that they are from Online Lending Applications operated by Respondent Lending Corp. Respondent assumed that the Complainant might have been communicating with a person not connected with the violation of MC 18 s. of 2019 (for brevity). Respondent filed its Comment dated 03 April Respondent. Mr. Dandoy did not file his Position Paper. Hence, FinLend Division will decide on his Complaint based on records on file. Respondent submitted its Answer and refuted the allegations of Complainant Dandoy for On 23 June 2023, following the directive during the Conference dated 08 June 2023, the following reasons: 1. The Complainant's documentary attachments do not prove nor support former's allegations. At best, the conclusion that could be arrived at from the attachments is merely speculative. The Respondent is in the position that the mention of "NewCash Plan G" in the Subject Messages with a contract number and amount from an unknown number Respondent. Its connection to the Respondent may be considered as speculative at (09852623029) does not prove that the message was sent under any authority of best. 2. The mobile number used to send the subject messages to the Complainant are not Complainant connecting the Subject Messages to the Company are conjecture and hypothetical at most, without any evidence linking these together making the complaint without basis. used by the Respondent's nor its ts representatives, as such, the assumptions made by 3. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against the Company prior to filing the complaint before the Honorable Commission. Failure to comply may cause the outright dismissal of the Complaint. MS. KRIS NELLY GALARRITA (09207722058) In a Complaint dated 23 February 2023, Complainant Kris Nelly Galaritta (the Respondent continued to harass the Complainant and texted her provided contact list. (for brevity). The Complainant alleged that despite the latter's information given to the Company of having enrolled at Debt Aid Consulting Internal for the settlement of the loan, "Complainant" or "Ms. Galaritta) charged Respondent with a violation of MC 18 s. of 2019 Attached to the said Complaint are the screenshots of the messages sent to the contacts of the Complainant. Some of the messages reads: "KUNG SINO MAN ANG NAKAKAALAM KUNG NASAAN SI GALARITTA KRIS Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of Page oof NELLY CAPAROSO IPAGBIGAY ALAM NYO PO AGAD SAMIN DAHIL IKAW AT NEW CASH) MAARI KAYONG MADAMAY SA MGA REKLAMO NA KAKA... ANG IYONG CONTACT NUMBER AY IBINIGAY NYA SAMIN BILANG CONTACT REFERENCE SA KANYANG PINAG KAKAUTANGANG KUMPANYA NA (PLAN C From 09207722058 "TO FAMILY/FRIENDS/RELATIVE/COLLEAGUE COMPANY: PLAN C - NEW CASH BORROWER'S NAME: GALARRITA CRIS NELLY CAPAROSO TAKASAN ANG KA[N]YANG UTANG. KAILANGAN PO NYANG MAKAPAG BAYAD NGAYONG ARAW. PATULOY PO KAYONG MAKAKATANGGAP NG MENSAHE AT TAWAG HANGGAT ANG TAONG MAY UTANG SA AMIN AY HINDI PA BAYAD!" NAIS PO NAMIN IPABATID SA INYO NA BINIGAY NYA ANG PANGALAN AT CONTACT NUMBER MO UPANG TAWAGAN NAMIN KUNG SAKALING DI DAW SYA NAMIN MATAWAGAN OR HINDI SYA MAKIPAG COOPERATE SA AMIN PAKISABI SA TAONG ETO WAG NYA KAMING PAGTAGUAN AT WAG NYANG On 16 March 2023, FinLend Division sent a Show Cause Letter for Respondent to show cause or explain why it should not be held liable for violation of MC 18 s. of 2019 (for brevity). In a response dated 20 March 2023, Respondent generally denied all the charges against them as it was not registered with the latter's system Upon careful evaluation of the attached evidences of the Complainant, it appears that the telephone numbers the Complainants complained are not associated with the Respondent, response, the latter admitted her obligation and added that she enrolled at debt aid However, the latter still continued to message the Complainant and her contact references. Pertaining to the Order requiring the Complainant to submit a Position Paper, in an email. consulting for the settlement of loans. The same was fully disclosed to the Respondent. Following the directive during the Conference dated 08 June 2023, the Respondent submitted its Answer on 23 June 2023. The Company refuted the allegations of Complainant Dandoy for the following reasons: 1. The subject messages do not pertain to the subject loan of Respondent; neither were the subject messages sent by Respondent nor any of its authorized representatives! a. The Respondent is in the position that the Complainant's documentary Company. Its connection to the Company may be considered as speculative attachments do not prove nor support the latter's allegations. At best, the speculative. The respondent added that the mention of "NEWCASH J" in the number does not prove that the message was sent under any authority of the conclusion that could be arrived at from these attachments is merely subject messages with a contact number and amount from an unknown at best. is Lending Corpor In the matter of Page 9 of 3 01 b. The mobile number used to send the subject messages to the Complainant linking these together making the complaint without basis. assumptions made by Complainant connecting the Subject Messages to the are not used by the Respondent nor its representatives, as such, the Company are conjecture and hypothetical at most, without any evidence 2. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against the Company prior to filing the complaint before the Honorable Commission. The Company is in the position that the Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies with the former before filing the complaint before the Commission. Failure to comply may cause the outright dismissal of the Complaint. 3. Complainant's allegations do not meet the quantum of evidence required for administrative cases before the Honorable Commission. outstanding balance on the Subject Loan. The lack of evidentiary basis to support the Complainant's allegations, by merely basis of the fact that the complainant is a registered NewCash client and has an outright dismissal. Complainant merely speculates and believes that the Respondent might have been or was probably responsible for sending the messages only on the attaching screenshots of the messages, is sufficient to cause the instant Complaint's MS. MA THERESA ARAGON (09207706681) Respondent. In addition, the Complainant previously availed loans from Populus and this thereof, the Respondent still entered into a contacts with the Complainant. On 23 March 2023, Complainant Ma. Theresa Aragon filed a Complaint before the FinLend Division against the Respondent for alleged violations of MC 18 and MC 3 stating among others that despite the high interest rates, the Complainant availed loan from the was the first time the former missed payments and tried to speak with the latter despite Attached in the complaint form is a screenshot of the message sent to one of the contacts of the Complainant which says: "PAALALA CO-BORROWER/REFERENCE: Aragon Ma. Theresa Castro Mukhang balak ng talikuran ni Aragon Ma. Theresa Castro, yung obligasyon nya! Hindi makakatulong yan mas lalo nya lang binibigyan ng problema sarili nya pati makakadamay sya ng Contact-Reference nya! Pakisabihan sya na nandito lahat ng information ninyong dalawa dahil nag agree sya terms and condition at ikaw ang nilagay nya para makautang. PAKIUSAP WAG NINYONG KUNSINTIHIN." From: 09207706681 "Update sa payment mo anung oras na po pakibayaran na po ito bago matapu ang cut off time.." "BILLERS NAME SA GCASH: SKYPAY" Populus Lending Corporatior Ir the matter of Page 10 of 31 account named Ernesto Lapuko. The message of the said account, it says: Attached also are the screenshots of the Complainant through messenger to a certain "OYYY TANGINAMO BALAK MONG TAKASAN UTANG MO? GAGO KA GUSTO MO MONG BOBO? AHHH!! BABABUYIN KO KAYO TANGINA KA1." IPOST KO SA PAGE NG QUEZON CITY ANG PAGMUMUKHA NYO NG NANAY Moreso, in the said message it was stated the code PSP234866684009, Biller name Payso. Aside from the said messages, an obscene edited photo of the Complainant was attached On 31 March 2023, relative to the said complaint, the FinLend Division issued an SCL to for the charges against it. the Company giving the latter the opportunity to show cause why it shall not be held liable In a response dated 08 May 2023, Respondent denied all the charges against them and Respondent appears to have an online app. However, the telephone numbers appearing in further stated that upon careful evaluation of the attached evidences of the Complainant the Complaint are allegedly not associated with the Respondent as it was not registered with the latter's system. submitted before FinLend Division. The Complainant failed to file her Position Paper in response to the FinLend Division's Order. Hence, the case will be decided based on the available records or documents for the following reasons: Pursuant to the directive during the Conference dated 08 June 2023, Respondent submitted its Answer on 23 June 2023, and refuted the allegations of Complainant Dandoy 1. The subject messages do not pertain to the subject loan of respondent; neither were the subject messages sent by respondent nor any of its authorized representatives. a. The Company is in the position that the Complainant's documentary attachments could be arrived at from these attachments is merely speculative. The respondent added that the mention of "NEWCASH J" in the subject messages with a contact number and amount from an unknown number does not prove that the message was sent under any authority of the Company. Its connection to the Company do not prove nor support the latter's allegations. At best, the conclusion that may be considered as speculative at best. b. The mobile number used to send the subject messages to the Complainant are conjecture and hypothetical at most, without any evidence linking these together making the complaint without basis . not used by the Respondent nor its representatives, as such, the assumptions made by Complainant connecting the Subject Messages to the Company are 2. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against the Company prior to filing the complaint before the Honorable Commission. The Company is in the position that the Complainant failed to exhaust all remedi Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 11 of 31 with the former before filing the complaint before the Commission. Failure to comply may cause the outright dismissal of the Complaint. 3. administrative cases before the Honorable Commission. Complainant's allegations do not meet the quantum of evidence required for basis of the fact that the complainant is a registered NewCash client and has an The lack of evidentiary basis to support the Complainant's allegations, by merely outright dismissal. Complainant merely speculates and believes that the Respondent attaching screenshots of the messages, is sufficient to cause the instant Complaint's might have been or was probably responsible for sending the messages only on the outstanding balance on the Subject Loan. MR. ABELARDO SIM MADRIDEJO III (09103956619; 09207721707) On 04 April 2023, Mr. ABELARDO SIM MADRIDEJO III (the "Complainant") filed a Complaint before FinLend Division alleging, among others, that the app New Cash texted Complainant alleged that Respondent was able access the Complainant's contacts and pictures. In return, Respondent disbursed money in favor of the Complainant's account without his consent. Moreover, allegedly, Respondent harassed the Complainant to pay and also threatened to contact the others in his contact lists. him with the information that his loan was approved. Upon his checking the app. From 09103956619 "FINAL WARNING! your Government loans, especially SSS and PAG IBIG. This is an important and authorities once you ignore us. We'll do something for you to cooperate We highly advise and notify you to settle the amount you owe AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, If you missed to pay the amount you owe, we have to transfer and will be BLACKLISTED customers in all Financial institutions. It will also affect precaution and highly needed for immediate action. It involves legal action with us. We have proof and documents like ID's information and voice recording that you have with the company. Failure to respond with this message will lead to legal action so better cooperate immediately. endorse your account to CIC or CREDIT INFORMATION CORPORATION. You Thank you! -NEW CASH PLAN E" From 09207721707 dahil malalaman to tatawagan to ng CIC DEPT. para sila nilang siguro ang "ano ayaw mo ng mabait na singilan? wala kang paramdam sa lahat ng text at tawag ng mga AGENT sige pa blacklist na kita sa CIC tutal tinataguan mo UTANG MO DITO siguraduhin mo lang alam to ng pinapsukan mong TRABAHO magbayad nito at obligahin sa PERWISYONG ginagawa mo !" Populus Lending Corporatior In the matter of. Page 12 of 31 On11 April 2023, FinLend Division issued a Show Cause Letter against Respondent giving the latter the opportunity to show cause/ explain why it shall not be held liable for the charges against it. Respondent failed to respond. Division issued. Thus, the case will be decided based on the available documents submitted before FinLend Division. The Complainant failed to submit his Position Paper pursuant to the Order FinLend Following the directive during the Conference dated 08 June 2023, Respondent submitted its Answer on 23 June 2023 and refuted the allegations of Complainant Dandoy as follows: The subject messages do not pertain to the subject loan of respondent; neither were the subject messages sent by respondent nor any of its authorized representatives. a. The Company is in the position that the Complainant's documentary the subject messages from an unknown number does not prove that the conclusion that could be arrived at from these attachments is merely attachments do not prove nor support the latter's allegations. At best, the speculative. The respondent added that the mention of "NEWCASH PLAN E" in message was sent under any authority of the Company. Its connection to the Company may be considered as speculative at best. b. The mobile number used to send the subject messages to the Complainant are not used by the Respondent nor its representatives, as such, the assumptions made by Complainant connecting the Subject Messages to the Company are conjecture and hypothetical at most, without any evidence linking these together making the complaint without basis. 2. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against our company prior to filing the complaint before the Honorable Commission. The Company is in the position that the Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies with the former before filing the complaint before the Commission. Failure to comply may cause the outright dismissal of the Complaint. 3. Complainant's allegations do not meet the quantum of evidence required for administrative cases before the Honorable Commission outstanding balance on the Subject Loan. The lack of evidentiary basis to support the Complainant's allegations, by merely outright dismissal. Complainant merely speculates and believes that the Respondent might have been or was probably responsible for sending the messages only on the basis of the fact that the complainant is a registered NewCash client and has an attaching screenshots of the messages, is sufficient to cause the instant Complaint's 4. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against Respondent prior to filing th complaint before the honorable Commission. Populus Lending Corporation Y the Page I3 of 3} It is in the Respondent's position that as stated in the complaint form, the complainant shall provide evidence/proof that the complainant has exhausted all remedies against Respondent before filing the complaint with the SEC. MS. MARIA YVETTE FLORES to collect payments for her debt and contacted persons in her contact list. On 15 March 2023, Ms. Maria Yvette Flores filed a complaint with the FinLend Division alleging, among others, that Respondent harassed her through text messages in an attempt Quoted in verbatim hereunder are the screenshots of text messages from the Respondent' agent, as follows: ngunit patuloy ang iyong hindi pagsagot ng mga tawag at hindi pagbabayad. "Hanggang ngayon wala parin kaming natanggap na bayad mula, 3:00PM na Maari lamang na bayaran mo na ang pagkakautang mo NGAYON NA, dahil makuha namin ang perang ipinahiram sayo! Huwag mong antayin. sisiguraduhin namin na gagawin namin lahat ng pwedeng AKsYON para MATUTO KANG MAGING RESPONSABLENG MANGUNGUTANG -LUCKYLOAN VIP8" Allegedly, these were the messages sent by Respondent to the Complainant's contacts, to quote: pera sa aming company at hindi na sya makita at makausap. Pakiusap was "Kami po ay humihingi ng tulong sa inyo upang makausap si Flores Maria Yvette Jamisola We are suspecting our client is hiding from us. Nangako na magbabayad pero hindi na makausap. You are the one of the contract references of our client. Hindi po kami ang scammer, sya po ang nakakuha ng ninyong kunsintihin." June 2023 a conference was held and following the directive during the said Conference On 16 March 2023, FinLend Division sent a SCL against the Company to show cause/ explain why it should not be held liable for violation of the MC 18. Subsequently, on 08 Respondent submitted its Answer on 23 June 2023 wherein it refuted the allegations of Complainant Flores for the following reasons: 1. The subject messages do not pertain to the subject loan of respondent; neither were the subject messages sent by respondent nor any of its authorized representatives a. The Company is in the position that the Complainant's documentary conclusion that could be arrived at from these attachments is merely speculative. The respondent added that the mention of "NEWCASH PLAN E" in the subject messages from an unknown number does not prove that the message was sent under any authority of our Company. Its connection to the attachments do not prove nor support the latter's allegations. At best, the Populus Lending Corporation In. the matter of. Page 14 of 3 Company may be considered as speculative at best. b. The mobile number used to send the subject messages to the Complainant are not used by the Respondent nor its representatives, as such, the assumptions made by Complainant connecting the Subject Messages to the Company are conjecture and hypothetical at most, without any evidence linking these together making the complaint without basis. 2. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against our company prior to filing the complaint before the Honorable Commission. The Company is in the position that the Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies with the former before filing the complaint before the Commission. Failure to comply may cause the outright dismissal of the Complaint. 3. Complainant's allegations do not meet the quantum of evidence required for administrative cases before the Honorable Commission. basis of the fact that the complainant is a registered NewCash client and has an outstanding balance on the Subject Loan. The lack of evidentiary basis to support the Complainant's allegations, by merely attaching screenshots of the messages, is sufficient to cause the instant Complaint's outright dismissal. Complainant merely speculates and believes that the Respondent might have been or was probably responsible for sending the messages only on the 4. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against respondent prior to filing the complaint before the honorable Commission. It is in the Respondent's position that as stated in the complaint form, the complainant shall provide evidence/proof that the complainant has exhausted all remedies against Respondent before filing the complaint with the SEC. withdraw her complaint against the Respondent. FinLend Division acknowledged the letter- On 19 March 2023, the Complainant emailed the FinLend Division of her intention to intent. MS. MARIE ANN DIHAYCO account will be endorsed to Credit Information Corporation (CIC) and will cause her the CIC and will be blacklisted to SSS, PAGIBIG and Philhealth. The Complainant narrated On 09 May 2023, Ms. Mari Ann Dihayco filed a Complaint before FinLend Division alleging, among others, that the Company threatened that if she failed to pay her obligations, her accounts to be blacklisted to all financial institutions and affect her government loans. and said that (quoted verbatim): Likewise, if she did not respond to the Company's calls, her documents will be endorsed to their platform NEWCASH & PESOCOW. Their interest is high (almost half of what duration of this loan is only 7 days. I paid on time and reloan again due to shortage "Due to financial constraint, I borrowed money from Populus Lending Corp under you applied) but I grabbed this just to obtain financial help from the lender. The Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 15 of 31 is against my right to be heard because I tried to negotiate if they can give me is very short. Hindi ko tatakbuhan ang hiniram ko pero sa ganitong ginagawa nila of money. My due came, May 5, 2023 and I told them that I was short of money. different numbers traumatized me. They made numerous calls every minute which extension because I still need to find funds to pay my debt but to no avail. They even texted me with harsh words. They have very high interest to be honest and the term sobra naman yata. Sa SEC ang naka indicate sa interest nila is 3% in 1 to 36 months daw but in reality, sa 4500 na hiniram, 2700 lang ang net proceeds. That is They bombarded me with text messages and even texted my contact references. I admit that I was delinquent but to harass me by sending multiple texts with became so disturbing. They even texted my contact references. What they are doing 40% in 7 days! Ang layo sa declared nila sa SEC na 3% per month. That is deception." The alleged message from Respondent says: legal action against all users who do not pay in order to reclaim what you borrowed from us. We have identification information and voice recording Failure to respond will prompt We urge to settle your obligation immediately, despite the fact that we will be transferring your NewCash (Plan D) account to Credit Information Corporation, which will result in you being blacklisted in all financial institutions and may also affect your government loans that are prohibited to your government loans that are prohibited to your employment. Don't try to ignore us We take us to send your documents to Credit Philhealth. We will wait for your payment until 3pm. Thank you Information Corporation for possible blacklisting for SSS, PAG IBIG and Division acknowledged the letter-intent. Expectedly, on 18 May 2023, Respondent sent a interest to pursue it allegedly because her concerns were heard and she agreed to resolve this matter with Respondent. The letter bears the word "NEWCASH" but no signature of Ms. answer charges against the latter. On 16 May 2023, the Complainant emailed FindLend Division of her intention to withdraw her complaint against the Respondent. verified Comment on an alleged withdrawal of Ms. Dihayco of her Complaint as she lost On 11 May 2023, FinLend Division sent a Show Cause Letter against the company to Dihayco. FinLend MS. MARIA YVETTE FLORES AND MS MARIE ANN DIHAYCO Complainants Flores and Dihayco submitted their intent to withdraw their complaints against the Respondent. In the Complaint submitted by the Complainant Flores, messages of Respondent states: Jamisola We are suspecting our client is hiding from us. Nangako na magbabayad pero hindi na makausap. You are the one of the contract references of our client. Hindi po kami ang scammer, sya po ang nakakuha ng pera sa aming company at hindi na sya makita at makausap. Pakiusap wag ninyong kunsintihin." "Kami po ay humihingi ng tulong sa inyo upang makausap si Flores Maria Yvette Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of Page 16 of 3 MS. MICHELLE MAE SALORICO ACOP On 08 March 2023, Ms. Michelle Mae Salorico Acop filed a Complaint with the FinLend they said that the Credit Information Corporation will file a small claims case against the Division alleging, among others, that the Company used a deceptive means to collect when complainant. The FinLend Division sent a Show Cause Letter dated 15 March 2023 to the Respondent for borrower when the Respondent was stating that those clients who cannot make a payment refuted the allegations of Complainant Acop for the following reasons: an alleged violation of MC 18 specifically by using any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information will be automatically forwarded to the Credit Information Corporation (CIC) for blacklisting In addition, on 08 June 2023 a conference was held and following the directive during the said Conference, the Company submitted its Answer on 23 June 2023. The Company concerning a 1. The subject messages do not pertain to the subject loan of respondent; neither were the subject messages sent by respondent nor any of its authorized representatives. a. All messages on the screenshots do not prove that the message was sent nor the amount of the Subject Loan even mentioned in the Subject Messages. under the authority of the Respondent. There is no mention of the Loan Contract Reference Number of the Complainant with NewCash was made, b. The mobile number used to send the subject messages to the Complainant linking these together making the complaint without basis. assumptions made by Complainant connecting the Subject Messages to the Company are conjecture and hypothetical at most, without any evidence are not used by the Respondent nor its representatives, as such, the 2. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against our company prior to filing the complaint before the Honorable Commission. with the former before filing the complaint before the Commission. Failure to comply The Company is in the position that the Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies may cause the outright dismissal of the Complaint. 3. Complainant's allegations do not meet the quantum of evidence required for administrative cases before the Honorable Commission. outright dismissal. Complainant merely speculates and believes that the Respondent might have been or was probably responsible for sending the messages only on the basis of the fact that the complainant is a registered NewCash client and has an outstanding balance on the Subject Loan. The lack of evidentiary basis to support the Complainant's allegations, by merely attaching screenshots of the messages, is sufficient to cause the instant Complaint's MS.ROWEN REYES (09079820278, 09854871781) On 02 May 2023, Ms. Rowen Reyes filed a Complaint before FinLend Division alleging Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of Page 17 of 31 among others, that the Company threatened her that if she failed to pay her obligations Respondent will contact her contact references. To support her allegations, the complainant-borrower attached screenshots of text verbatim from the screenshots: messages from Respondent' agent. Quoted hereunder are some of the messages taken From 09079820278 Wala kang konsensya at hindi ka marunong mahiya! Sisimulan ka na naming ngayon ipa report IHANDA MO SARILI mo sa sandamakmak na BAD RECORDS contact ref mob aka sila sumagot sa tawag naming para maka usap wag muna "Kung hindi ka kikilos ibang tao ang TATAWAGAN naming para sa utang mo! antayin" na uulanin ka! Walang kusa, kung ayaw mo gumawa ng paraan para makabayad From 09854871781 "HUWAG KANG MAGKAKAMALING HINDI MAGBAYAD! IPAPA PATAY TALAGA KITA! MAG INGAT INGAT NA RIN ANG MGA TAONG NAKATIRA SA ADDRESS NA MO! IBALIK MO YUNG PERANG INUTANG MO SA ONLINE LENDING! PINAPAKAIN MO SA PAMILYA MO GALING SA NAKAW!" SAYO KAPAG HINDI KA PARIN NAKABAYAD NGAYONG ARAW NATO NG UTANG BINIGAY MO PARA MAKA UTANG! PATI SILA MADADAMAY SA PAGPATAY "MAY ORAS KA PA PARA MAGBAYAD AT LINISIN ANG PANGALAN MO. ILANG ORAS NALANG SASABOG NA BAHO MO AT KAKALAT NA PAGMUMUKHA MO" violation of MC 18 s. of 2019 (for brevity). In addition, on 08 June 2023 a conference was held and following the directive during the said Conference, Respondent submitted its On 11 May 2023, FinLend Division sent a Show Cause Letter to Respondent for the alleged Answer on 23 June 2023 and refuted the allegations of Complainant Reyes for the following reasons: 1. The subject messages do not pertain to the subject loan of respondent; neither were the subject messages sent by respondent nor any of its authorized representatives. b. All messages on the screenshots do not prove that the message was sent The mobile number used to send the subject messages to the Complainant linking these together making the complaint without basis. Contract Reference Number of the Complainant with NewCash was made, nor the amount of the Subject Loan even mentioned in the Subject Messages. are not used by the Respondent nor its representatives, as such, the assumptions made by Complainant connecting the Subject Messages to the under the authority of the Respondent. There is no mention of the Loan Company are conjecture and hypothetical at most, without any evidence 2. Complainant failed to exhaust all remedies against the Company prior to filing the complaint before the Honorable Commission. Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 18 of 3 The Company is in the position that the Complain failed to exhaust all remedie with the former before filing the complaint before the Commission. Failure to comply may cause the outright dismissal of the Complaint. 3 Complainant's allegations do not meet the quantum of evidence required for administrative cases before the Honorable Commission. attaching screenshots of the messages, is sufficient to cause the instant Complaint's basis of the fact that the complainant is a registered NewCash client and has an outstanding balance on the Subject Loan. outright dismissal. Complainant merely speculates and believes that the Respondent The lack of evidentiary basis to support the Complainant's allegations, by merely might have been or was probably responsible for sending the messages only on the DATA (WSSECD) NO. 2022-194-PSG TO 2022-196-PSG WARRANT TO SEARCH, AND EXAMINE COMPUTER activity wherein he heard aggressive and threatening words. Some of the agent pretended to be a lawyer and a police office[r] and stated that a case was filed to the person in the other Corporationi. Pat. Laranan narrated that while walking inside the office of Respondent, he found numerous laptops and computer set being used by the agents while engaged in their side of the phone call2. Related to the Complaints filed before FinLend Division, on 16 March 2022, Patrolman Marc Emil Laranan, of the Philippine National Police, Anti Cybercrime Group Quezon City conducted casing/surveillance operation to gather information and obtained essential elements of information regarding an alleged Online Threat and Harassment of certain Online Lending applications and Finance Corporations named Populus Lending EIPD, and the National Privacy Commission (NPC) implemented a Warrant to Search, and Judge Elma M. Rafallo-Lingan of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 159, Pasig. Further, on 22 July 2022, the Philippine National Police Anti-Cybercrime Group (PNP-ACG) Eastern Police District Mobile Force Battalion (EPDMFB), Pasig City Police Station, the SEC. Examine Computer Data (WSSECD) No. 2022-194-PSG to 2022-196-PSG issued by Hon. the voluntary statements of the collection agents, it was found that Respondent and its collecting agents are operating and using online lending applications such as: Based on the digital forensic examination conducted on-site on the seized devices and from 4. Catcash; 7. Takecash; 8. Pesohere; 9. Weagle; 5. Cashguard; 10. Cocopeso; 3. Dragonloan; 2. Antwallet; 6. Topeso; 11. Cashin; 1. Pesopop; 2 Affidavit of Deponent Pat. Marc Emil Laranan, 11 August 2022 PNP Memorandum "After Surveillance re: Online Lending APPS", 17 March 2022 Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of age 19 af 3 13. Cashcow. 12. Candycash; and On the contrary, in a Certification dated 22 July 2022 of the Corporate Governance and NewCash and Luckyloan. Finance Department (CGFD), the recorded OLPs of Populus are: Pesopop, PesoCow, the laptop screens which they sent to the borrowers including the latter's contacts3. In addition, during the implementation of wSSECD, one hundred seventeen (117) employees of the Respondent were arrested. Also found were the threatening messages on Lastly, in a Joint Affidavit of Technical Officers4 it was stated that during the implementation of the WsSECD, the area was assessed and an onsite digital forensic examination using Incident Response Tools, Visual Examination and technical system and mobile phones revealed the following content: "PAKISABI KAY Rivas Macaso 09129931038, 09204410572 MAGABAYAD NG HANGGANG HINDI KAYO NAGBABAYAD!! MGA Hayop ! naghati hati kayo sa https://facebook.com/JulitaNHS. MGA MAGNANAKAW!! MGA KONSINTIDOR!! MGA HINDI MAPAGKAKATIWALAN!! IBABALANDRA KO KAYO LAHAT pera!! Irereport ko kayo lahat" UTANG! MGA MAGNANAKAW KAYONG GURO !! MGA TEACHERS SA A total of forty-eight 485 messages and screenshots were taken during the implementation IRR. containing words in violation of the SEC MC 18 s. of 2019 in connection to the SEC-FCPA- Thereafter, 27 June 2023, the FinLend Division issued a Cease and Desist Order against the Respondent. The dispositive portion of which reads: offices, units, and online lending platforms, together with its owners, operators, ACTING FOR AND, IN THEIR BEHALF, are hereby ORDERED to immediately CEASE AND DESIST from engaging in, carrying out, any unfair debt collection practices in WHEREFORE, Populus Lending Corporation including its branches, extension, satellite promoters, representatiues, agents AND ANY AND ALL PERSONS CLAIMING AND connection to any lending activity/transaction. OTHER RELATED SHOW CAUSE LETTERS INVOLVING VIOLATIONS OF SEC MEMORANDUM CIRCULARS, AS FOLLOWS: 1. Disclosure Requirements on Advertisements of Financing Companies and Lending Companies and Reporting of Online Lending Platforms (SEC Memorandum Circular No. 19, Series of 2019); and 2. Moratorium on New Online Lending Platforms (SEC Memorandum Circular Nos. 10, series of 2021) 3 Excerpt from the PNP Anti Cybererime Group Quezon City transfer of papers for inquest to the City Prosecu Pasig City P 5 Id Joint Affidavit of Pat Ibn Rashid P. Injal, Pat Rhea May B. Duque and Pat John Emillio P. Cruz, 23 July 2022 secutors' Office, Pasig City, 24 July 2023 Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 20 of 3 On 01 October 2021, records show that the CGFD of SEC issued a Show Cause Letter (SCL Advertisements of Financing Companies and Lending Companies and Reporting of Online Lending Platforms) for its failure to disclose online lending platforms (OLPs) it operated and Authority to Operate a Financing/Lending Company (CA) Number in a conspicuous portion of their Advertisements and Online Lending Platforms. for violation of SEC MC 19 series of 2019 (otherwise known as Disclosure Requirements on for its failure to include its Corporate Name, SEC Registration Number and Certificate of On 25 July 2022, two (2) Show Cause Letters and one (1) Order of Compliance against the Respondent were issued for violation of SEC MC 10 series of 2021 (otherwise known as the Moratorium on New Online Lending Platforms (OLP) for operating OLPs namely: Cashcow, Cashguard, Weagle, Cocopeso, Antwallet, Cashin, Catcash, Takecash, Spendcash, Pesohere, Topeso, Dragonloan, and Candycash; and reiteration of its violation of SEC MC explain why it should not be held liable for violation of MC 19 series of 2019, on 25 July 2022, an Order of Compliance was issued directing the Respondent to comply with the previous directive of the Commission. 19 in connection with the 01 October 2021 SCL. Since Respondent did not show cause/ Position Papers. The Respondent filed its Position Paper and asserted among others that: On 10 August 2022, a conference was heid and Respondent was required to submit 1. As regards SEC MC No. 10-2021, the Company has complied with the moratorium and aims to comply with the Guidelines on the Registration and Licensing of OLPs currently being drafted by your good office; and 2. As regards the provisions of SEC MC No. 19-2019 relating to disclosure and other Pesocow, Newcash, and Luckyloan have all been taken down. reportorial requirements, the Respondent confirm that the OLPs, namely Pesopop, ISSUE: violations of the following: Whether Respondent's Certificate of Authority (CA) should be revoked for numerous 3. SEC Memorandum Circular Nos. 10, series of 2021 2. SEC Memorandum Circular No. 19, Series of 2019; and 1. SEC Memorandum No. 18, series of 2019 RULING: The FinLend Division rules in the affirmative. Before discussing the main issue in this case, the FinLend Division is constrained from giving merit to Respondent's submission of an unsigned Position Paper dated 15 June 2023 under the name of its Compliance Officer.. The Supreme Court has helds that it is the signature that supplies a pleading with legal effect and elevates its status from a mere scrap of paper to that of a court document. Hence, an unsigned Petition is a mere scrap of pape that bears no legal effect. 6 Pastor v. People, G.R. No. 262425, February 22, 2023 Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 21 of 31 THE SUBJECT MESSAGES SEPARATE COMPLAINANTS DO NOT PERTAIN TO THE SUBJECT LOAN BEFORE RESPONDENT NOR ANY OF ITS ALLEGEDLY SENT TO AUTHORIZED HEREIN REPRESENTATIVES. The Respondent, however, has reservations on the submitted documents of the owned, all the messages on the screenshots does not prove that the messages were sent under any authority of Respondent. It further claimed the mobile numbers used were not theirs, neither did the telephone numbers belong to its representatives and Newcash. Complainants stating that although the messages contain the name of the application it We do not agree. apps, such as, NEWCASH, PESOCOW and LUCKYLOAN. bear the name of the Online Lending Platforms which Respondent admittedly owned the Complainants in this case attached screenshots of the messages that violate the said SEc Memorandum Circular and charge such acts against the Respondent since the messages Further, in one of the documents complainants submitted7 screen capture of the "PSP241254046859" and the "Plan G". In another screen capture where the Complainant "Plan G" under the app of PesoCow. Based on records, "PesoCow" is one of the OLPs of the Respondent. Therefore, it cannot refute that the subject messages do not pertain to the subject loan before Respondent. conversation between the alleged agent of "NewCash" did mention a code made his payment, it was indicated the same code "PSP241254046859" with the Lenders The numerous volumes of complaints against Respondent warrants FinLend to consider these formal and informal Complaints as circumstantial evidence. In the case of David u. Senate Electoral Tribunals, the Supreme Court has held: fact or facts from which, taken either singly or collectively, the existence of a Direct evidence is that which proves the fact in dispute without the aid of any inference or presumption; while circumstantial evidence is the proof of particular fact in dispute may be inferred as a necessary or probable consequence. People v. Raganas further defines circumstantial evidence: the fact in issue, which by experience have been found so associated with such fact that in a relation of cause and effect, they lead us to a satisfactory Circumstantial evidence is that which relates to a series of facts other than conclusion. Rule 133, Section 4 of the Revised Rules on Evidence, for instance, stipulates when circumstantial evidence is sufficient to justify a conviction in criminal proceedings 7 Complaint of Jeremy Dandoy, 16 March 2023 8 G.R. No. 221538, September 20, 2016 Populus Lending Corporatior In the matter of. ageZZ of evidence is sufficient for conviction if: Section 4. Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient. Circumstantial a) There is more than one circumstances; b) The facts from which the inferences are derived are C} The combination of all the circumstances is such as to proven; and produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. considering circumstantial facts as valid means for proof in civil and/or administrative Although the Revised Rules on Evidence's sole mention of circumstantial evidence is in circumstantial evidence in other proceedings. There is no rational basis for making the use of circumstantial evidence exclusive to criminal proceedings and for not proceedings. reference to criminal proceedings, this Court has nevertheless sustained the use of may result in deprivation of life, liberty, and property) anchored on the highest In criminal proceedings, circumstantial evidence suffices to sustain a conviction (which standard or proof that our legal system would require, i.e., proof beyond reasonable doubt. If circumstantial evidence suffices for such a high standard, so too may it suffice to satisfy the less stringent standard of proof in administrative and quasi judicial proceedings. (omission ours) reasonable ground that Respondent is doing the acts charged in violation of MC 18. Complaints against Respondent are repeatedly lodged with the FinLend Division with repeated mentions of the OLP owned by the Respondent. To which, FinLend Division has a TO FILING THE COMPLAINT BEFORE REMEDIES AGAINST RESPONDENT PRIOR COMPLAINANTS FAILED TO EXHAUST ALL FINLEND DIVISION substance due to failure of the Complainants to provide sufficient evidence showing that all remedies were exhausted against Respondent prior to its filing before FinLend Division. Respondent contends that the complaint shall be considered as insufficient in form and in We disagree. The complaint form uploaded in the website of SEC provides: XXXX against the company concerned before filing a complaint with the SEC, e.g. initial complaint to the company and the company's response to you, if any! 3. Proof/Evidence attached (showing that you have exhausted your remedies (emphasis supplied) XXXX Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 23 af 31 In the SEC Complaint Form, the Respor nce might have overlooked the words "if any which gives the opportunity to the Complainant, to provide or attach any proof of exhaustion, "if available". Moreover, the Supreme Court held9 that [Aldministrative bodies are not bound by the proceedings, technical rules of procedure and evidence are not strictly applied and administrative due process cannot be fully equated with due process in its strict judicial technical niceties of law and procedure and the rules obtaining in courts of law. Administrative tribunals exercising quasi-judicial powers are unfettered by the rigidity of certain procedural requirements, subject to the observance of fundamental and essential requirements of due process in justiciable cases presented before them. In administrative Sense. As soon as FinLend Division receives separate complaints, these were forwarded via email to the Respondent to give it a chance to settle the respective Complaints. Further, it has been observed from records that Respondent never proposed and/ or attempted to mediate and made attempts for possible amicable settlement during the pendency of the separate Complaints logged before FinLend. Lastly, Show Cause Letters and comment letters were also sent pursuant to the Complaint/s filed. However, Respondent failed to answer. COMPLAINANTS' MEET THE QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE REQUIRED CASES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ALLEGATIONS In administrative proceedings, the quantum of proof necessary for a finding of guilt is substantial evidenceio. More than a mere scintilla of evidence, substantial evidence means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a requirement is satisfied where there is reasonable ground to believe that the respondent is guilty of the act or omission complained of, even if the evidence might not be conclusion, even if other minds equally reasonable might conceivably opine otherwise. The overwhelming11 prove the affirmative allegations in his complaint while respondent has to prove the affirmative allegations in his affirmative defenses and counterclaims." In the case of Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for the Military and Other Law Enforcement must prove his affirmative allegation with substantial evidence; thus, complainant has to Offices v. Butlay12, the Supreme Court has held that "each party in an administrative case been committed. From September 2022 to March 2023, FinLend Division received a total of nine (9) formal complaints and three hundred fifty-Five (355) informal complaints. Based on the content of the numerous documentary evidence and the submissions received by the FinLend Division, we find overwhelming basis to engender a reasonable belief that violations have 11 Diaz v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 203217. July 02, 2018 9 Palao v. Florentino International Inc., G.R. No. 186967, January 18, 2017 Io Macaventa v. Nuyda, A.C. No. 11087, October 12, 2020 12 G.R. No. 219713 (Notice), 19 February 2018 Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Pag ge 24 of 31 Technical rules of procedure are liberally applied to administrative agencies exercising in utter disregard of the evidence on record.14 the most expeditious and inexpensive manner possible.13 Further, findings of fact of administrative agencies and quasi-judicial bodies, which have acquired expertise because their jurisdiction is confined to specific matters, are generally accorded not only great respect but even finality. They are binding upon this Court unless there is a showing of grave abuse of discretion or where it is clearly shown that they were arrived at arbitrarily or quasi-judicial functions. The intention is to resolve disputes brought before such bodies in for the loans. The Respondent likewise failed to attach evidences that would prove its claim that no unfair debt collection practices has been done by any of its agents. Respondent merely denied their ownership of the telephone numbers that sent separate messages to Complainants but failed to answer the real issue in the Complaint, that is, whether the Respondent is doing the unfair debt collection practices in collecting payment The Supreme Court has held that if an allegation is not specifically denied or the denial is a negative pregnant is an ambiguous pleading, since it cannot be ascertained whether it is the fact or only the qualification that is intended to be denied.16 A denial pregnant with the least an implication of some kind favorable to the adverse party. It is a denial pregnant with an admission of the substantial facts alleged in the pleading. Where a fact is alleged with qualifying or modifying language and the words of the allegation as so qualified or modified are literally denied, it has been held that the qualifying circumstances alone are denied while the fact itself is admitted. Guevarra v. Eala, (A.C. No. 7136, August 1, 2007). negative pregnant, the allegation is deemed admittedi5. More so, a denial in the form of a admission of the substantial facts in the pleading responded to which are not squarely denied. It was in effect an admission of the averments it was directed at. Stated otherwise, a negative pregnant is a form of negative expression which carries with it in affirmation or at the messages sent to the Complainants does not come, authored, nor sent under the Respondent failed to convince FinLend Division that it does not engage in any unfair debt collection practices. A mere attachment of their Debt collection manual does not prove that authority of Respondent. Practices) RESPONDENT MEMORANDUM NO. 18, SERIES OF 2019 (Unfair Debt VIOLATED Collection SEC Section 1 of the MC 18, series of 2019 provides: SEC. 1. Unfair Collection Practices. reasonable and legally permissible means to collect amounts due them under the loan agreement, provided that, in the exercise of their rights and performance of their duties, they must observe good faith and reasonable conduct and refrain from engaging in unscrupulous and untoward acts. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing. - FCs, LCs, and TPSPs hired by them may resort to all 15 Banares v. Barican, A.C. No. 1288 July 29, 1974 [4 Marlow Navigation Philippines, Inc. v. Heirs of Ganal, G.R. No. 220168, [June 7, 2017], 810 PHIL 956-969 16 Galofa v. Nee Bon Sing, G.R. No. L-22018, January 17, 1968. 13 De la Cruz v. Department of Education, Culture and Sports - Cordillera Administrative Region, G.R. No. 14673 [January 16, 2004], 464 PHIL 1033-1052 Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 25 of 3 1 the penalties provided herein: the following conduct shall constitute unfair collection practices, which shall be subject to A Use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical D. Disclosure or publication of the names and other personal information of borrowers F. Use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect H. Notwithstanding the financial consumer's consent, contacting the persons in the B. Use of threats to take any action that cannot legally be taken; C. Use of obscenities, insults, or profane language the natural consequence of which is E G. Making contact at unreasonable/inconvenient times or hours, which shall be Communication or threat of communication to any person of loan information, financial consumer's contact list other than those who were named as guarantors or which is known, or which should be known, to be false, including the failure to consent that the said times are the only reasonable opportunities for contact. co-makers shall also constitute unfair debt collection practice. to abuse the financial consumer and/or which amount to a criminal act or offense communicate that the debt is disputed, except as may be allowed under Section 2 of SEC Memorandum Circular No. 18, Series of 2019; any debt or to obtain information concerning a borrower; defined as contact before 6:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m., unless the account is past due for more than fifteen (15) days, or the financial consumer has given express Such consent which shall be evidenced by written, electronic or recorded means, may be given prior to, during, or after the execution of the loan agreement. under applicable laws; or financial consumers who allegedly refuse to pay debts or obligations arising from transactions involving financial products and services; person, reputation, or property of any person; MS. JENNY ROSE ARRIOLA In the case of Complainant Arriola, Respondent shall be held liable for violating MC 18, harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person; Use of threats to take any action that cannot legally be taken; Use of obscenities, insults, or profane language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the financial consumer and/or which amount to a criminal act or offense under applicable laws; and Disclosure or publication of the names and other personal information of borrowers or financial consumers who allegedly refuse to for using these words in employing collection practices: paragraphs A, B, C, & D for the Use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to pay debts or obligations arising from transactions involving financial products and services; MUKHA AT ID MO NGAYON!!! TIGAS NG MUKHA MO SA UTANG MO AH!!!"; "POTANG INA MO WALA KA NGANG BINABAYAD [HJHAYUP KA!!!"; "MAGHINTAY KA POTANG "ANO NA PAASAHIN MO BA AKO DITO SA UTANG MO? KANINA PA AKO NAGHIHINTAY NAKAKAPANG INIT KANA NG ULO AH!! SOBRANG KUNAT MO SA UTANG MO AH!"; "ANO NA BALAK MO SA UTANG MO? GUMAGAWA NA AKO MG (NG) GC SA FACEBOOK SA LAHAT NG KAPALIT LUGAR MO BINABALANDRA KO NA INA MO POPOST KO MUKHAA MO NGAYON!!" Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 26 of 3 MS. ALYSSA ASHLEY CRUZ In the case of Complainant Cruz, Respondent shall be held liable for violating MC 18, the physical person, reputation, or property of any person; Use of threats to take any action that cannot legally be taken for using these words in employing collection practices: paragraphs A & B for the use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm kasamang information mo at pictures sa CIC "Magbayad ka na, wag mo na kameng pilitin na i-report tong account mo na may MS. DONNA JANE GAYLON that cannot legally be taken for using these words in employing collection practices: In the case of Complainant Gaylon, Respondent shall be held liable for violating MC 18, paragraphs A & B for the use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person; Use of threats to take any action ka magbabayad,, aba, wag mo ko subukan, baka sa ibang tao ako mag coordinate sa utang mo.. "Ngayun ka magbayad... ang laki ng halaga na yan, tapos sasabihan mo ko hindi MR. JEREMY WILLIAM DANDOY Use of obscenities, insults, or profane language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the financial consumer and/or which amount to a criminal act or offense under from transactions involving financial products and services; for creating a Facebook NENETTE DANDOY" which was created by an account of Louie Delacruz and for making a Facebook comment made by certain Kenneth Dy which reads: Respondent shall be held liable for violating MC 18, paragraphs A, B, C, & D for the use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person; Use of threats to take any action that cannot legally be taken; applicable laws; and Disclosure or publication of the names and other personal information of borrowers or financial consumers who allegedly refuse to pay debts or obligations arising messenger group with a group name "AMBAGAN SA UTANG O NINAKAW NG ANAK NI PAKIKALA AH KASI ANO YANG ANAK MO GANYAN UGALI MO! KLEPTO!!!: PUTANGINA MO KA IKAKALAT KO TONG PAGMUMUKA MO SELFIE MO NUNG NASAN NA BAYAD MO PUTANGINAMO KA TALAGANG MATIGAS KA HAH!!! WALA "PAKI SABI SA ANAK MONG PALA UTANG MAGBAYAD NA NG UTANG MO! YUNG ANAK MONG MANANG MANA SAYO PAKISABIHAN! WAG MASYADO MAG UMUTANG KA AT ID. TANGINA HINDI KITA TGILAN IPOST NA MAGNANAKAW KA; AKONG IDEDELTE SA MUKHA NG PAMILYA MO HANGGAT DI KA BAYAD PUTANGINA MO HA MS. KRIS NELLY GALARRITA consumers who allegedly refuse to pay debts or obligations arising from transactions involving financial products and services; and Notwithstanding the financial consumer Respondent shall be held liable for violating MC 18, paragraphs D and H for disclosure or publication of the names and other personal information of borrowers or financial Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of Page 27 of 31 consent, contacting the persons in the financial ontact list other than those other than the borrowers contact number: who were named as guarantors or co-makers by sending these messages to the contact "TO FAMILY/FRIENDS/RELATIVE/COLLEAGUE COMPANY: PLAN C - NEW CASH BORROWER'S NAME: GALARRITA CRIS NELLY CAPAROSO ANG TAONG MAY UTANG SA AMIN AY HINDI PA BAYAD!" NAIS PO NAMIN IPABATID SA INYO NA BINIGAY NYA ANG PANGALAN AT KA[NJYANG UTANG. KAILANGAN PO NYANG MAKAPAG BAYAD NGAYONG ARAW. NAMIN MATAWAGAN OR HINDI SYA MAKIPAG COOPERATE SA AMIN. PAKISABI SA TAONG ETO WAG NYA KAMING PAGTAGUAN AT WAG NYANG TAKASAN ANG PATULOY PO KAYONG MAKAKATANGGAP NG MENSAHE AT TAWAG HANGGAT CONTACT NUMBER MO UPANG TAWAGAN NAMIN KUNG SAKALING DI DAW SYA MS. MA THERESA ARAGON involving financial products and services; and Notwithstanding the financial consumer's Respondent shall be held liable for violating SEC MC 18, paragraphs D and H for disclosure or publication of the names and other personal information of borrowers or financial consumers who allegedly refuse to pay debts or obligations arising from transactions consent, contacting the persons in the financial consumer's contact list other than those who were named as guarantors or co-makers by sending these messages to the contact other than the borrowers contact number: information ninyong dalawa dahil nag agree sya terms and condition at ikaw ang nilagay nya para makautang. PAKIUSAP WAG NINYONG KUNSINTIHIN. "PAALALA CO-BORROWER/REFERENCE: Aragon Ma. Theresa Castro Mukhang balak ng talikuran ni Aragon Ma. Theresa Castro, yung obligasyon nya! Hindi makakatulong yan mas lalo nya lang binibigyan ng problema sarili nya pati makakadamay sya ng Contact-Reference nya! Pakisabihan sya na nandito lahat ng MR. ABELARDO SIM MADRIDEJO III action that cannot legally be taken for using these words in employing collection practices: MC 18, paragraphs A & B for the use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person; Use of threats to take any In the case of Complainant Madridejo II, Respondent shall be held liable for violating SEC at obligahin sa PERWISYONG ginagawa mo !" MO DITO siguraduhin mo lang alam to ng pinapsukan mong TRABAHO dahil malalaman to tatawagan to ng CIC DEPT. para sila nilang siguro ang magbayad nito "ano ayaw mo ng mabait na singilan? wala kang paramdam sa lahat ng text at tawag ng mga AGENT sige pa blacklist na kita sa CIC tutal tinataguan mo UTANG MS. MARIA YVETTE FLORES AND MS MARIE ANN DIHAYCO Complainants Flores and Dihayco withdrew their complaints against Respondent. Nevertheless, these withdrawal of Complaints are without prejudice to FinLend Divisior Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 28 of 3] 2016 SEC Rules of Procedure, to wit: capacity to look into the substance of their Complaints pursuant to Rule II, SEC. 2-5 of the Part II does not automatically result in the outright dismissal of the investigation, there is documentary evidence which would tend to establish a prima facie case SEC. 2-5. Effects of Withdrawal of a Complaint. - Withdrawal of a complaint under nor discharge the person subject of the investigation from a possible imposition of any administrative sanction or penalty when there is merit to the charges, or where warranting the continuation of the investigation. In the complaint submitted by the Complainant Flores, messages of the respondent states: hindi na sya makita at makausap. Pakiusap wag ninyong kunsintihin." pero hindi na makausap. You are the one of the contract references of our client. Jamisola We are suspecting our client is hiding from us. Nangako na magbabayad Hindi po kami ang scammer, sya po ang nakakuha ng pera sa aming company at "Kami po ay humihingi ng tulong sa inyo upang makausap si Flores Maria Yvette In connection thereto, Respondent violated SEC MC 18 s. of 2019, specifically paragraph "H" as it states: H. Notwithstanding the financial consumer's consent, contacting the persons in the financial consumer's contact list other than those who were named as guarantors or co-makers shall also constitute unfair debt collection practice. Anent to the complaint of Complainant Dihayco, the FinLend Division finds nothing wrong her Complaint is hereby dismissed. with the wordings as shown in the screen captures attached by the Complainant. Hence, MS. MICHELLE MAE SALORICO ACOP debt or to obtain information concerning a borrower when the Company used a deceptive claims case against the complainant. Respondent shall be held liable shall be held liable for violating SEC MC 18, paragraph F for the use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any means to collect when they said that the Credit Information Corporation will file a small MS. ROWEN REYES that cannot legally be taken and use of obscenities, insults, or profane language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the financial consumer and/or which amount to a Respondent shall be held liable shall be held liable for violating SEC MC 18, paragraphs A, B and C for the use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person; Use of threats to take any action criminal act or offense under applicable laws konsensya at hindi ka marunong mahiya! Sisimulan ka na naming ngayon ipa report IHANDA MO SARILI mo sa sandamakmak na BAD RECORDS na uulanin ka! Walang kusa, kung ayaw mo gumawa ng paraan para makabayad contact ref mob aka sila sumagot sa tawag naming "Kung hindi ka kikilos ibang tao ang TATAWAGAN naming para sa utang mo! Wala kang "HUWAG KANG MAGKAKAMALING HINDI MAGBAYAD! IPAPA PATAY TALAGA KITA! MAG para maka usap wag muna antayin Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 29 af 31 INGAT INGAT NA RIN ANG MGA TAONG NAKATIRA SA ADDRESS NA BINIGAY MO PARA MAKA UTANG! PATI SILA MADADAMAY SA PAGPATAY SAYO KAPAG HINDI KA PARIN NAKABAYAD NGAYONG ARAW NATO NG UTANG MO! IBALIK MO YUNG PERANG INUTANG MO SA ONLINE LENDING! PINAPAKAIN MO SA PAMILYA MO GALING SA NAKAW! SEC MC 18, series of 2019 provides that with respect to Section 1, the number of violations shall be determined on a per loan transaction per complaint basis. Hence individual circumstances of unfair collection shall not be counted separately against the FC/LC if the same pertain to the same loan of the same complainant with the same FC/LC. Complaints filed against the Company totalled to nine (9) complaints which warrants revocation. the following penalties: SEC 5. Applicable Penalties. - Violation of this Circular shall subject FCs and LCs to First Offense: xxxx XXX Third Offense: Subject to the facts, circumstances, and gravity of the offense, the Commission, at its discretion, may impose a Fine of not less than twice the fine for the second offense but not more than P1 Million (1,000,000) Pesos; or Suspension of lending and financing activities for a period of sixty (60) days; or Revocation of Certificate of Authority to operate as a Financing or Lending Company, as appropriate for each circumstance. (emphasis ours) In the matter of Super Cash Lending Corp.17, the Corporate Governance and Finance Department (CGFD) ruled that the revocation of Respondent's (Super Cash Lending) CA is not merely appropriate, but rather necessitated by the gravity and number of its offenses. Further the Department states: A review of all the Complaints, as well as the evidence produced by the complainants reveal in the minds of the borrowers of being shamed on social media by publication of the to collect debts, all in violation of SEC MC 18. xxxx. These unfair collection practices are all too obnoxious to ignore. (omission ours) a common and recurring pattern in the Respondent's collection practices: inculcating fear borrower's loan and personal details; xxxx; xxxx; and use of profane and abusive language (2) THE MORATORIUM ON NEW ONLINE AND REPORTING SERIES OF 2021} RESPONDENT' ADVERTISEMENTS CIRCULAR NO. 19, SERIES OF 2019) AND LENDING MEMORANDUM DISCLOSURE COMPANIES AND LENDING COMPANIES PLATFORMS PLATFORMS (SEC REQUIREMENTS CIRCULAR OF ONLINE LENDING VIOLATED OF MEMORANDUM FINANCING NoS. (SEC 10 ON 1) We find Respondent violated the above-cited SEC MCs for reasons, as follow 17 CGFD Order No. 125, series of 2020 Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 30 of 3 1 Based on Respondent Position Paper dated 10 August 2022, the Company stated: At the outset, the Company manifests that it is only connected with four (4) Online Lending Platforms (OLPs). These are Pesopop, PesoCow, NewCash and LuckyLoan Please note however that currently all four (4) OLPs are non-operational. (emphasis ours) SEC MC 19, series of 2019 provides that the foregoing penalties shall be imposed without officers; as well as to the penalties that may be imposed by the courts or other government Presidential Decree No. 902-A, Republic Act (RA) No. 11232, otherwise known as the regulations being implemented by the Commission, which may include the suspension or revocation of the FCs/LC's primary registration and or/disqualification of its directors and agencies in the exercise of their respective mandates. prejudice to any other penalties that may be imposed by the Commission pursuant to Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines, and all other relevant laws, rules and lending/financing which shall be subject to strict monitoring by the Commission of their compliance with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations; Provided that, this is without prejudice to the outcome of any pending administrative actions involving FCs and LCs. SEC MC 10, series of 2021 provides that only the recorded lending and financing companies with OLPs as of 2 November 2021 may operate and be used for online Based on the digital forensic examination conducted on-site on 22 July 2022, particularly the seized devices, and the voluntary statements of the collection agents, Respondent and its collecting agents were operating and using thirteen (13) online lending applications (OLPs), not four (4) OLPs, such as: 4. Catcash; 1. Pesopop; 3. Dragonloan; 2. Antwallet; 5. Cashguard; 7. Takecash; 8. Pesohere; 9. Weagle: 10. Cocopeso; 11. Cashin; 6. Topeso; 12. Candycash; and 13.Cashcow Simply put, we find that Respondent violated the above-cited SEC Circulars and exercised misrepresentation and deceit. companies; and to encourage legitimate FCs and LCs to operate and flourish in the the Lending Company of Respondent. Once again, in the pursuit of the Commission's mandate to protect the public against rampant abusive practices in the lending industry; to further weed out misbehaving Philippines, there is a cogent reason to revoke of the Certificate of Authority (CA) to Operate W Populus Lending Corporation In the matter of. Page 31 of 31 Service Providers may resort to all reasonable and legally permissible means to collect timely and definite actions to adequately and effectively protect the interest of the borrowing While FinLend Division acknowledges that Financing, Lending and their hired Third-Party amounts due them under the loan agreement, such must be observed in good faith and reasonable conduct and shall refrain from engaging in unscrupulous and untoward acts. Precisely, existing legislation demands from the Commission and this Division to take public. RA No. 9474 or the "Lending Company Regulation Act of 2007" declares as a State policy the need to regulate the establishment of lending companies and place their operation on a additional source of credit; prevent and mitigate, as far as practicable, practices prejudicial to public interest; and lay down the minimum requirements and standards under which sound, efficient and stable condition to: derive the optimum advantages from them as an they may be established and do business. Moreover, RA No. 11765 or the "Financial Products and Services Consumer Protection Act" provides that the State shall implement measures to protect the rights of consumers of financial products and services, including the rights to equitable and fair treatment, disclosure and transparency of financial products and services, data privacy, and timely handling and redress of complaints. language employed by Respondent and its agents. All these taken together has convinced This Division has significantly noted, among others, the number of complaints lodged Corporation should be revoked. against Respondent, the evidences in support thereof, the on-site forensic examination conducted by authorities; and the gravity of the threats, obscenities, insults, and profane the FinLend Division that Respondent's Certificate of Authority (CA) to Operate as a Lending Operate as a Lending Company of Populus Lending Corporation is hereby REVOKED. Let a copy of this Order be published in two (2) newspapers of general circulation and at the SEC website. WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Certificate of Authority (C.A. No. 3066) to Department (ICTD) for further appropriate action. Moreover, this Order shall be disseminated to Respondent, all herein Complainants and all Monitoring Department (CRMD) and the Information and Communications Technology concerned SEC Departments, such as, but not limited to, the Company Registration and SO ORDERED. 14 July 2023. Makati City, Philippines. ATTY. KENNE Assistant'Director JOY A. QUIMIC