CoA calls out Pangasinan water firm over land titling
CoA noted that SMWD’s ownership of the structures and other improvements situated in the untitled lot may also be at stake.
CoA noted that SMWD’s ownership of the structures and other improvements situated in the untitled lot may also be at stake.

Tolosa said the prosecution has taken no formal position because its focus remains on presenting evidence.

Aquino noted that while Duterte’s statements were clearly captured on video, the failure to identify the alleged hitman…

Celebrates Diversity, Equality, at Las Piñas Pride Celebration 2026

Students and parents can now report bullying cases directly to the Department of Justice (DoJ), which says it is ready…

Pasig Mayor Vico Sotto urged graduating law students of the University of the Philippines to resist everyday ethical…

What's your take?
Google Preferred Sources
Get more Daily Tribune stories in your search results
Add Daily Tribune as a preferred source on Google Search.
Continue reading
The Commission on Audit (CoA) had reprimanded the Santa Maria Water District (SMWD) in Pangasinan for neglecting to obtain ownership titles for three parcels of land, which it said could be lost due to potential claims from third parties.
The 2023 CoA report showed that the SMWD acquired two untitled land properties through procurement, while the other was acquired by donation.
The procured lands, totaling 100 and 200 square meters, had selling prices of P75,000 and P275,000, respectively. Meanwhile, the donated 500 sq.m land was valued at P500,000.
State auditors cautioned that the properties, not covered with a certificate of title, contravened Section 2 of the Government Auditing Code of the Philippines, requiring conclusive proof of ownership or certificate of title from any government agency that procured the land.
The CoA said SMWD also breached Section 58 of the Government Auditing Code of the Philippines, stipulating that every government agency is responsible for ascertaining their property’s existence, ownership, valuation, and encumbrances.
The audit team said that while a land account presented by SMWD may serve as proof that it has a valid claim over the property or as a basis for inferring possession, it was still not conclusive evidence of ownership.
“Only when a ‘certificate of Title under the Torrens System is validly secured from the Registry of Deeds that absolute ownership of the lot could be established,” CoA said.
“Failure of the management to secure title of the said lot exposed SMWD to the risk of possible loss from third-party claims,” added CoA, noting that SMWD’s ownership of the structures and other improvements situated in the untitled lot may also be at stake.