Thursday, June 25, 2026

SEC revokes firm’s license over undisclosed online loan apps

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has revoked the corporate registration and lending license of Delisha Lending Investor and Trading Corp. after finding that the company operated several undisclosed online lending applications and repeatedly failed to comply with regulatory requirements.

In an order dated June 15, the SEC’s Financing and Lending Companies Department found Delisha Lending in violation of the implementing rules of the Lending Company Regulation Act and several SEC issuances.

Seven company officers and directors were also ordered to pay administrative penalties of P50,000 each, or a total of P350,000.

A key violation cited by the regulator was the company’s failure to disclose its operation of multiple online lending platforms.

The SEC identified the apps as Peso Cow – Mabilis Pera Loan, Peso Cow, Bingo Peso: Philippine Cash Loan, and Kapit Cash – Online Quick Loan, which were not disclosed as required under SEC Memorandum Circular No. 19, Series of 2019.

The commission also found that Delisha Lending continued operating the undisclosed lending apps despite the moratorium imposed under Memorandum Circular No. 10, Series of 2020, which prohibits new and unrecorded online lending platforms.

Aside from issues involving the online lending apps, the company failed to submit required reports, including its general information sheets, audited financial statements, interim financial reports, and other mandatory filings for multiple years.

It also failed to pay annual fees from 2014 to 2025 and did not provide updated contact information to the SEC.

Explaining its decision, the SEC said the company’s repeated violations left it with little choice but to revoke its registration and authority to operate.

“In view of the multiplicity, duration, seriousness, and continuing character of [Delisha Lending’s] violations, and in light of its failure to heed the Commission’s notices and directives, the [SEC] finds that revocation is not only authorized by law but compelled by the circumstances,” the order read.

The order added: “The violations are substantial, systemic, and deliberate. The record shows no genuine effort at correction, only repeated default and regulatory defiance.”

- Advertisement -spot_img

RELEVANT STORIES

spot_img

LATEST

- Advertisement -spot_img