Addressing Harassment and Threats from Online Lending Applications Under Philippine Law

Dear Attorney,

I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing to seek legal guidance regarding a deeply troubling situation involving certain online lending applications. Over the past few weeks, these lending apps—or the individuals or entities behind them—have been engaging in harassing behavior. They have used multiple unknown numbers to send threatening messages, including alarming statements that suggest potential harm to my person. Their conduct goes beyond mere collection calls; it has escalated to what I believe are credible threats to my safety and well-being.

I am seeking clarity on how best to protect myself and to pursue any necessary legal remedies against those responsible. I would appreciate any advice you could offer on the application of relevant Philippine laws, such as potential violations of the Revised Penal Code, the Data Privacy Act of 2012, and other related statutes or regulations regarding lending practices and consumer protection.

Thank you for your time and expertise. I look forward to your guidance on how to move forward with this matter.

Sincerely,
A Concerned Borrower

---

LEGAL ARTICLE: A COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OF LEGAL REMEDIES AND PROTECTIONS AGAINST HARASSMENT AND THREATS FROM ONLINE LENDING APPLICATIONS IN THE PHILIPPINES

I. Introduction
The rapid growth of technology and the fintech industry has brought convenience to many Filipino consumers, especially those in need of immediate financial assistance. Alongside these benefits, however, are emerging abuses by certain entities operating online lending applications. One of the most alarming issues is the potential for borrowers to experience harassment, repeated phone calls, and severe threats to life and safety. This article provides a thorough overview of the legal landscape and remedies available under Philippine law for individuals who may have been subjected to this conduct.

II. Nature of Online Lending Applications
Online lending applications, often called “fintech lenders,” facilitate quick loan approvals through digital platforms. They collect personal data—names, addresses, employment information, contact lists, and sometimes access to a borrower’s mobile device—ostensibly to assess creditworthiness. Unfortunately, some unscrupulous providers misuse these data.

1. Regulatory Framework

   • Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) oversees banks, financial institutions, and certain fintech operations.
   • Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) supervises lending companies and financing entities. Under the Lending Company Regulation Act of 2007 (Republic Act No. 9474), lending companies must register with the SEC.
   • National Privacy Commission (NPC) administers and enforces the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10173), ensuring personal data protection.

2. Potential Points of Abuse

   • Unlawful Data Collection and Processing: Accessing contact lists and pictures without genuine consent.
   • Harassment Methods: Repeated phone calls, threat messages, public shaming in social media groups, or unauthorized disclosure of private information to family, friends, or colleagues.
   • Threats to Life and Property: Statements suggesting bodily harm, harm to reputation, or damage to property if repayment demands are not met immediately.

III. Harassment and Threats Under the Revised Penal Code
The Revised Penal Code (RPC) provides various criminal offenses that may be relevant when an online lending app or its agents threaten the life or safety of a borrower.

1. Grave Threats (Articles 282–283, RPC)

   • If a person threatens another with the infliction of a wrong amounting to a crime, such as bodily harm or worse, it may constitute Grave Threats.
   • Even if no harm ultimately occurs, the threat alone can be punishable if made with the intention to create fear.

2. Light Threats (Article 283, RPC)

   • In contrast to Grave Threats, Light Threats involve statements that if the threatened act were carried out, it would not constitute a crime of a serious nature. An example might be a threat to damage one’s reputation or property in a less severe manner.

3. Other Relevant Provisions

   • Acts of Alarms and Scandals (Article 155, RPC) can be considered when the behavior disturbs public peace, such as continuously calling or sending messages that cause public uproar or alarm.
   • Unjust Vexation (Article 287, RPC) may also apply when repeated harassment without legitimate purpose causes annoyance or distress to another person.

IV. Threats and Harassment as Violations of Special Laws

1. Data Privacy Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10173)

   • Unauthorized Processing of Personal Data: If the online lending company uses the borrower’s personal data (including phone numbers or contact information of third parties) without consent or beyond the scope of legitimate purposes, it may be liable under the Data Privacy Act.
   • Damages and Penalties: The law provides for imprisonment, fines, or both for violations. Complaints may be filed with the National Privacy Commission.
   • Offenses: These include accessing personal data due to negligence, improper disposal of personal data, or unauthorized access or intentional breach.

2. Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10175)

   • While typically associated with hacking, phishing, or identity theft, the Cybercrime Prevention Act also penalizes libel and threats committed through a computer system or any other similar means. If the lender’s threats and harassing messages are disseminated through digital channels like emails, social media, or messaging apps, this law might apply.

3. Lending Company Regulation Act of 2007 (Republic Act No. 9474)

   • This law governs the establishment and operation of lending companies. A lending company that violates its provisions by resorting to illegal or improper debt collection practices may face administrative or criminal penalties.
   • In addition, the SEC has issued advisories and memoranda warning online lending platforms against unauthorized practices. Borrowers may file complaints with the SEC if the lending apps engage in unethical or prohibited collection tactics.

V. Civil Remedies
Aside from criminal complaints, borrowers can also explore civil remedies:

1. Violation of Data Privacy and Tort Liability

   • Under the New Civil Code, particularly Articles 19, 20, 21, and 26, any person who causes damage to another, either through fault or negligence, may be liable for damages.
   • A borrower who experiences harassment or threats can claim moral damages if they suffer emotional or psychological distress.

2. Breach of Contract and Abuse of Rights

   • A loan agreement, even if formed digitally, is still a contractual obligation. Certain implied obligations exist for lenders to conduct themselves in good faith. When a lending platform engages in harassment, it can be considered an abuse of rights. Article 19 of the Civil Code states that “Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.”

VI. Administrative Remedies and Regulatory Bodies

1. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

   • If a registered lending company is responsible, one can file a complaint with the SEC Enforcement and Investor Protection Department. The SEC can investigate, suspend, or revoke the lending entity’s license for improper practices.

2. National Privacy Commission (NPC)

   • Victims of unauthorized data use can lodge a complaint with the NPC. The NPC can order the lending company to cease its activities, impose fines, or initiate prosecution if warranted.

3. National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Cybercrime Division and Philippine National Police (PNP) Anti-Cybercrime Group

   • For threats made through electronic channels, one can seek help from these specialized law enforcement units. They have the capability to trace and investigate phone numbers, IP addresses, or online communications.

VII. Evidentiary Considerations

1. Documentation

   • Harassment and threats typically occur through text messages, emails, calls, or chat applications. Borrowers should document all threatening communications. Screenshots, call records, and relevant phone logs should be preserved.

2. Witness Accounts

   • If the lending company or its agents contact family members, friends, or co-workers to harass or humiliate the borrower, these individuals could serve as witnesses. Their accounts can corroborate the borrower’s claims of harassment.

3. Electronic Evidence Admissibility

   • Under the Rules on Electronic Evidence, text messages and social media communications can be admissible in court if properly authenticated. Therefore, borrowers should avoid deleting incriminating messages. Instead, they should keep them intact and possibly secure additional proofs of origin or screenshots that include timestamps and sender details.

VIII. Steps to Address Harassment and Threats

1. Immediate Safety Measures

   • If a threat appears imminent, a borrower should report the matter to the local police station and make a formal blotter entry. This records the incident and may deter further harassment.

2. Legal Consultation

   • Consult a lawyer immediately to explore legal options—criminal, civil, or administrative. The lawyer can draft cease and desist letters to the lending company, demand compensation for damages, or represent the borrower in court.

3. Filing Complaints

   • Criminal Complaints: Prepared under the relevant provisions of the Revised Penal Code (grave threats, light threats, etc.).
   • Data Privacy Complaints: Filed with the NPC if personal data has been misused or disclosed without consent.
   • Administrative Complaints: Lodged with the SEC if the harassing entity is a registered lending company that violates the Lending Company Regulation Act of 2007.

4. Preventive Measures

   • Blocking Numbers: Borrowers may block unknown or harassing numbers on their mobile devices, although this may not necessarily stop all threats if the lender switches to other numbers.
   • Limiting Access to Personal Data: Borrowers should scrutinize the permissions required by lending apps and avoid granting full access to personal data unless truly necessary.

IX. Penalties Under Relevant Laws

1. Revised Penal Code

   • Grave Threats (Article 282): Punishable by imprisonment (prisión mayor) if the threat of an act is a crime punishable by a higher penalty.
   • Light Threats (Article 283): Punishable by arresto menor or a fine depending on the severity of the threat.
   • Unjust Vexation can lead to imprisonment of up to 30 days or fines, depending on the circumstances.

2. Data Privacy Act of 2012

   • Penalties include imprisonment ranging from one year to six years, plus fines of up to several million pesos, depending on the nature and gravity of the offense.

3. Lending Company Regulation Act of 2007

   • The SEC can suspend or revoke licenses of erring lending companies. Administrative fines may also be imposed on top of any criminal liability under other laws.

X. Case Studies and Jurisprudence

1. Data Privacy Commission Precedents

   • While Philippine jurisprudence on misuse of data by lending apps is still developing, the NPC has already issued Cease and Desist Orders against certain unregistered or rogue lenders.
   • In some instances, the NPC has required these apps to modify their data collection practices and pay hefty fines.

2. Criminal Cases on Threats

   • Courts have historically recognized text messages or phone calls as valid evidence of threat if properly authenticated. The jurisprudence underscores the seriousness of threatening communications, even if no physical harm occurs.

XI. Strategic Considerations for Victims

1. Choice of Remedy

   • Victims may pursue both criminal and civil actions. A criminal case punishes the wrongful act in behalf of the State, while civil actions allow the victim to claim damages.

2. Potential Settlement

   • Some borrowers may opt for settlement if the lender agrees to cease harassing behavior, retract threatening statements, and correct credit records. However, caution is advised to ensure that any settlement does not infringe on the borrower’s rights to further recourse if threats continue.

3. Public Awareness

   • Raising awareness through social media or consumer advocacy groups can protect others from falling victim to similar schemes. This can also pressure the lending app to revise its abusive collection practices.

XII. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. Can I sue an online lending app for calling my relatives and telling them about my debts?

   • Yes. This may be a violation of your right to privacy under the Data Privacy Act. If the lending app disclosed your personal debt information without your consent or a legitimate purpose, you may file a complaint with the NPC and potentially pursue civil or criminal charges.

2. What if the online lender threatens to harm me if I fail to pay immediately?

   • Such a threat could constitute Grave Threats under the Revised Penal Code. You should gather evidence and report this to law enforcement agencies promptly.

3. Will the SEC help me if the company is not registered?

   • Even if the entity is unregistered, the SEC can issue cease and desist orders against persons or companies performing lending activities without authorization. You can also explore criminal complaints under the Lending Company Regulation Act of 2007.

4. Do I have to continue paying the loan if I file a complaint?

   • Filing a complaint does not automatically extinguish your obligation to repay a valid debt. However, the law expects lending companies to conduct themselves fairly and within legal bounds when collecting. You remain responsible for paying legitimate financial obligations, but you must not be subjected to threats or harassment.

5. How do I protect my personal data from unauthorized access by these lending apps?

   • Revoke permissions on your mobile device and avoid granting broad authorizations unless absolutely necessary. Check app privacy policies, and if you suspect a violation, contact the NPC for assistance and file a formal complaint.

XIII. Conclusion
The harassment and threats perpetrated by certain online lending applications underscore the importance of upholding data privacy, contractual fairness, and the integrity of our criminal justice system. Filipino borrowers must be aware of their rights and the available legal remedies to protect themselves from predatory or unlawful conduct. By filing complaints with the SEC, the NPC, or law enforcement agencies, victims can seek justice and ensure that abusive lending practices are curtailed.

Moreover, the overarching policy in Philippine law is that no individual should ever be subjected to threats or harassment by creditors. Lending is a commercial transaction that must be governed by law, not by intimidation or fear. Borrowers, in turn, have the responsibility to repay legitimate debts in good faith, but they should never be forced to endure tactics that undermine their personal safety and dignity.

Ultimately, the best course of action when confronted with harassment and threats from online lending applications is to seek legal counsel and pursue remedies in both civil and criminal forums, where appropriate. By doing so, the borrower protects not only personal interests but also contributes to shaping a more just, transparent, and secure fintech environment for all Filipinos.

---

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Individuals facing harassment or threats should consult a qualified attorney for guidance tailored to their specific circumstances.