Dear Atty. Gab,

Musta Atty! My name is Ricardo Cruz. Our family runs a small manufacturing business, Cruz Crafts Inc., here in Quezon City. We’ve been operational for about 15 years. Like many businesses, we’ve hit some rough patches recently due to rising costs and slower sales. A few years back, around 2008, we took out a significant business loan of about PHP 5 million from MetroBank to upgrade our equipment.

To secure this loan, the bank required additional collateral beyond the company’s assets. My wife and I agreed to mortgage our family home, which is under our personal names, not the corporation’s. This house is where we live, but we also use a room as a home office for some administrative tasks related to Cruz Crafts Inc., especially when we need to work late.

Now, things are quite tight, and we’re seriously considering filing for corporate rehabilitation for Cruz Crafts Inc. to give the business a chance to recover. I’ve heard that when a company files for rehabilitation, a court can issue a ‘Stay Order’ which stops creditors, like the bank, from collecting debts or foreclosing on the company’s assets for a certain period.

My big worry is our family home. Since the house is mortgaged for the company’s loan, but owned by me and my wife personally, will the Stay Order also protect our home from foreclosure by MetroBank? Or can the bank still go after our house even if Cruz Crafts Inc. is under rehabilitation? I vaguely remember hearing that maybe newer laws offer more protection, but I’m completely lost. Losing our home would be devastating. Can you shed some light on whether our personal property used as collateral is covered by a corporate rehabilitation Stay Order?

Salamat po for your guidance,

Ricardo Cruz

---

Dear Ricardo,

Thank you for reaching out. I understand your concern about your family home, especially during this challenging time for your business, Cruz Crafts Inc. It’s a stressful situation when personal assets are intertwined with business liabilities.

In essence, corporate rehabilitation provides a legal mechanism for financially distressed companies to suspend debt payments while working towards recovery under a court-approved plan. A key feature is the Stay Order, which generally halts actions against the debtor corporation’s assets. However, the protection offered by a Stay Order has traditionally been limited, particularly concerning properties owned by individuals (like you and your wife) even if mortgaged to secure the company’s debt (known as third-party or accommodation mortgages). While newer legislation, the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act (FRIA) of 2010, introduced potential exceptions, the default rule, especially under the older rules likely applicable given your loan timing, is that such personal properties are generally not shielded from foreclosure by the corporate Stay Order.

Securing Your Home: Third-Party Mortgages and Corporate Rehabilitation

Understanding the scope of a Stay Order is crucial in corporate rehabilitation proceedings. The primary purpose of a Stay Order is to give the debtor corporation breathing room to reorganize and recover without the pressure of immediate creditor actions against its own assets. Historically, under the rules governing rehabilitation proceedings before the FRIA took effect (specifically, the 2000 Interim Rules of Procedure on Corporate Rehabilitation), the protection was explicitly defined.

The Interim Rules stated that one effect of a Stay Order was the suspension of enforcement of claims against the debtor, its guarantors, and sureties not solidarily liable with the debtor. Critically, these rules did not extend this protection to assets owned by third parties who had mortgaged their property for the debtor’s benefit. Your situation, where you and your wife mortgaged your personal home for Cruz Crafts Inc.’s loan, falls squarely into this category – you are third-party mortgagors relative to the corporation’s debt.

The Supreme Court has clarified this limitation under the pre-FRIA framework, stating that rehabilitation courts acting under the Interim Rules lacked the authority to prevent foreclosure on properties belonging to such third-party mortgagors.

Nowhere in the Interim Rules is the rehabilitation court authorized to suspend foreclosure proceedings against properties of third-party mortgagors.

This principle holds true regardless of whether the third-party property is used in the debtor’s operations. The focus was strictly on the ownership of the asset. If it wasn’t owned by the debtor corporation, it wasn’t shielded by the Stay Order issued under those rules.

Thus, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the rehabilitation court to suspend foreclosure proceedings against properties of third-party mortgagors.

The legal landscape shifted somewhat with the enactment of the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act (FRIA) of 2010 (Republic Act No. 10142). Recognizing that sometimes third-party property might be essential for a successful rehabilitation, FRIA introduced a potential exception. Section 18(c) provides that a Stay Order generally does not apply to claims against third-party mortgagors, unless a specific condition is met.

The Stay or Suspension Order shall not apply: … (c) to the enforcement of claims against sureties and other persons solidarily liable with the debtor, and third party or accommodation mortgagors as well as issuers of letters of credit, unless the property subject of the third party or accommodation mortgage is necessary for the rehabilitation of the debtor as determined by the court upon recommendation by the rehabilitation receiver;

This means that under FRIA, there is now a legal basis to request the court to include a third-party mortgaged property (like your home) within the scope of the Stay Order. However, this is not automatic. You would need to convince the court, based on the rehabilitation receiver’s recommendation, that your home is necessary for the successful rehabilitation of Cruz Crafts Inc. Simply using a room as a home office might not meet this high threshold; typically, this refers to property indispensable to the core operations or viability of the business itself.

It’s also important to consider the timing. FRIA generally applies to petitions filed after its effectivity and to further proceedings in ongoing cases, unless doing so would be unfeasible or unjust. It cannot be used to retroactively expand the scope of a Stay Order issued years ago under the old Interim Rules.

This Act shall govern all petitions filed after it has taken effect. All further proceedings in insolvency, suspension of payments and rehabilitation cases then pending, except to the extent that in the opinion of the court their application would not be feasible or would work injustice, in which event the procedures set forth in prior laws and regulations shall apply.

Therefore, while FRIA offers a potential avenue that didn’t exist under the Interim Rules, securing protection for your home via a Stay Order remains an exception rather than the rule, requiring specific proof of necessity for the company’s survival. The bank’s right to foreclose on a third-party mortgage remains the general principle.

Practical Advice for Your Situation

• Determine Applicable Law: Confirm the exact date your loan and mortgage agreements were signed. Since the loan was from 2008, actions related to it might still arguably fall under pre-FRIA interpretations unless a new rehabilitation case is filed now under FRIA rules. Legal counsel can clarify which rules would most likely govern.
• Review Agreements: Carefully re-read your loan and mortgage contracts with the bank. Understand the specific clauses regarding default, foreclosure, and your personal liability versus the corporation’s.
• Consult Specialized Counsel: Before filing for rehabilitation, consult a lawyer specializing in corporate rehabilitation and insolvency. They can assess the specific risks to your personal assets based on your documents and circumstances.
• Negotiate with the Bank: Explore direct negotiations with MetroBank for loan restructuring or modified payment terms before considering formal rehabilitation. This might offer a path to protect your home without court intervention.
• Assess ‘Necessity’ Argument (FRIA): If rehabilitation under FRIA is pursued, realistically evaluate if you can strongly argue and prove that your entire home (not just the office space) is indispensable for Cruz Crafts Inc.’s rehabilitation. This is a high bar to clear.
• Evaluate Rehabilitation Feasibility: Consider whether the rehabilitation plan for Cruz Crafts Inc. remains viable if the bank can potentially foreclose on your home, which secures a significant portion of its debt. An unfeasible plan is likely to be dismissed by the court.
• Separate Personal and Corporate Finances: Moving forward, strive to maintain clear distinctions between personal assets/finances and those of the corporation to minimize future risks of this nature.
• Consider Alternatives: Discuss other potential insolvency remedies or workout arrangements with your legal counsel that might be more suitable or offer different protections.

Ricardo, facing potential business failure coupled with the risk to your family home is undoubtedly difficult. The legal distinction between the corporation and its owners is significant in rehabilitation law, especially concerning assets used as collateral. While FRIA introduced a narrow exception, relying on it to protect your home is uncertain. Proactive negotiation with the bank and thorough legal assessment before filing any court action are your most prudent next steps.

Hope this helps!

Sincerely,
Atty. Gabriel Ablola

For more specific legal assistance related to your situation, please contact me through gaboogle.com or via email at connect@gaboogle.com.

Disclaimer: This correspondence is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal guidance tailored to your situation, please schedule a formal consultation.