Dona Julia El Patio Completion Date

Hi
Anyone any idea of the completion date of the El Patio development at Dona Julia.
Was there on May 20 and the target date of end 2007 seems unrealistic.

Chas

My lawyer tells me its likley to be the latter half of Feb at the earliest

I snagged my apartment in EL Patio in Dec 07, sent the developer the snags list and have had little or no response or progress report back from them.

Also, I was lead to believe that completion would be Jan or Feb 08 and the developer had applied for the Inhabitation Licence and that would get it very quickly. It's now April and heard nothing further.

Anyone else had any feedback or progress on their Snagging or dates for completion?

The Grupo Evemarina website is still showing the Jan 08 photo's.

We also had our apartment snagged in Dec 07 and were  under the impression that completion would be in Feb 07. We were out there in late Feb and found that there was no labour on site and that very little had been done on any snagging or external work. We also were assured that the habitation licence would be obtained quickly but this appears to be taking much longer than anticipated. We have recently been told that the developer is  still waiting for the habitation licence and that the reason for the lack of completion of snagging/external work was because of a shortage of available labour.  Any further information from fellow buyers would be appreciated.


This message was last edited by Shallot on 4/12/2008.

Hi, I have been asked by my solicitor several weeks ago to complete on our el patio apartment without the habitation licence because it is rumored the developer is in financial difficulty, I have refused to do this and think it very bad advice!  I'm thinking of changing solicitors but dont know how complicated this would be at this stage.

I also heard a rumour that the golf club is closing from a friend in the area who golfs there.

Have you guys heard anything else since you're last posts? Is the Hyatt Hotel started/still going ahead?

Jean

Since my last post on this site I have has no help from my lawyers, whcih were recomended to me by the agents which I originally purchased my apartment through and am now looking to cancel my contract with the developer. 

I belive there are many other people in the same situation and I have has contact via e mail from several people who would like to join forces and employ Maria Del Castro, Costa del luz Lawyers to obtain our money back. 

If you are interested in participating in this. please e mail me
Thanks 

Hans H Korge - UK 

I am a new member and I was recommended to this site. I have read the the messages on the message board. Of course I have done my own research through my lawyers and directly with the site office. The lawyers tell me :
The bank guarantee is valid up to May 2009. This virtually gives the developer until that date to obtain the first occupation licenence from Casares town hall.
The only possibility of obtaining a refund on my deposit before then is if the developer, Evemarina file for bankrupcy.

The site office told me 2 weeks ago that there are 3 men on site going through the snagging lists and rectifying the problems. The area is being cleaned up and all services should be up and running/available in 2-3 weeks. 

Casares town hall told me that before the occupation licence can be granted on the El Patio development all the services including drainage, street lighting, communal facilities as well as the water, electric and gas installations must be completed to a specific standard and that is not the case, yet.

From my last inspection (I live in Casares) the gardens have been cleaned up by the contractor and there are a few guys pottering around.the site.

In my opinion, assuming there are no hidden agendas which I doubt, the earliest the site will be ready for first occupation licence will be September, 2008 that is.

What i have asked my lawyer to look into is compensation, not for the delay because according to my lawyer the delay is not unreasonable, but for the lack of facilities promised, specifically the village with 9 theme restaurants etc. This has yet to be started and is now the responsibility of Hyatt Hotels. Of course as soon as Evemarina files for bankruptcy we will be seeking our refund but until then we should put pressure on them. 

I am happy to assist if we can get a reasonable number of "owners" together here.
Stuart Burrell

There are new interesting updates on this development referring clients handled by Lawbird Legal Services which are to be posted and it relates to specific relevant dates which are being carefully studied by the litigation team to decide whether a court case is a feasible option.

In my capacity  as a representative of Lawyers of Spain I am now joining a number of forums with a view to help clarify the legal status of purchasers in certain developments. The above firm represents many individual purchasers of between 1 and 2 units in el Patio de Doña Julia, some of which have expressed their desire to complete  whilst others wish to cancel. 

All of our clients are ´bank´ guaranteed and so their deposits are safeguarded by an independent entity, ACC Seguros.

It is however the cancellation of these contracts and the possibility to obtain a refund what is causing confusion between some of our clients as well as many others. We can only give a legal opinion in the matter and not adventure a Court outcome, as some lawyers do, as it is not possible and it would not be fair on our clients. We can however try ot interpret the contract and reach a number of conclusions on which we can base important legal decisions, such as legally cancelling contracts through the Courts, an expensive exercise which can become very expensive if the case is lost (a 350.000 Euros contract can attract 30.000 Euros in fees, plus placing the buyer again under the obligation to complete should the developer enforce, which is what will happen).

Our contracts establish that completion will take place on or before the 30th of June 2008, having the developer completed in December 2007. The first occupation license was applied for on the 12th of February 2008 and is still being processed. We believe that they have cheekily applied for it before having all the paperwork in place, with the aim of earning time (but is difficult to prove).

The reality is however that the developer has complied with their main obligation, which is to build a property, in accordance to the quality specification and almost, if not, on time (save for the LFO). This is irrefutable evidence which any lawyer acting for the developer will be able to craftily use to their client´s advantage and puts ppc holders in a difficult legal position. There are judges that will throw the case away inmediately and award costs and perhaps others that may view the delay as fundamental and therefore decide against the developer, and certainly there are numerous courts rulings in favour of both predicaments. Any lawyer will therefore tell you that this is the typical ´coin tossing´ dispute and so it unethical and unfair to suggest that the favourable outcome desired by the claimants (return of deposit plus interest) is feasible and almost probable, let alone guaranteed, in any Court of law, here or abroad. We have seen in the news buyers who have lost their cases against developers which had illegal licenses, never mind a 2 month delay!!!.

As far as we are concerned, we have tentatively sent notice of termination of contracts to the developer, exposing their delays, but are not pushing clients just now to cancel in Courts, even where we would earn more fees, given the current circumstances. If and when circumstances change we will modify our legal stance and steer our advice to a more Court-wise one. 

Antonio:

What about the direct execution and refund  of all money paid plus legal interest that these clients are entitled to out of  just execution of the Bank Guarantee?  What is that 57/68 Law for then? In these cases no discussion on the character or sufficiency of the breach is needed. Law provided these purchasers with direct, executive rights.

In fact, the most of these executive proceedings are being won in many Spanish courts.

I also need to disagree wityh you on Completion: Completion is when the First Occupation License is granted. Not before. Accordingly, those guarantees are always in force till the First Occupation license is granted so their executive cancelattion/refunding rights are alive till then.

Are those clients you  prevent for not going ahead with cancellation same you are advising for conveyancing? Is not that a handicap for you in order to advise on cancellartion rights?

I understand you want to save contracts, we would like to save them too, but... I am sure you agree with me that abuses and breaches needs to be mentioned by their names and that these foreign buyers have been uncorrectly advised and represented for many years by Lawyers that, being recommended by developers or estate agents, did not have theie interest at their heart. 

Is not that conflict of interest? What do you think of that?

With all my respect,

Maria

Hello Maria,

I appreciate your comments and I agree with some of them but I do feel that sometimes you miss the point as your opinion is a general one and not specific to the merits of the individual case. Why would you think that a lawyer dealing with conveyancing is in conflict of interest if he has already been paid for the job? Would he not, in his own mind, prefer to cancel via the Courts so as to charge an extra sum of legal fees? It seems to me that the conflict of interest is raised by an external legal interference which has in mind just one option and one desire: to attempt to cancel, at whatever cost.

I cannot think that all lawyers recommended by real estate agents did not have their clients interests at heart although I concede that, as in all trades and professions, a number of them may have been affected. 

If you believe that some particular lawyers may have incurred in a serious conflict of interest jeopardising therefore the impartiality of their advice perhaps you should take the matter up with the Law society.

Antonio,

While you take issue with Maria on the conflict of interest point you really have not answered the substantive issues she raises which are :

1. What about the direct execution and refund  of all money paid plus legal interest that these clients are entitled to out of  just execution of the Bank Guarantee?  What is that 57/68 Law for then? In these cases no discussion on the character or sufficiency of the breach is needed. Law provided these purchasers with direct, executive rights.
2. I also need to disagree wityh you on Completion: Completion is when the First Occupation License is granted. Not before. Accordingly, those guarantees are always in force till the First Occupation license is granted so their executive cancelattion/refunding rights are alive till then.

Do you have a comment on these substantive points ?

Paddy22

Dear Antonio:

In answer to your specific question which I quote below:

Why would you think that a lawyer dealing with conveyancing is in conflict of interest if he has already been paid for the job?

In the 95% of the cases we have had the opportunity to intervene the half of the conveyancing fee was due at completion and lawyers were not prepared to litigate ( neither technically, or commercially- if that word can be used in our proffession).  Many clients came to us  being  so fed up with the lack of assistance by their lawyers who were just up to provide advice for completion. Who even threatened them with lost of deposits if they not completed, having, in the most of the cases.....FULL AND CLEAR RIGHTS FOR CANCELLATION OR COMPENSATION.

You Antonio, as a very experienced lawyer in Costa del Sol during the last 9 years, must be fully aware of that.... I have no doubts.

Of course, we have communicated specific breaches to Bar Associations and are ready to approach the General Council of Lawyers regarding this. It is a nasty behaviour that puts our proffession in a very degradated position.

How can colleagues can enjoy proffesion that way?? What are clients for them?

Again, with all my respects towards you and your good will as a proffessional.

Maria

1. The 1968 Law plus the 1999 LOE law envisage the guarantee of downpayments to guarantee compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract. If the developer has not complied a buyer can choose to execute it but not always will the guarantor accept the execution of it (via the use of legal exceptions) and will chose to fight. For example, buyers of a developer under judicial administration (Martinsa Fadesa) cannot execute the guarantees for that as they are not entitled to, so naturally the bank or insurance company will refuse to honour it. I have to therefore correct Maria as a contractual default has to be proved.
2. The LFO date is considered to be the end of the construction process and therefore a completion date, in my opinion, has to include the LFO. Unfortunately many judges dont consider this to be the case.

1. The 1968 Law plus the 1999 LOE law envisage the guarantee of downpayments to guarantee compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract. If the developer has not complied a buyer can choose to execute it but not always will the guarantor accept the execution of it (via the use of legal exceptions) and will chose to fight. For example, buyers of a developer under judicial administration (Martinsa Fadesa) cannot execute the guarantees for that sole as they are not entitled to, so naturally the bank or insurance company will refuse to honour it. I have to therefore correct Maria as a contractual default has to be proved.
2. The LFO date is considered to be the end of the construction process and therefore a completion date, in my opinion, has to include the LFO. Unfortunately many judges dont consider this to be the case.

1. The 1968 Law plus the 1999 LOE law envisage the guarantee of downpayments to guarantee compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract. If the developer has not complied a buyer can choose to execute it but not always will the guarantor accept the execution of it (via the use of legal exceptions) and will chose to fight. For example, buyers of a developer under judicial administration (Martinsa Fadesa) cannot execute the guarantees for that sole legal as they are not entitled to, so naturally the bank or insurance company will refuse to honour it. I have to therefore correct Maria as a contractual default has to be proved.
2. The LFO date is considered to be the end of the construction process and therefore a completion date, in my opinion, has to include the LFO. Unfortunately many judges dont consider this to be the case.

Antonio:

My apologies for the style, too concise and  schematic, maybe... I think it is favourable for discussions as ours. I need to thank you for your interventions as they are very challenging for me and the team.

 A) Are not these two statements of yourself... contradictories??


 1.- ( I quote you) " having the developer completed in December 2007. The first occupation license was applied for on the 12th of February 2008"    A. Flores  26 Aug 2008 5:14 PM

and


2.- ( I quote you) "The LFO date is considered to be the end of the construction process and therefore a completion date, in my opinion, has to include the LFO"  A. Flores 02 Sep 2008 1:31 PM

So ... my point is.... what is your point?   when you think completion happens?

B) Humbly, I do  not see why you need to correct us:  ( I quote you)  "I have to therefore correct Maria as a contractual default has to be proved. 
as it has not been stated the contrary by us, has it? 

We are fully aware and of course our opinions on execution of Bank Guarantees  are based on the premise that a contract default on timimg for starting or completion is needed. Not any default,  as you have stated :  ( I quote you) "The 1968 Law plus the 1999 LOE law envisage the guarantee of downpayments to guarantee compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract"   but building not started or not finished on time. Not every breach is covered by the 57/68 titles as  your statement may lead to understand.

Again, with all my due respects towards you as a colleague.

Maria,

This is perhaps a language interpretation exercise with little interest for posters. When I mention completion in point 1 I refer obviously to the works, and in point 2 I refer to compliance with the LFO included. 

That clarified, you had previously mentioned that ´What about the direct execution and refund  of all money paid plus legal interest that these clients are entitled to out of  just execution of the Bank Guarantee?In these cases no discussion on the character or sufficiency of the breach is needed. Law provided these purchasers with direct, executive rights´

It seems from this that you can walk into a bank and cash your guarantee. Please clarify. 

Thanks

Thanks for the question;

1. Execution of Bank Guarantee: I meant there that arguments on sufficiency of the delay to product a cancellation are  irrelevant when excuting a Bank Guarantee. The execution is performable before the Bank just one day after the completion deadline stated in the contract , once you have a negative by the developer on amicable refunding of the deposit plus interests. That has been explained by us to EOS members in numeruos occassions. I am sure they have no doubt about it.

2. Language interpretation.... that is what Law is about. So exercises on that are always in my opinion  a healthy thing to do. 

3. Completion moment , there is an important comforntation regarding this among us and Judges and therefore as you said  completed first and apllied for FOL later on... I was lead to think that you take completion by end of works. I see now that we both agree on what Law says... that is not opinable. Completion is once FOl is granted.

Have a good day.

I am very keen to cancel the contract and obtain my deposit. A very good friend of mine who also has an apartment in El Patio is also very keen to do the same; so we are 2. How many more would like Maria de Castro to start proceedings ? I am not advocating we go to court on a 50/50 chance but it seems as though the odds could well be in our favour. Obviously the longer time goes on the shorter the odds.

Can Maria give an opinion on the claim for compensation for the lack of facilities that were promised at the outset; in particular the "village with 9 theme restaurants" ? This was not suggested in the sales literature this was portrayed as a definite facilty which would be available for El Patio owners. If we do not go to court to cancel the contract maybe we should be seeking compensation. 

Regards
Stuart Burrell