CEBU City Councilor Jerry Guardo and his wife, Ailien, were charged for acts punishable under Article 318 of the Revised Penal Code after they reportedly failed to deliver a housing unit that their company had sold to a private individual.
In a resolution, Prosecutor Mario Ley Gidayawan found sufficient ground to charge the Guardo couple for other deceits and not estafa as originally filed by the complainant.
“There is sufficient ground to charge respondent Jerry Guardo not with estafa, but for other deceits under Article 318 of the Revised Penal Code,” read a portion of the resolution.
The charge was filed by Aldrina Alonzo, who purchased a house-and-lot unit in a proposed subdivision developed by Jacar Enterprises. Alonzo said construction had not begun despite full payment of equity.
In her complaint, Alonzo alleged that she personally transacted with Guardo and paid the P20,000 reservation fee for her unit in Phase 2 of Amber Homes in Talisay City.
On Sept. 10, 2015, she began paying her equity through post-dated checks amounting to P480,000, since she was told the construction of the house would only begin once she fully paid the equity.
Alonzo said Guardo told her that a deed of conditional sale would be issued to her after full payment of the equity, but after she completed the payment last August 2017, the latter no longer answered her calls.
The situation prompted her to visit Guardo at his office in City Hall, where she handed him the notice of recession of the contract they earlier entered into.
In his answer to the complaint, Guardo said the complaint should be dismissed for lack of cause of action since the transaction is between Jacar Enterprises and Alonzo, and the complainant failed to prove that he has a direct relation with the firm.
However, Gidayawan said that while Guardo claimed that the transaction was between Jacar and Alonzo, he did not deny signing the notice of recession and the schedule of payment for the refund.
“In the ordinary course of things, one would not just acknowledge liability of paying another unless he had an obligation under a specific transaction. Thus, the presumption is that Mr. Guardo is the proprietor of Jacar since he had assumed its liability of paying Ms. Alonzo,” read a portion of the resolution. (RVC)