Navigating the legal system with SCALE BC

By Christian Cunanan

Vancouver, BC — July 26, 2026

The Society for Community Arbitration and Legal Empowerment (“SCALE BC”), a British Columbia non-profit organization dedicated to helping members of the Filipino Canadian community held a community forum in Vancouver on July 26, 2026. Founded by Mel and Rachel Abonita, the group does not provide legal adviceor legal education. They assist the community to understand their rights and navigate the legal and courts system in matters relating to immigration scams, unpaid debts, fraud, harassment, defamation, Philippine conveyancing, and related concerns. 

A Pattern, Not a Person

A significant portion of the event addressed what organizers described as an ongoing, unproven legal matter currently before the BC courts. The session focused on describing a general patternconcerning breach of fiduciary duties.  Presenter noted this pattern is addressed by existing consumer-protection rules. Under oversight from the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada and the BC Financial Services Authority, a legitimate bank employee or mortgage specialist is barred from asking a client to lend money or invest in the advisor’s personal projects. Attendees were advised that anyone who suspects this is happening to them should refuse the request, document what occurred, report it internally to the institution, and file a complaint with the BCFSA or FCAC.

Public Record Case Studies

The forum walked through several matters drawn from public court and tribunal dockets, which organizers said were shared strictly to illustrate how BC’s legal system functions — not to suggest wrongdoing by any named party. These included a Civil Resolution Tribunal small-claims default decision (file SC-2024-003973) used to explain how a BC judgment can be registered and enforced in other provinces under that province’s Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act, and a separate CRT filing (SC-2023-009796) in which a claim by Rachel Abonita against Maricel Amoy Perry, doing business as MAP Entertainment, was dismissed strictly on procedural grounds — namely the two-year limitation period and questions of contractual privity. Organizers were explicit that the tribunal did not rule on the underlying merits of that refund dispute.

Presenter also reviewed a court summary sheet from a 2022 BC Supreme Court chambers hearing (Court File #VLC-S-S-218370), involving an oppression and oral-defamation claim brought by members of the Abonita and Almazar-Bui families against the Philippine Bicol Association of British Columbia (PBABC) and Elizabeth Valenciano-Cruz. According to the presentation, the court did not dismiss the claims outright; rather, it directed that the oppression remedy be refiled as a petition and that the civil claim be struck with leave to amend — meaning the plaintiffs retained the ability to correct and resubmit it. Organizers emphasized this was a procedural ruling only, took no position on the truth of any party’s allegations.  

Separately, the session referenced a public disciplinary decision issued by the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants (CICC v. Lucion, 2025 CICC 33), in which licensee Liza Lucion’s registration was permanently revoked effective February 6, 2026, following an earlier suspension. Organizers used the college’s public register to explain a new compensation fund, effective July 15, 2026, that may allow individuals with proven financial losses caused by a licensed consultant’s dishonest conduct to seek repayment.

The importance of due diligence and disclosure in business transaction was also discussed.  SCALE BC is planning their next public forum to focus on business.  Follow SCALE BC page for updates.

In closing, the presenter made the call that “Together, an informed community is the strongest safeguard against exploitation”

This article is based on statements and public records referenced during the presentation and is provided for general information only. It is not legal advice. Individuals or entities named in connection with ongoing proceedings are presumed innocent, and no finding on the merits has been made, unless a final decision by a court or tribunal states otherwise