SEC upholds revocation of Digido’s corporate registration, financing license
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has directed Digido Finance Corp. to permanently halt its financing operations, after finding that the company continued its operations despite the revocation of its corporate registration and secondary license last year.
In an order dated February 18, the SEC Financing and Lending Companies Department (FLCD) found Digido administratively liable for violation of Section 12(b)(1) and (2), and Section 14 of the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) of Republic Act No. 8556, or the Financing Company Act (FCA).
Section 12 of the FCA IRR prohibits an entity from engaging in the business of a financing company and holding itself out as such without a valid certificate of authority and certification of incorporation, while Section 14 sanctions non-compliance with a lawful and immediately executory order of the Commission.
Subsequently, the SEC directed Digido to pay an administrative fine of ₱600,000, consisting of a ₱100,000 fine each against the company and its five officers, namely President Aleksei P. Kosenko, Corporate Secretary Juan B. Solomon, Jr., Independent Director Leonardo G. Serrano, Jr., Treasurer Aries C. Felipe, and Compliance Officer Leo Cezar G. Caballes.
The order came following an investigation by FLCD which found that Digido continued to engage in the business of financing even after the Commission’s issuance of an order on May 9, 2025, revoking its certificate of incorporation and certificate of authority to operate as a financing company.
The FLCD denied the claim of Digido Finance that the order was not yet final and subject to appeal, noting that revocation orders are classified among immediately executory issuances under the 2016 SEC Rules of Procedure.
According to the FLCD, Digido continued to process and approve loan applications, disburse loan proceeds to borrowers, issue disclosure statements and promissory notes, and maintain active loan accounts.
“Each post-revocation loan transaction constitutes a discrete and independent act of engaging the business of a financing company without authority. The statutory violation is not theoretical; it attaches to every extension of credit made after revocation,” the order read.
In addition, FLCD found that Digido has been servicing and collecting loan payments through Fingertip Finance Corp., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Singapore-based Robocash Pte. Ltd.
“The continuation of collection operations through Fingertip is particularly telling. Collection and servicing are not ministerial remnants of past activity when they are executed through structured payment channels, borrower communications, and organized remittance instructions,” the order read.
“They are integral incidents of financing operations. By directing borrowers to remit payments through Fingertip after revocation, [Digido] sustained the operational core of its financing business despite the Commission’s withdrawal of authority,” it added.
###