REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES Regional Trial Court 6th Judicial Region Branch ___ Bacolod City -oOoSUSAN MENDOZA,

Plaintiff, -versusROMAN GARCIA Defendant, X--------------------------------X

ANSWER WITH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIM

Defendant, through counsel and to this Honorable Court, by way of Answer to the Complaint, copy of which was received by the defendant on September 7, 2011, most respectfully alleges:

1.

The allegations in paragraph 1 of the Complaint relative to herein parties are admitted;

2. The allegation in paragraph 2 relative to herein defendant is admitted; 3. The allegations in paragraphs 3,4 and 5 of the complaint are admitted; 4. Paragraph 6 of the Complaint is specifically denied. The truth of the matter is that plaintiff and defendant mutually agreed that the total cost of the project is Php2,500,000.00. Php 1,300,000.00 will be initially paid upon the commencement of the construction of the residential unit. The remaining PhP1,200,000.00 will be

proportionately divided to 5 monthly amortizations beginning 1 month after the initial payment. 5. The allegations in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the complaint are admitted; 6. Paragraph 9 of the Complaint is specifically denied. The truth of the matter is that plaintiff, being the owner of the residential building, is at the construction site every Saturday, constantly monitoring the progress of the work done by herein defendant. Attached is the Affidavit of Mr. Rolito Flores, the Construction Foreman of herein defendant, marked as Annex A ; 7. Paragraph 10 of the Complaint is specifically denied, the truth of the matter is that the plaintiff was the one who constantly refused to comply with the agreed terms of the undertaking. Plaintiff refused and continuously refuses to pay the agreed

amortizations of the remaining balance of the cost of construction, despite frequent

demands. Copy of the monthly billing statements duly received by plaintiff is hereto attached as Annex B . 8. The allegation in Paragraph 11 of the Complaint is admitted; 9. Paragraph 12 of the Complaint is specifically denied. The truth of the matter is that the plaintiff s refusal to comply with what was agreed upon as to the payment of monthly amortizations of the remaining balance of the construction cost had caused the delay in the progress of construction. 10. Paragraph 13 of the Complaint is specifically denied for lack of knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Answering defendant, Roman Garcia, reproduces all the foregoing allegations and by way of Affirmative Defenses, further alleges:

11.

Plaintiff and defendant mutually agreed that the latter shall construct a residential building for the former at a total construction cost of PhP 2,500,000.00;

12. Plaintiff shall render initial payment of PhP 1,300,000.00 before the commencement of the construction of the building while the remaining balance, subject to 10% Retention fee, shall be equally divided to Five (5) equal monthly amortizations payable one month after the date of initial payment; 13. The amount of amortization is PhP 190,000.00 payable monthly starting January 15, 2011; 14. Plaintiff FAILED TO COMPLY with what was agreed upon despite frequent demands from defendant; 15. Because of this non-compliance, defendant was constrained to limited availability of funds to purchase construction materials and later on reduced its workforce due to limited funds for salaries of the laborers; 16. Furthermore, plaintiff made unreasonable changes in the actual plan for the building, which also caused extra work and extra materials for the defendant; 17. Article 1724 of the New Civil Code states that, the contractor who undertakes to build a structure or any other work for a stipulated price, in conformity with plans and specifications agreed upon with the land-owner, can neither withdraw from the contract nor demand an increase in the price on account of the higher cost of labor or materials, save when there has been a change in the plans and specifications; 18. After the seventh month of construction, defendant, having no choice and acting in good faith, stopped the construction of the residential building. Article 1721 of the New Civil Code provides, if, in the execution of the work, an act of the employer is

required, and he incurs in delay or fails to perform the act, the contractor is entitled to a reasonable compensation. 19. In the interest of substantial justice, defendant s right to be compensated for the losses incurred is proper applying the principle of quantum meruit. When a person employs another to do work for him, without any agreement as to his compensation, the law implies a promise from, the employer to the workman that he will pay him for his services, as much as he may deserve or merit.

COUNTERCLAIM

20. Actual damages? 21. By reason of the filing of the instant case, defendant was forced to hire the services of a lwyer for a fee of PhP 100,000.00 plus Php 2,000.00 per court appearance, which plaintiff should reimburse; 22. Defendant likewise suffered besmirched reputation, sleepless nights and anxiety which entitles him to moral damages in the amount of PhP50,000.00.

PRAYER

Wherefore, Premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of the Honorable Court, to DISMISS the above-titled case for reasons above-stated.

Such other remedies deemed just and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for.

Bacolod City, Philippines, 9 September 2011.