It took me sometime to write this particular article as I have had a death in the family plus the fact that there were priorities that I had to take care aside from musing about my horrendous experience at the hands of mad power tripping employees from the LBC Branch located at Unit 110, Centermall, President's Ave. cor. G. Puyat, BF Homes, Paranaque City, Philippines. This does not preclude a few of their rude personnel answering their customer service hotline.
 Arrogant Customer Associate of LBC BF Homes, Paranaque Branch |  Customer Associate's name: Odiel R. Astibe |  Brutish and arrogant acting supervisor of LBC Paranaque Branch |  Delaying the release of my remittance. EMPLOYEE ID: 17090030 |  Verifying that he is not the supervisor of this branch but he's just trying to play the part. |
repeat customer
I have been a repeat customer during my early days as a freelancer sometime in 2010 long before I had a bank account. All I had to do was present the unique tracking number that a deemed valid ID (Identification card) WHICH BY THE WAY YOU CANNOT FIND IN THE PHILIPPINE COMPANY WEBSITE. Since this branch is conveniently near, it just takes me minutes to walk towards this place. In this particular photo, the company explains that an ID is being asked for first timers in that particular branch (or any branch for that matter) so that it could be recorded in their database in order not to hassle or give any inconvenience to the customer who personally get their remittance in that particular branch and therefore encouraging them to be repeat customers. Moreover, it is generally assumed that the person picking up that particular compensation is in possession of the unique tracking number that is being given by the sender not to mention that the photo that appears in the ID is one and the same. This is further bolstered by their customer service associate located at the General Aviation Center, Domestic Airport Compound, Domestic Road, Pasay City, in an email sent to me stating that: "Please be advice that we enter the ID number in our system for reference." in which she further quoted that this was the directive of the Central Bank that they follow.
Customer associate odiel r. astibe and customer associate id no. 17090030
It is unfortunate that a dear loved one passed away and I was the only one taking care of the affairs during that time. A very good friend decided to use the services of LBC's Instant Pesopack in order for me to get by during those trying moments. Going to LBC, I had two things in mind:
1. Get the remittance as a tracking number was provided.
2. On the business side, transmit two CDs in it's original packing hailing all the way from the UK to Gerona, Tarlac and get the matter over with.
Two things happened during this time:
1. Customer Associate ID No. 17090030 (REFUSING TO GIVE HIS NAME DURING THAT INSTANT) totally declined to accept and send my CDs even if it is in it's original content to the place stated above and just demurred with a sneer for reasons only known to himself while he sat smugly like a mafia boss with his arms folded at the other side of the table. Sending those CDs is NOT EVEN INCLUDED in their prohibited list as stated on their website; and,
2. As far as the remittance went, he passed the job to Customer Associate Astibe. I gave my tracking number however I totally forgot my ID so I had to quickly go home and get it. Upon my return, he could not release the condolence money EVEN IF HE KNEW IT WAS UNDER MY NAME INCLUSIVE OF MY PICTURE STILL POSSESSING THE SAME FEATURES on the premise that my baranggay ID had expired for two months blaming me for not renewing it He even advised that I should renew my baranggay ID so that I could claim the said renumeration. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS WAS ONLY ON THE FIRST WEEK OF JANUARY 2012 and it has only been barely two months plus the fact that never did I anticipate that a loved one would die barely within the first week of the New Year. Furthermore, in a biggety manner, he informed me that all IDs are inspected by them run by them quoting the Central Bank and that particular branch and it's personnel were given the authority by the Central Bank to do so as well as do background checks while the customer waits even if the remittance was just a lilliputian amount.
1. Get the remittance as a tracking number was provided.
2. On the business side, transmit two CDs in it's original packing hailing all the way from the UK to Gerona, Tarlac and get the matter over with.
Two things happened during this time:
1. Customer Associate ID No. 17090030 (REFUSING TO GIVE HIS NAME DURING THAT INSTANT) totally declined to accept and send my CDs even if it is in it's original content to the place stated above and just demurred with a sneer for reasons only known to himself while he sat smugly like a mafia boss with his arms folded at the other side of the table. Sending those CDs is NOT EVEN INCLUDED in their prohibited list as stated on their website; and,
2. As far as the remittance went, he passed the job to Customer Associate Astibe. I gave my tracking number however I totally forgot my ID so I had to quickly go home and get it. Upon my return, he could not release the condolence money EVEN IF HE KNEW IT WAS UNDER MY NAME INCLUSIVE OF MY PICTURE STILL POSSESSING THE SAME FEATURES on the premise that my baranggay ID had expired for two months blaming me for not renewing it He even advised that I should renew my baranggay ID so that I could claim the said renumeration. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS WAS ONLY ON THE FIRST WEEK OF JANUARY 2012 and it has only been barely two months plus the fact that never did I anticipate that a loved one would die barely within the first week of the New Year. Furthermore, in a biggety manner, he informed me that all IDs are inspected by them run by them quoting the Central Bank and that particular branch and it's personnel were given the authority by the Central Bank to do so as well as do background checks while the customer waits even if the remittance was just a lilliputian amount.
Customer representatives by phone and email
I complained about the arrogant much less the strange logic of this representative on the same day and in a nutshell:
1. A supervisor by the name of "Cyril" (Lady) refused to take down my complaint and even threatened me that the call was being recorded which can be used against me WHICH IS ABSOLUTE BOLLOCKS! For anyone that calls the establishment for any inquiry or complaint, they just quickly the customary greeting of "Hello, Company Name and Name of the Agent. Failure to inform the calling party either through an automated service or at the onset of the call that said action is and will be recorded is tantamount to a violation against two edicts, The Right to Privacy under the Philippine Constitutional Law Section 3, and the Anti-Wire Tapping Act to which has not been amended to date just to suit another party's need;
2. Two ladies helped me: Princess Lopez and Jehan Raymundo, her supervisor and advised me to write down and email my complaint to customercare@lbcexpress.com. Ms. Princess Lopez further elucidated that the background check that Mr. Astibe was talking about only bordered upon asking me whether or not I still worked for the company and as further illuminated by their email customer associate by the name of Mary Joyce Alcantara, "Please be informed that we validate company ID through checking the validity of the card." (referring to the ID.) "Please be informed that we are under the rules of BSP when claiming a remittance, the reason why an associate is looking for a valid Identification card. Under the rules of BSP valid up to date ID." (Again not stated in their website).
1. A supervisor by the name of "Cyril" (Lady) refused to take down my complaint and even threatened me that the call was being recorded which can be used against me WHICH IS ABSOLUTE BOLLOCKS! For anyone that calls the establishment for any inquiry or complaint, they just quickly the customary greeting of "Hello, Company Name and Name of the Agent. Failure to inform the calling party either through an automated service or at the onset of the call that said action is and will be recorded is tantamount to a violation against two edicts, The Right to Privacy under the Philippine Constitutional Law Section 3, and the Anti-Wire Tapping Act to which has not been amended to date just to suit another party's need;
2. Two ladies helped me: Princess Lopez and Jehan Raymundo, her supervisor and advised me to write down and email my complaint to customercare@lbcexpress.com. Ms. Princess Lopez further elucidated that the background check that Mr. Astibe was talking about only bordered upon asking me whether or not I still worked for the company and as further illuminated by their email customer associate by the name of Mary Joyce Alcantara, "Please be informed that we validate company ID through checking the validity of the card." (referring to the ID.) "Please be informed that we are under the rules of BSP when claiming a remittance, the reason why an associate is looking for a valid Identification card. Under the rules of BSP valid up to date ID." (Again not stated in their website).
pertinent to the said bangko sentral ng pilipinas circular on what valid id's to present.......
The recently promulgated Monetary Board Resolution (MBR) #553 via BSP Circular # 608 series of 2008
As per the email sent to me, Ms. Alcantara asserted that they are under the governance of the BSP (Banko Sentral ng Pilipinas) and they follow what the said government office has forwarded to them.
However, upon a closer perusal of such allegation, The BSP (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas) states the following:
"The recently promulgated Monetary Board Resolution (MBR) #553 via BSP Circular # 608 series of 2008 requires depositors to present only one (1) valid identification issued by an “official authority” (click here to view copy of said Circular) from the previous three (3) IDs as required by most financial institutions. Quoting further, "The resolution does not only apply to account opening but also to other banking transactions such as claiming of remittance proceeds by OFW beneficiaries" which could then be inferred to include remittance proceeds period. Lastly, the BSP Circular also states that, "It is hoped that this new resolution would make banking more accessible to a broader segment of the population who were previously unable to avail of bank services due to inadequate means of identification."
NOTHING THERE IS STATED THAT THE ID SHOULD BE UP TO DATE. In finality, quoting the circular itself, "For purposes of this Circular, financial transactions may include remittances, among others, as falling under the definition of transaction."; and,
3. When I called back, and as narrated and checked by the two representatives that I spoke to earlier on the phone plus another by the name of CIELO CELO, they have no employee nor supervisor recorded by the name of "Cyril", contractual, regular, man or woman to speak of.
However, upon a closer perusal of such allegation, The BSP (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas) states the following:
"The recently promulgated Monetary Board Resolution (MBR) #553 via BSP Circular # 608 series of 2008 requires depositors to present only one (1) valid identification issued by an “official authority” (click here to view copy of said Circular) from the previous three (3) IDs as required by most financial institutions. Quoting further, "The resolution does not only apply to account opening but also to other banking transactions such as claiming of remittance proceeds by OFW beneficiaries" which could then be inferred to include remittance proceeds period. Lastly, the BSP Circular also states that, "It is hoped that this new resolution would make banking more accessible to a broader segment of the population who were previously unable to avail of bank services due to inadequate means of identification."
NOTHING THERE IS STATED THAT THE ID SHOULD BE UP TO DATE. In finality, quoting the circular itself, "For purposes of this Circular, financial transactions may include remittances, among others, as falling under the definition of transaction."; and,
3. When I called back, and as narrated and checked by the two representatives that I spoke to earlier on the phone plus another by the name of CIELO CELO, they have no employee nor supervisor recorded by the name of "Cyril", contractual, regular, man or woman to speak of.
The second coming (customer associate id no. 17090030)
 |  |
I finally found my office ID and went back the following day. Mr. Astibe was not around and instead, I was confronted by this little tyrant whose just another customer associate but claimed to be the acting supervisor whose last three (3) pictures appear above. When I presented my ID, he laughed and smirked and told me, "Hahahaha! Di mo makukuha ang pera mo kasi mali ang spelling ng pangalan mo. Ang gawin mo, magpagawa ka ng panibagong ID o ipa-claim mo na lang sa iba at utusan mo yung nagbigay ng abuloy na ipangalan na lang sa iba para makuha mo pera mo." (Hahahaha! You cannot get your condolence money because your name was misspelled so I would advice you to just manufacture a new ID or ask the sender to just name the remittance under someone else in order to claim your money.) Now he's teaching me to falsify my credentials wherein I have been presenting that same ID ever since I began my transactions with them way back January 2010.
THIS IS PLAIN MOCKERY AND BLATANT DEFALCATION!
WHAT WAS MORE OFFENSIVE IS THAT I CAUGHT HIM TRYING TO POCKET MY OFFICE ID AND SIMULTANEOUSLY ACCOSTED HIM FOR DOING SUCH IN WHICH HE COULD NOT GIVE A REPLY. TWICE I DEMANDED MY ID BACK AND ON THE THIRD TIME AFTER HURLING AN UNMENTIONABLE INVECTIVE, HE MEEKLY OBLIGED!
To top it all, I was totally irritated over the matter is that this particular error WAS NEVER INFORMED BY CUSTOMER ASSOCIATE ASTIBE WHEREIN IT COULD BE SEEN THAT I WENT THERE TWICE ON THE SAME DAY otherwise I would have kindly informed the well - meaning sender over the matter!
I really blew my top over this one and he knew very well what the money was for and stormed out of the place. Customer Associate ID NO. 17090030's reason as to why he almost tried to slip my ID in his pocket and not letting it go is beyond my comprehension. I believe that the Central Bank of the Philippines does not sanction such devious activity since this particular branch and the establishment's overall customer service department has been loosely quoting such institution as if it were it were the preamble to the Philippine Constitution.
Furiously I wrote the sender who tried to get the money back from the Alabang branch where she sent the money to but according to that branch, she cannot get her money back anymore because she would have to pay a penalty (?) for doing such. Again, there is no such thing stated in their website much less their terms and conditions of contract found at the back of the receipt which states the following:
"12. Shipper agrees that Pesopack for pick-up not claimed within 5 days from date of acceptance as shown in this contract shall be forwarded back to Manila Head Office for safe keeping. However, either shipper or consignee may claim and request the said Pesopack be forwarded back to LBC main office of the place of origin or destination."
Even the poor shipper was subjected under a behest threat by the branch where she placed the remittance to that she would be liable to pay for any penalty in order to withdraw the money back even if she has already paid corresponding service fee to transmit the money in the first place.
Pure legalized larceny and once more using the BSP to suit their needs of keeping the money in their coffers.
In an earlier conversation that I had with Ms. Lopez, this bolstered her statement that once the remittance is unclaimed then the money is theirs to keep and treasure just like any spoils of war.
THIS IS PLAIN MOCKERY AND BLATANT DEFALCATION!
WHAT WAS MORE OFFENSIVE IS THAT I CAUGHT HIM TRYING TO POCKET MY OFFICE ID AND SIMULTANEOUSLY ACCOSTED HIM FOR DOING SUCH IN WHICH HE COULD NOT GIVE A REPLY. TWICE I DEMANDED MY ID BACK AND ON THE THIRD TIME AFTER HURLING AN UNMENTIONABLE INVECTIVE, HE MEEKLY OBLIGED!
To top it all, I was totally irritated over the matter is that this particular error WAS NEVER INFORMED BY CUSTOMER ASSOCIATE ASTIBE WHEREIN IT COULD BE SEEN THAT I WENT THERE TWICE ON THE SAME DAY otherwise I would have kindly informed the well - meaning sender over the matter!
I really blew my top over this one and he knew very well what the money was for and stormed out of the place. Customer Associate ID NO. 17090030's reason as to why he almost tried to slip my ID in his pocket and not letting it go is beyond my comprehension. I believe that the Central Bank of the Philippines does not sanction such devious activity since this particular branch and the establishment's overall customer service department has been loosely quoting such institution as if it were it were the preamble to the Philippine Constitution.
Furiously I wrote the sender who tried to get the money back from the Alabang branch where she sent the money to but according to that branch, she cannot get her money back anymore because she would have to pay a penalty (?) for doing such. Again, there is no such thing stated in their website much less their terms and conditions of contract found at the back of the receipt which states the following:
"12. Shipper agrees that Pesopack for pick-up not claimed within 5 days from date of acceptance as shown in this contract shall be forwarded back to Manila Head Office for safe keeping. However, either shipper or consignee may claim and request the said Pesopack be forwarded back to LBC main office of the place of origin or destination."
Even the poor shipper was subjected under a behest threat by the branch where she placed the remittance to that she would be liable to pay for any penalty in order to withdraw the money back even if she has already paid corresponding service fee to transmit the money in the first place.
Pure legalized larceny and once more using the BSP to suit their needs of keeping the money in their coffers.
In an earlier conversation that I had with Ms. Lopez, this bolstered her statement that once the remittance is unclaimed then the money is theirs to keep and treasure just like any spoils of war.
the one week litmus test
Because I had a lot to do, it took almost a week or so before I went back to that horrible place. Once more it was Customer Associate ID No. 17090030 who attended to this seemingly game of ping-pong. He asked me to sit down as he would have to call the main office in order to have my money released as it was placed on hold. It took him almost thirty minutes (30 min.) to do so and it was only me that he was attending to. Finally he reached someone from that office who obviously questioned him of his authority and in the end asked for his ID number and other credentials which he then lowered his voice for people not to hear and then went back to his usual tone explaining that their supervisor is located somewhere in Las Pinas and that he is now the acting supervisor over the place until finally, in less than a minute, I got my condolence money.
caveat: please beware of transacting with these individuals or this particular branch. whatever it is that they have intended (maybe they're trying to keep a quota or another agenda is in the works) i can only speculate as to why they have done this:
1. The individuals whose pictures appear above have tried their best to keep the money meant for bereavement which is morally reprehensible.
2. they make their rules as they go along smearing the name of the bsp and they will exert every effort to even charging an alleged penalty should a sender withdraw the money from them since the transaction was unsatisfactory.
3. this last individual has fast hands, he almost got away by stealing my id.
4. their customer service department via phone and email will result to threats and intimidation by any means necessary in order to justify the branch's action and yes...keep the money!
5. they only choose what they want to send depending on the amount to be paid by the customer. (for quota purposes maybe? i can only guess).
THEY CANNOT SAY THAT I HAVE NOT TRIED TO COMMUNICATE IN ALL MEANS POSSIBLE. THIS POST IS INTENDED AS A WARNING TO THOSE WHO ARE BOUND TO BE VICTIMIZED AND AS A CORRECTIVE MEASURE FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS TO EITHER MEND THEIR ERRING WAYS OR FOR MAIN OFFICE TO GIVE THEM SANCTIONS (OR ADDITIONAL LAURELS and a possible office promotion FOR DECEIT) AS FAR AS THIS PARTICULAR INCIDENT GOES AND TO ANYONE WHO THEY MAY VICTIMIZE.
In a somewhat similar episode, there was a post on a social networking site there was an allegation that an employee from LBC Shangrila who supposedly stole a customer's remittance and his picture sans his name was featured. It is not certain whether the company has done anything about this matter. Again, no one is stopping anyone to do business with them because I believe that not all of their offices are being run like some thievery satellite but please beware and be aware of these characters stated above.
RSS Feed