LETTER TO A LAWYER
From a Concerned Borrower

Dear Attorney,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to seek your professional advice and guidance regarding certain harassment issues I have been experiencing from an online lending application. Recently, I have been subjected to what I believe are unfair and intimidating collection practices. I feel distressed over the manner in which they communicate—using threatening or shaming tactics, contacting my personal contacts without my consent, and otherwise violating my right to privacy and fair treatment.

I would like to know: What are my legal remedies against the harassment perpetrated by the representatives of this online lending company? Where should I file a complaint if I believe these practices violate Philippine laws? How can I best protect myself from continuing harassment, and what specific laws or regulations govern the conduct of lending companies in the Philippines?

I would greatly appreciate your guidance on the matter, as I intend to pursue the most appropriate legal action to protect my rights and dignity. Thank you for your time and for sharing your expertise.

Sincerely,
A Concerned Borrower

LEGAL ARTICLE: OVERVIEW OF HARASSMENT CLAIMS AGAINST ONLINE LENDING APPS UNDER PHILIPPINE LAW

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and should not be construed as formal legal advice. For specific concerns, consult a qualified attorney.

Introduction
The rise of online lending applications has provided consumers with easier and faster access to credit in the Philippines. However, it has also led to increased reports of harassment and questionable collection practices by certain lenders. Borrowers claim that some of these online lending platforms engage in abusive tactics—public shaming, unsolicited messages to personal contacts, threats of legal action, and, in extreme cases, defamatory posts on social media.

In the Philippines, creditors do have the right to collect debts. However, this right is not absolute. There are statutes, rules, and regulations that protect consumers from unfair collection practices and harassment. This legal article aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the applicable laws, potential remedies, and the proper venues where aggrieved borrowers can file their complaints.
Key Legal Framework in the Philippines
Several Philippine laws and regulations protect individuals against unlawful collection practices and harassment by lending companies. The most relevant include:
- Republic Act No. 3765 (Truth in Lending Act)
  This law aims to protect consumers from a lack of awareness regarding the true cost of credit. While its main focus is on ensuring transparency in the finance charges and terms of credit, the implementing rules also reinforce the principle of fair dealing in credit transactions.
- Republic Act No. 7394 (Consumer Act of the Philippines)
  The Consumer Act ensures protection for consumers against unethical or unscrupulous trade practices. Although it primarily addresses goods and services, certain provisions may apply to lending transactions, as these are considered consumer credit services.
- Implementing Rules and Regulations of Lending Company Regulation Act (R.A. 9474)
  The Lending Company Regulation Act (R.A. 9474) regulates the organization and operation of lending companies in the Philippines. The Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) impose requirements for legitimate lending operations and fair practices. Violations of these regulations can give rise to administrative and possibly criminal sanctions.
- Republic Act No. 10173 (Data Privacy Act of 2012)
  Online lending companies often request access to personal data, including the borrower’s phone contacts. Using, storing, or disclosing personal data without consent may violate the Data Privacy Act. Under this law, maliciously disclosing personal data or using it for improper purposes—such as harassing calls or messages—could constitute a breach that is punishable by fines and imprisonment, subject to the determination of the National Privacy Commission (NPC) and Philippine courts.
- Republic Act No. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012)
  The Cybercrime Prevention Act penalizes offenses involving the use of information and communications technology, such as libel or harassment carried out through digital platforms. If a lending company sends threatening or libelous messages electronically, or engages in illegal data surveillance or unauthorized system access, it may be held liable under this law.
- Revised Penal Code Provisions
  - Grave Threats and Light Threats (Articles 282–283): If representatives of a lending app threaten borrowers with harm or illegal actions, they could be penalized under these provisions.
  - Slander and Slander by Deed (Articles 358–359): Publicly humiliating or defaming someone, whether verbally or physically, can result in criminal liability.
  - Unjust Vexation (Article 287): Persistent, unreasonable harassment could qualify as unjust vexation, punishable by arresto menor or a fine depending on the circumstances.
Identifying Harassment
Harassment in the context of debt collection typically involves methods that are oppressive, abusive, or unreasonable. Some common examples:
1. Threatening Messages: Repeatedly sending text messages or calls that threaten arrest, public humiliation, or other harmful actions against the borrower.
2. Public Shaming or “Shame Campaigns”: Posting the borrower’s information on social media or contacting friends, relatives, or employers to pressure the borrower.
3. Unauthorized Access to Contacts: Accessing the borrower’s phone contacts without consent and repeatedly calling them to demand payment, sometimes revealing sensitive information.
4. Defamatory Statements: Spreading false accusations about the borrower, such as calling them a “swindler,” “fraud,” or other defamatory remarks.
Determining whether a lender’s behavior constitutes harassment depends on the totality of circumstances. Generally, legitimate debt collection efforts (e.g., polite calls or reminders) are not harassing. However, once these efforts cross the boundary into threats, intimidation, public shaming, or privacy violations, they may be deemed harassment or related offenses under Philippine law.
Legal Remedies and Causes of Action
Borrowers facing harassment from online lending apps can explore various legal remedies:

4.1 Civil Actions
- Damages for Breach of Privacy or Defamation: Under Articles 19, 20, and 21 of the New Civil Code, any person who causes damage to another by acting contrary to law or good morals may be liable for damages. If a lending company violates a borrower’s right to privacy or engages in defamatory conduct, the borrower can seek moral and possibly exemplary damages.
- Injunction or Restraining Orders: If the harassment is persistent and ongoing, the court may issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) or injunction to stop the lender’s unlawful acts.
4.2 Criminal Complaints
- Grave Threats (Article 282, Revised Penal Code): If the threats involve a crime punishable by law, the borrower may lodge a criminal complaint for grave threats.
- Unjust Vexation (Article 287, Revised Penal Code): Persistent harassment or vexatious conduct that causes annoyance or distress without lawful justification can be prosecuted under this provision.
- Libel or Cyber Libel (Articles 353–354, Revised Penal Code, in relation to R.A. 10175): If the lender’s representatives publish or disseminate defamatory statements online, they may be liable for cyber libel.
4.3 Administrative Remedies
- National Privacy Commission (NPC): Borrowers may file a complaint for violations of the Data Privacy Act if the lender improperly accessed or disclosed their personal information.
- Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): Online lending companies are required to register with the SEC. Borrowers can complain to the SEC if the lending company violates lending regulations or commits fraudulent, oppressive, or illegal collection practices.
- Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP): If the entity is a bank or a quasi-bank under BSP supervision, complaints may also be lodged with the BSP. However, if it is merely a lending company or a financing company (not a bank), the SEC remains the relevant authority.
- Local Government Units (LGUs) and Barangay Conciliation: In certain cases, if the harassment is localized or intrapersonal, aggrieved borrowers can resort to barangay conciliation under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, although this is more for minor disputes rather than full-blown data privacy or criminal violations.
Where to File Your Complaint
Depending on the nature of the harassment, the borrower can file complaints in any of the following venues:
1. Philippine National Police (PNP) or National Bureau of Investigation (NBI): For immediate assistance and documentation of harassment or threats, you can approach local law enforcement. They can record the complaint and may forward the matter to the prosecutor’s office if there is a prima facie case for a criminal offense.
2. Prosecutor’s Office: If there is sufficient evidence for criminal charges (e.g., threats, slander, cyber libel), the borrower can file a criminal complaint at the city or provincial prosecutor’s office in the area where the offense took place or where the complainant resides.
3. National Privacy Commission (NPC): If the primary concern is the unauthorized access or disclosure of personal data, a formal complaint can be filed with the NPC, which has the authority to investigate data privacy violations and impose fines or recommend prosecution.
4. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): If the online lending app is registered with the SEC, and there is reason to believe they violated the Lending Company Regulation Act or relevant SEC regulations, the borrower can submit a complaint or letter of concern to the SEC.
5. Regular Courts (MTC, RTC): For civil lawsuits seeking damages, or for issuance of injunctions, the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) or Regional Trial Court (RTC) may have jurisdiction depending on the amount of damages claimed or the seriousness of the legal issue.
Evidence Collection and Documentation
Proper documentation significantly strengthens a borrower’s complaint. Potential evidence includes:
- Screenshots of Messages or Calls: Keep records of text messages, chat conversations, or emails that display threatening or harassing language.
- Call Logs: Note the time and frequency of calls. If possible, record phone conversations, but be mindful of wiretapping laws (R.A. 4200) which require consent under certain circumstances.
- Witness Statements: If third parties have witnessed or experienced the harassment—such as receiving calls on your behalf—they may provide written statements or affidavits to substantiate your claim.
- Proof of Unauthorized Data Access: If the lending company accessed your phone’s contacts or personal data without your consent, gather any pop-up permissions or application settings you initially agreed to. This will help show that the lender exceeded the scope of your consent.
- Screenshots of Social Media Posts (if any): If the lender publicly shamed you on social media, capturing those posts is crucial.
Practical Tips to Protect Yourself
- Limit Communications: Once the harassment escalates, consider limiting direct contact with the lender’s representatives. Communicate only through verifiable channels, such as official email addresses, and politely state that you are recording or documenting all communications.
- Exercise Caution in Granting Permissions: Before installing lending apps, review the permissions they request. Do not grant access to your entire contact list unless absolutely necessary.
- Negotiate in Good Faith (If You Acknowledge the Debt): If the debt is valid, propose a reasonable payment plan. Make sure all negotiations are documented. Debt negotiation may de-escalate conflict.
- Consult with a Lawyer: Obtain professional legal advice to better understand your rights and the steps you need to take in filing a complaint.
- File Formal Complaints with Appropriate Agencies: If harassment continues, be prepared to file a complaint promptly. Delaying may embolden the lender.
Possible Defenses or Tactics by Online Lending Apps
When a borrower initiates legal action or a regulatory complaint, the online lending platform may raise defenses such as:
- Consent: Claiming that the borrower consented to data sharing. However, consent must be specific, informed, and freely given under the Data Privacy Act.
- Legitimate Debt Collection Effort: Asserting that their calls or messages fall under standard collection efforts, not harassment. It is up to regulators or the courts to determine if the boundaries were crossed.
- Free Speech: If accused of public shaming or defamatory statements, the lender might argue free speech or truth as a defense. However, free speech does not protect false or malicious statements.
Enforcement of Judgments or Penalties
If a borrower prevails in a civil or criminal action against an online lender, courts may:
- Impose Fines or Order Damages: The court may order the lender to pay compensatory damages for actual losses and moral damages for emotional distress.
- Issue Restraining Orders or Injunctions: The court may direct the lender to cease its harassing activities immediately.
- Revoke or Suspend Licenses/Permits: In administrative proceedings, agencies like the SEC can suspend or revoke the lending company’s certificate of authority to operate.
Interaction with Barangay Proceedings
Under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, certain disputes must undergo barangay conciliation. However, if the harassment involves criminal offenses like grave threats, or if the matter involves data privacy violations, direct filing with the prosecutor’s office or the NPC may be more appropriate than resorting to barangay conciliation alone.
Future Legislative Developments
Legislative proposals are underway to strengthen consumer protection further. The Philippine Congress continuously reviews amendments to the Lending Company Regulation Act, the Consumer Act, and the Data Privacy Act to address evolving challenges in digital lending. Borrowers should stay informed about any new legal standards that might offer additional safeguards against harassment.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Parties can also explore mediation or arbitration to resolve issues if both sides agree. Mediation through the Philippine Mediation Center or private ADR institutions may be quicker and less adversarial than court litigation.
Best Practices for Borrowers
- Be Proactive: Once you detect signs of harassment, gather evidence immediately.
- Keep Emotions in Check: Responding with anger can worsen the situation. Stay calm and keep communications documented and respectful.
- Engage Competent Counsel: Ensure that your lawyer is well-versed in consumer protection, data privacy, and debt collection laws.
- Know Your Rights: Familiarize yourself with relevant laws and regulations. Knowledge can empower you to defend yourself effectively.
Best Practices for Lending Companies (For Context)
Though this article focuses on borrowers, lending companies are also encouraged to observe fair collection practices:
- Adopt Internal Guidelines: Ensure all staff adhere to ethical and legal collection strategies.
- Data Protection Compliance: Regularly update privacy notices and secure borrower data.
- Transparent Terms: Provide clear loan terms, including interest rates and penalties, as mandated by the Truth in Lending Act.
Conclusion
Filing a complaint for harassment against an online lending app in the Philippines involves understanding multiple facets of the law: consumer protection, data privacy, criminal law, and administrative regulations. Borrowers have several legal remedies at their disposal, including civil damages, criminal complaints, and administrative actions. Crucial to a successful claim is meticulous documentation of the lender’s harassing behavior, including unauthorized data access, threatening messages, defamatory statements, and public shaming tactics.

In many cases, sending a formal demand letter through a lawyer or seeking amicable settlement through mediation might be sufficient to halt harassing practices. However, if these attempts fail, the legal framework in the Philippines is robust enough to address harassment through courts and regulatory bodies such as the SEC and the NPC.

Ultimately, borrowers should not be compelled to endure abusive collection methods. While lenders have a right to collect debts, this right is tempered by the obligations to respect the borrower’s dignity, privacy, and legal protections. With proper evidence and timely action, aggrieved borrowers can file a formal complaint and seek redress for the harassment they have experienced.

Note: This write-up is not intended to replace independent legal consultation. The law may evolve, and each case should be evaluated based on specific facts, evidence, and applicable legal provisions.