“Perhaps, this is the best way to do it. Offer the car owner the less expensive GSIS policy or, if he chooses, a policy that he bought from another insurer.”
by Ducky Paredes
The main office of the Land Transportation Office in Diliman has started offering the cheaper GSIS Compulsory Third Party Liability Insurance even as the Court of Appeals still has a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the scheme whereby only the CTPL of the GSIS will be allowed.
Why not? If I had a choice, I would still go for the GSIS’ CTPL. It costs less than what others offer and is probably more reliable. At least, one is sure that it is insurance that will actually compensate any one injured by my vehicle. (I have not had an accident for several years; but, if it happens, it would be good to know that one’s CTPL is not totally worthless.)
Perhaps, this is the best way to do it. Offer the car owner the less expensive GSIS policy or, if he chooses, a policy that he bought from another insurer. Of course, this will not make the CTPL more reliable since many will still be selling fake ones against which there can be no claims. If the GSIS policies actually pay, however, in a few years, the fakes will be drummed out of their rackets.
This may take a bit longer but it would still clean out the industry.
* * *
Vice Governor Emmanuel Pinol of North Cotabato is absolutely right when he attacks the Memorandum of Agreement between the Government and the MILF for not bring in the affected officials and residents of the areas being included in the Bangs Moro Homeland. Many of the areas that have been included (including North Cotabato) have consistently rejected inclusion in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) in succeeding plebiscites. Why include them again?
The fact of the mater is that the ARMM has failed to deliver progress to the areas that have joined the nascent Muslim Homeland. A lot of funds have bee given the ARMM but progress has not been forthcoming. Imagine if the ARMM had been able to deliver progress faster than in the areas not covered by the ARMM. If that had happened, there would be no hesitation for even all of Mindanao for inclusion in the Muslim Homeland. The fact, however, is that the areas under the leadership of our brother Muslims are less developed than other areas in Mindanao.
Even the Amanah Bank which was set up for the Muslim population was an utter failure.
Thus, when one finds his province, city or town included in the nascent Muslim Homeland, there is real cause for worry over the danger that whatever gains have been achieved will even be reversed. I am not anti-Muslim. I just call it as I see it.
Besides, I cannot see that creating that homeland will actually lead to a lasting peace. As long as there is a difference in the progress of non-Muslim parts of Mindanao and the Muslim areas, there will be violence. Among the things that ought to happen is that the educational progress of the Muslim areas ought to be speeded up. Only education can wean the Muslim male from the use of violence and his reliance on the use of firearms.
Too bad that the Sandiganbayan took all the money of the Erap Muslim Youth Foundation for itself. That – offering higher education to the Muslim youth – was a capital idea.
* * *
A long letter from Belo Gozon Elma Parel Asuncion & Lucila reacts to an earlier column entitled “Haw Shiaw at BDO”. Here is the kernel of their explanation of how the Payumo Group was deprived of their right of first refusal:
“(a) In a letter of Dec. 5, 2007, which is the last day of the 90-day period given to Maxicare by BDO to exercise its right of first refusal, the Payumo Group advised BDO that the group is buying the BDO Shares as a group, not in their individual capacities as earlier stated in their separate letters.
“(b) But it turned out that the Payumo Group failed to notify the other minority shareholders of the purchase, as mandated by the original stockholders’ right of first refusal. Consequently, before the sale of the BDO Shares could proceed, BDO received a letter from Maxicare Chairman, Dr. Macasaet, acting for himself and other stockholders (the ‘Macasaet Group’) objecting to the Payumo Group’s ‘utter disregard of the mandatory notice requirement, a clear violation of a right granted to all the original stockholders’. He advised that the Payumo Group ’is disqualified from acquiring BDO’s offered shares’.
“(c) In still another letter to BDO, Dr. Macasaet and nine other original shareholders urged BDO to disqualify the Payumo group from buying the shares. The Macasaet Group also executed an affidavit certifying that they have not received a copy of the acceptance notices of the Payumo Group.
“(d) And on December 11, 2007, Maxicare, through its acting Corporate Secretary, advised BDO of the resolution of the board:
“i) disqualifying the Payumo Group from purchasing the BDO Shares for violating the requirements of the Stockholders Agreement;
“ii) directing the acting Corporate Secretary of Maxicare to advise BDO not to proceed with the sale to the Payumo Group;
“iii) declaring that there is no legal impediment to the sale of the BDO Shares to the ALG Group; and
“iv) directing the acting Corporate Secretary of Maxicare to record the transfer of the BDO shares in favor of ALG Group upon execution of the deed of sale.
“(e) Because of all these formal objections from Maxicare and the other original shareholders, BDO returned the Payumo Group’s payment tendered by the latter together with interest and executed the sale in favor of the ALG Group.
“From the foregoing circumstances, the basis for the disqualification of the Payumo Group in the purchase of BDO Shares was due to the numerous objections raised by the Macasaet Group and by Maxicare itself, and the mandatory requirements of the Stockholders Agreement on the exercise of the right of first refusal. Evidently, the Payumo Group failed to muster a united stand from the other original stockholders for them to purchase the BDO Shares under the Stockholders Agreement.”
* * *
The Macasaet Group were, of course, all appointees by the majority stockholder BDO which was selling its shares. BDO had accepted the payment of the Payumo Group. BDO reneged on their sale to give ALG – its original buyer – the company. It used the Macasaet Group to have an excuse for reneging on the sale to the Payumo Group. Simple!
Clearly, this case still has a long way to go. Eventually, of course, it is the ICC Arbitration Court in Singapore that will have to rule on the case, as specified in the Stockholders’ Agreement.
# # # #
hvp 08.08.08)
Post a Comment