Default of contract by Developer with regard to keeping of animals

My wife and I recently bought a new property from ACM near Imus because it states very clearly in their contract for sale that no animals are permitted to be kept in the sub division. We had previously lived in a very noisy neighbourhood and we wanted to live ina a quiet area.

Since we moved in 7 months ago we found out that there are many neighbours (more than 50) who each have several dogs in cages in their yards that bark continually and also some that keep roosters that wake us up at 5am every morning.

We have had many meetings with the developer and HOA officers and they admit readily that the contract states that there must be no animals but they are not prepared to ask the offending home owners to remove them as they do not want to upset them and also because it is the "Filipino culture". I have run out of patience with this sort of discussion.

I have tried for 7 months to overcome this and now I want to sue them for return of my full payment for my house plus substantial damages for personal distress. My wife and I are now living apart because I cannot bear to live in our new house. It has caused so many fights and we are both too tired to continue.

Can anyone give me some sound legal advice? I would really like to make these people wake up and to uphold their own contract or to pay me the damages I seek. I honestly believe that I am the injured party in this situation and I am prepared to do whatever it takes to get my rights upheld.

hi im not a lawyer i just read your message here, i just want to know if it is indicated in the developers deed of restriction the term animals means in general or have an exception such as pet animals(refers to dogs, cats and birds) under the personal care of owner but not allowed to stray or loose within the subdivision and not for business.because i also lived in a subdivision and i owned a pet dog inside my yard.

The deed of restrictions actually says " No animals (including but not limited to horses, sheep, goats, cattle, carabao or chickens) shall be kept on the premises of any homeowner unless the HOA or the developer has given specific permission for such animals to be kept for purely domestic purpose and not for any commercial reason."

I have had numerous meetings with the developer and the HOA and they have stated very clearly that no homeowner has permission to keep any animals. The DOR refers to all animals including dogs and roosters.

If you are keeping a dog in a cage in your yard it is impossible for that dog to protect your property. All it can do is make a noise and disturb your neighbours. In any case guard dogs are classed as commercial which also is in breach of the DOR.

I will also guarantee that your neighbours who do not own dogs will not appreciate your dog barking and disturbing them. They will probably not complain to you as it is not the Filipino way but they may complain to the HOA or the developer.

Since I started to complain and make my views known the developer has now received 135 complaints from other homeowners who had not previously complained but were clearly feeling bad about the situation.

The practice of keeping dogs continually tied up outside of the house on a leash or housed in a cage in the yard falls way short of the internationally accepted standards. I have visited 71 other countries and I have researched this in depth and the Philippines is the only country that I am aware of that adopts this practice.

Hope this answers your question.

this list: horses, sheep, goats, cattle, carabao or chickens, in my opinion, refers to livestock and animals for eventual sale, not pets.

you can file complaints at the bgy against your neighbors to make them take control of their dogs.