Alleged illegal operations filed against Casa Infini Builders & Realty Company Ltd dismissed

BAGUIO CITY, Philippines— Baguio City Prosecution Office recently dismissed the alleged illegal operations case filed against Casa Infini Builders & Realty Company Ltd. et al by SEC-EIPD, PAOCC, and RACU-COR.

The respondents, CEO Jennylyn Floresca and (24) twenty-four employees and individuals of Casa Infini Builders and Realty Co. Ltd , Casa Infini Properties and Development Corporation, Ray International Philippines Inc doing business under Ray Education Directions Consultancy Services, Be Unrivaled Productions, Sine Cordillera were all cleared of their cases  by Baguio City Prosecution Office against the complainants, the SEC represented by Atty Regina Cajucom-De Guzman, Atty Lester Bautista, and Aldrin Cabungcal for alleged violation of Sections 8,26, and 28 of SRC and Section 3(f) of Financial Products and Services Consumer Protection Act of 2022 in relation to Section 6 of Cybercrime Prevention Act.

The basic rule is that mere allegation is not evidence and is not equivalent to proof. Considering that the evidence is wanting to establish the commission of the crimes being alleged to have been committed, the complaint must be dismissed.

 Through the Casa Infini’s lawyers from Villaraza and Angangco Law Firm, the complaint for Violation of Sec. 8 of the SRC, they find that the evidence presented is insufficient to charge the respondents; Jennylyn Floresca, Jovielyn Mina, Eric Pineda, Jacqueline Melchor, Jerick Sadernas, Ruhhiyah Ymana, and Elmer Diga.

Section 8. Requirement of Registration of Securities.– 8.1  states that Securities shall not be sold or offered for sale or distribution within the Philippines, without a registration statement duly filed with and approved by the Commission. Prior to such sale, information on the securities, in such form and with such substance as the Commission may prescribe, shall be made available to each prospective purchaser.

In an announcement made by the CEO Floresca in the presence of the company lawyers, the complainants failed to allege who, in all the named corporations and who, among the persons belonging to the named corporations should be responsible for registering securities, which are to be sold or offered for sale or distribution within the Philippines. The complainants did not explain who among the respondents should be liable in case of failure to register securities and why said person should be held responsible.

SEC alleged that they were to serve and post (CDO) Cease and Desist Order against Casa Infini, however it was only served to Atty Chilagan, several hours after the arrest. At the time of the event, the respondents had no inkling that there was a CDO issued against them. The prosecutors believe that they were not served with the CDO at the time of the arrest, the respondents indeed were not properly informed of the nature and cause of accusations against them, which is a violation of their Constitutional Right.

The CDO also stated that, “In accordance with the provisions of Section 64.3 of the SRC and Sec. 4-3 of the 2016 Rules of Procedure of the Commission, the parties subject of this CDO may file a verified motion to lift the CDO within (5) five days from receipt thereof. The Motion to Lift CDO must be filed to the Commission En Banc through the Office of General Counsel, meaning they have the opportunity to question the CDO filed by SEC. The prosecutors believe that the filing is premature considering that there is no final determination that programs/investment schemes offered by the respondents are indeed to be considered securities.

As to the complaint for violation of Sections 28,26 of RA 8799, otherwise known as the Securities Regulations Code of the Philippines and Sec. 11 in relation to Sec. 3(f) of the Republic Act. No. 11765 or the financial Products and Services Consumer Protection Act of 2022, the prosecutors find that the evidence presented is insufficient to charge the respondents with the said offenses.

The complainants assumed that there was a buying and selling of securities on the grounds that they saw a woman handing money to one of the respondents and immediately arrested her without even ascertaining what the money was for. There is no proof that the money was intended to buy securities. According to the woman, the money was payment for the property she was buying from Casa Infini.

Sec. 26 of the Securities Regulation Code provides

 Fraudulent Transactions- It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, in connection with the purchase or sale of any securities to:

 26.3 engage in any act, transaction, practice or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person.

 Sec. 11 of the Financial Products and Services Consumer Protection Act of 2022 states:

 Investment Fraud- It shall be unlawful for any person or persons to commit investment fraud as defined in this Act. Any person who commits investment fraud shall be subject to the penalties under Se. 73 of Republic Act No. 8799 and administrative sanctions under Sec. 16 of this Act.

 Sec 3(f) Rep Act No. 11765 defines investment fraud as:

Investment fraud refers to any form of deceptive solicitation of investments from the public. This includes Ponzi schemes and such other schemes involving the promise or offer of profits or returns which are sourced from the investments or contributions made by the investors themselves, boiling room operations, and the offering or selling of investment schemes to the public without a license or permit from the SEC, unless such offering or selling involves exempt securities or are considered as exempt transactions as provided for under existing laws;

The complainants have not been able to present evidence that there was a fraud or deceit committed against any person, the mere fact they attended the seminar and claim that there were a lot of attendees but none of the attendees supported their claim that they, Casa Infini was selling securities, defrauded, deceived by the respondents. There is no sufficient evidence to charge the respondents for violation of Securities Regulations code of the Philippines and Financial Products and Services Consumer Protection Act of 2022, the complaint for Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 has no leg to stand on.

The incident happened on June 10, 2023 at Orchard Hotel. Twenty-four(24) employees and other individuals, and CEO Jennylyn Floresca were arrested in an entrapment operation led by SEC-EIPD, PAOCC, and RACU-COR for an alleged claim of Violation of Sections 8,26, and 28 of SRC and Section 3(f) of Financial Products and Services Consumer Protection Act of 2022 in relation to Section 6 of Cybercrime Prevention Act. The operation caused a great commotion in an important event of the company, especially there were seniors, children, and PWD. After the arrest, respondents were in the custody of the arresting officers for (40) forty hours, which is a violation under the provision of Article 125 as stated that it should be (36) thirty-six hours detention only.

Art. 125. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities. – The penalties provided in the next preceding article shall be imposed upon the public officer or employee who shall detain any person for some legal ground and shall fail to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within the period of: twelve (12) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by light penalties, or their equivalent; eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by correctional penalties, or their equivalent; and thirty-six (36) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by afflictive or capital penalties, or their equivalent.

 The complainants did not even ascertain who they really should file charges against. Innocent persons were dragged and they had to spend two nights at the police station and were only released for further investigation during the conduct of the inquest proceedings. The complainants should have exercised more prudence and diligence and should have conducted thorough investigation before charging all the respondents and dragging them into the complaint. There was no even explanation why it took them days to refer the matter to the inquest prosecutor. It was shown that there was no coordination with any of the inquest prosecutors immediately after the arrests were made.

“Justice is better served often by tempering it with mercy and a humble dose of common sense.”

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the undersigned hereby respectfully recommends that the complaint against all the respondents be dismissed.

 The respondents believe that the petition, which allegedly sparked the instant case was clothed with doubt, malice, and personal vendetta as the alleged petition was filed by Atty. Camtugan, who had been openly hostile and antagonistic with the business and the person of Floresca, who had filed criminal cases against Atty. Camtugan for Cyber libel and disbarment complaints.

The petition of Atty Camtugan was not based on the latter’s personal knowledge and should not have been given due course early on since he has never been privy to any of the businesses conducted by the respondents. Atty. Camtugan’s claims that the respondents were allegedly “scam” or “frauds” are all hearsay. The respondents claim that the actions taken by the SEC will regard the petition filed by Atty. Camtugan against the respondents were driven by partiality of Atty. Camtugan II and Atty. Cajucom’s close friendship

Impact on Casa Infini business

“The impact of SEC CDO grossly affected our credential approved loans from commercial banks and other institutions in the amount of more or less 500M pending and on hold project finance approvals. Therefore, giving us grueling financial management and project based operations,” Floresca stated.

“Because of this, our license to sell our luxury condominium project in Baguio City was suspended until the matter was resolved.  Additionally, as a member of Chamber of Real Estate & Builders’ Association, Incorporated, we were suspended as a member in good standing and definitely restricting our rights and privileges until the Board thinks otherwise and allegedly because of gross unethical conduct and violation of the code of ethics of the real estate industry practice and acts prejudicial to the best interest, image or reputation of CREBA Baguio Chapter without yet the resolution of the court and a clear case of the prosecution. We were already accused to reflect on our actions and familiarize ourselves with the bylaws of the organization as well as uphold its values.

“Excruciatingly, most of our banks closed and were restricted that paralyzed our sound system of our operations and there are more corporate damages that have transpired not only me as a CEO, but including my employees and our respective families. We suffered from sleepless nights, emotional and mental stress. We have been in this business for 11 years and since then, we had zero complainant up to this day, and there was no client defrauded.

“However, since the constitutional rights of 24 individuals were glaringly abused as decided by the prosecution, we reserve the right to file charges criminally, civilly, and administratively to liable personnel and actors.

“Furthermore, now that the case was dismissed, we will be maximizing our licenses to the betterment of the community and to deliver our mission and vision which is to build wealth to Filipino people by giving them happy homes,” Floresca expressed.

This dismissal is a testament to the fact that Casa Infini has always adhered to the highest standards of compliance with all relevant rules, laws, and regulations operate our business with utmost integrity, transparency and good faith.

“We want to thank everyone who has supported us during the pendency of these charges, and we assure you that we will not renege on our existing obligations with you as our partners,” Floresca concluded.

For Casa Infini Builders & Realty Co, Ltd and Casa Infini Properties & Development Corp., she added that they plan to build three commercial buildings, focus on land reclassification and develop AirBnB type vacation villas all over Northern Luzon; accenting on the high education of owning a self-liquidating asset that enables a simple Filipino to buy an asset or a property without cashout.

Despite the allegations, the company stands firm on the ground and even created more projects to fulfill their mission to help Filipinos in building their dream homes. The following are the events of the company:

The turnover ceremony of Alapang, La Trinidad Benguet Property on June 25, 2023; the ground breaking of Outlook Drive, Baguio City property on July 28, 2023; open house at RNJ Hotel Vera Hills, 2nd Road Quezon Hill, Baguio City on August 5, 2023;

Mr. BFC Benguet Fitness Center ( Muscle Showdown For a Cause – Open Invitation Body Building Competition (a gym owned and managed by Raffy Floresca) on August 19 ,2023 at the Baguio Convention Center; Saleng Spa and Wellness Towers Actual Groundbreaking towards the end of 2023.

Casa Infini Builders & Realty Co. Ltd will celebrate its 10th year & 11th anniversary on August 26, 2023 and November, 2023 respectively in Baguio City.