Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Regional Office No. 02
Cagayan Valley

GENELLYN C. DELA CRUZ Administrative Case No.______

Complainant
FOR: UNPROFESSIONAL 0R
-versus- DISHONORABLE CONDUCT

NOEL BABARAN
Respondent
x------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT
COMES NOW, complainant, by the undersigned legal clinic, unto this
Honorable Office most respectfully alleging and stating that:
PREFATORY STATEMENT
The preamble of the Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers of the
Philippines clearly states that:
“Teachers are duly licensed professionals who possess dignity and
reputation with high moral of values as well as technical and professional
competence in the practice of their noble profession, and they strictly adhere
to, observe, and practice this set of ethical and moral principles, standards
and values” (emphasis supplied)
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Complainant Genellyn Dela Cruz y Carmona is of legal age, married,
Filipino, public school teacher at Cauayan City National High School and a
resident of CMP Padilla, Tagaran, Cauayan City, Isabela;

2. On December 11, 2021, herein complainant borrowed from Mr. Noel

Babaran, the herein respondent, a public teacher at Cauayan National
High School and a resident of District 3, Cauayan City, Isabela, a cash
loan amounting to P 15,000.00, payable for 100 days, with P1,260.00
weekly payment. Mr. Babaran made her sign in a trust receipt and asked
P100.00 for its notarial fee. He did not give her a copy of the said trust
receipt and the notarized document which indicate her debt to him;

3. After weeks of religiously paying her weekly dues to Mr. Babaran,

complainant asked him if her husband can also make a cash loan from
him. At first, he said that it will take time for complainant and her husband
to make a cash loan again because there are so many borrowers lined up
for the cash loan but on January 26, 2022, he offered them instead to avail

Page 1 of 10
 an appliance loan with a P 10,000.00 cash loan which he refers to as a
“bundle loan”. According to him, it is his new promo that a borrower cannot
make a cash loan without availing the corresponding appliance and that
the release is faster than availing only a cash loan;

4. At first, the complainant hesitated and refused to avail Mr. Babaran’s

promo but because of her desperation to avail a cash loan, she agreed to
get a “bundle loan”. He has given her the option to select an appliance
worth P20,000.00 as a minimum in which, the complainant chose a
television.

5. On January 27, 2022, Mr. Babaran then told the complainant to go to SM

Appliance Center, SM City Cauayan, Isabela to look for a television which
would worth P20,000.00 or above. When the complainant and her
husband went to the said mall, she messaged Mr. Babaran that they
already have several choices and the latter asked her to send the pictures
of the said televisions. After that, Mr. Babaran told her that the basis of the
price would be its suggested retail price and not the discounted price so
she said to him that she would prefer the television which costs the lowest
amount. He then asked the complainant if she have a Home Credit
Account for her to get a P500.00 discount but unfortunately, she don’t
have one. On January 29, 2022, after 2 days of waiting, Mr. Babaran then
messaged the complainant to pick up the television at the said Appliance
Center. He said that the television will be paid for 5 months starting on
January 29, 2022 with P1,200.00 weekly payment and that the cash loan
will be given after her first payment on the television;

6. On the evening of January 29, 2022, Mr. Babaran messaged the

complainant asking if she knew someone who wants to avail of his bundle
loan so the latter asked some of her friends and advertised to them his
bundle loan. At that time, it is only Ma’am Alma Velasco who responded to
her so she referred her to Mr. Babaran and that he said that Ma’am Alma
should chat him via Facebook Messenger;

7. On February 02, 2022, the complainant paid her first week installment on
her appliance loan to Mr. Babaran via Gcash. The complainant also pays
him her weekly dues on the amount of P1,260.00 for her previous cash
loan religiously. On February 11, 2022, Mr. Babaran then told the
complainant to get her cash loan to their house at District 3, Cauayan City,
Isabela. She also paid her 2nd installment payment on the same date;

8. After the complainant got her cash loan, Mr. Babaran chatting her always
via Facebook Messenger to remind and ask for anyone who wants to avail
of his loan services and he also offered the former some of his other
bundle promos but she refused to avail again because she knows that she
can’t pay it anymore. On February 14, 2022, he offered her again to add a

Page 2 of 10
 cellphone loan or if she can advertise the said bundle loan to anyone. The
complainant referred her friend, Ms. Pheng Villegas, who is employed at
ACT Machineries, but Mr. Babaran refused first because he said that he
only does transactions with teachers. Mr. Babaran then asked the
complainant if she wants to be a guarantor for Ms. Pheng Villegas, but she
also refused. However, he asked her if Ms. Villegas is a good payer which
she answered in affirmative. After which, Mr. Babaran and Ms. Pheng
transacted with each other without any involvement of the complainant;

9. On February 19, 2022, Mr. Babaran brought up that the complainant is

qualified to avail an appliance loan with a P20,000.00 cash loan. The
complainant refused his offer because she wants to finish her outstanding
loan with him. On the same day, the complainant tried to inquire about the
loan that Mr. Babaran is offering and he suggested that if she could
advertise it to someone else, she can avail the cash loan and the
appliance loan will be given to whoever takes or accept the offer. The
items he’s offering are those ready for pick up items in their house. As the
days went by, he was so persistent to advertise his bundle loans and
suggest options so that the complainant could avail of such while she is
paying him her weekly dues on time;

10. It was March 07, 2022, when the complainant first asked Mr. Babaran if
she could renew her first loan and the latter replied that she can only have
a cash loan if it is coupled with an appliance loan so he offered some
promos that according to him, a special promo for her, but she refused
because she cannot guarantee her payments. After another weeks of
paying, on March 27, 2022, the complainant again asked Mr. Babaran if
she can renew her first loan. Mr. Babaran replied again the condition that it
should be bundled with an appliance and he offered her a television that is
available to him on-hand in which he suggested that she could advertise it
to someone and the cash loan will be given to her. Unfortunately, she
cannot find anyone. So, the complainant asked him if she could avail of
other items such as gas range or aircon. Mr. Babaran refused and offered
a cellphone or an automatic washing machine instead. The complainant
begged him if there could be a chance that the cash loan would be first
given to her, but Mr. Babaran said he have insufficient funds for the
P20,000.00 cash loan and according to him, his financer would not agree
to such condition. When the complainant guaranteed Mr. Babaran that she
is willing to avail the bundle loan, on March 28, 2022, he sent to her the
initial amount of P15,000.00 cash loan through GCash and the P5,000.00
balance will be sent to her after deciding what appliance to avail;

11. The complainant offered Erlyn Alejandro the washing machine which the
one offered by Mr. Babaran amounting to P 29, 760.00, and Ms. Alejandro
availed it on the condition that the complainant will be the guarantor of
such item because Mr. Babaran transacts only with teachers. On the same

Page 3 of 10
 day, the P5,000.00 cash completing the cash loan of complainant
amounting to P20,000.00 was also released and an initial payment was
given by Ms. Alejandro on April 1, 2022. Mr. Babaran let the complainant
signed an agreement together with Ms. Alejandro and asked for P100.00
as notarial fee. No copy of the signed document was given to the
complainant and to Ms. Alejandro;

12. On April 2, 2022, Mr. Babaran informed the complainant that Ms. Pheng
Villegas failed to pay her debt on time in which the latter reminded Ms.
Villegas;

13. Due to the persistent acts of Mr. Babaran, the complainant has referred to
him several persons to avail of his “bundle loan” and she served as the
guarantor to the said loans since some of these individuals are not
teachers;

14. First, when Ms. Lyra Mae Andres Ali availed of the Vivo V236 cellphone.
On April 15, 2022, the complainant asked Mr. Babaran that there is a
person who wants to avail an appliance loan (cellphone). At first, Mr.
Babaran refused because the borrower is not a teacher but the
complainant was made to be the guarantor again. The loan was named
after the complainant and Mr. Babaran knew that it was for another
person. The said cellphone is bundled with a P10,000.00 cash loan which
was not released immediately because Mr. Babaran said that Ms. Pheng
Villegas has failed to pay her debt so the P10,000.00 cannot be
completed. Ms. Ali gave her 1 st payment and immediately, send it to Mr.
Babaran through GCash;

15. Second, the complainant referred also Ms. Alma Velasco, who availed to
Mr. Babaran a television but the former is not involved with their
transactions. However, Mr. Babaran would tell the complainant to remind
Ms. Velasco about her payment;

16. Third, on May 4, 2022, another transaction with Ms. Ali was made for a
Realme cellphone worth P 24, 996.00 and it was also named after the
complainant. Said gadget was also bundled with a P 10,000.00 cash loan;

17. Fourth, on May 5, 2022, Ms. Ali availed again a Lenovo notebook
amounting to P 24,996.00 and also named again after the complainant.
Said gadget was also bundled with a P 10,000.00 cash loan;

18. On May 11, 2022, Mr. Babaran gave the complainant a check representing
the bundled cash loan of the appliances (Vivo and Realme cellphone) that
was availed by Ms. Ali amounting to P20,000.00. However, the said check
does not amount to P20,000.00 because Mr. Babaran deducted the 1 st

Page 4 of 10
 payment of the complainant. The complainant encashed said check in
Eastwest Bank last May 12, 2022;

19. On May 15, 2022, the complainant failed to pay Mr. Babaran because Ms.
Ali and Ms. Alejandro, failed to pay her. However, the complainant
managed to reduce her payments on May 22, 2022;

20. Mr. Babaran offered the complainant again another bundle loan but she
refused to avail. The complainant asked him the cash loan bundled with
the Lenovo notebook amounting to P10,000.00. Mr. Babaran gave her a
check amounting to P 8,700.00 which he deducted her payment for the
television amounting to P1,200.00 and a notarial fee amounting to
P100.00. Mr. Babaran instructed her not to encash said check for
insufficiency of funds and in return, he gave her cash;

21. After some time, the complainant failed to pay Mr. Babaran on time (on the
15th and 30th of the month) due to Ms. Ali’s and Ms. Alejandro’s delayed
payments. The complainant always informed Mr. Babaran of her situation
but he told her that he was out of it. The complainant always makes it to a
point that she has to pay him on a partial basis and those payments are
made through GCash;

22. On June 2022, the complainant started to receive demeaning

unprofessional words and threatening chats from Mr. Babaran. He would
always say the following:

a. “Gawan mo na ng paraan kasi nagagalit na financer ko.

Magkakaproblema talaga tayo ma’am”;
b. “Nakaschedule bumisita ang financer ko sayo bukas”;
c. “Mahirap pag nagalit ang financer ko. Sinasabihan na kita habang
maaga pa”; and
d. “Hindi basta-basta mga financers ko.”

and other statements alike. Sometimes, because of the threatening chats

of Mr. Babaran, the complainant seldom replied to him because of the
anxiety it causes her. The complainant is explaining herself to him but he
would always say “Magbayad ka na dahil kung hindi, ipapasummon ka na
ng financer ko”. He would always have mentioned the word “summon”,
partial payments are not acceptable, hanging statements, and also
mentioned that his brother is a policeman;

23. Even if the complainant would pay him partially, Mr. Babaran still threatens
her. Almost every day, he would have bombarded her through chats
saying;

a. “Hoy, magbayad ka na”;

Page 5 of 10
 b. “Palpak ka. Maghanap ka na ng bayad mo habang may oras ka
pa”;
c. “Pasensyahan nalang tayo. Teacher to teacher”;
d. “Sa korte tayo magkita. Small claims na yan. Alam mo naman nasa
DepEd ka. Administrative case yan”;
e. “Ipapatawag kita sa school bukas”; and
f. “Nakakahiya ka. Pareho pa naman tayo sa DepEd pero ganyan ka
pala mangutang. Di ka nagbabayad ng due”.

and other statements as well as mentioning the name of the complainant’s

school head. All of these statements caused the complainant stress as
these demeaned her character as a public teacher;

24. On July 8, 2022, Mr. Babaran started sending the complainant pictures of
their barangay hall as well as his complaint letters against her from the
barangay. Mr. Babaran also sent a message to the complainant’s
Department Head telling her about the latter’s indebtedness to him and
that she should pay it on time. He even went to the complainant’s
classroom to collect payment. On August 15, 2022, Mr. Babaran sent a
complaint letter to the principal of the complainant, Ma’am Maribeth Dela
Pena, in which they confronted twice before her. On September 10, 2022,
the complainant received a summon from the Cauayan City Police Station
requesting her appearance to have a dialogue with Mr. Babaran which she
attended the following day. The complainant thought that Mr. Babaran
would stop sending her summons but on September 20, 2022, he again
filed a complaint against her in their Barangay at Tagaran, Cauayan City,
Isabela, and he even asked her to make a promissory note in front of
them;

25. In their last confrontation, Mr. Babaran said that all the complainant’s loans
are bearing an interest of 5% and another 2% per week additional interest
on default of payment. The complainant signed a promissory note
reluctantly because of his threat. After which, Mr. Babaran sent her again
his conversation with Fiscal Mates and he also keeps on mentioning MTC,
the Division Office, and Regional Office of the Department of Education. If
he hhasa chance, he makes way to demean the complainant’s character
to everyone especially to her co-teachers and their mutual friends;

26. On September 26, 2022, the complainant received a message from him
through Facebook Messenger saying, “may araw ka din” which is
threatening and demeaning and made the complainant fear for her life.
Furthermore, on September 29, 2022, Mr. Babaran also sent the
complainant a picture of his complaint letter addressed to the Division
Office with a message “pagbabayaran mo yang ginawa mo sa akin” and
because of his continuous threats and demeaning words, the complainant
is not only frightened for her own life but as well to her family’s security so

Page 6 of 10
 she filed a blotter report at the Cauayan City Police Station on October 1,
2022;

27. On October 5, 2022, a student came to the complainant’s room to collect

her debt as per instruction of Mr. Babaran. Said student also insisted that
Mr. Babaran is looking for her;

28. That the actions of Mr. Babaran have caused the complainant stress,
anguish, and sleepless nights because of his threats and demeaning
unprofessional words which degrade her character as a professional. Mr.
Babaran’s attitude exhibits an abusive and oppressive behavior that is
beneath his profession as a teacher;

29. In view of all these facts and circumstances, the legal aid clinic, has seen
that the acts and omissions by the person it complained violated Section 2
(e) and (u) and of DepEd Order No. 49 series 2006.

Section 2. Ground for Disciplinary Action – An administrative

complaint may be filed for any of the following grounds for disciplinary
action:

a. xxx
b. Disgraceful and immoral conduct
c. xxx
u. Lending money at usurious rates of interest
v.xxx

30. The foregoing acts of the herein respondent clearly constitute disgraceful
and immoral conduct under Section 2 (e) is an offense classified as
GRAVE OFFENSE under Section 58 A (15) on the same rules of
procedure which read as follow:
Section 58. Classification of Offenses – Administrative offenses with
corresponding penalties are classified into grave, less grave or light,
depending on their gravity or depravity and effects on the government
service.

The following are grave offenses with their corresponding penalties:

xxx 15. Disgraceful and immoral conduct: 1 st offense –

Suspension for six (6) months and one (1) day to one (1) year; 2 nd
offense – Dismissal

31. The loan services also of herein respondent is clearly a violation of Section
2 (u) in which it is an offense classified as LIGHT OFFENSE under Section
58 C (9) on the same rules of procedure which read as follow:

Page 7 of 10
 C. The following are Light Offenses with Corresponding Penalties:

xxx 9. Lending money at usurious rates of interest: 1 st offense –

Reprimand; 2nd offense – Suspension for one (1) to thirty (30) days; 3 rd
offense – Dismissal.

32. Lastly, the undersigned legal clinic manifest and move that the additional
pieces of evidence and the other affidavits of witnesses in support of this
complaint be presented within 15 days from submission hereof.

33. To prove these allegations, the clinic attaching hereto the following
documents:

33.1. ANNEX A-1 to A-55 – a copy of screenshots showing the

conversation of the complainant and defendant herein from Facebook
Messenger.

33.2. ANNEX B – a copy of the complaint letter sent by the defendant

to herein complainant’s principal.

33.3. ANNEX C – a copy of summon from the Cauayan City Police

Station sent by the defendant to the complainant.

33.4. ANNEX D – a copy of the complaint made by the defendant

against complainant at the Tagaran Barangay Hall.

33.5. ANNEX E- a copy of summon received by the complainant sent

from the Barangay requesting her appearance for a dialogue with the
defendant at the Barangay Hall of Tagaran, Cauayan City, Isabela.

33.6. ANNEX F – a copy of complainant’s blotter report at the Cauayan

City Police Station.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, it is respectfully prayed of this
Honorable Office, the following:
1. To issue of a formal charge against herein respondents for the offenses of
Grave Misconduct and Lending Money at Usurious Rates of Interest in
accordance with DepEd Order No. 49 s. 2006.

2. The issuance of a preventive suspension order to temporarily remove the

respondent from the scene of his misfeasance or malfeasance and to
preclude the possibility of exerting undue influence or pressure on the

Page 8 of 10
 witnesses against him or tampering of documentary evidence on file with his
office.

3. The issuance, after due process, a decision finding the respondents guilty as
charged with the corresponding penalty of dismissal from the service.

4. Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this

________________, at _________________________, Philippines.

ISABELA STATE UNIVERSITY

Counsel for Plaintiff
Isabela State University – College of Law Building,
No. 18 Dacanay St., Cauayan City, Isabela

By:

BANNYLYN MAE S. GAMIT

Law Student Practitioner
Level 1 Certification No. L1-II-CAU-2022-070
February 22, 2022; Cauayan City, Isabela

MAE HAZEL P. LIBED

Law Student Practitioner
Level 1 Certification No. L1-II-CAU-2022-008
February 22, 2022; Cauayan City, Isabela

HYGEIA EUREKA C. BARILLOS

Law Student Practitioner
Level 1 Certification No. L1-II-CAU-2022-002
February 22, 2022; Cauayan City, Isabela

ATTY. MARK ANGELO S. DELA PEÑA

Supervising Lawyer

Page 9 of 10
 VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, GENELLYN DELA CRUZ y CARMONA, of legal age, Filipino, married, and

a resident of CMP Padilla, Tagaran, Cauayan City, Isabela on oath, state:

1. The allegations in this complaint are true and correct based on my

personal knowledge, or based on authentic documents;
2. This complaint is not filed to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or
needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
3. The factual allegations herein have evidentiary support or, if specifically,
so identified, will likewise have evidentiary support after a reasonable
opportunity for discovery; and
4. That I have not theretofore commenced any action or filed any claim
involving the same issue/s in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency
and, to the best of his knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending
therein and if I should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or
claim has been filed or is pending, I shall report that fact within five
(5) calendar days therefrom to the court wherein this aforesaid complaint
or initiatory pleading has been filed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this 18 th day of

October, 2022 in Cauayan City, Isabela, Philippines.

GENELLYN C DELA CRUZ

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _______ day of

_________________, 2022 at Cauayan City, Isabela.

Doc No. ______;

Page No.______;
Book No.______;
Series of 2022.

        

Page 10 of 10