Legal tip 693. Caja Murcia settling
01 February 2012 @ 07:26
Commun sense of this Saving Bank in Murcia, which after us presenting a claim based on provision 1segundo of Law 57/68, yesterday settled and paid our client´s amounts back into the Courts´account.
Provision 1 segundo of Law 57/68 establishes that Banks receiving buyers´ deposits in off plan purchases are liable if the buyer does not receive a Bank Guarantee.
Good! So good!
Maria
.jpg)
"Medina Sidonia, February 28 2010", Cádiz, Spain, by _ DODO, at flickr.com
Permalink
Keith said:
01 February 2012 @ 10:49
Excellent news María.
I am pleased to see that Caja Murcia is finally accepting its obligations under LEY 57/68.
Let's hope many more Banks begin to realise sooner rather than later that they DO have legal responsibilites and obligations under LEY 57/68.
Kind regards
Keith
Spanishpunter said:
01 February 2012 @ 13:33
This is great news and is it a start of all Spanish Banks being forced to acknowledge all their legal property loss obligations and make full provision in their accounts
it will also clear the way and create confidence in the minds of UK potential buyers and encourage them to start seriously looking at the good buys now available in Spain. Santander have now written down the value of their repossessed properties by 50% which is more realistic -this precedent will give hope to many!!
Sallybooboo said:
01 February 2012 @ 15:37
Hi Maria!
That's great news!! Which development was this for?
I'm so pleased that this may lead the way for many more!!
Congratulations
Sal
Maria said:
01 February 2012 @ 15:46
It was Palatinum by Proyectos Antele
Sallybooboo said:
01 February 2012 @ 17:32
One down...
Congratulations again!
Sal
Anne said:
01 February 2012 @ 17:42
Brilliant! Well done Maria and team. This is a credit to all the hard work you and your team are putting into this fight for justice.
Does this now set a precedent for other cases Maria, or did this relate to very specific circumstances?
Ian Clutton said:
08 February 2012 @ 20:26
Dear Maria
Myself and my friends purchased property at Palatinum from this builder. We are currently progressing a case through Fontanals solicitors. Will this ruling have a bearing on our case and if so, should Fontanals now be pursuing Caja Murcia using this ruling? I believe that we currently have an embargo on the land which was agreed by a preliminary hearing and we have a full court hearing in Murcia in September. I understand that this is with regards to the builder rather than the bank. Can you advise me or help in any way?
We have lost many thousands of pounds because of this.
Maria said:
08 February 2012 @ 20:35
Dear Ian:
I would prefer if you emailed me directly to:
web@costaluzlawyers.es
Kindest regards,
Maria
eamonn said:
20 February 2012 @ 23:37
Hi maria
I have a 2 bed apartment in Rojales , Alicante.
I bought it for 120 000 euros, but is now worth less than 50 000.
I still have a mortgage of around 60 000. Is it true the banks in Spain are following people in England for debt if they repossess? Also a friend of mine said that my bank (Caja Murcia) might accept an offer of half the mortgage( 30 000 euros) to finally pay of my mortgage.Many thanks for any help you can give me Maria
Regards
Eamonn
Please leave a comment about this post. You don't have to be registered to leave a comment.