De Castro said EGI lawyers are also preparing to bring the matter to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP).
The two — EGI and UCPB — have had a rather cordial and friendly bank-client relationship dating back to 1994 but which turned sour in February last year when the controversy arose.
EGI, which has 53 condominium, hotel and similar building projects under its belt, is claiming that it has overpayed its obligations with UCPB by more than P100 million based on an internal memorandum to UCPB chairman Jeronimo U. Kilayko dated Feb. 22,2001 which fell into the hands of EGI senior vice president Grace Layug. Attached to the memo is a tabulation titled Final Settlement. It contains two columns, one with the heading Actual and another with the heading Disclosed to EGI. The two columns showed the same principal balance of P41.6 million which EGI still owes UCPB. However, the Actual column has an item called Accrued Interest Receivable reflecting the amount of P2.43 million while the Disclosed to EGI column has an item called Interest and reflecting the amount of P150.64 million. The memo also reflected an Actual balance of P146.55 million against a balance of P266.97 million under the Disclosed to EGI column.
In a letter to EGI president Eulalio Ganzon, UCPB first vice president explained that the "Feb. 22 internal memo simply detailed, for management’s information, the amount of interest which the UCPB can recover from your account. What you have erroneously claimed as the actual obligation of EGI as contained in said internal memo only refers to the outstanding obligation inclusive of interest that had been accrued up to the time the account became past due. This does not include interest owing to the UCPB from the time the account became past due up to the time of settlement."
Ganzon went on to describe the memo as "internal" and "highly confidential memo of the UCPB to which EGI or any unauthorized party has no right, and which surely must have been stolen from UCPB."
Accordingly, UCPB filed a theft case against Ganzon and Layug but the case was dismissed by the fiscal who opined that the respondents could not have stolen something which they were not even aware existed. UCPB filed an appeal but the same was dismissed. Changing lawyers, UCPB elevated the case to the Department of Justice where it is now pending. – Roman Floresca