Is a survey plan necessary for identification of land?

In recovering a parcel of land, it is essential that the property must be identified.

This is in consonance with Article 434 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines which states that: "In an action to recover, the property must be identified, and the plaintiff must rely on the strength of his title and not on the weakness of the defendant's claim. (n)"

The certificate of title containing the technical description may not be sufficient to prove the identity of your land. This finds support in the case of Gemina vs. Heirs of Espejo Jr. (GR 232682, Sept. 13, 2021) where the Supreme Court stated that:

"If only to shed light on a few questions of law to serve as guide, Article 434 of the Civil Code is controlling in this case. It provides that '[i]n an action to recover, the property must be identified, and the plaintiff must rely on the strength of his title and not on the weakness of the defendant's claim.' It is hornbook doctrine that the entitlement to the possession of real property belongs to its registered owner. However, the registered owner must seek proper judicial remedy and comply with the requisites of the chosen action in order to recover possession of a real property from the occupant who has actual and physical possession thereof. Furthermore, it must be emphasized that the plaintiff must not bank on the weakness of the defendant's title, hence, must establish his title and the identity of the property because of the possibility that neither the plaintiff nor the defendant is entitled or even more the true owner of the property in dispute.

"It appears on record that the identity of the subject property was ascertained by the trial court and the appellate court based on the technical description stated in TCT 93309 and the Judicial Affidavit of Ma. Teresa R. Espejo which merely identified TCT 93809 as one registered in the names of Gerardo and Nenafe. To our mind, the technical description that provides for the metes and bounds of a parcel of land cannot stand alone, much more be considered as foolproof evidence exactly pointing to the subject property. The identity of the disputed land sought to be recovered or of the subject property in this case may be established through a survey plan of the said property. Absent such evidence or any other proof to such effect. We cannot subscribe hook, line and sinker to the conclusion that the subject property had been sufficiently identified."

Applying the above-cited decision, the technical description as reflected in the certificate of title (Torrens Title) which provides for the metes and bounds of the land cannot stand alone in an action for recovery of the same. The identity of the land may be established through a survey plan of the property.

Source: Manila Times

Government forms task force vs real estate scammers

The government has created a national task force that will put an end to scams and other malpractices in the real estate sector.

The Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD) has rolled out the National Task Force on Anti-Illegal Real Estate Practice to end the scams through proactive measures.

The Departments of Justice, Interior and Local Government and Environment and Natural Resources, Land Registration Authority, Professional Regulation Commission, Philippine National Police and National Bureau of Investigation are also part of the task force.

DHSUD chief Eduardo del Rosario said the inter-agency panel aims to end the fraudulent activities in the housing and real estate industry.

“Each of our partner agencies has a crucial role in the implementation of a comprehensive program to address illegal real estate practices,” he said.

Del Rosario said aside from ensuring the elimination of fraudulent real estate practices, the task force will also spearhead activities promoting public awareness and develop capacity-building plans.

Public clamor amid rising cases related to illegal real estate practices led to the task force’s establishment, he said.

Part of the DHSUD’s mandate is to protect the interest and livelihood of licensed brokers and real estate developers, as well as safeguard homebuyers from being duped.

Source: Philstar

Lenders' real estate exposure increases

Philippine banks' exposure to the real estate industry increased by 7.06 percent year on year, with loans accounting for the majority, as of end-March this year.

Banks and trust departments' real estate exposure climbed to P2.85 trillion as of end-March 2022, up from P2.66 trillion a year ago, according to the latest Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas data.

Real estate loans accounted for 86.21 percent of the total, with financial investments accounting for 13.78 percent.

The entire exposure's loan component was up 7.31 percent to P2.46 trillion from P2.29 trillion a year ago. Borrowers buying homes received 36.92 percent of total loans, while those buying commercial properties received 63.07 percent.

Commercial real estate loans saw an uptick of 6.89 percent year on year to P1.55 trillion at the end of March from P1.45 trillion a year earlier. Residential real estate loans, meanwhile, expanded by 8.03 percent year on year to P908.66 billion from P841.07 billion.

Non-performing loans, on the other hand, grew by 12.95 percent to P124.02 billion by the end of March 2022, accelerating from P109.24 billion the previous year. As a result, the overall ratio of non-performing real estate loans to total real estate loans soared to 5.04 percent, wider than the 4.79 percent a year ago.

Real estate securities investments, in the meantime, expanded by 5.57 percent year on year from the end of March 2021 to P393.54 billion.

Banks are safe, the central bank has pointed out earlier, and have sufficient buffers against any potential real estate market downturn.

"The latest results of the real estate stress test exercise show that banks remain adequately capitalized against a potential downturn in the real estate market," Bangko Sentral Governor Benjamin Diokno assured.

He noted that, assuming a 25-percent write-off in real estate exposures, the post-shock capital adequacy ratios of universal and commercial banks, including subsidiary thrift institutions, remain comfortably above the regulatory minimum of 10 percent.

Source: Manila Times