Oral partition of property is valid

Article 1079 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines provides for the meaning of partition, which states that:

"Art. 1079. Partition, in general, is the separation, division and assignment of a thing held in common among those to whom it may belong. The thing itself may be divided, or its value."

"Every act which is intended to put an end to indivision among co-heirs and legatees or devisees is deemed to be a partition. Partition may be inferred from circumstances sufficiently strong to support the presumption. Thus, after a long possession in severalty, a deed of partition may be presumed." (Spouses Marcos v. Heirs of Bangi, GR 185745, Oct. 15, 2014, penned by Associate Justice Bienvenido Reyes)

In the case of Espinas-Lanuza v. Luna, Jr., GR 229775, March 11, 2019, penned by Associate Justice Jose Reyes Jr., it is stated that:

"An oral partition by the heirs is valid if no creditors are affected. Even the requirement of a written memorandum under the statute of frauds does not apply considering that such a transaction is not a conveyance of property resulting in change of ownership but merely a designation and segregation of that part which belongs to each heir."

Citing an earlier case, the high court explained in Espinas-Lanuza v. Luna that:

"On general principle, independent and in spite of the statute of frauds, courts of equity have enforced oral partition when it has been completely or partly performed.

"Regardless of whether a parol* partition or agreement to partition is valid and enforceable at law, equity will in proper cases, where the parol partition has actually been consummated by the taking of possession in severalty and the exercise of ownership by the parties of the respective portions set off to each, recognize and enforce such parol partition and the rights of the parties thereunder.

Thus, it has been held or stated in a number of cases involving an oral partition under which the parties went into possession, exercised acts of ownership, or otherwise partly performed the partition agreement, that equity will confirm such partition and in a proper case decree title in accordance with the possession in severalty."

In many families, the issue of property inheritance often causes confusion and conflict, especially when the division of property is not formalized through a written agreement.

For an oral partition to be valid, it must be made with the consent of all the heirs. The oral partition is considered valid if the heirs have already taken possession of their respective shares in the property. If the heirs physically possess their designated portions, this can serve as proof of their agreement to the oral partition.

*Parol partitions are oral agreements between co-tenants to informally partition land.

Source: Manila Times

Airbnb scams: criminal activity on big tech platforms

Big tech sharing economy platforms like Airbnb and Uber are marketed as trustworthy, but a new book by a South African media scholar argues that they are highly vulnerable to scammers who spread delusive speech (a form of disinformation, designed to deceive by criminal intent).

Julie Reid draws from first-hand accounts and over 600 cases from around the world of victims lured into scams or physical danger by fake Airbnb reviews and listings, providing a detailed case study. We asked her five questions about her book.

HOW DO THE SCAMS WORK?

Airbnb is the world’s largest accommodation-sharing platform. It connects property owners who want to rent out their homes with travelers looking for alternatives to traditional hotels. The company recently expanded its offering and now facilitates the booking of other services like personal trainers or caterers along with accommodation rentals.

Airbnb scams happen in several ways. The most obvious is the phantom listing scam. The scammer constructs a fake but attractive listing on Airbnb and accepts payments from unsuspecting guests. It’s only when guests arrive at the address that they discover the property doesn’t exist. Scammers have also learned to navigate around Airbnb’s review system. Fake positive reviews are produced by scam host networks, making them appear to be authentic.

Bait and switch scams are also common. Here the scam “host” contacts the guest on check-in day claiming the reserved property is suddenly unavailable. They offer alternative accommodation, which the guest later discovers is not as good as the original property they’ve paid for (which is often fictional). The guest pays for a premium rental but is forced to stay in a property that might be unsafe, unclean, or missing amenities.

Scam hosts use misleading, plagiarized, or artificial intelligence (AI)-generated property images and fake descriptions along with fake personal profiles and aliases.

Delusive tactics also redirect guests away from the secure Airbnb payment portal to alternative payment methods. The scammer disappears with the money.

But the danger isn’t limited to financial crimes. The platform’s business model is premised on staying in a stranger’s private property, which can put guests’ personal safety at risk.

Criminal hosts can lure targets into dangerous environments. Once checked in, guests are isolated from public view, housed in a property to which the host has access.

I’ve assessed multiple cases where Airbnb guests were assaulted, robbed with no signs of forced entry, raped, murdered, made victims of sexploitation, extortion or human trafficking, or held hostage.

HOW DOES THE DISINFORMATION WORK?

I consider delusive speech a subset of disinformation because it presents intentionally misleading content at scale. But it differs from disinformation in its intentions. It isn’t done to promote a particular cause or gain ideological, military, or political advantage. Delusive speech is motivated purely by criminal intent or nefarious financial gain.

Delusive speech works by hiding in plain sight on platforms we think we can trust, like Airbnb, Booking.com, Uber, and others. Often, it’s indistinguishable from honest and genuine content. When users browse Airbnb listings for holiday accommodation, they’re presented with numerous options. A fake property listing looks, sounds, and feels exactly the same as a genuine one.

This happens on a platform that has built its brand narrative around the concept of trust. Scammers exploit these digital contexts of pre-established trust. When users log on to popular e-commerce or sharing economy platforms, they’re already primed to pay for something. It becomes relatively easy for scammers to delude targets into parting with their money.

WHAT CAN AIRBNB DO ABOUT IT?

Airbnb already has several trust and safety mechanisms in place. They include rapid response teams, an expert Trust and Safety Advisory Coalition and travel insurance for guests. The company claims to be trying to stop fake listings with machine learning technology.

Sadly, none of these mechanisms work perfectly. While Airbnb promises to verify properties and host identities, my analysis exposes flaws in these systems. Scammers easily bypass verification tiers through aliases, forged documents and AI-generated material. Airbnb has admitted it needs to address the failures of its verification processes.

My analysis uncovered how scammed guests are routinely denied the opportunity to post reviews of problematic rentals. Opaque terms of service and content policies allow Airbnb customer service agents and executives to justify censoring negative but honest guest reviews.

This means dangerous and fraudulent activity goes publicly unreported and unreviewed, leaving future guests vulnerable. I argue that Airbnb’s review curation mechanisms should be revamped according to internationally recognized human rights frameworks that protect freedom of speech. This would allow for more honest accounts of guest experiences and create a safer online environment.

Perhaps the most common complaint I encountered was that Airbnb doesn’t remove offending listings from its platform, even after a scammed guest provides evidence that the listing was posted by a fraudster. Airbnb must develop an urgent protocol for swiftly removing offending listings when discovered, to protect future guests from falling victim to the same scam trap.

WHAT CAN USERS DO TO PROTECT THEMSELVES?

Travelers can protect themselves by being extra cautious. Ask around. Seek recommendations from people you know and trust, and who can verify that the property you are booking actually exists and that the host is trustworthy.

If that isn’t an option, consider an established hotel instead, but book directly with the hotel and not via third party sites like Booking.com where listings can easily be faked. Check on Google Street View to make sure the property is where it claims to be.

Either way, have a Plan B in case things go wrong. Prepare ahead of your trip by deciding what you will do if you find yourself in an unsafe situation. And always, always, buy travel insurance.

IS IT PART OF A BIGGER PROBLEM?

I assessed several digitally initiated scam categories in this book. While my main case study focused on Airbnb, the problem of delusive speech online isn’t unique to this platform. Delusive speech is now carried by all major tech platforms integral to everyday life. In the book, I also highlight how scammers operate in every corner of the internet, including dating apps like Grindr, Tinder and Hinge; ride-sharing services like Uber, Lyft, and Bolt; travel sites like Booking.com and Hotels.com; and social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, among others.

I hope that these examples will boost awareness of the risks of using these apps and sites.

Julie Reid is a professor at the University of South Africa.

Source: Business World

Purchase money resulting trust

Question:

My parents bought a certain land, but the title was transferred to my brother. We are all living in the house built on said property. When my brother died, his heirs claimed ownership over the property, arguing that their father was the owner as reflected in the Torrens Title. My mother reminded them that their father has no financial capacity to purchase the land. Who is the real owner of said property? Can my parents present proof that my brother is not its real owner?

This is a classic case where legal ownership (as shown in the Torrens Title) and equitable ownership (who actually paid for the property) are in conflict. Here's how the situation breaks down legally and what options may be available:

Legal Context

Under the Torrens system, the person whose name appears on the certificate of title is presumed to be the lawful owner of the property. However, this presumption is not absolute and can be overturned with clear, strong, and convincing evidence.

Key Facts in Your Case

1. Title is under your brothers name – so, on paper, he's the legal owner.

2. Your parents paid for the land – they're claiming they are the true buyers.

3. Everyone lived in the house together – shows cohabitation but not necessarily ownership.

4. Your brother had no financial capacity to purchase the land – this is a critical point if provable.

5. Now that your brother is dead, his heirs are asserting ownership – they are legally standing in his shoes.

   
   

What Your Parents Can Do

Yes, your parents can present evidence to rebut the title in Jeff's name and establish a "resulting trust" or "implied trust." This is a legal concept where:

A trust is presumed in favor of the real buyer (your parents) if they can show they provided the purchase money, and the title was placed in another’s name for convenience or other reasons.

Types of Proof Your Parents Should Gather:

• Receipts or proof of payment (checks, bank withdrawals, sale agreements)

• Deed of sale naming them as the real buyers

• Affidavits from witnesses (e.g., the seller, neighbors, family, etc.)

• Lack of income or financial capacity of Jeff at the time of purchase

• Any written or oral admission by Jeff that he was not the real owner

  
  

Possible Legal Remedies

If amicable settlement fails, your parents may:

1. File a case in court to establish a resulting trust or reconveyance of the property.

2. Argue that Jeff held the title in trust for your parents, not in his own right.

3. Ask the court to order the cancellation of the title in Jeff’s name and issue a new one in your parents’ name.

   
   

Important Caveats

• Statute of limitations may apply depending on how long ago this happened. Usually, it's 10 years from discovery of fraud or denial of the trust.

• The burden of proof is on your parents since the title is not in their name.

• This can be a long and potentially costly legal battle, so legal advice is a must.

Next Steps

1. Consult a lawyer specializing in property or family law.

2. Start collecting any and all documentation that proves your parents paid for the land.

3. Try amicable settlement or mediation with your brother's heirs, if possible.

Source: Ziggurat Real Estate