Anti-fencing law help!

Hi,

 Need your legal advice!

Nancy loaned money and pawned her sidecar to me. A written document with Nancy's signature is made that she is pawning her sidecar. However after 3 months she was not able to pay the said loan. Today, a woman went to our house claiming she is the true owner of the sidecar, she is accompanied by a baranggay official from her baranggay as well as a policeman stating that they will charge me of anti-fencing law. This woman is claiming that the sidecar pawned to me is not yet fully paid and that Nancy bought her the sidecar on installament basis but Nancy failed to pay her that is why she is claiming the sidecar. I honestly did not know the transaction between Nancy and the said woman. I asked the woman any proof of her ownership and any proof that Nancy bought her the sidecar on installment basis. The only proof she gave me is a receipt that she bought a sidecar. She treatens to sue me a anti-fencing case. The woman told me that she will claim the sidecar and I should file a case against Nancy.  

What step should I take?
Can the woman really get the sidecar?
What steps should I file for Nancy?
What happens to our mortgage agreement?

I haven't heared anything called "anti-fencing"
but - asuming the woman tell the truth - she has the right to take the sidecar, because she had it as COLLATERAL BEFORE you.

In the Philippines it's much less protections in such situations. (In my home country the collateral has to be sold and the borrower (=Nancy) get the part higher than the dept. And people in your position can EASY check people as Nancy BEFORE you lend out any money.) In the Philippines there is a SMALL protection for the borrower (=Nancy) when it's REAL ESTATE. Then the collateral can be BOUGHT BACK (within a year from it's sold) for a STATIC amount, which depend of how big the UNPAID DEPT was, NOT depending of the value of the collateral. I don't know if there are any such buy back possibility for sidecars too. Check with the baranggay or PAO -if no one tell it here


A. You can try to buy the sidecar from the woman for what Nancy's dept was to HER, so you get SOME of your collateral value. Perhaps you can make the baranggay assist you with that.
B. UNDEPENDING of if you can buy the sidecar for the dept or not, you have a case against Nancy where you can demand what you have lost, because she falsely gave you a collateral, which couldn't be used as that, because it was collateral allready. The baranggay captain can assist you with this, at least to start it.

I suggest you try to get A + B handled as ONE case by the Baranggay captain.

"What happens to our mortgage agreement?"
YOU can still refer to it,
but NANCY have BROKEN the deal by giving you a false collateral, so SHE CAN'T refer to it to get the lower interest.
Depending of how high the agreed interest is, but if it's low BECAUSE you got collateral, then it's fair you get a much higher interest until you have got your money worth back.
Undepending of if the interest will stay the same or become higher, you are entitled to get interest until the dept is fully paid.
Bring it up when you cimmunocate with the Baranggay Captain, if you want a raised interest too.

Thanks Lunkan! is it possible that I asked for supporting documents stating that the woman is really the owner of the sidecar before I give the sidecar? She only showed a receipt indicating a sidecar purchase and she does not have any proof that she sold it to Nancy on installment basis besides a notebook with notes of date of payment (no signature acknowledgement from Nancy)

pepperito wrote:Thanks Lunkan! is it possible that I asked for supporting documents stating that the woman is really the owner of the sidecar before I give the sidecar? She only showed a receipt indicating a sidecar purchase and she does not have any proof that she sold it to Nancy on installment basis besides a notebook with notes of date of payment (no signature acknowledgement from Nancy)

You can start asking Nancy for the truth to get hints what can be possible for you.
Bring it up with the Batanggay Captain you want to see proof that the woman is the owner. BUT it seem the Baranggay Captain have found the documents proof enough, when he gave the decision she could fetch it from you. A bit odd though you weren't called to the baranggay office BEFORE the decision, but perhaps the BC found the case so clear so he didn't found hearing you would change the case that WOMAN filed. But perhaps the BC can ADJUST the decision some by YOU file a case to the BC adding your side.

I believe the decisions will be:
/the woman KEEP the sidecar.
/PERHAPS you get right to buy it for Nancy's dept amount.
/Nancy will sure have a dept to you. Unclear if you can get something else instead of the sidecar as collateral or some other compensation. And unclear if the BC will find the interest can be raised because of the false collateral.