June 1, 2008
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company (“Metrobank”
Metrobank Plaza, Sen. Gil Puyat Avenue
Makati City, 1200 Philippines
632 898-8000; fax 817-6248
Subject: File/Ref. No. SES-FCAG-L0556-2008
Dear Jasper Dela Cruz, Legal Officer, Metro Bank:
We had a chance to read your response letter Dated May 5, 2008, only a few days ago, after receiving a faxed copy from Elvira E Ditching-Lorico of Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, Maynila, Pilipinas this last week.
Note: We did not receive your response letter directly.
The best way for us to respond is point by point, since it seems to me that the tone of your letter is directed more at misleading Banko Sentral ng Pilipinas, rather than making any real attempt to satisfactorily meet our concerns.
QUOTE FROM METROBANK RESPONSE LETTER DATED 5 MAY 2008:
We write in connection with the above-captioned matter and in reply to your letter dated 08 March 2008 addressed to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) which the latter referred to us in its letter dated 25 March 2008.
It is untrue that nothing has been done by Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company (the “Bank”) to address your complaint. The Bank has responded to your concerns the best possibly way given thelimited information you made available to it.
Tell me when and where we have ever said?
“that nothing has been done by Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company (the “bank”)…” (Metrobank quote)
Matter of fact, Metrobank has been doing a lot, including going to SSS here in Baguio City, asking the SSS if payments were ever made to SSS from checks that Metrobank CASHED, (where these checks were made out to “SSS or cash”, as though it would make Metrobank less culpable).
This was not an isolated case of Metrobank cashing one or two checks being made out to a “3rd party or cash”, where the 3rd parties were: government agencies, like SSS, BIR, or Vendors and Suppliers, etc. Rather Metrobank repeatedly, over and over again, cashed checks made out to a “3rd party or cash”, and allowed these checks to be cashed by the same party who signed the check, instead of insisting the checks be given to the intended party. No other bank we have contacted will allow this practice and we expected the same high level of integrity from Metrobank.
What is it that you think we need to provide Metrobank before you can give us a response as to why Metrobank allowed this illegal practice to occur over so many years? Do you dispute or deny this occurred? If so, just state it in a letter to us.
Also, we have heard that Metrobank has gone through old records. So, in the last 11 months Metrobank has been doing a lot. What have you discovered? Why is it you have not disclosed any of your findings to us?
Be specific how Metrobank has responded to our concerns? Your last letter dated 9 October 4, 2007 (note: date is as printed in Metrobank letter) stated, that:
We reply to your letter dated 17 September 2007. (quote from Metrobank)
This means without question you received and read our letter dated 17 September 2007, and yet Metrobank consciously and deliberately chose to ignore every word in our letter and instead wrote the following:
The bank has looked into this matter. (quote from Metrobank)
Which means by this date, 9 October 4, 2007, MetroBank had really looked into the matter. When we first met, you promised Metrobank would give us a full report of your findings and that it would take only two weeks. Again on 9/2/07 you promised Vita Kalashian by email:
Noted. We shall be looking into the matter and shall revert to you as soon as the investigation is concluded. (quote from Metrobank) | 