There’s a recent article from 'Actualidad Almanzora' entitled: ‘Luis Caparrós continues to fail to heed the urban disaster of Arboleas’.
The subheads read:
*A dozen barrios with 2,000 foreign-owned properties without planning or basic services.
*The mayor of the town admits that the Junta de Andalucía has not presented as much as a single official complaint. (NB – the town is PSOE)
*The regional administration (i.e. Junta de Andalucía) does however have 150 legal cases in process against the towns of Zurgena, Albox, Cuevas and Vera. (not PSOE towns, except Albox, whose urban problems date back to the PP)
The first paragraph of the three-page special includes the following: ‘...the anarchy of the buildings could hardly be more in evidence. The disorder of the streets is absolute’. Pictures of urban sprawl accompany the title 'lo que el ojo de Caparrós sigue sin ver' - What the eye of Caparrós fails to see...
(Doesn't exist online. We can email a PDF to anyone who asks).
Luis Caparrós is a gauleiter - an Almerían who has worked for the Junta de Andalucía as the Consejero Delegado de la Consejería de Vivienda y Ordenación de Territorio en Almería since 2003. Previously, he was mayor of Purchena from 1991 to 1999. He comes from Oria. He is best known to the expats as the man who ordered the demolition of the Prior's home in Vera in the early days of 2008. Find him here.
Monday, 21 December 2009
Friday, 18 December 2009
THE SPANISH PROPERTY SCANDAL
THE SPANISH PROPERTY SCANDAL
How it all began
Unlike the UK, where the mayor is merely a figurehead, in Spanish towns the Mayor is a very powerful person within his town or village. The mayor and his town council have traditionally been responsible for almost all major decisions. The issue of building licences being of paramount importance to this report. Building licences cannot be issued on non-urbanizable land.
The price differential between urban land (which can be built on) and rustic land (which cannot be built on) is in the region of 100 euros per square metre. So it can be seen that there are huge profits to be made from building on rustic land. Therein lies the start of the problem.
With so much profit to be made, the temptation for illegal building and corruption became too great. The builders, with a nod and a wink, and the passing over of many brown envelopes stuffed with euros, were encouraged to build on rustic land. They were then able to sell at urban prices, with some of the larger builders/developers making hundreds of millions of euros profit.
Complicit in this were the mayors, town councils, police (responsible for upholding planning law), lawyers (especially lawyers), agents, notaries, and even the Junta (the regional government). All insisted that the correct paperwork was in place when assisting ex-pats to purchase property in Spain.
Spain rode high on the construction boom, all the while aware that the majority of the building work was unlicensed, and illegal. The authorities were more than happy to take taxes from the building work, and to turn a blind eye. How far up the governmental chain does the corruption go?
More demolitions are happening almost daily.
So what happened?
During the past four years it has become clear that many thousands of people had fallen victim to the building scandal. They were unable to obtain the correct paperwork for their property, without which they could not obtain mains electricity and water.
The Spanish environmentalists began to look more closely at what was happening, and started to initiate proceedings against some of those responsible for the illegal building. The rate of growth within the construction industry was unsustainable, with services struggling to cope.
The Junta stepped in and stopped all building. Shutting the stable door some time after the horse had already bolted. Many people had their building licences revoked, as they had been issued illegally, many just did not have building licences. The Priors home in Vera was very publicly demolished, even though they had the correct paperwork.
Personal experience
This was part of a submission to the Auken Report, but which could effectively apply to tens of thousands more people caught up in the property scandal:
I belong to a group of mainly British third age people who bought houses in El Fas, Cantoria, in the Province of Andalucia, who are from all walks of life, most of us were very careful when we made the big decision to embrace the Spanish way of life and purchased our houses. Checks were made on agents, Spanish solicitors were employed, notaries processed the escrituras, and we were constantly assured that all was in order and that our houses in Spain were completely legal according to Spanish law.
You would find it hard to imagine the horror, stress and strain of discovering that your house, into which you have put your life savings was to become subject to demolition because it was illegal.
The first any of us knew about this was when we discovered that the builders were being prosecuted and that the public prosecutor of Huercal Overa wanted to demolish 19 houses on El Fas where we live. Oblivious to the fact that we were all victims of fraud, and making us double victims by threatening our houses.
We fully understand that the laws of Spain have to be upheld, but where was the law when we were cheated and lied to? Where was the “Law” when our house where being constructed?, the authorities did not control the situation, the “Town Hall officials”, “Mayors” and “Councilmen” Police, Guardia Civil ALL turned a blind eye. WHY? We are now told that no building licences have been issued by Cantoria for 25 years. Why are we being punished when we had done all we could to ensure that we complied with the law and bought in good faith.
It is inconceivable that the Spanish authorities were unaware of the situation regarding the illegal building, and thereby condoned it. Where did they think the extra revenues were coming from? Why has Spain been booming in recent years? Where did all the businesses that profited from the mainly British investments think that the money came from? It really is shameful that they should suggest that we should pay more. What about sharing some of the profits that have made out of us. Profits which the government has shared with the taxes which have been paid.
Our Dutch builders have received around 4 million euros from us just on our small estate. We now find that we have no electricity except from a very expensive to run generator (generously provided by the Mayor of Cantoria), and water from who knows where ( NOT drinking water ). All because we have been misled, lied and cheated to by Agents, Developers, Solicitors, and above all by the Administers of the Laws of Spain, the Town Halls, Andalucian Parliament, Andalucian Junta. We cannot now get the correct paperwork for our houses.
Tens of thousands of people now find themselves in the same situation.
Why was this allowed to happen?
This is the shame of Spain!
The realisation that so many houses are now classed as illegal was the main cause of the property slump in Spain, long before the current worldwide economic problems.
All we want is to live out our lives in peace, and enjoy this wonderful country, among the good Spanish people. Surely this is our fundamental basic human right.
We think the Spanish government should consider the following:
1. Take away the threat of demolition.
2. Allow us to gain mains electricity and water. We can then contribute to the local councils and pay our bills correctly as we would all wish to do.
3. Sequester the assets of the builders and developers who have acted illegally, and use this to carry out any further work to enable developments such as ours to become fully legal.
4. Further punish those responsible, by applying the criminal laws of Spain.
5. Use any money remaining to compensate the victims (legal expenses, etc.). Those of us who are taking legal action are doing so at our own expense, against these builders/developers who are criminals, and we are having to pay huge amounts of euros to bring them to justice.
6. Make the Spanish Authorities, ADMIT that they have been complicit and instrumental in the making of this situation, as highlighted by Michael cashman, MEP; Margaret Auken MEP and recently by Willie Meyers MEP.
These actions would bring much needed revenue into the towns and the service industries, and would cost very little. We estimate that the population of our few houses in El Fas spend in the region of 4000 euros per week in the locality. Multiply this by the many thousands more properties and you can see that this is a massive amount of money being put into the Spanish economy. Most of us are registered on the padron, and have our residencia.
Latest developments
The authorities have instigated inspections to ascertain just how many illegal houses there are. This has resulted in a figure of 11,000 for the Valle de Almanzora. And across the whole of Spain the figure is likely to be around 250,000 properties.
These inspections allow each town to produce a new PGOU (Plan General de Urbana - a town plan) which can incorporate many of the illegal houses. However, the rules which need to be applied to new plans are strict, and all illegal houses will not be included.
The time scale for these plans to be approved can be up five years. The majority of UK ex-pats are in their twilight years.
There are other systems which are being put into place, but the majority of these will involve many thousands of euros having to be paid by home owners to legalise their property, if it can be legalised at all. Euros that many simply do not have. It was said that the British were “like sheep waiting to be fleeced”, that would appear to still be applicable.
European Union - What are they doing?
Despite the fact that the EU is involved in every single aspect of life in the UK, they continually tell us that they cannot interfere in the internal affairs of a member state.
Margrete Auken has produced a report adopted by the EU (available at http://www.aulan.es/Auken_Report.pdf) highlighting the problems faced by the victims in the property scandal in Spain. The Green parties are backing this report and are helping to fight for justice for the many thousands of people affected.
The report is highly critical of Spain, and suggests withholding a sum of money from Spain’s EU grants (billions of euros), until such time as the problems are solved. A vote for this action was due to be held in the EU Parliament on 26th October, however the amendment was never voted on due to some obscure technicality which only applies to budget-votes. The technicality is that you cannot have a vote where you increase the budget line. This amendment did not increase the budget, it only stated that the money for that part of Spain should be frozen as agreed by Parliament in the Auken-report, so it would seem that the decision to disallow a vote may have been politically motivated. The Green MEP Margrete Auken has apparently submitted a complaint, but unfortunately the vote is now closed and the chances of retabling the amendment in December to the vote on the actual budget are slim. However, it may be that this issue can be re-opened as part of the budget discussions required by the Lisbon Treaty.
UK - are they interested?
It would appear to many that those UK citizens who have chosen to live in another European country have become persona non-gratis as far as the UK government is concerned. Despite much lobbying within the UK, it has so far failed to produce any worthwhile results.
For the many thousands of UK victims, the support from the UK Government has been non-existent. There has been some rhetoric from the British Consulate in Madrid, but they are words with no action.
Many of the political parties in the UK voice their support for the victims in Spain, but only the UKIP has so far publicly voiced their support with the following press release:
Pursuing Justice For British Home-Owners In Spain
In recent years, Spanish provincial governance has employed a number of instruments for depriving tens of thousands of home-owners, in new developments, either of their properties, in their entirety, or of the amenities, such as access-roads and water- and electricity-supplies, to which they were legally entitled.
One such instrument was a requirement for "retrospective planning-permission", whereby planning-permissions, which had already been granted, and on the basis of which properties had been built, could be, and frequently were, retrospectively withdrawn.
Legal challenges to such instruments characteristically foundered in a welter of official obstruction, which it would not be extravagant to call corrupt; and an outcry consequently arose, from Spain, which eventually reached the Petitions-Committee of the European Union's consultative assembly, in Brussels, and gave rise there to a report, by Margrete Auken (2008/2248(INI)) condemning the actions of the Spanish authorities and calling for the budget of the European Union to be suspended, until suitable redress was made.
Many thousands of those dispossessed or disadvantaged in this way were Britons, who were tempted to invest, and live, in Spanish properties, on the understanding that to do so would be safe enough, because Spain was a "member-state" of the European Union.
Accordingly, the UK Independence Party supported the adoption of the "Auken Report" and deplores the assembly's inaction - with regard to bringing pressure to bear on Spain by suspending the European Union's budget - which has nevertheless followed.
Moreover, since the British Government, as an EU-member government, seems to be unwilling to intervene, or to be incapable of intervening, to protect its nationals abroad, despite its assurances that they would be as secure in another "member-state" of the EU, as in their own; and in view of the erroneous nature of the assumption that diplomatic relations, between the EU's "member-states", would be more, and not less, effective, than diplomatic relations generally, for providing the necessary safeguards, the UK Independence Party is determined to press the members of the EU's consultative assembly to use what power they have, in the way they promised to use it, when they adopted the "Auken Report".
Conclusion
The Spanish economy has proved especially vulnerable to the global credit crunch because growth relied heavily on credit-fuelled domestic demand and a property boom boosted by easy access to loans that has collapsed, leaving around one million new homes unsold, and hundreds of thousands more houses unsaleable.
Spain got around 20 per cent of its output from the property and construction sectors in 2007 before the housing bubble ended, according to government data.
Meanwhile the laws of supply and demand will mean that Spanish property values will remain low and without any significant growth for a long time. This is desperate news if you are a seller of property in Spain - particularly if you bought at the height of the boom. Indeed, the only possible consolation for UK sellers is the strength of the Euro over Sterling, thus allowing sellers of Spanish property to reduce their prices on the basis that their Euros can be beneficially converted into Sterling. However the strength of the Euro is a double edged sword and has meant that Britons have seen the purchasing power of their UK incomes fall dramatically - sometimes meaning that they have been forced, unwillingly, to sell their Spanish properties. They have found themselves simply unable to afford to live in Spain on their reduced incomes.
As you can see, the Spanish authorities have little or no regard for the victims of their property scandal. Which they themselves have caused.
Some members of our group are facing severe harassment including death threats, both physically and by e-mail, a live shotgun cartridge placed on a front doorstep, and abusive and malicious e-mail and press campaigns.
There has been some movement towards regularising most of the illegal properties (Certificate of Ordenanza), but that has proved to be unworkable, and will merely result in extracting more money from the victims. There are then all of the other irregularities, ie, the land not being properly segregated, problems over who actually has title to the land, the payment of urban prices for rustic land, etc.
In the case of the 19 houses at El Fas, some of us have grouped together and employed a solicitor who is properly versed in Spanish law, and a barrister from Madrid. Their estimate of the costs to sort out the illegal mess is 50,000 – 60,000 euros. Yes, that is 50 to 60 thousand euros. Where is that money supposed to come from. Why should the victims bear the costs of bringing the criminals to justice?
As I have already stated, the authorities were complicit in this scandal. They have received taxes from the developers (where the developers have bothered to declare), and taxes from the profits made by the many businesses who themselves have profited from the illegal building. All those people who have profited should now be paying for the problems to be sorted out.
The scale of the fraud is immense, not only are there rogue builders and developers, there are rogue property agents, solicitors, notaries, town councils and especially some Mayors. All have played their part in this shameful scandal.
The authorities would appear to be trying to pretend that they knew nothing, and that they have no say in the judicial process. What rubbish! They could allow the majority of properties to be connected to the mains services tomorrow, if they so wished. At least that would go some way to helping the victims, many of whom are having to pay for very expensive to run generators for their electricity. Some can now only afford to run their generator for five hours per day.
Apart from the horrendous legal costs, we are now threatened with the costs of infrastructure, which again can run into many thousands of euros. Where will the money come from? The victims should not need to pay even one cent more.
Most of the victims of this scandal are pensioners living on a set income, much reduced as the euro gets stronger. Many have had to return to the UK to beg for help from friends and family. Their properties in Spain are virtually worthless in the current economic climate. Many are trapped in Spain, existing as best they can.
There is a belief that the houses were purchased very cheaply because they were built on rustic land. Whilst that may be true in a few isolated cases, we certainly did not pay rustic prices. We have paid urban prices for rustic land, and the developers have made massive profits. Possibly more than 4 million euros from our 19 houses alone. Many of these developers are now pleading poverty, but we are assured that much of the money has been salted away. Even if the properties were legal and had correct paperwork, where is the market for selling?
Many of these victims need help, help towards the costs and stress of living as victims of this massive fraud.
The Spanish authorities have no regard whatsoever for the victims of their housing policies, and have been quite happy to turn a blind eye as long as the economy was booming on the back of this scandal.
Unless action is swift, these problems are going to rumble on for years, many of the victims are in their twilight years, they do not have years to wait for their life to begin again. Four ex-pat males have died in El Fas in the last eighteen months.
How it all began
Unlike the UK, where the mayor is merely a figurehead, in Spanish towns the Mayor is a very powerful person within his town or village. The mayor and his town council have traditionally been responsible for almost all major decisions. The issue of building licences being of paramount importance to this report. Building licences cannot be issued on non-urbanizable land.
The price differential between urban land (which can be built on) and rustic land (which cannot be built on) is in the region of 100 euros per square metre. So it can be seen that there are huge profits to be made from building on rustic land. Therein lies the start of the problem.
With so much profit to be made, the temptation for illegal building and corruption became too great. The builders, with a nod and a wink, and the passing over of many brown envelopes stuffed with euros, were encouraged to build on rustic land. They were then able to sell at urban prices, with some of the larger builders/developers making hundreds of millions of euros profit.
Complicit in this were the mayors, town councils, police (responsible for upholding planning law), lawyers (especially lawyers), agents, notaries, and even the Junta (the regional government). All insisted that the correct paperwork was in place when assisting ex-pats to purchase property in Spain.
Spain rode high on the construction boom, all the while aware that the majority of the building work was unlicensed, and illegal. The authorities were more than happy to take taxes from the building work, and to turn a blind eye. How far up the governmental chain does the corruption go?
More demolitions are happening almost daily.
So what happened?
During the past four years it has become clear that many thousands of people had fallen victim to the building scandal. They were unable to obtain the correct paperwork for their property, without which they could not obtain mains electricity and water.
The Spanish environmentalists began to look more closely at what was happening, and started to initiate proceedings against some of those responsible for the illegal building. The rate of growth within the construction industry was unsustainable, with services struggling to cope.
The Junta stepped in and stopped all building. Shutting the stable door some time after the horse had already bolted. Many people had their building licences revoked, as they had been issued illegally, many just did not have building licences. The Priors home in Vera was very publicly demolished, even though they had the correct paperwork.
Personal experience
This was part of a submission to the Auken Report, but which could effectively apply to tens of thousands more people caught up in the property scandal:
I belong to a group of mainly British third age people who bought houses in El Fas, Cantoria, in the Province of Andalucia, who are from all walks of life, most of us were very careful when we made the big decision to embrace the Spanish way of life and purchased our houses. Checks were made on agents, Spanish solicitors were employed, notaries processed the escrituras, and we were constantly assured that all was in order and that our houses in Spain were completely legal according to Spanish law.
You would find it hard to imagine the horror, stress and strain of discovering that your house, into which you have put your life savings was to become subject to demolition because it was illegal.
The first any of us knew about this was when we discovered that the builders were being prosecuted and that the public prosecutor of Huercal Overa wanted to demolish 19 houses on El Fas where we live. Oblivious to the fact that we were all victims of fraud, and making us double victims by threatening our houses.
We fully understand that the laws of Spain have to be upheld, but where was the law when we were cheated and lied to? Where was the “Law” when our house where being constructed?, the authorities did not control the situation, the “Town Hall officials”, “Mayors” and “Councilmen” Police, Guardia Civil ALL turned a blind eye. WHY? We are now told that no building licences have been issued by Cantoria for 25 years. Why are we being punished when we had done all we could to ensure that we complied with the law and bought in good faith.
It is inconceivable that the Spanish authorities were unaware of the situation regarding the illegal building, and thereby condoned it. Where did they think the extra revenues were coming from? Why has Spain been booming in recent years? Where did all the businesses that profited from the mainly British investments think that the money came from? It really is shameful that they should suggest that we should pay more. What about sharing some of the profits that have made out of us. Profits which the government has shared with the taxes which have been paid.
Our Dutch builders have received around 4 million euros from us just on our small estate. We now find that we have no electricity except from a very expensive to run generator (generously provided by the Mayor of Cantoria), and water from who knows where ( NOT drinking water ). All because we have been misled, lied and cheated to by Agents, Developers, Solicitors, and above all by the Administers of the Laws of Spain, the Town Halls, Andalucian Parliament, Andalucian Junta. We cannot now get the correct paperwork for our houses.
Tens of thousands of people now find themselves in the same situation.
Why was this allowed to happen?
This is the shame of Spain!
The realisation that so many houses are now classed as illegal was the main cause of the property slump in Spain, long before the current worldwide economic problems.
All we want is to live out our lives in peace, and enjoy this wonderful country, among the good Spanish people. Surely this is our fundamental basic human right.
We think the Spanish government should consider the following:
1. Take away the threat of demolition.
2. Allow us to gain mains electricity and water. We can then contribute to the local councils and pay our bills correctly as we would all wish to do.
3. Sequester the assets of the builders and developers who have acted illegally, and use this to carry out any further work to enable developments such as ours to become fully legal.
4. Further punish those responsible, by applying the criminal laws of Spain.
5. Use any money remaining to compensate the victims (legal expenses, etc.). Those of us who are taking legal action are doing so at our own expense, against these builders/developers who are criminals, and we are having to pay huge amounts of euros to bring them to justice.
6. Make the Spanish Authorities, ADMIT that they have been complicit and instrumental in the making of this situation, as highlighted by Michael cashman, MEP; Margaret Auken MEP and recently by Willie Meyers MEP.
These actions would bring much needed revenue into the towns and the service industries, and would cost very little. We estimate that the population of our few houses in El Fas spend in the region of 4000 euros per week in the locality. Multiply this by the many thousands more properties and you can see that this is a massive amount of money being put into the Spanish economy. Most of us are registered on the padron, and have our residencia.
Latest developments
The authorities have instigated inspections to ascertain just how many illegal houses there are. This has resulted in a figure of 11,000 for the Valle de Almanzora. And across the whole of Spain the figure is likely to be around 250,000 properties.
These inspections allow each town to produce a new PGOU (Plan General de Urbana - a town plan) which can incorporate many of the illegal houses. However, the rules which need to be applied to new plans are strict, and all illegal houses will not be included.
The time scale for these plans to be approved can be up five years. The majority of UK ex-pats are in their twilight years.
There are other systems which are being put into place, but the majority of these will involve many thousands of euros having to be paid by home owners to legalise their property, if it can be legalised at all. Euros that many simply do not have. It was said that the British were “like sheep waiting to be fleeced”, that would appear to still be applicable.
European Union - What are they doing?
Despite the fact that the EU is involved in every single aspect of life in the UK, they continually tell us that they cannot interfere in the internal affairs of a member state.
Margrete Auken has produced a report adopted by the EU (available at http://www.aulan.es/Auken_Report.pdf) highlighting the problems faced by the victims in the property scandal in Spain. The Green parties are backing this report and are helping to fight for justice for the many thousands of people affected.
The report is highly critical of Spain, and suggests withholding a sum of money from Spain’s EU grants (billions of euros), until such time as the problems are solved. A vote for this action was due to be held in the EU Parliament on 26th October, however the amendment was never voted on due to some obscure technicality which only applies to budget-votes. The technicality is that you cannot have a vote where you increase the budget line. This amendment did not increase the budget, it only stated that the money for that part of Spain should be frozen as agreed by Parliament in the Auken-report, so it would seem that the decision to disallow a vote may have been politically motivated. The Green MEP Margrete Auken has apparently submitted a complaint, but unfortunately the vote is now closed and the chances of retabling the amendment in December to the vote on the actual budget are slim. However, it may be that this issue can be re-opened as part of the budget discussions required by the Lisbon Treaty.
UK - are they interested?
It would appear to many that those UK citizens who have chosen to live in another European country have become persona non-gratis as far as the UK government is concerned. Despite much lobbying within the UK, it has so far failed to produce any worthwhile results.
For the many thousands of UK victims, the support from the UK Government has been non-existent. There has been some rhetoric from the British Consulate in Madrid, but they are words with no action.
Many of the political parties in the UK voice their support for the victims in Spain, but only the UKIP has so far publicly voiced their support with the following press release:
Pursuing Justice For British Home-Owners In Spain
In recent years, Spanish provincial governance has employed a number of instruments for depriving tens of thousands of home-owners, in new developments, either of their properties, in their entirety, or of the amenities, such as access-roads and water- and electricity-supplies, to which they were legally entitled.
One such instrument was a requirement for "retrospective planning-permission", whereby planning-permissions, which had already been granted, and on the basis of which properties had been built, could be, and frequently were, retrospectively withdrawn.
Legal challenges to such instruments characteristically foundered in a welter of official obstruction, which it would not be extravagant to call corrupt; and an outcry consequently arose, from Spain, which eventually reached the Petitions-Committee of the European Union's consultative assembly, in Brussels, and gave rise there to a report, by Margrete Auken (2008/2248(INI)) condemning the actions of the Spanish authorities and calling for the budget of the European Union to be suspended, until suitable redress was made.
Many thousands of those dispossessed or disadvantaged in this way were Britons, who were tempted to invest, and live, in Spanish properties, on the understanding that to do so would be safe enough, because Spain was a "member-state" of the European Union.
Accordingly, the UK Independence Party supported the adoption of the "Auken Report" and deplores the assembly's inaction - with regard to bringing pressure to bear on Spain by suspending the European Union's budget - which has nevertheless followed.
Moreover, since the British Government, as an EU-member government, seems to be unwilling to intervene, or to be incapable of intervening, to protect its nationals abroad, despite its assurances that they would be as secure in another "member-state" of the EU, as in their own; and in view of the erroneous nature of the assumption that diplomatic relations, between the EU's "member-states", would be more, and not less, effective, than diplomatic relations generally, for providing the necessary safeguards, the UK Independence Party is determined to press the members of the EU's consultative assembly to use what power they have, in the way they promised to use it, when they adopted the "Auken Report".
Conclusion
The Spanish economy has proved especially vulnerable to the global credit crunch because growth relied heavily on credit-fuelled domestic demand and a property boom boosted by easy access to loans that has collapsed, leaving around one million new homes unsold, and hundreds of thousands more houses unsaleable.
Spain got around 20 per cent of its output from the property and construction sectors in 2007 before the housing bubble ended, according to government data.
Meanwhile the laws of supply and demand will mean that Spanish property values will remain low and without any significant growth for a long time. This is desperate news if you are a seller of property in Spain - particularly if you bought at the height of the boom. Indeed, the only possible consolation for UK sellers is the strength of the Euro over Sterling, thus allowing sellers of Spanish property to reduce their prices on the basis that their Euros can be beneficially converted into Sterling. However the strength of the Euro is a double edged sword and has meant that Britons have seen the purchasing power of their UK incomes fall dramatically - sometimes meaning that they have been forced, unwillingly, to sell their Spanish properties. They have found themselves simply unable to afford to live in Spain on their reduced incomes.
As you can see, the Spanish authorities have little or no regard for the victims of their property scandal. Which they themselves have caused.
Some members of our group are facing severe harassment including death threats, both physically and by e-mail, a live shotgun cartridge placed on a front doorstep, and abusive and malicious e-mail and press campaigns.
There has been some movement towards regularising most of the illegal properties (Certificate of Ordenanza), but that has proved to be unworkable, and will merely result in extracting more money from the victims. There are then all of the other irregularities, ie, the land not being properly segregated, problems over who actually has title to the land, the payment of urban prices for rustic land, etc.
In the case of the 19 houses at El Fas, some of us have grouped together and employed a solicitor who is properly versed in Spanish law, and a barrister from Madrid. Their estimate of the costs to sort out the illegal mess is 50,000 – 60,000 euros. Yes, that is 50 to 60 thousand euros. Where is that money supposed to come from. Why should the victims bear the costs of bringing the criminals to justice?
As I have already stated, the authorities were complicit in this scandal. They have received taxes from the developers (where the developers have bothered to declare), and taxes from the profits made by the many businesses who themselves have profited from the illegal building. All those people who have profited should now be paying for the problems to be sorted out.
The scale of the fraud is immense, not only are there rogue builders and developers, there are rogue property agents, solicitors, notaries, town councils and especially some Mayors. All have played their part in this shameful scandal.
The authorities would appear to be trying to pretend that they knew nothing, and that they have no say in the judicial process. What rubbish! They could allow the majority of properties to be connected to the mains services tomorrow, if they so wished. At least that would go some way to helping the victims, many of whom are having to pay for very expensive to run generators for their electricity. Some can now only afford to run their generator for five hours per day.
Apart from the horrendous legal costs, we are now threatened with the costs of infrastructure, which again can run into many thousands of euros. Where will the money come from? The victims should not need to pay even one cent more.
Most of the victims of this scandal are pensioners living on a set income, much reduced as the euro gets stronger. Many have had to return to the UK to beg for help from friends and family. Their properties in Spain are virtually worthless in the current economic climate. Many are trapped in Spain, existing as best they can.
There is a belief that the houses were purchased very cheaply because they were built on rustic land. Whilst that may be true in a few isolated cases, we certainly did not pay rustic prices. We have paid urban prices for rustic land, and the developers have made massive profits. Possibly more than 4 million euros from our 19 houses alone. Many of these developers are now pleading poverty, but we are assured that much of the money has been salted away. Even if the properties were legal and had correct paperwork, where is the market for selling?
Many of these victims need help, help towards the costs and stress of living as victims of this massive fraud.
The Spanish authorities have no regard whatsoever for the victims of their housing policies, and have been quite happy to turn a blind eye as long as the economy was booming on the back of this scandal.
Unless action is swift, these problems are going to rumble on for years, many of the victims are in their twilight years, they do not have years to wait for their life to begin again. Four ex-pat males have died in El Fas in the last eighteen months.
Tuesday, 15 December 2009
El Fallo del Tribunal Constitucional de España
Helen and Len Prior lost their house in Vera, Almería on January 9th 2008 when bulldozers came in and, after a couple of hours grace, time for the Priors and some neighbours to remove their possessions from the doomed house, knocked the home down. Pictures of this outrage flashed around the world and several TV programs still continue to be shown on British, Norwegian and German TV (in particular) on this sorry page in Spain's r
elationship with the millions of Europeans who have come here to live. The house had all its permits in order from the town hall, but fell foul of an ambitious politician in Almería who worked for a different political party, the dominant PSOE ('Spanish Socialist Workers Party') which controls - and some say 'mismanages' - the Andalucían autonomy.
A substitute judge - the normal one who 'had never signed a demolition order and never would' was away - signed the order in late December 2007 and the home was duly knocked down - even though the Priors had appealed to Spain's Constitutional Court about the threat of losing their house.
The Constitutional Court eventually ruled in the Prior's favour - long after the demolition. The Junta de Andalucía - unbelievably - is now appealing that ruling.
See full ruling here (en castellano).
elationship with the millions of Europeans who have come here to live. The house had all its permits in order from the town hall, but fell foul of an ambitious politician in Almería who worked for a different political party, the dominant PSOE ('Spanish Socialist Workers Party') which controls - and some say 'mismanages' - the Andalucían autonomy.A substitute judge - the normal one who 'had never signed a demolition order and never would' was away - signed the order in late December 2007 and the home was duly knocked down - even though the Priors had appealed to Spain's Constitutional Court about the threat of losing their house.
The Constitutional Court eventually ruled in the Prior's favour - long after the demolition. The Junta de Andalucía - unbelievably - is now appealing that ruling.
See full ruling here (en castellano).
Tuesday, 8 December 2009
Saturday, 5 December 2009
Thursday, 3 December 2009
Questions raised in the House of Lords
Questions raised in the House of Lords
AUAN, 31th October 2009
In response to submissions from the AUN to the House of Lords, Lord Burnett, Vice-chair of the Legal and Constitutional affairs group raised the following written questions to the House of Lords on the 28th of October.
By convention replies should be issued by the 11th of November.
Lord Burnett to ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the report prepared by Margrete Auken MEP, dated 20 February, on the impact of extensive urbanisation in Spain on individual rights of European citizens; and whether they have raised the matter with the Prime Minister of Spain. HL6107
Lord Burnett to ask Her Majesty's Government what action they have taken in response to the petition delivered to No 10 Downing Street on 12 March by Suzanne Wyatt concerning United Kingdom citizens who have bought, or attempted to buy, property in Spain: and whether they have raised the matter with the government of Spain. HL6108
Lord Burnett to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will make representations to the government of Spain about the level of compensation paid to United Kingdom citizens for properties nationalised under the Ley de Costas. HL6109
Lord Burnett to ask her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the number of properties owned by United Kingdom citizens in Spain which may be demolished following revocation of planning permission, in the light of assurances given to the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on his recent visit to Madrid that no, or very few, properties owned by United Kingdom Citizens would be demolished. HL6110
AUAN, 31th October 2009
In response to submissions from the AUN to the House of Lords, Lord Burnett, Vice-chair of the Legal and Constitutional affairs group raised the following written questions to the House of Lords on the 28th of October.
By convention replies should be issued by the 11th of November.
Lord Burnett to ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the report prepared by Margrete Auken MEP, dated 20 February, on the impact of extensive urbanisation in Spain on individual rights of European citizens; and whether they have raised the matter with the Prime Minister of Spain. HL6107
Lord Burnett to ask Her Majesty's Government what action they have taken in response to the petition delivered to No 10 Downing Street on 12 March by Suzanne Wyatt concerning United Kingdom citizens who have bought, or attempted to buy, property in Spain: and whether they have raised the matter with the government of Spain. HL6108
Lord Burnett to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will make representations to the government of Spain about the level of compensation paid to United Kingdom citizens for properties nationalised under the Ley de Costas. HL6109
Lord Burnett to ask her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the number of properties owned by United Kingdom citizens in Spain which may be demolished following revocation of planning permission, in the light of assurances given to the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on his recent visit to Madrid that no, or very few, properties owned by United Kingdom Citizens would be demolished. HL6110
Wednesday, 2 December 2009
Submission made to Margrete Auken report
Please find herewith my submission with regard to the property scandal in Spain. I am one of a group of people who purchased properties in Spain.
This letter was sent to Senor Chaves (President of the Junta de Andalucia) (translated into Spanish) and other members of the Junta de Andalucia in October 2008:
For the attention of Senor Chaves (President of the Junta de Andalucia).
I belong to a group of mainly British third age people who bought houses in El Fas, Cantoria. From all walks of life, most of us were very careful when we made the big decision to embrace the Spanish way of life and purchased our houses. Checks were made on agents, Spanish solicitors were employed, notaries processed the escrituras, and we were constantly assured that all was in order and that our houses in Spain were completely legal according to Spanish law.
You would find it hard to imagine the horror, stress and strain of discovering that your house, into which you have put your life savings was to become subject to demolition because it was illegal. The first any of us knew about this was when we discovered that the builders were being prosecuted and that the public prosecutor of Huercal Overa wanted to demolish 19 houses on El Fas where we live. Oblivious to the fact that we were all victims of fraud, and making us double victims by threatening our houses.
We fully understand that the laws of Spain have to be upheld, but where was the law when we were cheated and lied to? We are now told that no building licences have been issued by Cantoria for 25 years. Why are we being punished when we had done all we could to ensure that we complied with the law and bought in good faith.
It is inconceivable that the Spanish authorities (represented by yourself) were unaware of the situation regarding the illegal building, and thereby condoned it. Where did you think the extra revenues were coming from? Why has Spain been booming in recent years? Where did all the businesses that profited from the mainly British investments think that the money came from? It really is shameful that they should suggest that we should pay more. What about sharing some of the profits that have made out of us. Profits from crime, which the government has shared in with the taxes which have been paid.
Our dutch builders have received over 4 euros million from us. We now find that we have no electricity except from a very expensive to run generator (generously provided by the Mayor of Cantoria), and water from who knows where. All because we have been lied and cheated to, and cannot get the correct paperwork for our houses.
Tens of thousands of people now find themselves in the same situation. Why was this allowed to happen? This is the shame of Spain! The realisation that so many houses are now classed as illegal was the main cause of the property slump in Spain, long before the current worldwide economic problems.
All we want is to live out our lives in peace, and enjoy your wonderful country among the good Spanish people. Surely this is our basic human right.
We hope that you can do all in your power to help us, and would request the following:
1. Take away the threat of demolition.
2. Allow us to gain mains electricity and water. We can then contribute to the local councils and pay our bills correctly as we would all wish to do.
3. Sequester the assets of the builders and developers who have acted illegally, and use this to carry out any further work to enable developments such as ours to become fully legal. Their assets are the result of criminal activity and within European law can be confiscated.
3. Further punish those responsible by applying the criminal laws of Spain.
4. Use any money remaining to compensate the victims (legal expenses, etc.).
These actions would bring much needed revenue into the towns and the service industries, and would cost very little. We estimate that the population of our few houses in El Fas spend in the region of ?4000 per week in the locality. Multiply this by the many thousands more properties and you can see that this is a massive amount of money being put into the Spanish economy. Most of us are on the padron, and have our residencia.
Some good news in the press could help enormously in the revival of the building and property industry in the region, and we would all do our utmost in ensuring that the good news travelled fast.
At the end of January 2009 the following response was received (original Spanish response and our own rudimentary translation into English:
(Spanish version not included here).
Reply translated into English from letter to Sntr Chaves Prresident of Andalucia
The General Register of the Council for Public Works and Transport has received a letter signed by you on behalf of a group of home-owners from El Fas in the district of Cantoria, dated 27th Oct 08. In it a series of issues are raised and questions asked which we hope to answer here.
Under the Spanish Constitution, Public Works acts in full accordance with the law (article 103 of the constitution), carrying out the duties ascribed to it in each case, bearing in mind that the exercise of those duties is compulsory (Article 12, Law 30/1992 of the Judicial Orders on Public Works and Common Administrative Procedure).
In the case of urban matters, it is the sole responsibility of town halls to grant urban licences (article 171, Law 7/2002 of Town Planning of Andalucíía) which should be awarded in strict compliance with the urban and planning controls in place at the time (article 172.4°° of Law 7/2002). In the same way, the direct and sole responsibility for the remaining jurisdictions lies with the municipalities (articles 92 of the Statute of Autonomy for Andalucíía article 25.2.d) of Law 7/1985, of 2nd April, of Basis for Local Responsibility, and articles 179 and following, Law 7/2002 of 17 Dec, Town Planning in Andalucíía). Carrying out of urban related duties in Andalucíía is limited to practical matters defined in article 188 of the aforementioned Law 7/2002.
In summary, the Autonomous Administration carries out its duties taking into account the rules and urban planning, and with it achieving respect for the environment and rational use of land (article 37.1.20 and 22 of the Statute of Autonomy), as well as effective exercise of the constitutional and statutory rights of the citizens of Andalucíía, which can only be met within the framework of the planning complex(?)
In reply to your 1st question we would like to inform you that jurisdictional matters, passing and carrying out judgements, lie entirely with the Courts, who are obliged to carry out sentences and decisions of the Judges and Courts, as well as collaborate fully with the latter in the judgement process (articles 117 and 118 of the Spanish Constitution). For its part, the the Dept of the Public Prosecutor controls the action of the judiciary to protect the law, the rights of citizens and public interest advised by the law (article 124 of Spanish Constitution). The Junta of Andalucíía has no jurisdiction to “remove the threat of demolition”, with regard to – according to your own letter – decisions made by the Dept of Public Prosecutor, as it is the responsibility of the Junta de Andalucíía to give full support to activity carried out by the Office of the Public Prosecutor.
In relation to the second question (“allow access to mains electric and water”), we wish to inform you that the Town Planning Act of Andalucíía obliges administering companies to insist on proper urban licences before contracting those services (article 175). Such companies are obliged to comply with the law, the Junta de Andalucíía having no jurisdiction as such.
Regarding your request that “the assets of the builders and developers who have acted illegally be confiscated” and that “the money be used to compensate the victims”, we would like to refer again to the Courts who have legitimate jurisdiction over the penal process in the area of administrative or civil disputes. In the same way, your request that “those responsible should be punished with the full force of the law” again directs itself to decisions under the remit of Penal Jurisdiction, in this case bearing in mind that the power to approve penal law belongs to the State (Article 149.1 of the Constitution) which is beyond the remit of this Autonomous Administration.
Independently of what is stated above, since the General Body of Inspection of Town, Country and Dwelling Planning, in developing a General Plan of Inspection, is developing a way of working with Cantoria Town Hall so that it can carry out its duties on urban matters more efficiently to provide a satisfactory outcome of general interests. In such an atmosphere of collaboration we are collaborating with the Town Hall in the adoption of measures which can allow lamedor solution to the problems created by the construction of dwellings on green belt, without necessary planning licences.
The Director General of Inspection of Town, Country and Housing Planning
I´´ve done my best with this but it’s clearly written by a lawyer (hence all the detailed legal references), in legalistic and beaurocratic language that is not meant to be understood by anyone with less than a Law Degree!! (Translator)
As you can hopefully see from above, the Spanish authorities have little or no regard for the victims of this property scandal. Indeed, the Public Prosecutor who wanted to demolish the houses in El Fas had no regard whatsoever for the victims, not even thinking it worth mentioning.
One of the rogue developers has been heard to say that ‘the British were like lambs waiting to be fleeced’. We now feel that the authorities are thinking the same, how can they extract more money from the victims.
Some members of our group are facing severe harrassment including death threats, both physically and by e-mail, a live shotgun cartridge placed on a front doorstep, and abusive and malicious e-mail campaigns.
There are moves in the pipeline to regularise most of the illegal properties, but that is only the start. There are then all of the other irregularities, ie, the land not being properly segregated, problems over who actually has title to the land, the payment of urban prices for rustic land, etc.
In the case of the 19 houses at El Fas, some of us have grouped together and employed a solicitor who is properly versed in Spanish law, and a barrister from Madrid. Their estimate of the costs to sort out the illegal mess is ?50,000 – ?60,000. Yes, that is 50 to 60 thousand euros. Where is that money supposed to come from.
As I have already stated, the authorities were complicit in this scandal. They have received taxes from the developers (where the developers have bothered to declare), and taxes from the profits made by the many businesses that have profited from the illegal building. All those people who have profited should now be paying for the problems to be sorted out.
The scale of the fraud is immense, not only are there rogue builders and developers, there are rogue property agents, solicitors, notaries, town councils and especially some mayors. All have played their part in this shameful scandal.
The authorities would appear to be trying to pretend that they knew nothing, and that they have no say in the judicial process. What rubbish! They could allow the majority of properties to be connected to the mains services tomorrow, if they so wished. At least that would go some way to helping the victims, many of whom are having to pay for very expensive to run generators for their electricity.
Apart from the horrendous legal costs, we are now threatened with the costs of infrastructure, which again can run into many thousands of euros. Where will the money come from? The victims should not need to pay even one cent more.
Most of the victims of this scandal are pensioners living on a set income, much reduced as the euro gets stronger. Many have had to return to the UK to beg for help from friends and family. Their properties in Spain are virtually worthless in the current economic climate. Many are trapped in Spain, existing as best they can.
There is a belief that the houses were purchased very cheaply because they were built on rustic land. Whilst that may be true in a few isolated cases, we certainly did not pay rustic prices. We have paid urban prices for rustic land, and the developers have made massive profits. More than 4 million euros from our 19 houses alone. Many of these developers are now pleading poverty, but we are assured that much of the money has now been salted away. Even if the properties were legal and had correct paperwork, where is the market for selling?
Many of these victims need help, help towards the costs and stress of living as victims of this massive fraud.
The Spanish authorities have no regard whatsoever for the victims of their housing policies, and have been quite happy to turn a blind eye as long as the economy was booming on the back of this scandal.
Unless action is swift, these problems are going to rumble on for years, many of the victims are in their twilight years, they do not have years to wait for their life to begin again.
What can we do to get the help and justice we deserve?
This letter was sent to Senor Chaves (President of the Junta de Andalucia) (translated into Spanish) and other members of the Junta de Andalucia in October 2008:
For the attention of Senor Chaves (President of the Junta de Andalucia).
I belong to a group of mainly British third age people who bought houses in El Fas, Cantoria. From all walks of life, most of us were very careful when we made the big decision to embrace the Spanish way of life and purchased our houses. Checks were made on agents, Spanish solicitors were employed, notaries processed the escrituras, and we were constantly assured that all was in order and that our houses in Spain were completely legal according to Spanish law.
You would find it hard to imagine the horror, stress and strain of discovering that your house, into which you have put your life savings was to become subject to demolition because it was illegal. The first any of us knew about this was when we discovered that the builders were being prosecuted and that the public prosecutor of Huercal Overa wanted to demolish 19 houses on El Fas where we live. Oblivious to the fact that we were all victims of fraud, and making us double victims by threatening our houses.
We fully understand that the laws of Spain have to be upheld, but where was the law when we were cheated and lied to? We are now told that no building licences have been issued by Cantoria for 25 years. Why are we being punished when we had done all we could to ensure that we complied with the law and bought in good faith.
It is inconceivable that the Spanish authorities (represented by yourself) were unaware of the situation regarding the illegal building, and thereby condoned it. Where did you think the extra revenues were coming from? Why has Spain been booming in recent years? Where did all the businesses that profited from the mainly British investments think that the money came from? It really is shameful that they should suggest that we should pay more. What about sharing some of the profits that have made out of us. Profits from crime, which the government has shared in with the taxes which have been paid.
Our dutch builders have received over 4 euros million from us. We now find that we have no electricity except from a very expensive to run generator (generously provided by the Mayor of Cantoria), and water from who knows where. All because we have been lied and cheated to, and cannot get the correct paperwork for our houses.
Tens of thousands of people now find themselves in the same situation. Why was this allowed to happen? This is the shame of Spain! The realisation that so many houses are now classed as illegal was the main cause of the property slump in Spain, long before the current worldwide economic problems.
All we want is to live out our lives in peace, and enjoy your wonderful country among the good Spanish people. Surely this is our basic human right.
We hope that you can do all in your power to help us, and would request the following:
1. Take away the threat of demolition.
2. Allow us to gain mains electricity and water. We can then contribute to the local councils and pay our bills correctly as we would all wish to do.
3. Sequester the assets of the builders and developers who have acted illegally, and use this to carry out any further work to enable developments such as ours to become fully legal. Their assets are the result of criminal activity and within European law can be confiscated.
3. Further punish those responsible by applying the criminal laws of Spain.
4. Use any money remaining to compensate the victims (legal expenses, etc.).
These actions would bring much needed revenue into the towns and the service industries, and would cost very little. We estimate that the population of our few houses in El Fas spend in the region of ?4000 per week in the locality. Multiply this by the many thousands more properties and you can see that this is a massive amount of money being put into the Spanish economy. Most of us are on the padron, and have our residencia.
Some good news in the press could help enormously in the revival of the building and property industry in the region, and we would all do our utmost in ensuring that the good news travelled fast.
At the end of January 2009 the following response was received (original Spanish response and our own rudimentary translation into English:
(Spanish version not included here).
Reply translated into English from letter to Sntr Chaves Prresident of Andalucia
The General Register of the Council for Public Works and Transport has received a letter signed by you on behalf of a group of home-owners from El Fas in the district of Cantoria, dated 27th Oct 08. In it a series of issues are raised and questions asked which we hope to answer here.
Under the Spanish Constitution, Public Works acts in full accordance with the law (article 103 of the constitution), carrying out the duties ascribed to it in each case, bearing in mind that the exercise of those duties is compulsory (Article 12, Law 30/1992 of the Judicial Orders on Public Works and Common Administrative Procedure).
In the case of urban matters, it is the sole responsibility of town halls to grant urban licences (article 171, Law 7/2002 of Town Planning of Andalucíía) which should be awarded in strict compliance with the urban and planning controls in place at the time (article 172.4°° of Law 7/2002). In the same way, the direct and sole responsibility for the remaining jurisdictions lies with the municipalities (articles 92 of the Statute of Autonomy for Andalucíía article 25.2.d) of Law 7/1985, of 2nd April, of Basis for Local Responsibility, and articles 179 and following, Law 7/2002 of 17 Dec, Town Planning in Andalucíía). Carrying out of urban related duties in Andalucíía is limited to practical matters defined in article 188 of the aforementioned Law 7/2002.
In summary, the Autonomous Administration carries out its duties taking into account the rules and urban planning, and with it achieving respect for the environment and rational use of land (article 37.1.20 and 22 of the Statute of Autonomy), as well as effective exercise of the constitutional and statutory rights of the citizens of Andalucíía, which can only be met within the framework of the planning complex(?)
In reply to your 1st question we would like to inform you that jurisdictional matters, passing and carrying out judgements, lie entirely with the Courts, who are obliged to carry out sentences and decisions of the Judges and Courts, as well as collaborate fully with the latter in the judgement process (articles 117 and 118 of the Spanish Constitution). For its part, the the Dept of the Public Prosecutor controls the action of the judiciary to protect the law, the rights of citizens and public interest advised by the law (article 124 of Spanish Constitution). The Junta of Andalucíía has no jurisdiction to “remove the threat of demolition”, with regard to – according to your own letter – decisions made by the Dept of Public Prosecutor, as it is the responsibility of the Junta de Andalucíía to give full support to activity carried out by the Office of the Public Prosecutor.
In relation to the second question (“allow access to mains electric and water”), we wish to inform you that the Town Planning Act of Andalucíía obliges administering companies to insist on proper urban licences before contracting those services (article 175). Such companies are obliged to comply with the law, the Junta de Andalucíía having no jurisdiction as such.
Regarding your request that “the assets of the builders and developers who have acted illegally be confiscated” and that “the money be used to compensate the victims”, we would like to refer again to the Courts who have legitimate jurisdiction over the penal process in the area of administrative or civil disputes. In the same way, your request that “those responsible should be punished with the full force of the law” again directs itself to decisions under the remit of Penal Jurisdiction, in this case bearing in mind that the power to approve penal law belongs to the State (Article 149.1 of the Constitution) which is beyond the remit of this Autonomous Administration.
Independently of what is stated above, since the General Body of Inspection of Town, Country and Dwelling Planning, in developing a General Plan of Inspection, is developing a way of working with Cantoria Town Hall so that it can carry out its duties on urban matters more efficiently to provide a satisfactory outcome of general interests. In such an atmosphere of collaboration we are collaborating with the Town Hall in the adoption of measures which can allow lamedor solution to the problems created by the construction of dwellings on green belt, without necessary planning licences.
The Director General of Inspection of Town, Country and Housing Planning
I´´ve done my best with this but it’s clearly written by a lawyer (hence all the detailed legal references), in legalistic and beaurocratic language that is not meant to be understood by anyone with less than a Law Degree!! (Translator)
As you can hopefully see from above, the Spanish authorities have little or no regard for the victims of this property scandal. Indeed, the Public Prosecutor who wanted to demolish the houses in El Fas had no regard whatsoever for the victims, not even thinking it worth mentioning.
One of the rogue developers has been heard to say that ‘the British were like lambs waiting to be fleeced’. We now feel that the authorities are thinking the same, how can they extract more money from the victims.
Some members of our group are facing severe harrassment including death threats, both physically and by e-mail, a live shotgun cartridge placed on a front doorstep, and abusive and malicious e-mail campaigns.
There are moves in the pipeline to regularise most of the illegal properties, but that is only the start. There are then all of the other irregularities, ie, the land not being properly segregated, problems over who actually has title to the land, the payment of urban prices for rustic land, etc.
In the case of the 19 houses at El Fas, some of us have grouped together and employed a solicitor who is properly versed in Spanish law, and a barrister from Madrid. Their estimate of the costs to sort out the illegal mess is ?50,000 – ?60,000. Yes, that is 50 to 60 thousand euros. Where is that money supposed to come from.
As I have already stated, the authorities were complicit in this scandal. They have received taxes from the developers (where the developers have bothered to declare), and taxes from the profits made by the many businesses that have profited from the illegal building. All those people who have profited should now be paying for the problems to be sorted out.
The scale of the fraud is immense, not only are there rogue builders and developers, there are rogue property agents, solicitors, notaries, town councils and especially some mayors. All have played their part in this shameful scandal.
The authorities would appear to be trying to pretend that they knew nothing, and that they have no say in the judicial process. What rubbish! They could allow the majority of properties to be connected to the mains services tomorrow, if they so wished. At least that would go some way to helping the victims, many of whom are having to pay for very expensive to run generators for their electricity.
Apart from the horrendous legal costs, we are now threatened with the costs of infrastructure, which again can run into many thousands of euros. Where will the money come from? The victims should not need to pay even one cent more.
Most of the victims of this scandal are pensioners living on a set income, much reduced as the euro gets stronger. Many have had to return to the UK to beg for help from friends and family. Their properties in Spain are virtually worthless in the current economic climate. Many are trapped in Spain, existing as best they can.
There is a belief that the houses were purchased very cheaply because they were built on rustic land. Whilst that may be true in a few isolated cases, we certainly did not pay rustic prices. We have paid urban prices for rustic land, and the developers have made massive profits. More than 4 million euros from our 19 houses alone. Many of these developers are now pleading poverty, but we are assured that much of the money has now been salted away. Even if the properties were legal and had correct paperwork, where is the market for selling?
Many of these victims need help, help towards the costs and stress of living as victims of this massive fraud.
The Spanish authorities have no regard whatsoever for the victims of their housing policies, and have been quite happy to turn a blind eye as long as the economy was booming on the back of this scandal.
Unless action is swift, these problems are going to rumble on for years, many of the victims are in their twilight years, they do not have years to wait for their life to begin again.
What can we do to get the help and justice we deserve?
Margrete Auken report
Here is a link to the Margrete Auken report:
http://www.aulan.es/Auken_Report.pdf
http://www.aulan.es/Auken_Report.pdf
UK MEPs responses to Urban abuse letter
MEPs RESPONSES TO URBAN ABUSE IN SPAIN
Following the PDF of MEPs responses sent to the leaders of all the UK political parties prior to the recent non-vote on the Auken report, there have been many more replies from UK MEPs. It is really not necessary to plough through the list here, along with snippets from their replies, suffice it to say that according to these responses all of the UK Political Parties are sympathetic to our cause.
I am not sure whether UK MEPs are bound to toe the party line, but if they are then perhaps a better way forward would be to target the party leaders and headquarters.
Jacqueline Foster MEP Conservative MEP- North West Rest assured that all my Conservative Party colleagues will do everything possible to ensure that this miscarriage
Transport and Tourism of justice rectified as soon as possible.
ATKINS Robert ASSISTANT Sir Robert is in full support of you and the many others who find themselves in similar situations.
I have now spoken to Sir Robert about this. What he has suggested, and what I shall do, is to first find out what the Commission's response was to the Auken report. As Sir Robert is no longer a full member of the Petitions Committee, he is not as closely involved in the workings of the Committee as he was. I shall also liase with the office of Margarete Auken to find out what the current situation is and what are the options to move this forward. You will be aware that passing the Auken report in the Petitions Committee was as far as MEPs could go at that stage, and it was then up to the Commission to take a stand. If they have not taken satisfactory action, then we can ask some pertinent questions as to why. But as I say, before this can happen I need to find out what the Commission's response was to the Auken report and go from there.
NEWTON DUNN Bill “Then Bill needs to hear from them, he says” – his response to my statement: “I live in Telford, Shropshire, which is not your area. However, as there are hundreds of thousands of people across Spain affected by this scandal, there will be many members from your constituency.”
Michael Cashman Member of the European Parliament for the West Midlands Indeed it is essential we continue to fight on together to end these terrible injustices. Rest assured, my colleagues
and I in the European Parliamentary Labour Party will continue to do all we can to achieve the realisation of the measures called for in the Auken report, with the aim of ultimately securing a more hopeful future for those affected.
Jill Evans MEP Plaid Cymru Thank you for your email and for bringing this matter to
my attention. I work closely with Margrete Auken, and will support her efforts in implementating the recommendations of her report.
ROGER HELMER MEP Good news and bad news, I'm afraid. I have been in the forefront of support for the Auken report. I have voted and spoken for it repeatedly. But in the end we'll only get progress if the Commission beats up on the Spanish government. They are moving the right way, but painfully slowly. We'll keep up the pressure, but don't expect immediate results.
Geoffrey Van Orden MEP Thank you for your email. As you are aware, Conservatives in the European Parliament have been very active on this issue and helped to produce the report which calls on the Spanish authorities to act.
Glenis Willmott MEP, Leader, European Parliamentary Labour Party Thank you for getting in touch and reiterating the importance of this issue. As I said, sadly your case is one of many. Michael Cashman has been very active on this issue and Glenis and the other Labour MEPs support his work. Unfortunately the European Parliament has limited powers on this issue but we hope the Auken report will increase the pressure on Spain.
George Lyon MEP This is, unfortunately, a state of affairs I am all too aware of; the Spanish local planning authority giving building consent in breach of National Environmental Law. It is an issue all my Liberal Democrat MEP colleagues continue to take up with the Commission, and my colleague, Graham Watson MEP has raised through a number of Parliamentary Questions. However, by virtue of the EC Treaty the European Union’s involvement in property matters is limited as legislation on this issue remains the sole preserve of Member States.
Nonetheless, the EU has worked through other avenues to strengthen the position of consumers, by implementing wider consumer protection directives, such as the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and the Unfair Contract Terms Directive which do apply to the purchase of real estate.
In addition to this, my colleagues and I continue to regularly press the Spanish Government and its representatives on this matter as we remain dissatisfied that so many problems continue to persist.
Emma McClarkin MEP Many thanks for your email informing me of the difficult times you have experienced after purchasing and building property in Spain.
We have been inundated with letters from constituents with similar problems and at this stage I can only recommend that you file a petition, which you can do here at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/parliament/public/staticDisplay.do?id=49. This is a good way of getting the European Parliament to take action.
Peter Skinner MEP Thank you for writing to me regarding your situation with Spanish property and your concerns regarding the Auken report. A vote on an amendment to the 2010 EU Budget withholding structural funds from Spain, rejected earlier in Committee, is due to be voted on by the European Parliament today.
I'm happy to inform you that it has the full support of the European Parliamentary Labour Party. Last year we voted for a similar budgetary amendment and I see no reason to alter our position, especially given the intransigent response of the Spanish authorities to the recommendations contained in the Auken report. As you are no doubt aware the European Parliament called on Spain to take a number of measures to address the serious problems brought about by regional irregularities in land-law. Since the adoption of the Auken report a disappointing lack of progress has been made and many of the recommendations have so far been ignored by the Spanish authorities.
Realistically, it is unlikely in this time of economic crisis that this budgetary amendment will gain enough support to be adopted. Nonetheless, I believe it is important we support it, both to be consistent with our previous position and to put further pressure on the Spanish authorities to respect the legitimate property right of EU-citizens in Spain. I hope you will receive similar replies from other EU representatives.
Dr Caroline Lucas Green Party MEP for SE England Caroline's Green colleague, the Danish MEP Margrete Auken, has led efforts in the Parliament's Petitions Committee to secure a strong response to the many petitions on this matter. Despite attempts by other political groups to water down the Auken Report, it was adopted on March 26th by the Parliament as a whole and Caroline voted in favour along with all Green MEPs. The report tries to find a solution for the many citizens from EU countries who have become victims of abuse by unscrupulous local authorities or developers. It also reminds countries like Spain that the EU has the right to freeze EU funding if citizens rights or European directives on eg environmental protection and the protection of scarce water resources are breached. The Green Party's amendment to the 2010 Budget takes this a step further and seeks to withhold funds from Spain for serious breaches of its duties as a member state. Caroline will be voting for the amendment as will the Green Group of MEPs as a whole.
Nick Griffin I am somewhat overdue in my response but, as you may appreciate, I am a ´new boy´ here and it has taken a small while to get my feet under the table.
You have my total support in your campaign.
What, specifically, do you think I can do to assist you?
Tim Aker It is truly shameful what the Spanish authorities have done to you and your neighbours. The EU lectures countries like Turkey to abide by its 'human rights' code, but it hypocritically allows Spain to treat you and your neighbours in such an inhumane way.
The EU Parliament has already supported the Auken Report this year: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7965912.stm
The threat of freezing Spain's EU grant has also been suggested by the parliament as a measure of how serious this is, but this seems to be the only course of action the EU can take against Spain: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8050768.stm
Sadly, however, the vote to block EU funding to Spain has itself been blocked on procedural grounds.
I will draft a question for David Campbell Bannerman MEP to put to the Commission by either himself or by another member of the Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group.
Liz Lynne West Midlands LibDem MEP 26th Mar 2009 – West Midlands LibDem MEP Liz Lynne has today welcomed a vote in the European Parliament that seeks to finally put an end to the horrendous ordeal of people who have bought property in Spain
Diana Wallis Unfortunately MEPs were denied the right to vote on this important issue during Thursday's votes due to procedural rules, which led to the amendment falling. Mrs. Wallis, together with other Liberal Democrats, were planning to support this amendment and put pressure on the Spanish government to help the victims of Spanish land-grab laws. They were disappointed not to have the opportunity, but will continue to push for this topic to stay on the agenda. Mrs. Wallis takes a particular interest in this issue through her active membership of the Petitions Committee.
Jim Nicholson MEP Mr Nicholson is currently helping people who have been similarily affected in Spain.I can assure you that he will continue that pressure.
Malcolm Harbour Member of the European Parliament for the West Midlands, UK I would like to explain that whilst the European Parliament is fully committed to upholding resolutions passed, the issue of private property is one for national, as opposed to European, competence. The Auken report was passed by the Petitions Committee, which means that the report was in response to petitions received by European citizens. Therefore, the petitions committee can look into, and adopt, any resolutions regardless of whether it falls outside the competence of the European Union. Therefore, enforcing the provisions in the Auken report are difficult in practise, because it is ultimately a decision for the Spanish authorities to act upon.
I would also like to explain, however, that in the recent draft budget of the European Union, an amendment was tabled to allow some incentivised funding for the Spanish authorities to improve the situation of land grabs. Unfortunately this amendment did not pass, despite the support of Conservative MEPs. We will continue this kind of pressure from our end in any way possible.
I hope this answers some of your concerns and also clarifies the difficult position the Parliament is in - whilst we have every wish to protect EU citizens, we must also respect the national sovereignty of Member States.
Giles Chichester MEP I can tell you that I voted for the Auken Report. I can also tell you that MEPs have little power to intervene in the internal affairs of other Member States so please keep your hopes of what we can achieve within bounds.
In my experience the Spanish authorities are particularly difficult to engage in any dialogue. Too many of our countrymen have been beguiled by sunshine and sangria unaware of all the perils of property ownership in Spain.
Philip Bradbourn MEP As this is a matter of Spanish domestic policy, there is little I can do on a European level. May I suggest therefore, that you get in contact with the regional authorities in Spain. If you feel your case is sufficiently serious you could also contact the Spanish Ombudsman. Like Mr Chichester, both Malcolm Harbour and I voted in favour of the Auken Report.
SYED KAMALL Conservative MEP for London Will in Robert Atkins' office tells me that he has been in contact with you and previously replied with an update of the situation. He will write again soon to let him know of any developments. However, I understand that there has been little change in the situation. The Petitions Committee did as much as it could given its limited powers. The only development involved an amendment tabled by the Greens in the last Plenary to the Budget, asking the Commission to follow through with the proposals of the Auken report and effectively withhold development funds until the Spanish regional authorities do what they have been asked.
For some reason the amendment fell during the vote so it did no get through despite the efforts of the Greens, British Conservatives and other MEPs.
Claude Moraes MEP Labour Member of the European Parliament for London As a result of your email, I have today written to Europe Minister the Rt. Hon Chris Bryant MP to ask what representation the UK government is making on behalf of constituents facing similar problems as well as making him aware of your individual case. I enclose a copy of this letter here for your reference.
As a Labour MEP, I take consumer and human rights very seriously indeed. As you may be aware, my colleague in the European Parliament Michael Cashman MEP is currently working on this issue, as well as the European Parliament more widely being very aware of it. The failure of Spain to act on this issue is drawing a great deal of sharp criticism and I and my Labour colleagues are following the issue closely. As soon as I receive a reply from the Europe Minister, I will contact you with whatever information his office may supply.
Robert Sturdy MEP In your message you mentioned that you were in a similar position to those who have taken action under petition 0042-09, and I would just like to say that Conservative MEPs were, and remain, fully supportive of efforts by British citizens robbed of property by Spanish property laws to retrieve their money.
This is the situation as I currently understand it. The European Parliament's Petitions Committee accepted and sent a series of similar petitions regarding this issue to the European Commission for consideration on the 8th of June, along with a copy of a report drafted by Margrete Auken, a Danish Green MEP, calling for the law which allows property to be confiscated without compensation, to be scrapped and the victims finally compensated. The report says that if Spain does not change the unjust laws, the European Commission should freeze £32 billion of aid funds earmarked for Spain in 2007-2013.
The European Commission are now investigating the extent to which any abuses could mean that the Spanish authorities are liable under EU Directives for having failed to ensure the proper application of safeguards to consumers in this context. This reply is expected by the Committee some time in October or November, and once received shall once again be subject to consideration by the Petitions Committee, when the members will decide upon the next course of action.
I should warn you that you should not be placed under any illusions that we can ensure that all the monies owed are returned to you, but I can assure you that should the European Commission find the Spanish authorities culpable that we will be doing all we can to bring them to account.
I hope that this letter can offer you a glimmer of hope, we are doing all we can to help. Please do not hesitate to contact me again in future should you require any further information.
Following the PDF of MEPs responses sent to the leaders of all the UK political parties prior to the recent non-vote on the Auken report, there have been many more replies from UK MEPs. It is really not necessary to plough through the list here, along with snippets from their replies, suffice it to say that according to these responses all of the UK Political Parties are sympathetic to our cause.
I am not sure whether UK MEPs are bound to toe the party line, but if they are then perhaps a better way forward would be to target the party leaders and headquarters.
Jacqueline Foster MEP Conservative MEP- North West Rest assured that all my Conservative Party colleagues will do everything possible to ensure that this miscarriage
Transport and Tourism of justice rectified as soon as possible.
ATKINS Robert ASSISTANT Sir Robert is in full support of you and the many others who find themselves in similar situations.
I have now spoken to Sir Robert about this. What he has suggested, and what I shall do, is to first find out what the Commission's response was to the Auken report. As Sir Robert is no longer a full member of the Petitions Committee, he is not as closely involved in the workings of the Committee as he was. I shall also liase with the office of Margarete Auken to find out what the current situation is and what are the options to move this forward. You will be aware that passing the Auken report in the Petitions Committee was as far as MEPs could go at that stage, and it was then up to the Commission to take a stand. If they have not taken satisfactory action, then we can ask some pertinent questions as to why. But as I say, before this can happen I need to find out what the Commission's response was to the Auken report and go from there.
NEWTON DUNN Bill “Then Bill needs to hear from them, he says” – his response to my statement: “I live in Telford, Shropshire, which is not your area. However, as there are hundreds of thousands of people across Spain affected by this scandal, there will be many members from your constituency.”
Michael Cashman Member of the European Parliament for the West Midlands Indeed it is essential we continue to fight on together to end these terrible injustices. Rest assured, my colleagues
and I in the European Parliamentary Labour Party will continue to do all we can to achieve the realisation of the measures called for in the Auken report, with the aim of ultimately securing a more hopeful future for those affected.
Jill Evans MEP Plaid Cymru Thank you for your email and for bringing this matter to
my attention. I work closely with Margrete Auken, and will support her efforts in implementating the recommendations of her report.
ROGER HELMER MEP Good news and bad news, I'm afraid. I have been in the forefront of support for the Auken report. I have voted and spoken for it repeatedly. But in the end we'll only get progress if the Commission beats up on the Spanish government. They are moving the right way, but painfully slowly. We'll keep up the pressure, but don't expect immediate results.
Geoffrey Van Orden MEP Thank you for your email. As you are aware, Conservatives in the European Parliament have been very active on this issue and helped to produce the report which calls on the Spanish authorities to act.
Glenis Willmott MEP, Leader, European Parliamentary Labour Party Thank you for getting in touch and reiterating the importance of this issue. As I said, sadly your case is one of many. Michael Cashman has been very active on this issue and Glenis and the other Labour MEPs support his work. Unfortunately the European Parliament has limited powers on this issue but we hope the Auken report will increase the pressure on Spain.
George Lyon MEP This is, unfortunately, a state of affairs I am all too aware of; the Spanish local planning authority giving building consent in breach of National Environmental Law. It is an issue all my Liberal Democrat MEP colleagues continue to take up with the Commission, and my colleague, Graham Watson MEP has raised through a number of Parliamentary Questions. However, by virtue of the EC Treaty the European Union’s involvement in property matters is limited as legislation on this issue remains the sole preserve of Member States.
Nonetheless, the EU has worked through other avenues to strengthen the position of consumers, by implementing wider consumer protection directives, such as the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and the Unfair Contract Terms Directive which do apply to the purchase of real estate.
In addition to this, my colleagues and I continue to regularly press the Spanish Government and its representatives on this matter as we remain dissatisfied that so many problems continue to persist.
Emma McClarkin MEP Many thanks for your email informing me of the difficult times you have experienced after purchasing and building property in Spain.
We have been inundated with letters from constituents with similar problems and at this stage I can only recommend that you file a petition, which you can do here at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/parliament/public/staticDisplay.do?id=49. This is a good way of getting the European Parliament to take action.
Peter Skinner MEP Thank you for writing to me regarding your situation with Spanish property and your concerns regarding the Auken report. A vote on an amendment to the 2010 EU Budget withholding structural funds from Spain, rejected earlier in Committee, is due to be voted on by the European Parliament today.
I'm happy to inform you that it has the full support of the European Parliamentary Labour Party. Last year we voted for a similar budgetary amendment and I see no reason to alter our position, especially given the intransigent response of the Spanish authorities to the recommendations contained in the Auken report. As you are no doubt aware the European Parliament called on Spain to take a number of measures to address the serious problems brought about by regional irregularities in land-law. Since the adoption of the Auken report a disappointing lack of progress has been made and many of the recommendations have so far been ignored by the Spanish authorities.
Realistically, it is unlikely in this time of economic crisis that this budgetary amendment will gain enough support to be adopted. Nonetheless, I believe it is important we support it, both to be consistent with our previous position and to put further pressure on the Spanish authorities to respect the legitimate property right of EU-citizens in Spain. I hope you will receive similar replies from other EU representatives.
Dr Caroline Lucas Green Party MEP for SE England Caroline's Green colleague, the Danish MEP Margrete Auken, has led efforts in the Parliament's Petitions Committee to secure a strong response to the many petitions on this matter. Despite attempts by other political groups to water down the Auken Report, it was adopted on March 26th by the Parliament as a whole and Caroline voted in favour along with all Green MEPs. The report tries to find a solution for the many citizens from EU countries who have become victims of abuse by unscrupulous local authorities or developers. It also reminds countries like Spain that the EU has the right to freeze EU funding if citizens rights or European directives on eg environmental protection and the protection of scarce water resources are breached. The Green Party's amendment to the 2010 Budget takes this a step further and seeks to withhold funds from Spain for serious breaches of its duties as a member state. Caroline will be voting for the amendment as will the Green Group of MEPs as a whole.
Nick Griffin I am somewhat overdue in my response but, as you may appreciate, I am a ´new boy´ here and it has taken a small while to get my feet under the table.
You have my total support in your campaign.
What, specifically, do you think I can do to assist you?
Tim Aker It is truly shameful what the Spanish authorities have done to you and your neighbours. The EU lectures countries like Turkey to abide by its 'human rights' code, but it hypocritically allows Spain to treat you and your neighbours in such an inhumane way.
The EU Parliament has already supported the Auken Report this year: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7965912.stm
The threat of freezing Spain's EU grant has also been suggested by the parliament as a measure of how serious this is, but this seems to be the only course of action the EU can take against Spain: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8050768.stm
Sadly, however, the vote to block EU funding to Spain has itself been blocked on procedural grounds.
I will draft a question for David Campbell Bannerman MEP to put to the Commission by either himself or by another member of the Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group.
Liz Lynne West Midlands LibDem MEP 26th Mar 2009 – West Midlands LibDem MEP Liz Lynne has today welcomed a vote in the European Parliament that seeks to finally put an end to the horrendous ordeal of people who have bought property in Spain
Diana Wallis Unfortunately MEPs were denied the right to vote on this important issue during Thursday's votes due to procedural rules, which led to the amendment falling. Mrs. Wallis, together with other Liberal Democrats, were planning to support this amendment and put pressure on the Spanish government to help the victims of Spanish land-grab laws. They were disappointed not to have the opportunity, but will continue to push for this topic to stay on the agenda. Mrs. Wallis takes a particular interest in this issue through her active membership of the Petitions Committee.
Jim Nicholson MEP Mr Nicholson is currently helping people who have been similarily affected in Spain.I can assure you that he will continue that pressure.
Malcolm Harbour Member of the European Parliament for the West Midlands, UK I would like to explain that whilst the European Parliament is fully committed to upholding resolutions passed, the issue of private property is one for national, as opposed to European, competence. The Auken report was passed by the Petitions Committee, which means that the report was in response to petitions received by European citizens. Therefore, the petitions committee can look into, and adopt, any resolutions regardless of whether it falls outside the competence of the European Union. Therefore, enforcing the provisions in the Auken report are difficult in practise, because it is ultimately a decision for the Spanish authorities to act upon.
I would also like to explain, however, that in the recent draft budget of the European Union, an amendment was tabled to allow some incentivised funding for the Spanish authorities to improve the situation of land grabs. Unfortunately this amendment did not pass, despite the support of Conservative MEPs. We will continue this kind of pressure from our end in any way possible.
I hope this answers some of your concerns and also clarifies the difficult position the Parliament is in - whilst we have every wish to protect EU citizens, we must also respect the national sovereignty of Member States.
Giles Chichester MEP I can tell you that I voted for the Auken Report. I can also tell you that MEPs have little power to intervene in the internal affairs of other Member States so please keep your hopes of what we can achieve within bounds.
In my experience the Spanish authorities are particularly difficult to engage in any dialogue. Too many of our countrymen have been beguiled by sunshine and sangria unaware of all the perils of property ownership in Spain.
Philip Bradbourn MEP As this is a matter of Spanish domestic policy, there is little I can do on a European level. May I suggest therefore, that you get in contact with the regional authorities in Spain. If you feel your case is sufficiently serious you could also contact the Spanish Ombudsman. Like Mr Chichester, both Malcolm Harbour and I voted in favour of the Auken Report.
SYED KAMALL Conservative MEP for London Will in Robert Atkins' office tells me that he has been in contact with you and previously replied with an update of the situation. He will write again soon to let him know of any developments. However, I understand that there has been little change in the situation. The Petitions Committee did as much as it could given its limited powers. The only development involved an amendment tabled by the Greens in the last Plenary to the Budget, asking the Commission to follow through with the proposals of the Auken report and effectively withhold development funds until the Spanish regional authorities do what they have been asked.
For some reason the amendment fell during the vote so it did no get through despite the efforts of the Greens, British Conservatives and other MEPs.
Claude Moraes MEP Labour Member of the European Parliament for London As a result of your email, I have today written to Europe Minister the Rt. Hon Chris Bryant MP to ask what representation the UK government is making on behalf of constituents facing similar problems as well as making him aware of your individual case. I enclose a copy of this letter here for your reference.
As a Labour MEP, I take consumer and human rights very seriously indeed. As you may be aware, my colleague in the European Parliament Michael Cashman MEP is currently working on this issue, as well as the European Parliament more widely being very aware of it. The failure of Spain to act on this issue is drawing a great deal of sharp criticism and I and my Labour colleagues are following the issue closely. As soon as I receive a reply from the Europe Minister, I will contact you with whatever information his office may supply.
Robert Sturdy MEP In your message you mentioned that you were in a similar position to those who have taken action under petition 0042-09, and I would just like to say that Conservative MEPs were, and remain, fully supportive of efforts by British citizens robbed of property by Spanish property laws to retrieve their money.
This is the situation as I currently understand it. The European Parliament's Petitions Committee accepted and sent a series of similar petitions regarding this issue to the European Commission for consideration on the 8th of June, along with a copy of a report drafted by Margrete Auken, a Danish Green MEP, calling for the law which allows property to be confiscated without compensation, to be scrapped and the victims finally compensated. The report says that if Spain does not change the unjust laws, the European Commission should freeze £32 billion of aid funds earmarked for Spain in 2007-2013.
The European Commission are now investigating the extent to which any abuses could mean that the Spanish authorities are liable under EU Directives for having failed to ensure the proper application of safeguards to consumers in this context. This reply is expected by the Committee some time in October or November, and once received shall once again be subject to consideration by the Petitions Committee, when the members will decide upon the next course of action.
I should warn you that you should not be placed under any illusions that we can ensure that all the monies owed are returned to you, but I can assure you that should the European Commission find the Spanish authorities culpable that we will be doing all we can to bring them to account.
I hope that this letter can offer you a glimmer of hope, we are doing all we can to help. Please do not hesitate to contact me again in future should you require any further information.
Letter to UK MEPs
I am writing to you in the hope that you can help to bring the Auken Report and the recommendations made therein to the forefront of Parliamentary activity.
At a recent meeting in El Albir, Spain, attended by Margrete Auken, it was noted that the Spanish government had effectively ignored the adopted text of the Auken Report, along with that previously of Michael Cashman into the building problems and land grab in Spain.
How long can the European Parliament allow the Spanish authorities to blatantly ignore EU decisions that are taken? There are many thousands of people whose lives are being ruined by this scandal, and all they want is a satisfactory end to this nightmare, to be able to live in peace and harmony, and to enjoy their life in Spain.
This was part of my submission to the Auken Report, but which could effectively apply to tens of thousands more people caught up in the property scandal:
I belong to a group of mainly British third age people who bought houses in El Fas, Cantoria, in the Province of Andalucia, who are from all walks of life, most of us were very careful when we made the big decision to embrace the Spanish way of life and purchased our houses. Checks were made on agents, Spanish solicitors were employed, notaries processed the escrituras, and we were constantly assured that all was in order and that our houses in Spain were completely legal according to Spanish law.
You would find it hard to imagine the horror, stress and strain of discovering that your house, into which you have put your life savings was to become subject to demolition because it was illegal.
The first any of us knew about this was when we discovered that the builders were being prosecuted and that the public prosecutor of Huercal Overa wanted to demolish 19 houses on El Fas where we live. Oblivious to the fact that we were all victims of fraud, and making us double victims by threatening our houses.
We fully understand that the laws of Spain have to be upheld, but where was the law when we were cheated and lied to? Where was the “Law” when our house where being constructed?, the authorities did not control the situation, the “Town Hall officials”, “Mayors” and “Councilmen” Police, Guardia Civil ALL turned a blind eye. WHY? We are now told that no building licences have been issued by Cantoria for 25 years. Why are we being punished when we had done all we could to ensure that we complied with the law and bought in good faith.
It is inconceivable that the Spanish authorities were unaware of the situation regarding the illegal building, and thereby condoned it. Where did they think the extra revenues were coming from? Why has Spain been booming in recent years? Where did all the businesses that profited from the mainly British investments think that the money came from? It really is shameful that they should suggest that we should pay more. What about sharing some of the profits that have made out of us. Profits which the government has shared with the taxes which have been paid.
Our Dutch builders have received around 4 million euros from us just on our small estate. We now find that we have no electricity except from a very expensive to run generator (generously provided by the Mayor of Cantoria), and water from who knows where ( NOT drinking water ). All because we have been misled, lied and cheated to by Agents, Developers, Solicitors, and above all by the Administers of the Laws of Spain, the Town Halls, Andalucian Parliament, Andalucian Junta. We cannot now get the correct paperwork for our houses.
Tens of thousands of people now find themselves in the same situation.
Why was this allowed to happen?
This is the shame of Spain!
The realisation that so many houses are now classed as illegal was the main cause of the property slump in Spain, long before the current worldwide economic problems.
All we want is to live out our lives in peace, and enjoy this wonderful country, among the good Spanish people. Surely this is our fundamental basic human right.
We think the Spanish government should consider the following:
1. Take away the threat of demolition.
2. Allow us to gain mains electricity and water. We can then contribute to the local councils and pay our bills correctly as we would all wish to do.
3. Sequester the assets of the builders and developers who have acted illegally, and use this to carry out any further work to enable developments such as ours to become fully legal.
4. Further punish those responsible, by applying the criminal laws of Spain.
5. Use any money remaining to compensate the victims (legal expenses, etc.). Those of us who are taking legal action are doing so at our own expense, against these builders/developers who are criminals, and we are having to pay huge amounts of euros to bring them to justice.
6. Make the Spanish Authorities, ADMIT that they have been complicit and instrumental in the making of this situation, as highlighted by Michael cashman, MEP; Margaret Auken MEP and recently by Willie Meyers MEP.
These actions would bring much needed revenue into the towns and the service industries, and would cost very little. We estimate that the population of our few houses in El Fas spend in the region of 4000 euros per week in the locality. Multiply this by the many thousands more properties and you can see that this is a massive amount of money being put into the Spanish economy. Most of us are on the padron, and have our residencia.
As you can hopefully see from above, the Spanish authorities have little or no regard for the victims of their property scandal. Which they themselves have caused.
Some members of our group are facing severe harassment including death threats, both physically and by e-mail, a live shotgun cartridge placed on a front doorstep, and abusive and malicious e-mail and press campaigns.
There has been some movement towards regularising most of the illegal properties (Certificate of Ordenanza), but that has proved to be unworkable, and will merely result in extracting more money from the victims. There are then all of the other irregularities, ie, the land not being properly segregated, problems over who actually has title to the land, the payment of urban prices for rustic land, etc.
In the case of the 19 houses at El Fas, some of us have grouped together and employed a solicitor who is properly versed in Spanish law, and a barrister from Madrid. Their estimate of the costs to sort out the illegal mess is 50,000 – 60,000 euros. Yes, that is 50 to 60 thousand euros. Where is that money supposed to come from.
As I have already stated, the authorities were complicit in this scandal. They have received taxes from the developers (where the developers have bothered to declare), and taxes from the profits made by the many businesses who themselves have profited from the illegal building. All those people who have profited should now be paying for the problems to be sorted out.
The scale of the fraud is immense, not only are there rogue builders and developers, there are rogue property agents, solicitors, notaries, town councils and especially some Mayors. All have played their part in this shameful scandal.
The authorities would appear to be trying to pretend that they knew nothing, and that they have no say in the judicial process. What rubbish! They could allow the majority of properties to be connected to the mains services tomorrow, if they so wished. At least that would go some way to helping the victims, many of whom are having to pay for very expensive to run generators for their electricity.
Apart from the horrendous legal costs, we are now threatened with the costs of infrastructure, which again can run into many thousands of euros. Where will the money come from? The victims should not need to pay even one cent more.
Most of the victims of this scandal are pensioners living on a set income, much reduced as the euro gets stronger. Many have had to return to the UK to beg for help from friends and family. Their properties in Spain are virtually worthless in the current economic climate. Many are trapped in Spain, existing as best they can.
There is a belief that the houses were purchased very cheaply because they were built on rustic land. Whilst that may be true in a few isolated cases, we certainly did not pay rustic prices. We have paid urban prices for rustic land, and the developers have made massive profits. Possibly more than 4 million euros from our 19 houses alone. Many of these developers are now pleading poverty, but we are assured that much of the money has been salted away. Even if the properties were legal and had correct paperwork, where is the market for selling?
Many of these victims need help, help towards the costs and stress of living as victims of this massive fraud.
The Spanish authorities have no regard whatsoever for the victims of their housing policies, and have been quite happy to turn a blind eye as long as the economy was booming on the back of this scandal.
Unless action is swift, these problems are going to rumble on for years, many of the victims are in their twilight years, they do not have years to wait for their life to begin again. Four local males have died in El Fas in the last eighteen months.
Many of us were overjoyed that at last the European Parliament was taking up our case. We call on you to get the help and justice we deserve.
At a recent meeting in El Albir, Spain, attended by Margrete Auken, it was noted that the Spanish government had effectively ignored the adopted text of the Auken Report, along with that previously of Michael Cashman into the building problems and land grab in Spain.
How long can the European Parliament allow the Spanish authorities to blatantly ignore EU decisions that are taken? There are many thousands of people whose lives are being ruined by this scandal, and all they want is a satisfactory end to this nightmare, to be able to live in peace and harmony, and to enjoy their life in Spain.
This was part of my submission to the Auken Report, but which could effectively apply to tens of thousands more people caught up in the property scandal:
I belong to a group of mainly British third age people who bought houses in El Fas, Cantoria, in the Province of Andalucia, who are from all walks of life, most of us were very careful when we made the big decision to embrace the Spanish way of life and purchased our houses. Checks were made on agents, Spanish solicitors were employed, notaries processed the escrituras, and we were constantly assured that all was in order and that our houses in Spain were completely legal according to Spanish law.
You would find it hard to imagine the horror, stress and strain of discovering that your house, into which you have put your life savings was to become subject to demolition because it was illegal.
The first any of us knew about this was when we discovered that the builders were being prosecuted and that the public prosecutor of Huercal Overa wanted to demolish 19 houses on El Fas where we live. Oblivious to the fact that we were all victims of fraud, and making us double victims by threatening our houses.
We fully understand that the laws of Spain have to be upheld, but where was the law when we were cheated and lied to? Where was the “Law” when our house where being constructed?, the authorities did not control the situation, the “Town Hall officials”, “Mayors” and “Councilmen” Police, Guardia Civil ALL turned a blind eye. WHY? We are now told that no building licences have been issued by Cantoria for 25 years. Why are we being punished when we had done all we could to ensure that we complied with the law and bought in good faith.
It is inconceivable that the Spanish authorities were unaware of the situation regarding the illegal building, and thereby condoned it. Where did they think the extra revenues were coming from? Why has Spain been booming in recent years? Where did all the businesses that profited from the mainly British investments think that the money came from? It really is shameful that they should suggest that we should pay more. What about sharing some of the profits that have made out of us. Profits which the government has shared with the taxes which have been paid.
Our Dutch builders have received around 4 million euros from us just on our small estate. We now find that we have no electricity except from a very expensive to run generator (generously provided by the Mayor of Cantoria), and water from who knows where ( NOT drinking water ). All because we have been misled, lied and cheated to by Agents, Developers, Solicitors, and above all by the Administers of the Laws of Spain, the Town Halls, Andalucian Parliament, Andalucian Junta. We cannot now get the correct paperwork for our houses.
Tens of thousands of people now find themselves in the same situation.
Why was this allowed to happen?
This is the shame of Spain!
The realisation that so many houses are now classed as illegal was the main cause of the property slump in Spain, long before the current worldwide economic problems.
All we want is to live out our lives in peace, and enjoy this wonderful country, among the good Spanish people. Surely this is our fundamental basic human right.
We think the Spanish government should consider the following:
1. Take away the threat of demolition.
2. Allow us to gain mains electricity and water. We can then contribute to the local councils and pay our bills correctly as we would all wish to do.
3. Sequester the assets of the builders and developers who have acted illegally, and use this to carry out any further work to enable developments such as ours to become fully legal.
4. Further punish those responsible, by applying the criminal laws of Spain.
5. Use any money remaining to compensate the victims (legal expenses, etc.). Those of us who are taking legal action are doing so at our own expense, against these builders/developers who are criminals, and we are having to pay huge amounts of euros to bring them to justice.
6. Make the Spanish Authorities, ADMIT that they have been complicit and instrumental in the making of this situation, as highlighted by Michael cashman, MEP; Margaret Auken MEP and recently by Willie Meyers MEP.
These actions would bring much needed revenue into the towns and the service industries, and would cost very little. We estimate that the population of our few houses in El Fas spend in the region of 4000 euros per week in the locality. Multiply this by the many thousands more properties and you can see that this is a massive amount of money being put into the Spanish economy. Most of us are on the padron, and have our residencia.
As you can hopefully see from above, the Spanish authorities have little or no regard for the victims of their property scandal. Which they themselves have caused.
Some members of our group are facing severe harassment including death threats, both physically and by e-mail, a live shotgun cartridge placed on a front doorstep, and abusive and malicious e-mail and press campaigns.
There has been some movement towards regularising most of the illegal properties (Certificate of Ordenanza), but that has proved to be unworkable, and will merely result in extracting more money from the victims. There are then all of the other irregularities, ie, the land not being properly segregated, problems over who actually has title to the land, the payment of urban prices for rustic land, etc.
In the case of the 19 houses at El Fas, some of us have grouped together and employed a solicitor who is properly versed in Spanish law, and a barrister from Madrid. Their estimate of the costs to sort out the illegal mess is 50,000 – 60,000 euros. Yes, that is 50 to 60 thousand euros. Where is that money supposed to come from.
As I have already stated, the authorities were complicit in this scandal. They have received taxes from the developers (where the developers have bothered to declare), and taxes from the profits made by the many businesses who themselves have profited from the illegal building. All those people who have profited should now be paying for the problems to be sorted out.
The scale of the fraud is immense, not only are there rogue builders and developers, there are rogue property agents, solicitors, notaries, town councils and especially some Mayors. All have played their part in this shameful scandal.
The authorities would appear to be trying to pretend that they knew nothing, and that they have no say in the judicial process. What rubbish! They could allow the majority of properties to be connected to the mains services tomorrow, if they so wished. At least that would go some way to helping the victims, many of whom are having to pay for very expensive to run generators for their electricity.
Apart from the horrendous legal costs, we are now threatened with the costs of infrastructure, which again can run into many thousands of euros. Where will the money come from? The victims should not need to pay even one cent more.
Most of the victims of this scandal are pensioners living on a set income, much reduced as the euro gets stronger. Many have had to return to the UK to beg for help from friends and family. Their properties in Spain are virtually worthless in the current economic climate. Many are trapped in Spain, existing as best they can.
There is a belief that the houses were purchased very cheaply because they were built on rustic land. Whilst that may be true in a few isolated cases, we certainly did not pay rustic prices. We have paid urban prices for rustic land, and the developers have made massive profits. Possibly more than 4 million euros from our 19 houses alone. Many of these developers are now pleading poverty, but we are assured that much of the money has been salted away. Even if the properties were legal and had correct paperwork, where is the market for selling?
Many of these victims need help, help towards the costs and stress of living as victims of this massive fraud.
The Spanish authorities have no regard whatsoever for the victims of their housing policies, and have been quite happy to turn a blind eye as long as the economy was booming on the back of this scandal.
Unless action is swift, these problems are going to rumble on for years, many of the victims are in their twilight years, they do not have years to wait for their life to begin again. Four local males have died in El Fas in the last eighteen months.
Many of us were overjoyed that at last the European Parliament was taking up our case. We call on you to get the help and justice we deserve.
Briefing paper: AUAN, AULAN, SOHA
Dear Sir,
The information contained herein has been compiled to highlight the many problems that we in the Valle of Almanzora, Levante Almeriense and La Axarquia areas of Andalucia are experiencing due to widespread abuse of the planning system. It is by no means exhaustive but will hopefully give you an understanding of our position and why we have raised our concerns with you.
You are, of course, aware that many citizens from the European community settled in Spain believing that, having used the services of a local solicitor; they had purchased a legal property; only later to find out that their homes were illegal. You know that the Spanish authorities knew and allowed this practice to continue. That Governments and Town Halls continued to build knowing that they were breaking the planning laws. That profit and, in many cases, corruption was more important than complying with such laws.
These owners, having used the Spanish legal framework for the purchase, now find they are expected to shoulder the blame, and future costs, in order to get what they have already paid for. The Spanish authorities, which include many Notaries, Lawyers, Town Halls and Regional Governments, were aware of the abuses, and in many cases are implicated in the corruption.
You are no doubt also aware that ‘land grab’ or the expropriation of land from existing owners and the charging of infrastructure expenses to the same owners has also manifested itself in Andalucia.
We hope that you will consider the issues raised and can see why we fear for our future. No European citizen should be placed, and possibly live the remainder of their life, in these circumstances.
Yours faithfully,
Maura Hillen Philip Smalley Rex Dobson
President AUAN President SOHA President AULAN
Table of Contents
Table of Contents 2
Urban Abuse in Andalucia 3
Legal Situation of Homeowners 3
Lack of Documentation 3
Denuncias & Legal Proceedings 4
Local Legality but Regional Illegality 4
Land Grab 5
Disenfranchisement 5
Legal Remedies currently available 5
Litigation – Justice delayed is justice denied 5
Legalisation – Fitting a square peg into a round hole 5
Special regulations for access to services 6
Our fears for the future 6
What do we want? 8
Appendix A – Reporting of Urban Abuse in Andalucia. 11
Appendix B – Case Studies 16
Sample case 1 – Inadequate documentation 16
Sample case 2 – Impact of Existence of Denuncia 16
Sample case 3 – Impact of Legal Proceedings 17
Sample case 4 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality 17
Sample case 5 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality 18
Sample case 6 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality 19
Sample Case 7 – Land Grab 20
Sample Case 8 – Land Grab 20
Urban Abuse in Andalucia
Urban abuse in Andalucia has been well documented. Our mayors, council members, officials, architects, lawyers, promoters and constructors have all been called before the court to answer a variety of charges including abuse of office, bribery, abuse of urban planning powers, forgery, buying of favours, prohibited negotiations and abuse of power in general. (See - Appendix A).
Spain has been the subject of damning reports from the European Union (Auken 2009, Libicki and Cashman 2007). No other EU member state has been called on the Parliament's carpet in such a manner before, concerning the systematic property rights and environmental abuses reported.
And yet, it is clear that the Junta de Andalucia has done nothing to recognise or implement the recommendations of the European Union on this matter.
It has done little or nothing to implement our demands for a fair and equitable solution for the victims of urban abuse. (See- What do we want?).
We believe that if the government of Andalucia fails to recognise its moral obligations and its economic peril and continues to react in a slow, indecisive and short-sighted manner to this crisis then foreign investment will continue to decline leaving a region that will forever struggle to regain its reputation in a highly competitive property market.
If current problems remain un-resolved then the future problems could become insurmountable. The economic damage could well spread to those as yet un-effected including the Spanish Banks who hold vast mortgage debts. Profits created will quickly diminish to debt without a steady stream of foreign investors to oil the wheels of the economy.
Legal Situation of Homeowners
Lack of Documentation
Tens of thousands of people bought their homes in good faith, with services promised and paid for in a ‘package’ of house and land from a promoter only to find that the houses were actually built on rural land and were hence illegal. Some have no documentation at all, some have partial documentation, some have illegally issued documentation and some have found that they have fraudulent documentation.
It is not possible to legally register, to sell or to pay taxes on an undocumented house.
Without documentation (specifically a habitation certificate), the homeowner is unable to legally obtain water and electricity via a meter and to have a contract with the suppliers. As a result, many homeowners have illegal or temporary ‘builders’ supplies (an inadequate low wattage electricity and low volume water supply) or no supply at all.
Sample case 1, (Albox, Valle de Almanzora)
This is a typical case of members buying in good faith, but not being able to get connections to water and electricity because they have no habitation certificate. They rely on tankered water which is expensive and use a generator for a few hours a day which is also expensive.
Denuncias & Legal Proceedings
As the scale of the urban abuse scandal became apparent many developments were denounced by ecology groups or belatedly by the Junta de Andalucia. As is normal in Spain, the owners of houses are not usually informed of a denuncia affecting their property, the existence of which only comes to light during other proceedings.
The effects of a denuncia can be seen in Sample Case 2. (Albox, Valle de Almanzora)
Residents bought in good faith and mains supplies were included in the house price. However, the builder vanished leaving them on a temporary builders supply, which was later disconnected . In 2006 residents grouped together to pay 100,000 euros for the installation of pylons and cables. They had permission from the local council and the Junta de Anadalucia. On the point of connection the Junta stopped the work because a denuncia existed. It had existed for 6 months before the Junta gave approval. It had been unknown to the residents. They fortunately have water, as they grouped together to pay for this and managed to obtain a connection and meter. However, they are still without electricity.
The effects of legal proceedings can be seen in Sample Case 3. (Cantoria, Valle de Almanzora)
Residents who bought in good faith and lived in houses with documentation were contacted to see if they wished to declare an interest in court proceedings against their promoter for the construction of property on rustic land without a building license. The judge indicated that he was considering demolition of the 19 homes involved in the case. In September 2008 the mains electricity supply was disconnected and the occupants were forced under threat of a 6,000 euro fine for stealing electricity, to connect to a generator.
Local Legality but Regional Illegality
A few residents appear to be trapped in an argument between the local and regional levels of government. They have a full set of paperwork from the local councils and yet the regional level insists they are illegal. This situation exists in Zurgena (Valle de Almanzora), in Vera (Levante Almeriense) and in La Vinuela (Axarquia). The homeowners themselves are not informed until it is too late to defend themselves.
The effects of a dispute between the regional and local authorities can been seen in Sample Case 4 (La Vinuela, Axarquia) & 5 (Alcaucin, Axarquia)
Residents of houses with full paperwork and permissions advised that their building licences were in question (8 years after they were issued) and their properties were at risk of demolition.
It is here that we find our most extreme example (sample case 6), that of the Priors in Vera:-
The Prior’s had full local paperwork for their house. However they were evicted with two hours notice and had to watch as the house was demolished by the Junta. Their electricity and water meters were removed. For 2 years they have been forced to live in their garage without water and electricity. They are both pensioners. They are not allowed to reconnect the services. They have no compensation.
Land Grab
We have instances of ‘land grab’ in Bedar, Levante Almeriense.
See Sample Cases 7 and 8 (Bedar)
Where an attempt has been made to expropriate from existing owners with the charging of infrastructure expenses to the same owners.
Disenfranchisement
Registration on the Padron is a prerequisite for registration on the censo electoral. Owners of illegal homes in Zurgena (Valle de Almanzora) are unable to register on the padron because they do not have street names and house numbers. Thus they are denied the right to vote in municipal and European Elections.
Legal Remedies currently available
Litigation – Justice delayed is justice denied
Various individuals and small groups of residents have taken civil action for fraud against their promoters. However, this is a lengthy process with civil actions taking up to 8 years to reach a conclusion. It is also expensive (€10,000 +) and thus beyond the reach of many.
Legalisation – Fitting a square peg into a round hole
In late 2008 the Junta de Andalucia began to show a political will to address the problem of illegal properties.
• The Junta ordered an inspection of all of the ‘irregular’ houses in the the region including the problem areas of the Valle de Almanzora and La Axarquia with 11,000 and 10,000 illegal houses identified in these areas to date.
• The Junta began to enforce planning legislation first introduced in 2002 (Ley de Ordenacion Urbanistica de Andalucia or LOUA) which requires all of our Town Halls to produce an urban plan. These plans must take notice of the results from the inspection team with respect to the legalisation of our homes i.e. Will we be in the 95% that the Junta has stated will be ‘regularised’ in some way or in the 5% that will be demolished because they are on protected land or in a dangerous position?
Problem 1 – Current solutions will take decades
Whilst this sounds like progress but the problems are revealed in the detail. The LOUA does not allow for the existence of a house on rustic land for any purpose other than agriculture (Why? Other EU countries allows this). So, we must wait until a town plan expands gradually to encompass our property. This process will take many years and may never be achieved. Each iteration of a PGOU takes 6-9 months to create and approximately 2 years to approve.
Given the difficulties involved in ‘reverse engineering’ illegal houses into a legal plan (with land segregation being a key issue) we anticipate that many homes in Andalucia will ultimately be abandoned to the uncertain legal status of ‘fuera de ordenation’ and thousands may be demolished.
Problem 2 - The victims may become the forgotten
As none of the EU recommendations with respect to undue influence in the Town Halls has been enacted, the homeowner must continue to compete with powerful vested interests in the planning process.
As the EU recommendation for independent arbitration and support for the homeowner has been ignored we must struggle to understand the complex process of planning legislation as it is ‘reverse engineered’ unto our homes.
Problem 3 – Who pays?
The construction industry is in serious recession and a number of promoters have gone out of business or cannot afford to pay the costs for necessary infrastructure. This might leave the homeowner with no option but to carry those costs. It is further feared that Town Halls will not pursue, even where possible, promoters for costs relating to required infrastructures but pass these to homeowners as an easier solution, even though they, the Town Halls, should have incorporated or ‘bonded’ these costs at first planning stage.
Special regulations for access to services
For those who have been denied access to mains water and electricity there is now the cost of a ‘special licence’ being sought by Town Halls the cost of which starts at €850.
Problem
Many homeowners are excluded from obtaining this license because.
• There is a denuncia against their home.
• They do not own the land on which their house stands.
• The land has not been segregated.
• They are unwilling to declare under the 4 year rule that they are responsible for the existence of an illegal house on rustic land.
Our fears for the future
It is reported that inspection teams have identified 21,000 illegal houses in the Almanzora Valley and La Axarquia alone. This is a huge problem!
1. We are fearful that current actions, especially those relating to any fines; demands for infrastructure payments; and the like; will lead to many home owners being put into a worse financial situation than they are in at present. This is already leading to much stress and anxiety for our members and, of course, many others.
2. We are fearful that this could also lead to many being forced to return to their homeland having lost their life savings because they cannot afford to legalise their home.
3. We fear that our constructors, our Town Halls, our architects and our lawyers will get away with what they have done because continents drift faster than a Spanish civil court case. A moot point anyway if you can’t afford to sue.
4. We are concerned that NEW areas of urbanisations will be included in some plans before the legalisation of properties already being occupied.
5. We believe that if the current plan of action continues without significant change many owners will not see a solution in their life-time. You will be aware that under Spanish Planning Laws an urbanisation can only grow by a permitted amount over a certain period. This restriction has knowingly been far exceeded in many districts. Many owners will therefore not be made legal as authorities ‘hide’ behind this rule. The very one they broke in the first place! This law needs to be altered to allow for the existence of homes on rustic land for purposes not related to agriculture. You can imagine the constant fear and concern this brings when people see a distinct possibility that they will pass the problem and the possible financial burden on to their children.
6. We fear that we will be blamed and held responsible. In many cases home owners have been ‘duped’ into becoming a promoter of their property therefore liable to future infrastructure costs and any possible penalties (civil and criminal) that should have been the responsibility of the builders. We are already experiencing a problem where builders charge owners for various utilities and then fail to pay the supply company. Some owners have now been cut off from these services and asked to pay the outstanding charges or pay a large sum for re-connection.
7. We fear that we are seen as a ‘cash generator’ for our impoverished Councils. 50% of our members do not have access to mains water or electricity. Some local councils now require that the owners pay exorbitant amounts to be given permission to connect to these services.
8. We have no certainty! Some members have fully legalised documents for their property, now to be told that the Junta of Andalucía has withdrawn building licences for ‘irregularities’, in many cases court proceeding are being actioned. Their documents have official stamps from the very people that now take these actions.
9. We fear there is no justice! While many of our Human Rights have and continue to be abused, we know that we would struggle to see justice due to the slowness of Spain’s judicial system. While it would be our right to do so, it is a futile action and one that would probably take as long, if not longer, than the process they are currently taking. Many cannot afford it. To this extent we implore you to continue to seek, on our behalf, a fair and speedy solution.
10. We fear (with some justification) that we will be pilloried in the Spanish press, made scapegoats and portrayed as somehow complicit in the scandal of urban abuse. For example, an article in Teleprensa published 2nd September 2009 titled ‘Harsh attack by the British Community in Cantoria on the issue of illegal houses’ asserts that British residents knowingly purchased property on non urbanised land, made ‘black money’ payments to avoid Spanish tax, bought houses cheaply and most bizarrely of all, moved to Spain to take advantage of a free health care system.
11. We fear that our homes will be left in limbo, outside of any known planning regulation or ‘fuera de ordenacion’ with no legal status, no paper work and simply left to return to the dust as a forgotten statistic of the Spanish planning scandal. We observe that this fear is already becoming a reality as the town plans emerge.
What do we want?
1. COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION: A national commission of investigation be established, with representatives of the administration and citizens’ groups (including those for the protection of homeowners’ rights and the ecologists), to investigate the existing grave planning and environmental problems, to draw up a report on the causes of said problems and their possible solutions, as well as recommendations for the future.
2. ARBITRATION: The creation of a special administrative commission that includes a provincial public ombudsman, advised by independent investigation services, including representatives from the administration and from citizens’ groups (including those for the defence of individual property owners and ecology groups), and with arbitration powers in relation to disputes concerning these problems, available to affected parties free of charge.
3. RESPONSIBILITY: The liability of developers, the administration and pertinent third parties, for having given rise to the grave planning and environmental problems which exist, must be made enforceable and real. Any process of regularisation should, as far as possible, include binding agreements (including adequate guarantees) between those who have caused the irregularities and the administration, and these must include the opportune measures so that those who caused the irregularities compensate for the damage caused.
4. PRINCIPLES TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT: The following principles should be recognized and reflected in urban law.
(1) In urban development priority must be given to the true needs of the cities and towns affected, sustainability from an environmental point of view and the need to preserve the historical and cultural identity of the affected areas.
(2) The need for full compliance with community law and fundamental rights, including the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and case law of the European Court of Human Rights.
(3) In the case of demolition of property acquired in good faith by citizens real, effective and prior compensation must be guaranteed. Such compensation must be made prior to any loss and at proper rates and conforming to the case law of the Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights.
(4) The legitimate right of purchasers to property acquired legally must be recognised and criteria established for the application of Art. 33 of the Spanish Constitution with respect to public and social interest in order to prevent and prohibit the infringement of people’s property rights by decisions of local and regional authorities;
5. TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION: Notice of any planning or environmental proceedings should be communicated individually to all those affected, directly or indirectly; as well as publicised widely; publication in the relevant Bulletins not being sufficient. The possibility of electronic access (Internet) to planning and environmental documents in the process of being approved or approved be ensured. Information in the Cadastral and Land Registry must coincide, and the Land Registry must include graphical information. It must be ensured that the information on the land registry includes information about the status of the property with respect to urban regulations as well as environmental and cultural restrictions or similar.
6. JUDICIAL SYSTEM: There is an urgent need to reform the judicial system to avoid the lack of effective rights before the courts; shortening of the real length of proceedings; computerizing and providing adequate resources.
7. ESTATE AGENTS: Should 1) be licensed or have passed an examination of sufficient knowledge and capacity; 2) have adequate insurance to cover all civil liabilities; 3) be clearly regulated in their activities.
8. PROMOTERS & CONSTRUCTORS: These must be subject to bonds, guarantees or insurance to cover possible liabilities to third parties (including to buyers), and to the administration; for possible planning or environmental breaches or infractions; and proof that such guarantees are in place must be a pre-requisite to present and manage any planning instrument.
9. PROTOCOL: An obligatory protocol for the buying and selling of real estate should be established for the benefit of the consumer, setting out the precise steps and standardised procedures , similar to those in other EU member states (for example the United Kingdom).
10. BASIC SERVICES: As a matter of priority and on humanitarian grounds, any house which has been occupied in the past three years should be temporarily permitted electricity and water services until the status of the home is clarified.
Appendix A – Reporting of Urban Abuse in Andalucia.
'Costurero' vincula 85 viviendas en Zurgena a movimientos inusuales en cuentas de ediles detenidos
ALMERÍA, 10 Abr. (EUROPA PRESS) -
La operación 'Costurero' contra la corrupción urbanística en Zurgena (Almería), que derivó el pasado día 2 en la detención del alcalde, Cándido Trabalón y el edil de Urbanismo, Manuel Tijeras (PA), se centra en investigar si se produjo prevaricación y cohecho en la autorización municipal para la construcción de 85 viviendas, de entre el millar bajo sospecha construido desde 2004.
http://www.europapress.es/00279/20080410213354/costurero-vincula-85-viviendas-zurgena-movimientos-inusuales-cuentas-ediles-detenidos.html
Un juzgado de Almería imputa al exalcalde del PP de Albox y portavoz del partido por delitos urbanísticos y el PSOE pide su dimisión
Francisco Granero
ALBOX.- El Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción número 2 de Huercal Overa cita a Francisco Granero Granados exalcalde de Albox y actual portavoz del PP a comparecer en el juzgado el 27 de marzo a las 11,30 horas.
El objeto de la citación de Francisco Granero Granados es ser oído en concepto de imputado, de acuerdo con lo dispuesto en el articulo 486 de la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal, como responsable de un presunto delito de Construcción no autorizada y por tanto un presunto delito contra la ordenación del territorio……
http://www.teleprensa.es/almeria-noticia-162995-Un-juzgado-de-Almer26iacute3Ba-imputa-al-exalcalde-del-PP-de-Albox-y-portavoz-del-partido-por-delitos-urban26iacute3Bsticos-y-el-PSOE-pide-su-dimisi26oacute3Bn.html
AXARQUÍA
Imputan al alcalde de La Viñuela en cinco causas por delitos urbanísticos
La Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente acusa al regidor socialista Juan Millán de conceder cinco licencias en suelos no urbanizables
18.03.09 -
AGENCIAS / E. C.
| MÁLAGA
Nueva denuncia urbanística contra el alcalde de La Viñuela, el socialista Juan Millán. La Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente de Málaga ha presentado cinco denuncias contra el regidor por conceder por decreto varias licencias, presuntamente irregulares, para la construcción de viviendas en suelo no urbanizable, lo que para el fiscal podría constituir cinco delitos contra la ordenación del territorio, uno de ellos continuado. ……
http://www.diariosur.es/20090318/axarquia/imputan-alcalde-vinuela-cinco-20090318.html
ALMERÍA
La Fiscalía ve a funcionarios y autoridades como «cómplices» del urbanismo ilegal
La crítica la extiende a la sociedad, que refleja «pasividad» en el tema La Memoria de la Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente y Urbanismo advierte de la progresiva sofisticación de las tramas de corrupción urbanística
28.05.08 -
A. P.
La Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente de Almería no se corta ni un pelo a la hora de definir y dar cuentas de la situación creada en la provincia con las casas ilegales y otras irregularidades urbanísticas. La Memoria de la Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente y Urbanismo 2007 recoge que en el caso almeriense la proliferación de construcciones ilegales no se entiende sin la «pasividad, cuando no complicidad, de autoridades y funcionarios de las administraciones competentes». Y añade que «llama poderosamente la atención la actuación de cargos, representantes y funcionarios de ayuntamientos», así como «una serie de profesionales como técnicos (arquitectos, ingenieros...), gestores y compañías de servicios...» que favorecen con su actuación el 'florecimiento' de corrupción pública y privada.
La crítica se extiende hasta la sociedad en general a la que también atribuye «pasividad» ya que «salvo excepciones de organizaciones ecologistas o algún particular que ha denunciado actuaciones ilegales, ha permanecido indiferente». No obstante, la crisis en la construcción también está afectando a este entramado como se desprende del hecho de que la Fiscalía almeriense pasara de 118 diligencias penales en 2006 a 88 en 2007.
Y en Almería no queda sólo la cosa. La corrupción urbanística es España, dice el informe a nivel nacional, se «sofistica» y las tramas tienen un carácter progresivamente «más organizado». El texto abunda sobre todo en las situaciones detectadas en las provincias del litoral meridional, en particular en provincias como Cádiz, Málaga, Almería , Murcia y otras. Las fiscalías regionales más afectadas hablan de «avalancha» de casos urbanísticos que puede acabar, dicen, por monopolizar los recursos y efectivos de que disponen para investigar estos casos, muy complejos, en detrimento de otras cuestiones medioambientales. Casos que no se limitan a construcciones particulares, sino a grandes complejos urbanísticos que prosperan, pese a vulnerar preceptos legales y de protección ambiental, debido a la inoperancia de las administraciones implicadas. También en materia de vivienda, el fiscal de Sala de Medio Ambiente, Antonio Vercher, aboga en la memoria por modificar el Código Penal para perseguir a los ayuntamientos y sus alcaldes que vulneren la Ley del Suelo y destinen menos del 30% del suelo edificable para viviendas de protección oficial (VPO); también a aquellos que incurran en malversación de este bien público con abusos en recalificaciones y cambios injustificados de uso del suelo municipal.
Según la memoria, en 2007 se tramitaron en la Fiscalía Especial de Medio Ambiente 1.220 diligencias de investigación penal en materia medioambiental y 1.781 en ordenación del territorio. El saldo revela una disminución de asuntos en el primer capítulo respecto de 2006, primer año de funcionamiento de la Fiscalía, que se achaca al fin del 'efecto novedad'. En cambio los temas relacionados con el urbanismo siguieron creciendo, de 1.634 casos en 2006 a 1.781 en 2007 a falta de los datos provinciales de Guadalajara.
En su informe, la Fiscalía critica la «lentitud en el desarrollo» del organismo, y la falta sistemática de medios. Una y otra comprometen «la practicidad y eficacia» que se espera de ellas. También da cuenta de la intensa actividad del SEPRONA de la Guardia Civil en el control de vertederos ilegales y potencialmente peligrosos para las masas forestales y parajes de gran valor natural. Se han llegado a censar 2.269 vertederos, de los que 382 fueron eliminados, 41 están a punto de desaparecer y en otros 274 «se ha aminorado el riesgo».
http://www.ideal.es/almeria/20080528/almeria/fiscalia-funcionarios-autoridades-como-20080528.html
Appendix B – Case Studies
Sample case 1 – Inadequate documentation
Written by Charles and Geraldine Day, La Hortichuela, Albox.
My wife and I bought a development plot in Albox, in 2002, supposedly with water and electricity from Almeria Homes, who recommended a builder, a company called La Paz. These two companies’ were connected by a common law relationship (they were a couple with children). Unfortunately we were too far down the line with our purchase, when we found out that our land was in fact classified as rustic, and that there was a building ban in place on this kind of land. The house build was completed in September 2003 but due to problems we had in the UK we did not move in until July 2006. We then found ourselves in the middle of a massive problem, including Town Hall and planning abuses, plus corruption by the local legal profession, architects and builders. We later discovered that we were not an isolated case but that the problem was rife throughout the Almanzora Valley and in fact most of Spain.
We now find ourselves in a situation where we cannot be connected to water or electricity because we do not have of a habitation certificate. We did have builder’s supply electricity until July 2008 when it was terminated. We do not have mains water and fortunately have a deposit tank which we have to fill by way of a tanker, at vast expense. Without electricity we are unable to pump this water into our home. We thought that when we moved to Spain (an EU Member State) we would be retiring to a better climate and way of life for our latter years, but we have been placed in a most stressful environment because, like others, our basic human rights are being breached by this country.
We have attended various meetings with the Town Hall representatives to try and resolve our problems but are constantly told that ‘the law is the law’. Where was ‘the law’ when these abuses were being carried out. Dare I say it, but the perpetrators were quite happy to take our money but are not prepared to take responsibility for the mess we now find ourselves in.
Sample case 2 – Impact of Existence of Denuncia
Written by Mrs Carole Maneely and Mr Tom Jones – Aljambra, Albox.
The original details of the villa from North Property stated we would have water and electricity. We have also paid for the water connection from the road and the meter and then successfully had the mains water connected - we have no complaint there.
• We are one couple amongst a group of 13 villa owners in Aljambra who entered into a contract, dated April 2006, with a local electrician to provide a full electricity supply, to be paid for in four installments. This was to replace the temporary builder’s supply connected when we moved in.
• The project was prepared and sent to the relevant department. This was later agreed and stamped in Almeria.
• Initially electrical work went ahead as detailed in the contract – to date the group have paid a total of 100,000 Euros.
• After the snow brought down power lines nearby, during early 2007, the electricity company visited our area and disconnected the cables providing our temporary supply. Our group of villa owners now has to use expensive, individual generators to supply power for our homes.
• We have boletins for electricity and permission for electricity to be connected from the previous Mayor of Albox. We have been told by the Ministry of Works at the Junta that they cannot pass the works completed so far because there is a denuncia against us for being illegal properties and we cannot be finally connected to the main grid. However, the project was approved by the Junta six months after the denuncia was in place. We wish to continue with the electrical work, have the infrastructure connection to the main grid and pay for the electricity we use.
• We wish to be treated fairly and be allowed to live our lives without the hardship and high costs that lack of mains electricity causes.
Sample case 3 – Impact of Legal Proceedings
Written by Bruce Hobday and Dan Thornycroft, residents of El Fas
W belong to a group of mainly British third age people who bought houses in El Fas, Cantoria, in the Province of Andalucia. We are from all walks of life, most of us were very careful when we made the big decision to embrace the Spanish way of life and purchased our houses. Checks were made on agents, Spanish solicitors were employed, notaries processed the escrituras, and we were constantly assured that all was in order and that our houses in Spain were completely legal according to Spanish law.
Our Dutch builders have received around 4 million euros from us just on our small estate. .In May 2008 we were contacted to see if they wished to declare an interest in the court case of our builders Southern Spain Consultants who faced charges of building without licences on rustic land.In September 2008 the mains electricity supply was disconnected and the occupants were forced under threat of a 6,000 euro fine for stealing electricity, to connect to a generator.
It is inconceivable that the Spanish authorities were unaware of the situation regarding the illegal building, and thereby condoned it. Where did they think the extra revenues were coming from?
All we want is to live out our lives in peace, and enjoy this wonderful country, among the good Spanish people. Surely this is our fundamental basic human right?
Sample case 4 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality
Written by Leslie Nash, resident of La Vinuela
In November 2001 the La Vinuela ayuntamiento issued 12 building licences to an enterprising couple from the United Kingdom to authorise the building of individual architect designed houses in a beautiful area to the west of the reservoir. Many other houses were being built at the same time adjoining surrounding villages and standing alone in the countryside. The local press was full of advertisements to buy in the area.
It was not surprising that the plots with building permission were quickly sold since the electricity pylons and mains water supply were visible and no secret was made of Junta plans to build an asphalt road from the main road serving the area to the location of the projected houses. The road was subsequently built. Buyers obtained the assurance of the ayuntamiento that the plans were properly authorised: one buyer's solicitor contacted the Junta directly to obtain confirmation that all was well. Eleven houses were built and all paperwork was applied and paid for including first occupancy licences, water and electricity meters, IBI etc. Escrituras were issued and the Land Registry registered the homes in their official records.
In May 2009 the local policeman delivered notices to the majority of the owners to say that their licenses to build were in question and that if the Junta were successful in their challenge the process of demolition would automatically begin. They were required to name a solicitor as representing them at court where their licenses would be challenged. Nine working days were allowed to do this.
Eight of the owners have since prepared files including copies of their paperwork as evidence that they followed the correct procedures in buying their houses and have met their financial running costs and taxes. They want their licences to be reinstated. These papers are now with the Junta de Andalucia.
Already thousands of euros have passed to solicitors as if the owners were the guilty parties rather than the solicitors, ayuntamiento staff, notaries and the Junta who have failed to offer a secure and honest method of purchasing their houses. Of course, the notional value of these houses has plummeted and the ability to move away when personal tragedy strikes has now been denied, since no one wants a home subject to a demolition threat. The Spanish property law is in need of complete revision in order to protect the rights of innocent home-owners who, in this case, through no fault of their own, have become embroiled in what appears to be an internal procedural dispute between the Junta and the local town halls of Andalucia.
Sample case 5 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality
Written by Ivor Pringle, Alcaucin, Axarquia.
My name is Ivor Pringle my wife's name is Judith. We own a house in Spain, close to the village of Alcaucin in the province of Malaga. The area in which we live is known as the Axarquia.
We live here as residents, after leaving the UK in 2001 for health reasons. In brief I served in the Army from 1965 - 1997. As a result of injuries sustained during my service I was advised by medical specialists to seek a warmer climate.
My wife and I left the UK in May 2001 for Spain and a new life. Following a short rental period we found our dream home. In July 2001 we bought the house we still live in and set to work improving it.
Our world has now fallen apart because on the 14 October 2009 we were served with notification from the town hall in Alcaucin that the building license for our home had been cancelled back in December 2000 and the house was therefore illegal. Three days later on 17 October we were served further notification that we have 2 months in which to voluntarily demolish our home or the local authorities would do so and present us with a bill for the total costs. As of today we have 53 days to save our home.
When we bought the property we had no idea the house was illegal and we did not know until 14 October, 10 days ago. The original owner a Spaniard, knew from December 2000 that it was illegal and promptly put the property up for sale in Jan 2001. We paid cash for the property in July 2001.
In October 2008 notification of the license being cancelled was again sent to the original owner, who after selling the property over 7 years previously to us, took no action to inform us. Why should he, he had our money and had left the scene of the crime.
Following a very stressful weekend 17/18 October my wife and I started the week arranging lawyers to fight our case in the courts. They believe that it will be a difficult case and cannot guarantee a court ruling in our favour. Apart from the fraudulent dealings of the original owner our lawyers are hoping to win the case on humanitarian grounds. We are after all a totally innocent party and if we lose our home we will in effect be homeless. Like most elderly 'expats' our only source of income is pensions, I have an Army pension and because of my health disability a war veterans pension and my wife her old age pension. At present our future at the age of 61 years does not look very bright.
My wife and I like so many other 'expats' purchased our home through estate agents, using solicitors to act on our behalf and complying fully with all the relevant laws for owning a property in Spain. The result is that many of us have been lied to, have had illegal building licenses issued and are now prisoners, if not in our homes but in Spain as it is very difficult to sell a property without a valid license.
We earnestly request your assistance in stopping the destruction of our home, reinstating the legality of the house, and to give hope to many other Britons in a similar position.
Sample case 6 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality
Written by Helen Prior, also pp. Leonard
My husband and I came to Spain in 2002 on a 4 day inspection tour with Medsea Estates. We were shown 6 parcels of land for sale on an area called La Loma which is just outside Vera. The land had been split into plots of 10,000 square metres with outline building permissions. At that time there were probably 90 houses in the La Loma area. We found a builder, a house design, a solicitor and a bank, paid deposits and went back to the UK. In August 2002 we received a letter from our solicitor to say that the builder had received all necessary licences and would we sign the contract. Work commenced on the house around October of 2002.
The house was completed 15th May 2003 and we moved to Spain as full time residents on the 22nd. The house was beautiful and life was good. We started to landscape the gardens and spent a lot of money making the house and gardens something to be proud of.
In May of 2006 we received a telephone call from our builder to say we had to go to Vera Ayuntaniento. He did not know why, but one of the secretaries would go with us to interpret. We were handed a letter which the secretary read and she informed us that we had 15 days to knock the house down or the Junta de Andalusia would do it and charge us. We could not believe this and went straight to our solicitor. He said it was a mistake and try not to worry. We learnt within a few days that it was not a mistake, our licence had been revoked.
Our solicitor informed us that a secret Court Case had been held without any representation from us. He had not been told about it, our builder had not been told about it, nor had we. The only people who knew were the Junta de Andalusia and Felix Lopez the Mayor of Vera. Our solicitor told us again try not to worry, our house was 100% legal. But he had employed , on our behalf, two Barristers to challenge this through the Constitutional Court in Madrid. We were told that while this was in Litigation the Junta could not demolish the house.
However, on the 9th of January 2008 they arrived with police, bulldozers and lorries. Our water and electricity metres had been removed and although there were solicitors, barristers, neighbours, TV cameras and many police at the scene, the house was demolished.
The reason given was that we would cause an Urban Nucleus. There were 90 houses here before we arrived and the Junta approved the building of a further 9 houses after ours. How could we possibly be the cause of an Urban Nucleus? Surely if one house is illegal they must all be illegal, but ours has been the only demolition. We also find that the further down the pile we dig the more bizarre our findings become.
We were also given, by a source who wishes to remain anonymous, a copy of a Junta De Andalusia meeting which was held in October 2003. In these minutes, it states quite clearly that the Junta realises that stopping the build on the Prior house (we had actually being living in the house 6 months) would not stop the Urban Nucleus. It would only cause financial hardship to the Priors. Further into the report it states that the Junta should be very careful because knocking down any houses would have grave financial and social repercussions in the area. These were obviously ignored.
Representatives from the local ayuntamiento visited our site (after the house was knocked down) and measured distances between the road, the neighbours, the boundaries, etc. and left, as very happy people, because they were convinced we could not be the cause of an urban nucleus.
The bottom line is that every Spanish person whose opinion we know believes that the demolition was a political act because the local party is in disagreement with the Regional Government, We have requested compensation but obviously nobody wants to pay. The local Mayor in Vera said he should not pay because the house was legal, the Junta say they should not pay because they were only carrying out the judge’s order. The judge says that he only acted because he was being bullied by the Junta.
In April 2009 the constitutional court in Madrid judged that the proceedings leading to the demolition our house were not carried out correctly. We were not informed about the proceedings, not given the opportunity to put our case forward and therefore denied our right to justice. The proceedings were invalid, and so was the demolition order -our house should not have been knocked down !
However, to make matters even worse, the Junta de Andalucia are now going back to court again to ratify the decision to have our house demolished. This time, hopefully, it will not be a SECRET Court Case but we shall be informed of the time and date and will be able to have legal representation.
Almost 2 years later we are still living in our garage without water or electricity, abandoned by the local authority, regional authority and national authority. Should two old-age pensioners be treated in this manner?
Sample Case 7 – Land Grab
Written by John and Joyce Bowling and Alan and Kate Keeling Bedar, Levante
Article 1 of The First Protocol, Protection of Property establishes the Rights of individuals to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions, unless there is an overriding Public Interest. The Authorities have to maintain a fair balance between the Individual and Society in General. If the possessions are affected by Public Interest, compensation should be paid.
15 years ago we bought land within what we were told was, the Urban Nucleus of the village of El Pinar de Bedar, Almeria , and with the full knowledge of the Ayuntamiento in Bedar we built two houses. The Spanish Land Registry shows we are owners of these properties, as does the Catastral.
Due to extremely questionable actions by the Ayuntamiento and a Developer, Landsur S.L., we now find our land has been redesignated as urbanisable, rather than urban and that we are included within the ambit of a development sector, and included in a Plan Parcial. As a result we are being subjected, by the Developer, to an appropriation of about 50% of our land, and in addition the payment of many thousands of pounds towards his infrastructure costs, despite those services already being in place at our houses.
We consider that this is unjust as there is clearly no Overriding Public Interest in this case, the only Interest being financial gain for the Ayuntamiento and the Developer. The village has already been extensively over developed with miles of infrastructure installed for houses that have not been built, or are unlikely to be so, due to low demand.
Clearly our Human Rights have been infringed as we are certainly not peacefully enjoying our possessions, and indeed are involved in expensive Legal Action to protect our position.
Sample Case 8 – Land Grab
Story of Robert Barlow and Marjory Easton of Bedar Almeria.
In a rural area near Bedar, a picturesque village surrounded by beautiful countryside in Almeria province, a retired British couple Robert Barlow and Marjory Easton, purchased 172,000 sqm of rustic land in 1991. They obtained all the relevant building permissions in 1992 after which construction work on their 600 sqm house began. In April 1994 they moved into their new home believing they could live out their retirement in peace, having purchased more than sufficient land to insulate themselves and after taking considerable legal and professional advice to ensure that they were 100% legal and safe from any future developments.
In January 2005, to their astonishment, they were approached by the same development company which had originally sold them their land and told that part of their land had been included in the town’s urbanisation proposals and the developer’s development plans, known as a Plan Parcial. Apparently, the development company had been making various Plan Parcial applications through the years and 33,000 sqm of their latest Plan was identified as belonging to the couple. Needless to say, the couple had never been informed of any development proposals at any time. At that first meeting between the couple and the development company, which was also attended by two professional advisors, the couple were given three choices, namely:
a. Do nothing in the hope that nothing was likely to happen anyway;
b. Become a minority partner in the development and be required to contribute financially;
c. Agree to have their 33,000 sqm segregated altogether from the development and for the land to therefore remain non-urbanisable/rustic.
The couple, who had no intention whatsoever of getting involved in any development scheme, naturally chose the third option. Agreements in both Spanish and English were drawn up and signed on 23 March 2005 which clearly stated that the 33,000 sqm of the couple’s land “had been included within Sector 2 (the relevant Plan Parcial reference) due to a “material (serious) error” – without the knowledge or consent of the land owners.” The agreement also stated that the 33,000 sqm would be segregated from Sector 2 of the Plan Parcial and that the developer undertook to carry out a punctual modification of Sector 2 involving initiation of a new procedure based on a Sector of reduced size without the participation of the couple as land owners.
Attached to this agreement was a detailed topographical survey of the 172,000 sqm of land, the boundaries of which had been signed by the same developer in July 1995. On this survey, the 33,000 sqm “material error”, which included the couples’ house, gardens and swimming pool, was clearly identified as belonging to the couple as part of their original 172,000 sqm holding. The couple’s professional advisor was able at the time to demonstrate that the 33,000 sqm referred to by the developer’s latest Plan Parcial was in fact different. In the event, after agreeing on the correct identification of the relevant 33,000 sqm, the agreement and topographical survey duly signed by all parties concerned was then presented to the local town hall which registered and stamped both documents on 6 April 2005.
On 2 June 2005, a unanimously signed minutes of the plenary session of the town hall acknowledging reduction of the surface area of Sector 2 and the agreement between the couple and the development company was received. The couple then thought that everything necessary had been done to protect their land from any further interference. To their great indignation and shock, nearly a year and a half later on 27 January 2007, they were informed by their planning consultant that the developers were no longer proceeding with the segregation modification previously agreed upon. Apparently the original development company had sold their land adjoining the couple’s to a development company based in the provincial capital of Almeria in September 2006 and the original developer professed to have no knowledge of the current situation. The instigator of the latest strategy shift by speculators/developers appears to be legislation ratified in January 2007 decreeing that 30% of all residential development projects be destined for “social (council) housing”, thereby significantly reducing potential profits for developers/speculators.
On 2 February 2007, the couple were formally notified by the town hall of the latest Plan Parcial and the official notice in the provincial Boletin (official gazette which is not widely publicised and difficult for laypeople to understand) appeared. This notice allowed only 28 days to file formal objections and the relevant and extensive back-up documents had to be obtained subsequently by the couple’s planning consultant. Then followed lengthy and costly research by the couple’s planning consultant and specialist abogado, as well as an unproductive meeting with the mayor and secretary. With only two days to spare, a detailed set of professionally worded objections was formally filed. These were supported by 11 separate sets of professionally worded objections from adjoining neighbours and a considerable amount of informal support from others in the area. A press conference was called where some of the principal issues were made public, including:
a. Proposed forfeiture of 33,000 sqm of land against the will of legal owners;
b. Demand of 670,000 euros in financial contribution towards infrastructure for the proposed development (which could be substantially higher depending on final costs);
c. Construction of residential dwellings in protected areas and without previous study of ecological and other infrastructure considerations
Continuous pressure and negative publicity in recent months leading up to hotly contested local elections, as well as the couple’s well defended legal stand, may well have contributed to a softening of attitude from the town hall. Meetings were held with the mayor and secretary during which verbal agreement to segregate the couple’s land from the Plan Parcial and maintain it as non-urbanisable/rustic have been reached. However, the mayor and secretary do not yet appear to be prepared to give further commitments regarding other “unjustified land grab” cases.
On 25 April 2007, a meeting took place in Almeria between the couple’s abogado, planning consultant, the local mayor, the delegate from the Public Works and Planning Department of the regional Junta de Andalucia government and the technical head of the Junta’s Planning Section where it was agreed that the local town hall would shortly pass a resolution to specifically exclude the couple’s 33,000 sqm from the Plan Parcial and keep it as non-urbanisable land. On 2 May 2007, the local town hall approved the non-urbanisation proposal put to them in allegations submitted on 25 April 2007. On 9 May 2007 the provincial Environmental (Medioambiente) Ministry confirmed informally that the land in question was in an environmentally protected area and that permission for development was most unlikely. However an environmental study would be required and this could take about two years to complete. The couple is now advised that their land is likely to be safe. However, final ratification will not occur until the area’s regional plan (PGOU) is published and agreed by all concerned bodies, also possibly taking another two years. Until then, nothing can be regarded as 100% guaranteed.
Whatever the final outcome of this particular case, victims of unjustified land grab and other illegal practices must remain vigilant regarding all changes in Spanish planning and building legislation as well as documentation relating to their own and related cases. For example, in the case above, as late as 26 April 2007 further written allegations were received and stamped by the local town hall which included reference to an application made by the new developer to segregate the couple’s land as early as October 2006. This request was given initial approval by the town hall but not published anywhere (not even in the Boletin) nor processed. The segregation was subsequently nullified by the town hall in January 2007 when the new developer decided to proceed with the entirety of the initial Sector, presumably as a result of modified financial considerations caused by the new social housing requirements. Another ruling which could adversely affect victims of unjustified land grab is that from July of this year, compensation, if such exists, for seized land will be calculated at non-urbanisable/rustic values, not urban.
The information contained herein has been compiled to highlight the many problems that we in the Valle of Almanzora, Levante Almeriense and La Axarquia areas of Andalucia are experiencing due to widespread abuse of the planning system. It is by no means exhaustive but will hopefully give you an understanding of our position and why we have raised our concerns with you.
You are, of course, aware that many citizens from the European community settled in Spain believing that, having used the services of a local solicitor; they had purchased a legal property; only later to find out that their homes were illegal. You know that the Spanish authorities knew and allowed this practice to continue. That Governments and Town Halls continued to build knowing that they were breaking the planning laws. That profit and, in many cases, corruption was more important than complying with such laws.
These owners, having used the Spanish legal framework for the purchase, now find they are expected to shoulder the blame, and future costs, in order to get what they have already paid for. The Spanish authorities, which include many Notaries, Lawyers, Town Halls and Regional Governments, were aware of the abuses, and in many cases are implicated in the corruption.
You are no doubt also aware that ‘land grab’ or the expropriation of land from existing owners and the charging of infrastructure expenses to the same owners has also manifested itself in Andalucia.
We hope that you will consider the issues raised and can see why we fear for our future. No European citizen should be placed, and possibly live the remainder of their life, in these circumstances.
Yours faithfully,
Maura Hillen Philip Smalley Rex Dobson
President AUAN President SOHA President AULAN
Table of Contents
Table of Contents 2
Urban Abuse in Andalucia 3
Legal Situation of Homeowners 3
Lack of Documentation 3
Denuncias & Legal Proceedings 4
Local Legality but Regional Illegality 4
Land Grab 5
Disenfranchisement 5
Legal Remedies currently available 5
Litigation – Justice delayed is justice denied 5
Legalisation – Fitting a square peg into a round hole 5
Special regulations for access to services 6
Our fears for the future 6
What do we want? 8
Appendix A – Reporting of Urban Abuse in Andalucia. 11
Appendix B – Case Studies 16
Sample case 1 – Inadequate documentation 16
Sample case 2 – Impact of Existence of Denuncia 16
Sample case 3 – Impact of Legal Proceedings 17
Sample case 4 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality 17
Sample case 5 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality 18
Sample case 6 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality 19
Sample Case 7 – Land Grab 20
Sample Case 8 – Land Grab 20
Urban Abuse in Andalucia
Urban abuse in Andalucia has been well documented. Our mayors, council members, officials, architects, lawyers, promoters and constructors have all been called before the court to answer a variety of charges including abuse of office, bribery, abuse of urban planning powers, forgery, buying of favours, prohibited negotiations and abuse of power in general. (See - Appendix A).
Spain has been the subject of damning reports from the European Union (Auken 2009, Libicki and Cashman 2007). No other EU member state has been called on the Parliament's carpet in such a manner before, concerning the systematic property rights and environmental abuses reported.
And yet, it is clear that the Junta de Andalucia has done nothing to recognise or implement the recommendations of the European Union on this matter.
It has done little or nothing to implement our demands for a fair and equitable solution for the victims of urban abuse. (See- What do we want?).
We believe that if the government of Andalucia fails to recognise its moral obligations and its economic peril and continues to react in a slow, indecisive and short-sighted manner to this crisis then foreign investment will continue to decline leaving a region that will forever struggle to regain its reputation in a highly competitive property market.
If current problems remain un-resolved then the future problems could become insurmountable. The economic damage could well spread to those as yet un-effected including the Spanish Banks who hold vast mortgage debts. Profits created will quickly diminish to debt without a steady stream of foreign investors to oil the wheels of the economy.
Legal Situation of Homeowners
Lack of Documentation
Tens of thousands of people bought their homes in good faith, with services promised and paid for in a ‘package’ of house and land from a promoter only to find that the houses were actually built on rural land and were hence illegal. Some have no documentation at all, some have partial documentation, some have illegally issued documentation and some have found that they have fraudulent documentation.
It is not possible to legally register, to sell or to pay taxes on an undocumented house.
Without documentation (specifically a habitation certificate), the homeowner is unable to legally obtain water and electricity via a meter and to have a contract with the suppliers. As a result, many homeowners have illegal or temporary ‘builders’ supplies (an inadequate low wattage electricity and low volume water supply) or no supply at all.
Sample case 1, (Albox, Valle de Almanzora)
This is a typical case of members buying in good faith, but not being able to get connections to water and electricity because they have no habitation certificate. They rely on tankered water which is expensive and use a generator for a few hours a day which is also expensive.
Denuncias & Legal Proceedings
As the scale of the urban abuse scandal became apparent many developments were denounced by ecology groups or belatedly by the Junta de Andalucia. As is normal in Spain, the owners of houses are not usually informed of a denuncia affecting their property, the existence of which only comes to light during other proceedings.
The effects of a denuncia can be seen in Sample Case 2. (Albox, Valle de Almanzora)
Residents bought in good faith and mains supplies were included in the house price. However, the builder vanished leaving them on a temporary builders supply, which was later disconnected . In 2006 residents grouped together to pay 100,000 euros for the installation of pylons and cables. They had permission from the local council and the Junta de Anadalucia. On the point of connection the Junta stopped the work because a denuncia existed. It had existed for 6 months before the Junta gave approval. It had been unknown to the residents. They fortunately have water, as they grouped together to pay for this and managed to obtain a connection and meter. However, they are still without electricity.
The effects of legal proceedings can be seen in Sample Case 3. (Cantoria, Valle de Almanzora)
Residents who bought in good faith and lived in houses with documentation were contacted to see if they wished to declare an interest in court proceedings against their promoter for the construction of property on rustic land without a building license. The judge indicated that he was considering demolition of the 19 homes involved in the case. In September 2008 the mains electricity supply was disconnected and the occupants were forced under threat of a 6,000 euro fine for stealing electricity, to connect to a generator.
Local Legality but Regional Illegality
A few residents appear to be trapped in an argument between the local and regional levels of government. They have a full set of paperwork from the local councils and yet the regional level insists they are illegal. This situation exists in Zurgena (Valle de Almanzora), in Vera (Levante Almeriense) and in La Vinuela (Axarquia). The homeowners themselves are not informed until it is too late to defend themselves.
The effects of a dispute between the regional and local authorities can been seen in Sample Case 4 (La Vinuela, Axarquia) & 5 (Alcaucin, Axarquia)
Residents of houses with full paperwork and permissions advised that their building licences were in question (8 years after they were issued) and their properties were at risk of demolition.
It is here that we find our most extreme example (sample case 6), that of the Priors in Vera:-
The Prior’s had full local paperwork for their house. However they were evicted with two hours notice and had to watch as the house was demolished by the Junta. Their electricity and water meters were removed. For 2 years they have been forced to live in their garage without water and electricity. They are both pensioners. They are not allowed to reconnect the services. They have no compensation.
Land Grab
We have instances of ‘land grab’ in Bedar, Levante Almeriense.
See Sample Cases 7 and 8 (Bedar)
Where an attempt has been made to expropriate from existing owners with the charging of infrastructure expenses to the same owners.
Disenfranchisement
Registration on the Padron is a prerequisite for registration on the censo electoral. Owners of illegal homes in Zurgena (Valle de Almanzora) are unable to register on the padron because they do not have street names and house numbers. Thus they are denied the right to vote in municipal and European Elections.
Legal Remedies currently available
Litigation – Justice delayed is justice denied
Various individuals and small groups of residents have taken civil action for fraud against their promoters. However, this is a lengthy process with civil actions taking up to 8 years to reach a conclusion. It is also expensive (€10,000 +) and thus beyond the reach of many.
Legalisation – Fitting a square peg into a round hole
In late 2008 the Junta de Andalucia began to show a political will to address the problem of illegal properties.
• The Junta ordered an inspection of all of the ‘irregular’ houses in the the region including the problem areas of the Valle de Almanzora and La Axarquia with 11,000 and 10,000 illegal houses identified in these areas to date.
• The Junta began to enforce planning legislation first introduced in 2002 (Ley de Ordenacion Urbanistica de Andalucia or LOUA) which requires all of our Town Halls to produce an urban plan. These plans must take notice of the results from the inspection team with respect to the legalisation of our homes i.e. Will we be in the 95% that the Junta has stated will be ‘regularised’ in some way or in the 5% that will be demolished because they are on protected land or in a dangerous position?
Problem 1 – Current solutions will take decades
Whilst this sounds like progress but the problems are revealed in the detail. The LOUA does not allow for the existence of a house on rustic land for any purpose other than agriculture (Why? Other EU countries allows this). So, we must wait until a town plan expands gradually to encompass our property. This process will take many years and may never be achieved. Each iteration of a PGOU takes 6-9 months to create and approximately 2 years to approve.
Given the difficulties involved in ‘reverse engineering’ illegal houses into a legal plan (with land segregation being a key issue) we anticipate that many homes in Andalucia will ultimately be abandoned to the uncertain legal status of ‘fuera de ordenation’ and thousands may be demolished.
Problem 2 - The victims may become the forgotten
As none of the EU recommendations with respect to undue influence in the Town Halls has been enacted, the homeowner must continue to compete with powerful vested interests in the planning process.
As the EU recommendation for independent arbitration and support for the homeowner has been ignored we must struggle to understand the complex process of planning legislation as it is ‘reverse engineered’ unto our homes.
Problem 3 – Who pays?
The construction industry is in serious recession and a number of promoters have gone out of business or cannot afford to pay the costs for necessary infrastructure. This might leave the homeowner with no option but to carry those costs. It is further feared that Town Halls will not pursue, even where possible, promoters for costs relating to required infrastructures but pass these to homeowners as an easier solution, even though they, the Town Halls, should have incorporated or ‘bonded’ these costs at first planning stage.
Special regulations for access to services
For those who have been denied access to mains water and electricity there is now the cost of a ‘special licence’ being sought by Town Halls the cost of which starts at €850.
Problem
Many homeowners are excluded from obtaining this license because.
• There is a denuncia against their home.
• They do not own the land on which their house stands.
• The land has not been segregated.
• They are unwilling to declare under the 4 year rule that they are responsible for the existence of an illegal house on rustic land.
Our fears for the future
It is reported that inspection teams have identified 21,000 illegal houses in the Almanzora Valley and La Axarquia alone. This is a huge problem!
1. We are fearful that current actions, especially those relating to any fines; demands for infrastructure payments; and the like; will lead to many home owners being put into a worse financial situation than they are in at present. This is already leading to much stress and anxiety for our members and, of course, many others.
2. We are fearful that this could also lead to many being forced to return to their homeland having lost their life savings because they cannot afford to legalise their home.
3. We fear that our constructors, our Town Halls, our architects and our lawyers will get away with what they have done because continents drift faster than a Spanish civil court case. A moot point anyway if you can’t afford to sue.
4. We are concerned that NEW areas of urbanisations will be included in some plans before the legalisation of properties already being occupied.
5. We believe that if the current plan of action continues without significant change many owners will not see a solution in their life-time. You will be aware that under Spanish Planning Laws an urbanisation can only grow by a permitted amount over a certain period. This restriction has knowingly been far exceeded in many districts. Many owners will therefore not be made legal as authorities ‘hide’ behind this rule. The very one they broke in the first place! This law needs to be altered to allow for the existence of homes on rustic land for purposes not related to agriculture. You can imagine the constant fear and concern this brings when people see a distinct possibility that they will pass the problem and the possible financial burden on to their children.
6. We fear that we will be blamed and held responsible. In many cases home owners have been ‘duped’ into becoming a promoter of their property therefore liable to future infrastructure costs and any possible penalties (civil and criminal) that should have been the responsibility of the builders. We are already experiencing a problem where builders charge owners for various utilities and then fail to pay the supply company. Some owners have now been cut off from these services and asked to pay the outstanding charges or pay a large sum for re-connection.
7. We fear that we are seen as a ‘cash generator’ for our impoverished Councils. 50% of our members do not have access to mains water or electricity. Some local councils now require that the owners pay exorbitant amounts to be given permission to connect to these services.
8. We have no certainty! Some members have fully legalised documents for their property, now to be told that the Junta of Andalucía has withdrawn building licences for ‘irregularities’, in many cases court proceeding are being actioned. Their documents have official stamps from the very people that now take these actions.
9. We fear there is no justice! While many of our Human Rights have and continue to be abused, we know that we would struggle to see justice due to the slowness of Spain’s judicial system. While it would be our right to do so, it is a futile action and one that would probably take as long, if not longer, than the process they are currently taking. Many cannot afford it. To this extent we implore you to continue to seek, on our behalf, a fair and speedy solution.
10. We fear (with some justification) that we will be pilloried in the Spanish press, made scapegoats and portrayed as somehow complicit in the scandal of urban abuse. For example, an article in Teleprensa published 2nd September 2009 titled ‘Harsh attack by the British Community in Cantoria on the issue of illegal houses’ asserts that British residents knowingly purchased property on non urbanised land, made ‘black money’ payments to avoid Spanish tax, bought houses cheaply and most bizarrely of all, moved to Spain to take advantage of a free health care system.
11. We fear that our homes will be left in limbo, outside of any known planning regulation or ‘fuera de ordenacion’ with no legal status, no paper work and simply left to return to the dust as a forgotten statistic of the Spanish planning scandal. We observe that this fear is already becoming a reality as the town plans emerge.
What do we want?
1. COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION: A national commission of investigation be established, with representatives of the administration and citizens’ groups (including those for the protection of homeowners’ rights and the ecologists), to investigate the existing grave planning and environmental problems, to draw up a report on the causes of said problems and their possible solutions, as well as recommendations for the future.
2. ARBITRATION: The creation of a special administrative commission that includes a provincial public ombudsman, advised by independent investigation services, including representatives from the administration and from citizens’ groups (including those for the defence of individual property owners and ecology groups), and with arbitration powers in relation to disputes concerning these problems, available to affected parties free of charge.
3. RESPONSIBILITY: The liability of developers, the administration and pertinent third parties, for having given rise to the grave planning and environmental problems which exist, must be made enforceable and real. Any process of regularisation should, as far as possible, include binding agreements (including adequate guarantees) between those who have caused the irregularities and the administration, and these must include the opportune measures so that those who caused the irregularities compensate for the damage caused.
4. PRINCIPLES TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT: The following principles should be recognized and reflected in urban law.
(1) In urban development priority must be given to the true needs of the cities and towns affected, sustainability from an environmental point of view and the need to preserve the historical and cultural identity of the affected areas.
(2) The need for full compliance with community law and fundamental rights, including the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and case law of the European Court of Human Rights.
(3) In the case of demolition of property acquired in good faith by citizens real, effective and prior compensation must be guaranteed. Such compensation must be made prior to any loss and at proper rates and conforming to the case law of the Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights.
(4) The legitimate right of purchasers to property acquired legally must be recognised and criteria established for the application of Art. 33 of the Spanish Constitution with respect to public and social interest in order to prevent and prohibit the infringement of people’s property rights by decisions of local and regional authorities;
5. TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION: Notice of any planning or environmental proceedings should be communicated individually to all those affected, directly or indirectly; as well as publicised widely; publication in the relevant Bulletins not being sufficient. The possibility of electronic access (Internet) to planning and environmental documents in the process of being approved or approved be ensured. Information in the Cadastral and Land Registry must coincide, and the Land Registry must include graphical information. It must be ensured that the information on the land registry includes information about the status of the property with respect to urban regulations as well as environmental and cultural restrictions or similar.
6. JUDICIAL SYSTEM: There is an urgent need to reform the judicial system to avoid the lack of effective rights before the courts; shortening of the real length of proceedings; computerizing and providing adequate resources.
7. ESTATE AGENTS: Should 1) be licensed or have passed an examination of sufficient knowledge and capacity; 2) have adequate insurance to cover all civil liabilities; 3) be clearly regulated in their activities.
8. PROMOTERS & CONSTRUCTORS: These must be subject to bonds, guarantees or insurance to cover possible liabilities to third parties (including to buyers), and to the administration; for possible planning or environmental breaches or infractions; and proof that such guarantees are in place must be a pre-requisite to present and manage any planning instrument.
9. PROTOCOL: An obligatory protocol for the buying and selling of real estate should be established for the benefit of the consumer, setting out the precise steps and standardised procedures , similar to those in other EU member states (for example the United Kingdom).
10. BASIC SERVICES: As a matter of priority and on humanitarian grounds, any house which has been occupied in the past three years should be temporarily permitted electricity and water services until the status of the home is clarified.
Appendix A – Reporting of Urban Abuse in Andalucia.
'Costurero' vincula 85 viviendas en Zurgena a movimientos inusuales en cuentas de ediles detenidos
ALMERÍA, 10 Abr. (EUROPA PRESS) -
La operación 'Costurero' contra la corrupción urbanística en Zurgena (Almería), que derivó el pasado día 2 en la detención del alcalde, Cándido Trabalón y el edil de Urbanismo, Manuel Tijeras (PA), se centra en investigar si se produjo prevaricación y cohecho en la autorización municipal para la construcción de 85 viviendas, de entre el millar bajo sospecha construido desde 2004.
http://www.europapress.es/00279/20080410213354/costurero-vincula-85-viviendas-zurgena-movimientos-inusuales-cuentas-ediles-detenidos.html
Un juzgado de Almería imputa al exalcalde del PP de Albox y portavoz del partido por delitos urbanísticos y el PSOE pide su dimisión
Francisco Granero
ALBOX.- El Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción número 2 de Huercal Overa cita a Francisco Granero Granados exalcalde de Albox y actual portavoz del PP a comparecer en el juzgado el 27 de marzo a las 11,30 horas.
El objeto de la citación de Francisco Granero Granados es ser oído en concepto de imputado, de acuerdo con lo dispuesto en el articulo 486 de la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal, como responsable de un presunto delito de Construcción no autorizada y por tanto un presunto delito contra la ordenación del territorio……
http://www.teleprensa.es/almeria-noticia-162995-Un-juzgado-de-Almer26iacute3Ba-imputa-al-exalcalde-del-PP-de-Albox-y-portavoz-del-partido-por-delitos-urban26iacute3Bsticos-y-el-PSOE-pide-su-dimisi26oacute3Bn.html
AXARQUÍA
Imputan al alcalde de La Viñuela en cinco causas por delitos urbanísticos
La Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente acusa al regidor socialista Juan Millán de conceder cinco licencias en suelos no urbanizables
18.03.09 -
AGENCIAS / E. C.
| MÁLAGA
Nueva denuncia urbanística contra el alcalde de La Viñuela, el socialista Juan Millán. La Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente de Málaga ha presentado cinco denuncias contra el regidor por conceder por decreto varias licencias, presuntamente irregulares, para la construcción de viviendas en suelo no urbanizable, lo que para el fiscal podría constituir cinco delitos contra la ordenación del territorio, uno de ellos continuado. ……
http://www.diariosur.es/20090318/axarquia/imputan-alcalde-vinuela-cinco-20090318.html
ALMERÍA
La Fiscalía ve a funcionarios y autoridades como «cómplices» del urbanismo ilegal
La crítica la extiende a la sociedad, que refleja «pasividad» en el tema La Memoria de la Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente y Urbanismo advierte de la progresiva sofisticación de las tramas de corrupción urbanística
28.05.08 -
A. P.
La Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente de Almería no se corta ni un pelo a la hora de definir y dar cuentas de la situación creada en la provincia con las casas ilegales y otras irregularidades urbanísticas. La Memoria de la Fiscalía de Medio Ambiente y Urbanismo 2007 recoge que en el caso almeriense la proliferación de construcciones ilegales no se entiende sin la «pasividad, cuando no complicidad, de autoridades y funcionarios de las administraciones competentes». Y añade que «llama poderosamente la atención la actuación de cargos, representantes y funcionarios de ayuntamientos», así como «una serie de profesionales como técnicos (arquitectos, ingenieros...), gestores y compañías de servicios...» que favorecen con su actuación el 'florecimiento' de corrupción pública y privada.
La crítica se extiende hasta la sociedad en general a la que también atribuye «pasividad» ya que «salvo excepciones de organizaciones ecologistas o algún particular que ha denunciado actuaciones ilegales, ha permanecido indiferente». No obstante, la crisis en la construcción también está afectando a este entramado como se desprende del hecho de que la Fiscalía almeriense pasara de 118 diligencias penales en 2006 a 88 en 2007.
Y en Almería no queda sólo la cosa. La corrupción urbanística es España, dice el informe a nivel nacional, se «sofistica» y las tramas tienen un carácter progresivamente «más organizado». El texto abunda sobre todo en las situaciones detectadas en las provincias del litoral meridional, en particular en provincias como Cádiz, Málaga, Almería , Murcia y otras. Las fiscalías regionales más afectadas hablan de «avalancha» de casos urbanísticos que puede acabar, dicen, por monopolizar los recursos y efectivos de que disponen para investigar estos casos, muy complejos, en detrimento de otras cuestiones medioambientales. Casos que no se limitan a construcciones particulares, sino a grandes complejos urbanísticos que prosperan, pese a vulnerar preceptos legales y de protección ambiental, debido a la inoperancia de las administraciones implicadas. También en materia de vivienda, el fiscal de Sala de Medio Ambiente, Antonio Vercher, aboga en la memoria por modificar el Código Penal para perseguir a los ayuntamientos y sus alcaldes que vulneren la Ley del Suelo y destinen menos del 30% del suelo edificable para viviendas de protección oficial (VPO); también a aquellos que incurran en malversación de este bien público con abusos en recalificaciones y cambios injustificados de uso del suelo municipal.
Según la memoria, en 2007 se tramitaron en la Fiscalía Especial de Medio Ambiente 1.220 diligencias de investigación penal en materia medioambiental y 1.781 en ordenación del territorio. El saldo revela una disminución de asuntos en el primer capítulo respecto de 2006, primer año de funcionamiento de la Fiscalía, que se achaca al fin del 'efecto novedad'. En cambio los temas relacionados con el urbanismo siguieron creciendo, de 1.634 casos en 2006 a 1.781 en 2007 a falta de los datos provinciales de Guadalajara.
En su informe, la Fiscalía critica la «lentitud en el desarrollo» del organismo, y la falta sistemática de medios. Una y otra comprometen «la practicidad y eficacia» que se espera de ellas. También da cuenta de la intensa actividad del SEPRONA de la Guardia Civil en el control de vertederos ilegales y potencialmente peligrosos para las masas forestales y parajes de gran valor natural. Se han llegado a censar 2.269 vertederos, de los que 382 fueron eliminados, 41 están a punto de desaparecer y en otros 274 «se ha aminorado el riesgo».
http://www.ideal.es/almeria/20080528/almeria/fiscalia-funcionarios-autoridades-como-20080528.html
Appendix B – Case Studies
Sample case 1 – Inadequate documentation
Written by Charles and Geraldine Day, La Hortichuela, Albox.
My wife and I bought a development plot in Albox, in 2002, supposedly with water and electricity from Almeria Homes, who recommended a builder, a company called La Paz. These two companies’ were connected by a common law relationship (they were a couple with children). Unfortunately we were too far down the line with our purchase, when we found out that our land was in fact classified as rustic, and that there was a building ban in place on this kind of land. The house build was completed in September 2003 but due to problems we had in the UK we did not move in until July 2006. We then found ourselves in the middle of a massive problem, including Town Hall and planning abuses, plus corruption by the local legal profession, architects and builders. We later discovered that we were not an isolated case but that the problem was rife throughout the Almanzora Valley and in fact most of Spain.
We now find ourselves in a situation where we cannot be connected to water or electricity because we do not have of a habitation certificate. We did have builder’s supply electricity until July 2008 when it was terminated. We do not have mains water and fortunately have a deposit tank which we have to fill by way of a tanker, at vast expense. Without electricity we are unable to pump this water into our home. We thought that when we moved to Spain (an EU Member State) we would be retiring to a better climate and way of life for our latter years, but we have been placed in a most stressful environment because, like others, our basic human rights are being breached by this country.
We have attended various meetings with the Town Hall representatives to try and resolve our problems but are constantly told that ‘the law is the law’. Where was ‘the law’ when these abuses were being carried out. Dare I say it, but the perpetrators were quite happy to take our money but are not prepared to take responsibility for the mess we now find ourselves in.
Sample case 2 – Impact of Existence of Denuncia
Written by Mrs Carole Maneely and Mr Tom Jones – Aljambra, Albox.
The original details of the villa from North Property stated we would have water and electricity. We have also paid for the water connection from the road and the meter and then successfully had the mains water connected - we have no complaint there.
• We are one couple amongst a group of 13 villa owners in Aljambra who entered into a contract, dated April 2006, with a local electrician to provide a full electricity supply, to be paid for in four installments. This was to replace the temporary builder’s supply connected when we moved in.
• The project was prepared and sent to the relevant department. This was later agreed and stamped in Almeria.
• Initially electrical work went ahead as detailed in the contract – to date the group have paid a total of 100,000 Euros.
• After the snow brought down power lines nearby, during early 2007, the electricity company visited our area and disconnected the cables providing our temporary supply. Our group of villa owners now has to use expensive, individual generators to supply power for our homes.
• We have boletins for electricity and permission for electricity to be connected from the previous Mayor of Albox. We have been told by the Ministry of Works at the Junta that they cannot pass the works completed so far because there is a denuncia against us for being illegal properties and we cannot be finally connected to the main grid. However, the project was approved by the Junta six months after the denuncia was in place. We wish to continue with the electrical work, have the infrastructure connection to the main grid and pay for the electricity we use.
• We wish to be treated fairly and be allowed to live our lives without the hardship and high costs that lack of mains electricity causes.
Sample case 3 – Impact of Legal Proceedings
Written by Bruce Hobday and Dan Thornycroft, residents of El Fas
W belong to a group of mainly British third age people who bought houses in El Fas, Cantoria, in the Province of Andalucia. We are from all walks of life, most of us were very careful when we made the big decision to embrace the Spanish way of life and purchased our houses. Checks were made on agents, Spanish solicitors were employed, notaries processed the escrituras, and we were constantly assured that all was in order and that our houses in Spain were completely legal according to Spanish law.
Our Dutch builders have received around 4 million euros from us just on our small estate. .In May 2008 we were contacted to see if they wished to declare an interest in the court case of our builders Southern Spain Consultants who faced charges of building without licences on rustic land.In September 2008 the mains electricity supply was disconnected and the occupants were forced under threat of a 6,000 euro fine for stealing electricity, to connect to a generator.
It is inconceivable that the Spanish authorities were unaware of the situation regarding the illegal building, and thereby condoned it. Where did they think the extra revenues were coming from?
All we want is to live out our lives in peace, and enjoy this wonderful country, among the good Spanish people. Surely this is our fundamental basic human right?
Sample case 4 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality
Written by Leslie Nash, resident of La Vinuela
In November 2001 the La Vinuela ayuntamiento issued 12 building licences to an enterprising couple from the United Kingdom to authorise the building of individual architect designed houses in a beautiful area to the west of the reservoir. Many other houses were being built at the same time adjoining surrounding villages and standing alone in the countryside. The local press was full of advertisements to buy in the area.
It was not surprising that the plots with building permission were quickly sold since the electricity pylons and mains water supply were visible and no secret was made of Junta plans to build an asphalt road from the main road serving the area to the location of the projected houses. The road was subsequently built. Buyers obtained the assurance of the ayuntamiento that the plans were properly authorised: one buyer's solicitor contacted the Junta directly to obtain confirmation that all was well. Eleven houses were built and all paperwork was applied and paid for including first occupancy licences, water and electricity meters, IBI etc. Escrituras were issued and the Land Registry registered the homes in their official records.
In May 2009 the local policeman delivered notices to the majority of the owners to say that their licenses to build were in question and that if the Junta were successful in their challenge the process of demolition would automatically begin. They were required to name a solicitor as representing them at court where their licenses would be challenged. Nine working days were allowed to do this.
Eight of the owners have since prepared files including copies of their paperwork as evidence that they followed the correct procedures in buying their houses and have met their financial running costs and taxes. They want their licences to be reinstated. These papers are now with the Junta de Andalucia.
Already thousands of euros have passed to solicitors as if the owners were the guilty parties rather than the solicitors, ayuntamiento staff, notaries and the Junta who have failed to offer a secure and honest method of purchasing their houses. Of course, the notional value of these houses has plummeted and the ability to move away when personal tragedy strikes has now been denied, since no one wants a home subject to a demolition threat. The Spanish property law is in need of complete revision in order to protect the rights of innocent home-owners who, in this case, through no fault of their own, have become embroiled in what appears to be an internal procedural dispute between the Junta and the local town halls of Andalucia.
Sample case 5 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality
Written by Ivor Pringle, Alcaucin, Axarquia.
My name is Ivor Pringle my wife's name is Judith. We own a house in Spain, close to the village of Alcaucin in the province of Malaga. The area in which we live is known as the Axarquia.
We live here as residents, after leaving the UK in 2001 for health reasons. In brief I served in the Army from 1965 - 1997. As a result of injuries sustained during my service I was advised by medical specialists to seek a warmer climate.
My wife and I left the UK in May 2001 for Spain and a new life. Following a short rental period we found our dream home. In July 2001 we bought the house we still live in and set to work improving it.
Our world has now fallen apart because on the 14 October 2009 we were served with notification from the town hall in Alcaucin that the building license for our home had been cancelled back in December 2000 and the house was therefore illegal. Three days later on 17 October we were served further notification that we have 2 months in which to voluntarily demolish our home or the local authorities would do so and present us with a bill for the total costs. As of today we have 53 days to save our home.
When we bought the property we had no idea the house was illegal and we did not know until 14 October, 10 days ago. The original owner a Spaniard, knew from December 2000 that it was illegal and promptly put the property up for sale in Jan 2001. We paid cash for the property in July 2001.
In October 2008 notification of the license being cancelled was again sent to the original owner, who after selling the property over 7 years previously to us, took no action to inform us. Why should he, he had our money and had left the scene of the crime.
Following a very stressful weekend 17/18 October my wife and I started the week arranging lawyers to fight our case in the courts. They believe that it will be a difficult case and cannot guarantee a court ruling in our favour. Apart from the fraudulent dealings of the original owner our lawyers are hoping to win the case on humanitarian grounds. We are after all a totally innocent party and if we lose our home we will in effect be homeless. Like most elderly 'expats' our only source of income is pensions, I have an Army pension and because of my health disability a war veterans pension and my wife her old age pension. At present our future at the age of 61 years does not look very bright.
My wife and I like so many other 'expats' purchased our home through estate agents, using solicitors to act on our behalf and complying fully with all the relevant laws for owning a property in Spain. The result is that many of us have been lied to, have had illegal building licenses issued and are now prisoners, if not in our homes but in Spain as it is very difficult to sell a property without a valid license.
We earnestly request your assistance in stopping the destruction of our home, reinstating the legality of the house, and to give hope to many other Britons in a similar position.
Sample case 6 - Local Legality, Regional Illegality
Written by Helen Prior, also pp. Leonard
My husband and I came to Spain in 2002 on a 4 day inspection tour with Medsea Estates. We were shown 6 parcels of land for sale on an area called La Loma which is just outside Vera. The land had been split into plots of 10,000 square metres with outline building permissions. At that time there were probably 90 houses in the La Loma area. We found a builder, a house design, a solicitor and a bank, paid deposits and went back to the UK. In August 2002 we received a letter from our solicitor to say that the builder had received all necessary licences and would we sign the contract. Work commenced on the house around October of 2002.
The house was completed 15th May 2003 and we moved to Spain as full time residents on the 22nd. The house was beautiful and life was good. We started to landscape the gardens and spent a lot of money making the house and gardens something to be proud of.
In May of 2006 we received a telephone call from our builder to say we had to go to Vera Ayuntaniento. He did not know why, but one of the secretaries would go with us to interpret. We were handed a letter which the secretary read and she informed us that we had 15 days to knock the house down or the Junta de Andalusia would do it and charge us. We could not believe this and went straight to our solicitor. He said it was a mistake and try not to worry. We learnt within a few days that it was not a mistake, our licence had been revoked.
Our solicitor informed us that a secret Court Case had been held without any representation from us. He had not been told about it, our builder had not been told about it, nor had we. The only people who knew were the Junta de Andalusia and Felix Lopez the Mayor of Vera. Our solicitor told us again try not to worry, our house was 100% legal. But he had employed , on our behalf, two Barristers to challenge this through the Constitutional Court in Madrid. We were told that while this was in Litigation the Junta could not demolish the house.
However, on the 9th of January 2008 they arrived with police, bulldozers and lorries. Our water and electricity metres had been removed and although there were solicitors, barristers, neighbours, TV cameras and many police at the scene, the house was demolished.
The reason given was that we would cause an Urban Nucleus. There were 90 houses here before we arrived and the Junta approved the building of a further 9 houses after ours. How could we possibly be the cause of an Urban Nucleus? Surely if one house is illegal they must all be illegal, but ours has been the only demolition. We also find that the further down the pile we dig the more bizarre our findings become.
We were also given, by a source who wishes to remain anonymous, a copy of a Junta De Andalusia meeting which was held in October 2003. In these minutes, it states quite clearly that the Junta realises that stopping the build on the Prior house (we had actually being living in the house 6 months) would not stop the Urban Nucleus. It would only cause financial hardship to the Priors. Further into the report it states that the Junta should be very careful because knocking down any houses would have grave financial and social repercussions in the area. These were obviously ignored.
Representatives from the local ayuntamiento visited our site (after the house was knocked down) and measured distances between the road, the neighbours, the boundaries, etc. and left, as very happy people, because they were convinced we could not be the cause of an urban nucleus.
The bottom line is that every Spanish person whose opinion we know believes that the demolition was a political act because the local party is in disagreement with the Regional Government, We have requested compensation but obviously nobody wants to pay. The local Mayor in Vera said he should not pay because the house was legal, the Junta say they should not pay because they were only carrying out the judge’s order. The judge says that he only acted because he was being bullied by the Junta.
In April 2009 the constitutional court in Madrid judged that the proceedings leading to the demolition our house were not carried out correctly. We were not informed about the proceedings, not given the opportunity to put our case forward and therefore denied our right to justice. The proceedings were invalid, and so was the demolition order -our house should not have been knocked down !
However, to make matters even worse, the Junta de Andalucia are now going back to court again to ratify the decision to have our house demolished. This time, hopefully, it will not be a SECRET Court Case but we shall be informed of the time and date and will be able to have legal representation.
Almost 2 years later we are still living in our garage without water or electricity, abandoned by the local authority, regional authority and national authority. Should two old-age pensioners be treated in this manner?
Sample Case 7 – Land Grab
Written by John and Joyce Bowling and Alan and Kate Keeling Bedar, Levante
Article 1 of The First Protocol, Protection of Property establishes the Rights of individuals to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions, unless there is an overriding Public Interest. The Authorities have to maintain a fair balance between the Individual and Society in General. If the possessions are affected by Public Interest, compensation should be paid.
15 years ago we bought land within what we were told was, the Urban Nucleus of the village of El Pinar de Bedar, Almeria , and with the full knowledge of the Ayuntamiento in Bedar we built two houses. The Spanish Land Registry shows we are owners of these properties, as does the Catastral.
Due to extremely questionable actions by the Ayuntamiento and a Developer, Landsur S.L., we now find our land has been redesignated as urbanisable, rather than urban and that we are included within the ambit of a development sector, and included in a Plan Parcial. As a result we are being subjected, by the Developer, to an appropriation of about 50% of our land, and in addition the payment of many thousands of pounds towards his infrastructure costs, despite those services already being in place at our houses.
We consider that this is unjust as there is clearly no Overriding Public Interest in this case, the only Interest being financial gain for the Ayuntamiento and the Developer. The village has already been extensively over developed with miles of infrastructure installed for houses that have not been built, or are unlikely to be so, due to low demand.
Clearly our Human Rights have been infringed as we are certainly not peacefully enjoying our possessions, and indeed are involved in expensive Legal Action to protect our position.
Sample Case 8 – Land Grab
Story of Robert Barlow and Marjory Easton of Bedar Almeria.
In a rural area near Bedar, a picturesque village surrounded by beautiful countryside in Almeria province, a retired British couple Robert Barlow and Marjory Easton, purchased 172,000 sqm of rustic land in 1991. They obtained all the relevant building permissions in 1992 after which construction work on their 600 sqm house began. In April 1994 they moved into their new home believing they could live out their retirement in peace, having purchased more than sufficient land to insulate themselves and after taking considerable legal and professional advice to ensure that they were 100% legal and safe from any future developments.
In January 2005, to their astonishment, they were approached by the same development company which had originally sold them their land and told that part of their land had been included in the town’s urbanisation proposals and the developer’s development plans, known as a Plan Parcial. Apparently, the development company had been making various Plan Parcial applications through the years and 33,000 sqm of their latest Plan was identified as belonging to the couple. Needless to say, the couple had never been informed of any development proposals at any time. At that first meeting between the couple and the development company, which was also attended by two professional advisors, the couple were given three choices, namely:
a. Do nothing in the hope that nothing was likely to happen anyway;
b. Become a minority partner in the development and be required to contribute financially;
c. Agree to have their 33,000 sqm segregated altogether from the development and for the land to therefore remain non-urbanisable/rustic.
The couple, who had no intention whatsoever of getting involved in any development scheme, naturally chose the third option. Agreements in both Spanish and English were drawn up and signed on 23 March 2005 which clearly stated that the 33,000 sqm of the couple’s land “had been included within Sector 2 (the relevant Plan Parcial reference) due to a “material (serious) error” – without the knowledge or consent of the land owners.” The agreement also stated that the 33,000 sqm would be segregated from Sector 2 of the Plan Parcial and that the developer undertook to carry out a punctual modification of Sector 2 involving initiation of a new procedure based on a Sector of reduced size without the participation of the couple as land owners.
Attached to this agreement was a detailed topographical survey of the 172,000 sqm of land, the boundaries of which had been signed by the same developer in July 1995. On this survey, the 33,000 sqm “material error”, which included the couples’ house, gardens and swimming pool, was clearly identified as belonging to the couple as part of their original 172,000 sqm holding. The couple’s professional advisor was able at the time to demonstrate that the 33,000 sqm referred to by the developer’s latest Plan Parcial was in fact different. In the event, after agreeing on the correct identification of the relevant 33,000 sqm, the agreement and topographical survey duly signed by all parties concerned was then presented to the local town hall which registered and stamped both documents on 6 April 2005.
On 2 June 2005, a unanimously signed minutes of the plenary session of the town hall acknowledging reduction of the surface area of Sector 2 and the agreement between the couple and the development company was received. The couple then thought that everything necessary had been done to protect their land from any further interference. To their great indignation and shock, nearly a year and a half later on 27 January 2007, they were informed by their planning consultant that the developers were no longer proceeding with the segregation modification previously agreed upon. Apparently the original development company had sold their land adjoining the couple’s to a development company based in the provincial capital of Almeria in September 2006 and the original developer professed to have no knowledge of the current situation. The instigator of the latest strategy shift by speculators/developers appears to be legislation ratified in January 2007 decreeing that 30% of all residential development projects be destined for “social (council) housing”, thereby significantly reducing potential profits for developers/speculators.
On 2 February 2007, the couple were formally notified by the town hall of the latest Plan Parcial and the official notice in the provincial Boletin (official gazette which is not widely publicised and difficult for laypeople to understand) appeared. This notice allowed only 28 days to file formal objections and the relevant and extensive back-up documents had to be obtained subsequently by the couple’s planning consultant. Then followed lengthy and costly research by the couple’s planning consultant and specialist abogado, as well as an unproductive meeting with the mayor and secretary. With only two days to spare, a detailed set of professionally worded objections was formally filed. These were supported by 11 separate sets of professionally worded objections from adjoining neighbours and a considerable amount of informal support from others in the area. A press conference was called where some of the principal issues were made public, including:
a. Proposed forfeiture of 33,000 sqm of land against the will of legal owners;
b. Demand of 670,000 euros in financial contribution towards infrastructure for the proposed development (which could be substantially higher depending on final costs);
c. Construction of residential dwellings in protected areas and without previous study of ecological and other infrastructure considerations
Continuous pressure and negative publicity in recent months leading up to hotly contested local elections, as well as the couple’s well defended legal stand, may well have contributed to a softening of attitude from the town hall. Meetings were held with the mayor and secretary during which verbal agreement to segregate the couple’s land from the Plan Parcial and maintain it as non-urbanisable/rustic have been reached. However, the mayor and secretary do not yet appear to be prepared to give further commitments regarding other “unjustified land grab” cases.
On 25 April 2007, a meeting took place in Almeria between the couple’s abogado, planning consultant, the local mayor, the delegate from the Public Works and Planning Department of the regional Junta de Andalucia government and the technical head of the Junta’s Planning Section where it was agreed that the local town hall would shortly pass a resolution to specifically exclude the couple’s 33,000 sqm from the Plan Parcial and keep it as non-urbanisable land. On 2 May 2007, the local town hall approved the non-urbanisation proposal put to them in allegations submitted on 25 April 2007. On 9 May 2007 the provincial Environmental (Medioambiente) Ministry confirmed informally that the land in question was in an environmentally protected area and that permission for development was most unlikely. However an environmental study would be required and this could take about two years to complete. The couple is now advised that their land is likely to be safe. However, final ratification will not occur until the area’s regional plan (PGOU) is published and agreed by all concerned bodies, also possibly taking another two years. Until then, nothing can be regarded as 100% guaranteed.
Whatever the final outcome of this particular case, victims of unjustified land grab and other illegal practices must remain vigilant regarding all changes in Spanish planning and building legislation as well as documentation relating to their own and related cases. For example, in the case above, as late as 26 April 2007 further written allegations were received and stamped by the local town hall which included reference to an application made by the new developer to segregate the couple’s land as early as October 2006. This request was given initial approval by the town hall but not published anywhere (not even in the Boletin) nor processed. The segregation was subsequently nullified by the town hall in January 2007 when the new developer decided to proceed with the entirety of the initial Sector, presumably as a result of modified financial considerations caused by the new social housing requirements. Another ruling which could adversely affect victims of unjustified land grab is that from July of this year, compensation, if such exists, for seized land will be calculated at non-urbanisable/rustic values, not urban.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)