Jolyn M. Ingson and Joaquina B. Manarop NPS Docket No.

17-2373
-versus- Case of Alleged Estafa
Spouses Ernesto Rapadas and Raquel Rapadas

Factual Circumstances:

Ms. Jolyn Manarop Ingson is an OFW of Myanmar, came about to file a case of alleged estafa against
Mrs. Racquel Rapadas, because she was swindled by the latter as early as the year May 2016. She claimed that she
met and acquainted Mrs. Racquel Rapadas at Union School International. Prior to their acquaintance, her
grandmother Mrs. Joaquina Manarop already had a transaction regarding a rent to own condominium unit at
Burnham Suite Kisad Road. Around the last weeks of May of 2016, Ms. Ingson, together with the family of Mrs.
Rapadas had a tripping on different properties all within Baguio City, however they did not let her see the
Burnham Suite property. It was on the same month that Ms. Ingson gave her initial payment of P50,000.00 as her
reservation fee of the alleged property of Mrs. Rapadas. Thereafter, on June of 2016, Ms. Ingson travelled back to
Myanmar due to her employment as Human Resources Manager. It was agreed upon that while in Myanmar,
Ms.Ingson will send Mrs. Rapadas the remaining payment for the condominium unit through the BDO online
banking under Mr. Ernesto Rapadas, the husband of Mrs. Racquel Rapadas. Due to said payments through
remittances, Ms. Ingson was able to pay a total of P 360,000.00, even despite the fact that everytime Mrs. Joaquina
Manarop would request to visit the condominium unit upon the instruction of Ms. Ingson since she was abroad,
Sps. Rapadas, would always make themselves unavailable, until such time that they refused to communicate to Ms.
Ingson and refused to meet Mrs. Joaquina Manarop by the school, nowhere to be found and contacted upon the
receipt of the amounts paid for the alleged sale of the condominium unit.

The case was still ongoing during the interview, in so far as the warrants of arrest has been issued however
both Sps. Rapadas went into hiding and are still at large.

Advise:

The advice that I had given to the aggrieved parties particularly Ms. Jolyn Ingson is that there is a
clear manifestation that she has been swindled and that it constitutes the case of estafa. The
representations that the Sps. Rapadas made are by false pretenses or fraudulent acts executed prior and
even simultaneously with the commission of the fraud, my misleading the aggrieved parties that indeed
such condominium unit does come into their ownership and control when it fact there is none. Also, due to
the acts of the Sps. Rapadas that they through false pretenses, misrepresented themselves to possess power,
influence, business transactions and agency, and misrepresented themselves to be realtors of Burnham
Suites Condominium and its members, and had influence in the community as pastors and politicians, the
aggrieved parties were induced to part with their hard-earned money, to their damage and prejudice.

I had also advised them, to continue making inquiries at the School (Union School International) or
in their community, if ever they had seen the spouses to be present there once in a while since their children
are still studying in the aforementioned school and they might miss the chance to eventually by chance
confront both of the accused. Indeed due to the illegal acts and misrepresentation made by the spouses, the
case is a clear cut case of estafa.
Insights:

Initially, I was quite hesitant since I was trying to gauge as to how I should conduct the interview
as to Ms. Jolyn Ingson and her grandmother Mrs. Joaquina B. Manarop, so I could be able to get them to
be honest or be comfortable to disclose the details of their case with me. I started by asking how are they,
and how are they dealing with the dilemma of the case at hand, and it seemed that the case has really taken
a toll upon them. Ms. Jolyn Ingson, had said that it had really left her heartbroken since it seemed to her
that all her sacrifices have been thrown into waste, she further commented, “being an OFW is not easy,
you work hard every day for your family’s future, and just by one single transaction in hopes of investing
for one’s hard earned labor everything is gone, just like that”. During the course of the whole interview, I
was thankful that they were able to disclose the details of the case with ease, by connect with them, though
similarities and told them that my mother is an OFW too, and that I understand how it must have been
for her and it made the interview a little less formal and more light.

It may not be the first time that I had to give advice on legal matters as my aunts and cousins
would usually ask me about matters that would relate to what I study in law school. However, it really is
different when an actual case is what you give advice upon, where you know that even a misinterpretation
or mis-appreciation of a particular law, would give a faulty and dangerous advice and it would cost a lot
for a client. So by this, I always tend to be very careful about the legal advice that I give, even the simplest
ones, or even hypothetical ones. Thus, I try my best to know beforehand so at least be armed to the proper
things to say and give legal advice to.

The interview and the exchange that had transpired served much more of the view of the reality
waiting when to become a lawyer in the near future. That as members of the legal profession, we can only
do so much for the clients, that there are things which are way beyond our control. It also made me weigh
my options of where I should be in the field of law when I finally get there, because there is a wide spectrum
and paths for lawyers. Through this experience, it made me more open to the decision that litigation and
private practice may just be the right field for me.