Ver's 'girl' does not own Forbes mansion, court says


Posted at Jan 30 2014 11:21 PM | Updated as of Jan 31 2014 07:21 AM

MANILA -- Someone else owns a Forbes Park mansion lent rent-free since the 1990s to a woman close to the late Gen. Fabian Ver, a court said.

Edna Camcam filed a claim to ownership of the mansion after Dr. Daniel Vazquez initiated ejectment proceedings for her refusal to vacate the property despite demands. The ejectment case is still pending.

A ruling dated December 16, 2013 issued by Makati Regional Trial Court Judge Winlove Dumayas said Camcam admitted that Vasquez owned the property on Cambridge Circle.

The ruling said “it is an undisputed fact that the subject property is registered in the name of (Vazquez)” and that Camcam even proved this her "own judicial admissions.”

Camcam also executed a legal document titled “Guaranty” in September 1994, admitting that Vazquez owned the property -- which she acknowledged and confirmed during the trial.

Ver, who was friends with Vazquez, was in exile after the ouster of former President Marcos when he requested the latter to provide a home for Camcam and her children.

Vazquez found and offered the Forbes Park mansion, which was acquired from the United Coconut Planters Bank through Benjamin Bitanga.

On September 27, 1994, Bitanga executed a Sale with Right of Repurchase over the property in favor of Vasquez. Camcam, on the same day, issued the guaranty declaring Vazquez as the owner.

In their quest to wrest control of the property, Camcam and Bitanga questioned the original sale of the property from UCPB, to Bitanga, and to Vasquez.

They said the real intention was to enter into a loan transaction and not a sale.

The court did not buy the argument and said the two did not even bother to annul the document, taking cognizance of Camcam’s claim that she was a veteran banker and an expert in mortgage transactions.

Camcam also claimed to have fully paid for the property, but the court said she issued the check to a corporation, not to Vazquez. She also could not present proof that the checks had been encashed.