REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

Department of Labor and Employment

PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION
Adjudication Office
Mandaluyong City

S & I INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT INC,

Complainant,

- versus - POEA Case No. DAW 18-01-0196

For : Violation of Section I. A (2)
of Rule III, Part VI of the 2002
POEA Rules and Regulations

YOLANDA M. VILLANUEVA,
Respondent.
x------------------------------------------------------x H.O. Atty. Gamboa

VERIFIED ANSWER

Respondent YOLANDA M. VILLANUEVA, provisionally assisted by

counsel, unto this Honorable Administration, by way of answer to the
charges filed against her, respectfully states THAT:

1. Respondent is being made to answer in this Administrative

recruitment proceedings for alleged violation of Section I. A (2) of
Rule III, Part VI of the 2002 POEA Rules and Regulations;

2. Respondent vehemently and specifically denies the aforesaid

charge because said charge is false. The truth of the matter are
those set forth below:

3. Respondent was introduced to S & I INTERNATIONAL

MANAGEMENT INC, by a person whom she met at Binangonan,
Rizal sometime on 2014;

4. Respondent was asked by an employee of S & I INTERNATIONAL

MANAGEMENT INC, to fill-up the application form and was then
asked to process her passport;

5. After the processing of her passport sometime on November 2014,

respondent was then advised to undergo medical examination and
TESDA training;
6. Respondent had undergone medical examination but failed to
attend the TESDA training because she got sick;

7. Sometime on January 2015, respondent received a call from an

employee of S & I INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT INC., informing
the respondent that they will have her blacklisted at Saudi;

8. After receiving the call from S & I INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT

INC., respondent then lost hope that she will be able to go abroad;

9. It is not true that Respondent signed any contract with the

complainant nor was she informed that her employment or travel
documents have been processed nor duly approved by the
appropriate government agency/ies. The Letter of Request for
Laboratory Examination of the respondent’s signature in the
alleged contact with PNP Crime Laboratory at NBI are hereto
attached as Annex “1” at Annex “2”;

10. Respondent was surprised that a complaint was filed against

her before this Honorable Administration due to unjustified refusal
to depart for the worksite as the respondent has been more than
willing to work abroad to be able to support the schooling of her
children, she, being a single mom for her children;

11. Respondent denies that the signature appearing on the

contract is hers. In fact, it was only today, April 24, 2018, that the
Respondent was able to secure a copy of the complaint against her
and it is only now that the Respondent saw the contract alleged to
be signed by her.

12. Other than the alleged verified contract, which the

respondent denies to have signed, no iota or direct and relevant
evidence exists to sustain complainant’s accusation against
respondent. A recruitment violation, similar to the present case, is a
serious charge that must be proven by means of clear and
convincing evidence, such that fabricated evidence warrants the
dismissal of any charge. In fact as held by this Honorable
Administration, the charges of recruitment violations are serious
since they may cause the suspension of the authority or license of
any private charging employment agency. It follows therefore that
such charges must at the very least, be substantiated and proven by
clear and convincing, credible and competent evidence. Absent this
evidence required, such charges must necessarily fail. (Roger
Ramos, et. al. vs. EMS Manpower and Placement Services, Inc., et. al.
POEA Case No. RV 96-12-1913).

PRAYER
 WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully moved
that the complaint be dismissed for lack of merit.

Other reliefs just and equitable in the premises are likewise sought.

Respectfully submitted.
April 24, 2018., San Juan City.

Department of Justice
PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
NCR-San Juan District
2nd Floor PNP Building,
cor. P. Guevarra St., Santolan Rd.
City of San Juan

By:

CHARLIE M. CABE
Public Attorney III
Roll No. 51022
IBP No. 1032502/3-4-16
MCLE compliance no. V-0011393

CAMILLE CORAZON A. VALDEZ

Public Attorney I
Roll No. 68186
IBP No.: 002935; 05-08-17
MCLE Compliance No. exempt

COPY FURNISHED:

JERI MAE L. SERRANO

S & I INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
Unit 98 Pacific Place Building
Arqui Street, # 539 Ermita
1000 Manila
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)

San Juan City ) SS.

VERIFICATION

I, YOLANDA M. VILLANUEVA, of legal age and Filipino, after having

been duly sworn to in accordance with law, depose and state THAT:

1. I am the respondent in the above-entitled case;

2. I have caused the preparation of the foregoing Answer and
I have read the same and the contents of which are true
and correct of my own knowledge and/or on the basis of
authentic documents.

AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto affix my signature this April 24,

2018.

YOLANDA M. VILLANUEVA
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 24 th day of April 2018;

affiant exhibited to me her Unified Multi-Purpose ID CRN-
011107557073-6.
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
Department of Labor and Employment
PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION
Adjudication Office
Mandaluyong City

S & I INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT INC,

Complainant,

- versus - POEA Case No. DAW 18-01-0196

For : Violation of Section I. A (2)
of Rule III, Part VI of the 2002
POEA Rules and Regulations

YOLANDA M. VILLANUEVA,
Respondent.
x------------------------------------------------------x H.O. Atty. Gamboa

MOTION TO ADMIT ANSWER

Respondent, provisionally assisted by the undersigned counsel,

unto this Honorable Administration, most respectfully state that:

1. Respondent YOLANDA M. VILLANUEVA received summons on

March 22, 2018 directing her to file her verified answer to the
complaint in the above-entitled case within 10 days from receipt
thereof;

2. Respondent failed to answer within the reglementary period

because when the summons was received by her, she was not
furnished a copy of the complaint against her. It was only today,
April 24, 2018, that she received a copy of the complaint after
she went to the Honorable Administration to ask of a copy of it;

3. Respondent begs that her answer be admitted due to the

abovementioned reason. However, when she learned that the
period given to her to answer had lapsed, she immediately went
to the Public Attorney’s Office to seek legal assistance;

4. In the interest of substantial justice and for the reason earlier

stated, respondent begs the compassion of this Honorable
Administration to admit her attached verified Answer and form
part of the records of the case.

5. It is not the intention of the Respondent to delay the proceedings

of this case but only for the reason stated above.
 PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed

of this Honorable Court that the attached Answer to the complaint
be admitted and that it would form part of the record of the case.

Respectfully submitted.
April 24, 2018, San Juan City.

Department of Justice
PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
NCR-San Juan District
2nd Floor PNP Building,
cor. P. Guevarra St., Santolan Rd.
City of San Juan

By:

CHARLIE M. CABE
Public Attorney III
Roll No. 51022
IBP No. 1032502/3-4-16
MCLE compliance no. V-0011393

CAMILLE CORAZON A. VALDEZ

Public Attorney I
Roll No. 68186
IBP No.: 002935; 05-08-17
MCLE Compliance No. exempt

COPY FURNISHED:

JERI MAE L. SERRANO

S & I INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
Unit 98 Pacific Place Building
Arqui Street, # 539 Ermita
1000 Manila