The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed complaints against two other companies belonging to the Legacy Group before the Department of Justice (DOJ) for alleged violation of the Securities Regulation Code and the Corporation Code.

The SEC identified the companies as Conventional Realty Corp. (CRC) and Shining Armour Property (SAP). Both are headed by Celso de los Angeles, owner of the embattled Legacy Group of Companies.

Besides de los Angeles, the commission named his estranged wife, Ma. Concepcion; son, Nicolo; mother, Purita; and brother, Victorino, among the respondents, they being officers of both companies.

Other respondents include Roy Hilario and lawyer Christine Cruz-Limpin, both officers of CRC; and Namnama Pasetes and Rachell Baldovino, director and assistant  corporate secretary of SAP, respectively.

Meanwhile, the Court of Appeals (CA)yesterday said it would come up with a resolution on or before April 16 on the issue of whether to extend the 20-day freeze order it earlier issued in favor of the Antimoney Laundering Council.

The CA’s Former Special Third Division issued a 20-day freeze order on March 27 against the 1,177 bank accounts supposedly used by the Legacy Group of Companies in siphoning off the funds of its investors and preneed holders.

Based on the complaints, the SEC accused the CRC and SAP of acting as conduits of Legacy Consolidated Plans in its schemes—“double-your- money program,” “mutual fund,” and “preneed buy back with deed of assignment”—to defraud its investors.

The said schemes offered an unusual rate of interest as high as 100 percent to every investor with an assurance that they will be paid through postdated checks payable on equal monthly and/or quarterly basis.

Part of its modus operandi is to use sales agents to offer and sell investment products to the public, and once an investment is made, the investor is issued with receipts bearing the names of various companies, such as CRC and SAP.

However, the SEC stressed that Legacy Consolidated was only authorized to sell preneed plans to the public and not other securities, such as investment contracts.

The commission noted that under Section 8 of the SRC, investment contracts are required to be registered before being sold to the general public.

The complainants added Legacy Consolidated used the names CRC and SAP as its business conduits for the purpose of issuing the postdated checks given to the complainants-investors and assuming liability for their payment.

“There was a commonality in the modus operandi in the companies involved where there was a patent unity of purpose or design in their concerted solicitation efforts. Thus, these acts undertaken by Legacy Consolidated Plans Inc. and the respondents… implied a conscious and intentional design to do a wrongful act for a dishonest purpose of exacting and fraudulently taking the public’s hard-earned monies,” the SEC said.

In issuing the postdated checks, the SEC said CRC and SAP perpetrated the fraudulent schemes of Legacy Consolidated, such as the selling of unregistered securities, to the detriment of its investors.

In particular, the SEC accused CRC and SAP of violating Section 8 and 26 of Republic Act 8799, or the Securities Regulation Code, and Section 45 of the Corporation Code.

Section 26 of SRC prohibits the purchase or sale of securities for fraudulent means, while Section 45 of the Corporation Code states that “no corporation shall possess or exercise any corporate powers except those conferred by this Code or by its articles of incorporation, and except such as are necessary or incidental to the exercise of the powers so conferred.”