Winning a PAG-IBIG (HDMF) foreclosed property at auction is often only the start of the “possession phase.” The buyer may face occupants who refuse to leave—sometimes the former borrower, sometimes tenants, relatives, caretakers, or third parties. In Philippine practice, the two most-used legal pathways to obtain physical possession are:

Writ of Possession (most commonly tied to foreclosure), and
Ejectment cases (forcible entry / unlawful detainer) under Rule 70.

They are related but not interchangeable. Choosing the correct remedy depends on how the foreclosure was done, whether the buyer’s title has been consolidated, and who the occupants are and why they are there.

1) The possession problem after a PAG-IBIG foreclosure

Typical post-auction scenario

After the auction sale, the winning bidder receives documents evidencing the sale (commonly a Certificate of Sale). Even if the buyer has paid, occupants are not automatically removed. If they do not vacate voluntarily, the buyer must use lawful processes.

Who might be occupying?

The mortgagor (original borrower) and family
People claiming under the mortgagor (relatives, caretakers, “house-sitters,” employees)
Tenants/lessees (with or without a written lease)
Third parties claiming an independent right (e.g., someone asserting they purchased earlier, an heir asserting ownership, an alleged co-owner, or someone occupying “adversely”)

Different occupants can mean different legal routes.

2) The two main remedies: quick map

A. Writ of Possession (foreclosure-based)

A writ of possession is a court order directing the sheriff to place the buyer in possession of the property.

Best suited when the occupant is the mortgagor or persons claiming under the mortgagor.
Often faster than a full trial because it is typically summary/ex parte in nature in extrajudicial foreclosure settings (subject to important limits discussed below).
Typically filed in the RTC of the place where the property is located.

B. Ejectment (Rule 70: Forcible Entry / Unlawful Detainer)

An ejectment case is a court action in the MTC/MeTC/MCTC to recover physical possession.

Appropriate when:
- the occupant is arguably a third party with a claim not clearly derived from the mortgagor, or
- the situation does not cleanly fit writ-of-possession rules, or
- the buyer needs a judgment for possession and damages (rent, attorney’s fees).
Requires pleadings, hearings, and proof (but Rule 70 is designed to be faster than ordinary civil cases).

3) Understanding the foreclosure context (why it matters)

PAG-IBIG foreclosures are commonly extrajudicial, meaning the mortgage contains a power of sale, and foreclosure is conducted without a full-blown court trial. This matters because the classic writ of possession framework for extrajudicial foreclosure is built around Act No. 3135 (as amended).

Key stages you’ll hear about

Auction Sale → issuance/registration of Certificate of Sale
Redemption period (in many extrajudicial foreclosures, the law provides a redemption period; actual applicability can vary depending on the status of the debtor and other factors)
Consolidation of title → execution of a deed of consolidation, cancellation of old title, issuance of a new title in the buyer’s name
Possession enforcement → voluntary turnover or court-assisted process

The buyer’s ability to get a writ of possession and the conditions (like bond requirements) often depend on whether the buyer seeks possession during a redemption period or after consolidation.

4) Writ of Possession in extrajudicial foreclosure (Act 3135 framework)

4.1 What a writ of possession is for

In extrajudicial foreclosure, the purchaser’s right to possession is strongly protected. Courts generally treat issuance of the writ as ministerial once legal prerequisites are met—meaning the court usually does not conduct a full trial on ownership issues just to issue the writ.

4.2 When you can apply

Common timing patterns:

After the auction sale (and registration of the certificate of sale): a buyer may seek possession even during the redemption period, but a bond is commonly required if possession is sought before the redemption period ends.
After consolidation of title: the buyer’s right is stronger, and the writ is typically available without posting a bond.

4.3 Where and how it’s filed

Usually filed as a petition/motion for issuance of writ of possession in the RTC where the property is located.
Often ex parte (without needing to summon and try the occupants first), subject to limits.
The RTC issues the writ; the sheriff implements it.

4.4 What the sheriff can do

Implementation can include:

Serving the writ and notice to vacate/turn over,
Physically placing the purchaser in possession,
Requiring occupants to leave,
Coordinating for peace and order (often with local officials and, when necessary, police assistance).

Self-help by the buyer (changing locks, cutting utilities, removing property without authority) is risky and can create criminal and civil exposure.

5) The most important limit: writ of possession vs “third parties”

A writ of possession in foreclosure is generally effective against:

The mortgagor, and
Anyone claiming under the mortgagor (family members, successors, occupants whose stay traces to the mortgagor’s permission, many lessees).

However, it is not a universal bulldozer against everyone.

5.1 Who may resist or complicate enforcement

If an occupant claims an independent right that is adverse to the mortgagor (not derived from the mortgagor), courts often treat them as third parties. In such cases, the occupant may not be summarily dispossessed via a foreclosure writ alone; the purchaser may be pushed toward ejectment or another appropriate action to litigate possession rights.

Examples that commonly trigger “third-party” issues:

Someone claiming they bought the property earlier (whether valid or not),
Someone claiming co-ownership or inheritance independent of the mortgagor’s authority,
A possessor alleging rights predating the mortgage or otherwise not tied to the mortgagor.

5.2 Practical takeaway

If the occupant is plainly the borrower or the borrower’s household/privies: writ of possession is usually the primary tool.
If the occupant looks like a genuine third-party claimant: be ready for ejectment (Rule 70) or a more appropriate civil action.

6) Ejectment (Rule 70): Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer

Ejectment cases determine physical possession (possession de facto)—not ultimate ownership. They are filed in the first-level courts (MTC/MeTC/MCTC). They are designed to be summary and quicker than ordinary civil actions, though delays still happen.

6.1 Which ejectment case applies?

A) Forcible Entry

Use when the occupant took possession by:

force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth.

Key point: the one-year period is counted from the date of actual entry, or from discovery in cases of stealth.

B) Unlawful Detainer

Use when the occupant’s initial possession was lawful (by contract, tolerance, permission), but became illegal because the right to stay ended, and the occupant refused to leave.

Typical in foreclosure aftermath where:

The borrower is “tolerated” for a time after sale/consolidation,
Tenants refuse to leave after the buyer demands turnover,
Relatives/caretakers stay by the borrower’s permission.

A prior written demand to vacate is a central requirement in unlawful detainer.

6.2 Why ejectment is often used even when you have a title

Even if the buyer has a new title after consolidation, ejectment can still be necessary when:

the occupant is a third party not clearly bound by the foreclosure relationship,
the buyer needs a judgment that includes rent/damages,
the facts don’t fit the writ-of-possession pathway cleanly.

6.3 Jurisdiction and venue

Filed in the MTC/MeTC/MCTC where the property is located.
These courts have exclusive original jurisdiction over ejectment.

6.4 Evidence that typically matters

Proof of buyer’s right (certificate of sale, deed of consolidation, new title, tax declaration, etc.)
Proof of demand (unlawful detainer)
Proof of the occupant’s entry/how they came to stay
Proof of refusal to vacate
For damages: proof of fair rental value, unpaid rentals, attorney’s fees (as allowable)

6.5 Relief you can ask for

Restitution of possession
Payment of reasonable compensation for use and occupation (rent)
Damages, attorney’s fees, and costs (as justified)
Immediate execution rules can apply in ejectment, but require strict compliance and can be contested via supersedeas bond and rental deposits.

7) Barangay conciliation (Katarungang Pambarangay): when it appears

For many disputes between individuals residing in the same city/municipality, barangay conciliation is a precondition to filing in court. Whether it applies depends on the parties, their residences, and statutory exceptions (e.g., urgent legal actions, parties who do not fall under barangay jurisdiction, etc.).

In practice:

Many lawyers still serve a formal written demand and evaluate whether KP is required before filing an ejectment case.
When required and skipped, a case can be dismissed or delayed.

Because this is highly fact-specific (addresses, party status, and exceptions), it’s usually treated as a checklist item before filing.

8) Choosing the correct remedy: decision guide

Step 1: Identify the foreclosure posture

Do you have only a certificate of sale?
Has title been consolidated and transferred to you?

This affects bond requirements and the overall strength of a writ-of-possession application.

Step 2: Identify the occupants’ legal relationship

Ask: “Are they here because of the borrower/mortgagor, or independent of the mortgagor?”

Mortgagor / family / people claiming under mortgagor → writ of possession is commonly viable.
Independent third-party claimant → expect resistance; ejectment or another action may be needed.

Step 3: Identify what you need beyond mere turnover

If you want possession quickly and the occupants are privies of the mortgagor → pursue writ of possession.
If you also want damages/rent and a full judgment against a resistant occupant → ejectment may be preferable or complementary.

9) Can you do both?

They are different tracks:

Writ of possession is a foreclosure-incident remedy typically used to implement the purchaser’s possessory right arising from the foreclosure sale and consolidation.
Ejectment is a possession action to litigate who has the better right to physical possession at the time.

In real-world practice:

A buyer may start with a writ of possession; if enforcement is blocked by a third-party claim, the buyer may pivot to ejectment (or another appropriate case).
In some scenarios, a buyer may file ejectment directly to avoid being stalled by third-party resistance.

10) Common occupant arguments and how they usually play out (possession-focused)

“We have nowhere to go / humanitarian reasons”

Courts and sheriffs must maintain peace and order, but hardship alone typically does not defeat a lawful writ or a valid ejectment judgment.

“The foreclosure was invalid”

Writ proceedings generally do not try the full validity of the foreclosure in the same way as an ordinary case. Occupants may file separate actions to annul foreclosure, but possession remedies may proceed unless restrained by a proper court order.

“We are tenants; we have a lease”

If the tenancy is derived from the mortgagor, the buyer often steps into a complex area:

Some leases may bind the purchaser depending on timing, registration, and applicable laws.
Some tenancies may be considered terminated by the foreclosure context, but outcomes vary by facts (written contract, period, notice, good faith, whether the lease is registered, etc.). When the tenant asserts independent enforceable rights, ejectment often becomes the battleground.

“I’m a third party; I’m not the borrower”

This is the line that often forces a shift from writ-of-possession speed to the more litigated route of ejectment or other actions.

11) Practical, lawful sequence many buyers follow

1) Document everything immediately

Take dated photos/videos of occupancy, condition, and posted notices.
Gather property documents: certificate of sale, deed of consolidation, new title, tax declaration, receipts.

2) Serve a clear written demand to vacate

Even when pursuing a writ, a written demand helps:

Establish refusal,
Support unlawful detainer if needed,
Show good faith and orderly conduct.

3) If occupants refuse, choose the remedy based on occupant type

Mortgagor/privies → petition for writ of possession (RTC)
Unclear/third-party claimant → ejectment (MTC) may be more appropriate

4) Enforce only through lawful officers

Implementation should be through the sheriff (writ) or via execution of an ejectment judgment.
Avoid self-help measures that can trigger criminal complaints (e.g., coercion, trespass, malicious mischief) or civil damages.

12) Special notes that often matter in PAG-IBIG foreclosed properties

A) “As-is, where-is” vs possession

Auctions often sell properties “as-is, where-is,” but that typically concerns physical condition and sometimes occupancy risk—it does not mean the buyer has no remedy. It means the buyer should expect to do the legal work to obtain possession if occupants resist.

B) Transfer expenses and timing vs possession timing

Many buyers prioritize title transfer and consolidation first, because:

It strengthens the buyer’s posture in both writ and ejectment,
It reduces ambiguity about authority to demand turnover.

C) Coordination with local officials

Even with a writ, enforcement is smoother when coordinated properly to maintain peace and order. But local officials cannot replace the court’s authority.

13) When ejectment is not enough: accion publiciana / reivindicatoria (brief orientation)

When possession issues go beyond the narrow scope of Rule 70 (e.g., the dispute involves better right to possess not confined to the Rule 70 timeline, or effectively requires broader adjudication), buyers sometimes move to:

Accion publiciana (recovery of better right to possess, typically when dispossession lasted more than one year), or
Accion reivindicatoria (recovery of ownership plus possession).

These are generally filed in the RTC and take longer than ejectment.

14) Bottom line principles

Writ of possession is the foreclosure purchaser’s primary mechanism to obtain possession against the mortgagor and privies, especially after consolidation of title.
Ejectment (Rule 70) is the primary mechanism when the occupant is a resistant possessor whose continued stay needs adjudication, especially third-party claimants or situations requiring a classic demand-and-refusal framework (unlawful detainer) or force/stealth entry allegations (forcible entry).
The hardest cases are not about paperwork—they are about who the occupant is and whether their claim is derivative of the mortgagor or independent/adverse.