| The Comments |
Question is why do you have a cat when it states that you should not. Did you not know of this rule or did you chose to ignore it.
0
Like
|
We purchased the apartment in 2003 and we had our cat in 1998. We were never told about the rules until AFTER we bought the place! We had the apartment for 2 years before we moved ina and came here on regualr holidays and there were many cats roaming the community and when we moved here, ours joined it. The president even authorised a cat flap ..... please answer this .......... why authorise the cat flap if cats are not allowed?
However, you seem to be missing the point Tinto ........... we are not disputing stopping our cats from using the gardens, we just object to being told that WE have to obey the rule, when the PRESIDENT decides that SHE does not want to obey the rules.
The President of this community likes to insist on rules being obeyed, but is prepared to break them herself OR she likes to modify rules for her own benefit!!!
0
Like
|
Well.... " our community president wants to take us to court(using our community fees that we pay)"
Taking you to court with your own money. That is rather insulting to you and members of the community. Considering the circumstances i would seriously suggest for your community to take action leading to a re-election of a new president if possible.
Anyone can perceive the concept of a 'no animals' policy. But taking into consideration what i have read from your posts you live in an area of a vast amount of stray/wild animals so it is inevitable that your community grounds shall have 'visitors' at some point unless security in the surrounding area is constantly monitored or adapted to a point that it will probably affect another factor of the community. Such as cost implication, the interference with surrounding views or even possibly safety depending on the plan of action.
"I'm afraid I agree with your president, who wants cat or any other type of feces on the area where your children or grandchildren will be playing. As you say your community rules state "no animals allowed in community areas", end of." Erm... has this person been reading the posts? Reference to below.
Another thing..... These people ridicule you and your husband despite committing the most obvious contradiction imaginable. Having a dog of course which you state is walked around the very grounds that the 'no animals' policy applies for. Who lacks intelligence to the point they would take someone to court in that situation, that is the same as nullifying their own complaint let alone further limiting any chance they have in court by stating the stray cats can stay. What is the defining factor? The length of time the animals are exposed to the community grounds? The size of the s**t? I would suggest supervised exposure to the outdoors with a lead or something so they can go about their 'business' Then it can be controlled and ensured personally the cats are not leaving 'presents' anywhere so any factual analysis of change can go in your favour. Sad for it to be suggested really especially when the president has stated the stray cats can stay. Well thats a suggestion anyway.
There are quite obviously more important issues to discuss at community meetings. I mean what is next? "Someone from the community came round my apartment and pi***d on the toilet seat" Controlled urinating of community toilet facilities policy next? Pathetic, so that is more of an issue than rats? Well i dont know about anyone else but i would rather wake up to a dung on the grass than a rat outbreak in the area. Feces is self conclusive anyway, it will biodegrade amongst the dirt. Say a domesticated animal leaves its 'business' in a public place that one might visit regularly you would not consider taking anybody to court. It is a natural thing. I mean what, would the president rather live in an 'Alcatraz' environment?
It ponders the question why did they consider moving to a community environment when they evidently have such individual needs? If people where as petty as they are then the world would a very fictitious and sad place to be. I would suggest isolation for these morons. There is no place in a community for people like that. Especially not to be run by them, it seems biased and unreasonable in their favour. That is not communal at all....... One of the most skewed version of Ethics i have encountered.....
The best of luck to you both!!!
P.S. I apologize for how derogatory my response may seem but it really is a farce and a complete waste of everyones time involved!!!
This message was last edited by MLW_idiot-basher on 4/29/2008.
0
Like
|
i would think no cats or stray cats and no dogs for anyone is the only fair way. No crap on the lawns and other areas, no risk of being bitten by dog, and no risk of cats torturing birds and small animals to death.
Anything else but a total ban sounds very unfair to me.
0
Like
|
Well said goodstich & idiot basher. At least you have supporters in our EOS camp, Debs.
Goodstich, how are you ? Haven't "seen" you around in a while. From reading posts by you in *** I gather it's still all up in the air & I'm sorry it's not resolved yet. Regards to you.
_______________________
0
Like
|
yes i agree . but we do live in a country where there is a huge problem with stray animals roaming around. So to reinforce the( no animals in the community ban) would mean installing more fencing making our community more like alcatraz! So how can this rule stand?
This message was last edited by debwal on 4/29/2008.
0
Like
|
You may like to note that it is illegal in Spain to feed stray animals.
0
Like
|
Thats interesting. So you are telling me that while my cats (that i am now keeping indoors,) are looking out of the window watching the other stray cats basking in the sun, after being fed by our security man ( with whom our president is fully aware of them being fed by him) is doing so illegally?
0
Like
|
Debs, certainly seems to be ... READ HERE under header of Nerja animal feeding organised
(I quite like their idea of a cat cafe  )
_______________________
0
Like
|
so do i but i couldnt eat a whole one...............
_______________________
www.taylorlandandpropertygroup.co.uk
still here after all these years!
0
Like
|
debwal
sounds like the president needs to be given the choice to abide by the rules, get rid of her dog, and all other stray cats/dogs......... or walk. I realise it's not as easy as that, but what's the alternative?
you can't blame the hungry strays, if being encouraged with food. They could be fed if wanted, on wasteland well outside the site. If they remain hungry and are 'shooed' away on the site, they will usually move on to 'greener pastures' after a while.
Morerosado
hello again, nothing much to report, so don't want to bring people down with my ongoing nightmare any more than i need to!!. (6 years in June)
Our first court case coming up in May, so may have news fairly soon?. One piece of good news is, that the UK agent we were also taking to court for their part in the mess, has now offered to help us in our fight against the developer. This should strenghthen our case and will take the heat of the agent ......We shall see?
0
Like
|
Shurrup Georgia or no more magic straws for you in future ! 
(In case no one recalls, I took Nestle's Magic Straws to Spain for Georgia for his little daughter).
_______________________
0
Like
|
thank you for your information sallieg and morerosado. you would think that as the president of our community is a on the board/member of PADS ( charity for animals inc. strays) that she would know that it is illegal to feed stray cats.  This message was last edited by debwal on 4/29/2008.
0
Like
|
More said "Well said goodstich & idiot basher". Sitting firmly on the fence there, then, More? These two seem to me to have completely contradictory opinions on whether animals should be allowed or not.
Just for the record, this, from Goodstich,
"i would think no cats or stray cats and no dogs for anyone is the only fair way. No crap on the lawns and other areas, no risk of being bitten by dog, and no risk of cats torturing birds and small animals to death.
Anything else but a total ban sounds very unfair to me."
....in my humble opinion, has to be the most ridiculous thing I have read on this forum in months.
_______________________
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please"
Mark Twain
0
Like
|
I accept your (fair) comment, Roberto re Goodstich's post. I was really concentrating on his first part
I would think no cats or stray cats and no dogs for anyone is the only fair way.
I meant that I was in agreement that if Deb's cats have to go, then so should the President's dog.
(I can see an early night for me. You'll have to find someone else to share the wee hours on here with, Roberto.  )
_______________________
0
Like
|
Exactly right morerosado, some people just need the point further stressed to them so they comprehend what everyone else understands already.
I think it is pretty clear to everyone that has posted and is generally a universal opinion that all of the animals should be allowed within the community or none whatsoever. Regardless of what animal it is. A pet is a pet, and until they learn to live like us and use a toilet the President cannot exclude cats while owning a dog. Simple logic and common sense.
Please people read all of the posts CLEARLY before you make a statement about them, i mean come on. No one wants to look like a plonker right?
0
Like
|
Hi idiot basher, Roberto & I are friendly sparring partners on the forum. He ribs me something rotton at times & I have to keep him tied down.  He made a fair enough point. I accept that. Maybe what I said could be construed as ambiguous, not to worry. Roberto is a cat lover, so am I, enuff said.
_______________________
0
Like
|
I do not have a pet but i accept a lot of people do, and as far as animal dung goes there is not really much you can do about it. Animals are only containable to a certain extent. I figured you knew each other somehow. Oh well no problem. As long as people are in favour it doesnt matter at the end of the day. We can all agree the President is wrong in their futile attempt at trying to get rid of the domesticated cats. I think at best taking it to court is only flagging themselves up as having a dog in a 'no animals' area. They truly must be very 'special' people :)
0
Like
|
Roberto
so what in your 'humble opinion' is ridiculous with my statement?. Surely no pets means no pets? The rule is there for reasons i've mentioned.
Why do you have to be so unpleasent?
0
Like
|
Community Notice
Will all members please note that, with immediate effect, the following rules will apply:
1. All small animals will be banned from community grounds, to avoid any danger of cats choking on them
2. All birds flying over the community grounds must fly upside down, in order to avoid the possibility of any crap fowling our land
3. All grass & plants will be banned, to avoid risk of hayfever
4. Children will be banned from crying in public places, in order to reduce risk of noise pollution
5. All children using the pool must henceforth wear waterproof nappies
Thank you for your compliance.
_______________________
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please"
Mark Twain
0
Like
|