| The Comments |
Hi Beast and Fin,
Yup typical rude and stupid replies but nothing of any relevance. What is really surprising is that you have not managed to stiffle the threads and all you post is in response to it. You are purelly reactionaries, you have no news, no truth and are of no help to any one. Quite sad really.
Any way 90% of my soliciotors clients want their property and the administrators have told him that a large number of purchasers do.....hmmmm
I WANT MY HOUSE AND FOR EVERY ONE TO HAVE THE CHANCE TO HAVE THEIRS' TOO
Tony R17 18
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Oooooooh.
Now earth shattering news again.
90% of my " soliciotors" clients want their property.
If that is "property", then it is one client. If there are "clients", it should be properties. So is there more that one client?
Can you clarify please.
There are solicitors and all their clients want their money back. What does that prove.
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Tony I suggest you consider all threads and Chrissies behaviour before you are so quick to give us the schoolmaster from a carry on film act. People are annoyed at Chrissie not be cause she wants her house but because the whole of last evening she was being nothing but a total pest and constantly intterupting useful debate .
As for the post you have just made may I remind you that Linda's lawyer went to great lenghts to show the comment about refinancing was " Please note the following information comes from San Jose representatives " Therefore the report from Linda's lawyer did not say this at all .The report from Linda's lawyer contained information from San Jose representatives not quite the same thing . When put back into the correct context .The way you report fact is as usual very misleading .This is a prime example of the way SARC play with information to their own end.It is really not acceptable . So instead of doing the the school master routine perhaps you should go back to school and take Chrissie with you .
No wonder people don't want to post any information here with you rejigging everything to suit yourself . I had reservations about Linda posting this info I bet she does now too. JA
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Tony, I sincerely hope you any anyone else gets their house, I thought I might at one time and kept as neutral as is possible. I had hoped SJ got the funding they seek before being forced into full bankruptsy. I still do as it may mean I can claim my money and expenses etc. back. What is so darn tiersome is everytime we read the postings from Chrissie in particular, its unfortunate that they offer absolutely nothing whatsoever. I only hope dropping her knickers everytime we end the posting is just kept 'in house'. Sorry Chrissie but its very boring. We had a good dialogue going earlier on then it all got spoilt. Again. Most of us have and always will keep a PM exactly that. When you haven solid information we will read, when anyone else does we give the information the same curtesy. the majority of us would not resort to childish knicker dropping to end every post. Perhaps we can all get back to a sensible forum tonight?
_______________________
Sal
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
JA,
No it is you who never posts anything other than an attack on some one else or a negative rumour about SADM. Why don't you do some thing original and post some thing that would actually be worth reading.
As for LInda's solicitor update, so now you claim that even the administrators are lying!
I WANT MY HOUSE AND FOR YOU ALL TO BE ABLE TO CHOOSE IF YOU WANT YOURS TOO
Tony R 17 18
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
|
Hi All, Why dont we all club together, buy some concrete, meet in SJ/HdT Head office, mix it up and pour into a square, let it set and top it off with a nice plaque , quoting Santa Ana Del Monte " An investement in the Quality of Your Life". Or we could hire jack hammers and dig up our own bases and dump the concrete in their foyer!! Now thats feels a whole lot better now that I`ve got that off my chest!! Cheers Joanniemac
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
|
|
Just thought I would re post as Tony has lost the point of this post .
Tony I suggest you consider all threads and Chrissies behaviour before you are so quick to give us the schoolmaster from a carry on film act. People are annoyed at Chrissie not be cause she wants her house but because the whole of last evening she was being nothing but a total pest and constantly intterupting useful debate .
As for the post you have just made may I remind you that Linda's lawyer went to great lenghts to show the comment about refinancing was " Please note the following information comes from San Jose representatives " Therefore the report from Linda's lawyer did not say this at all .The report from Linda's lawyer contained information from San Jose representatives not quite the same thing . When put back into the correct context .The way you report fact is as usual very misleading .This is a prime example of the way SARC play with information to their own end.It is really not acceptable . So instead of doing the the school master routine perhaps you should go back to school and take Chrissie with you .
No wonder people don't want to post any information here with you rejigging everything to suit yourself . I had reservations about Linda posting this info I bet she does now too. JA
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Hi All,
A belated reply to JA's post.
1) The forum is open for all to post comment. If someone is making remarks that are not pertanent to the previous postings that does not excuse nasty aggresive behaviour.
2)The refienancing of SADM mentioned in LInda's report was confirmed by Martin of Abolex and even my solicitor.
There have been many rumours, many vitriolic and nasty comments spread around but the bottom line is that we need to protect our money! Wanting your house and wanting SADM built is not supporting HdT/SJ but supporting ourselves the purchasers. The money has been spent and we need the build to go ahead and get what we paid for; a property and a home for some!
All the best and wanting a positive outcome for all
I WANT MY HOUSE
Tony R17 18
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Can you explain what exactly was confirmed by Martin and even you lawyer .The fact that SJ representitives said that they were trying to refinance that is all nothing more nothing less . Why can you not just tell things as they are why the constant waffle
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
|
Hi ALL,
I had a meting with Almudena on Wednesday the 29 October and I am in the process of writing it up. I hope that it will be of help.
I WANT MY HOUSE
Tony R17 18
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Did she say there was a chance that she will be part of the "new" partners or investors, if that option is to proceed?  This message was last edited by FriendinNeed on 11/1/2008.
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Hi and welcome back Tony
It will again be interesting to see if you found me anything out that will change my view in context of the administration, good-will, confidence and certainty.
Im really not in any mood to listen to jam tomorrow from Almudena or anybody else. I have come to a crossroads and want some value for my investment,............this may sound against your own principles Tony but a pay back now without interest and even without achieving the amount we already paid....is financial sense..in the current climate.
The thing is, the builder dosnt care if i sink or swim, and i have the same contempt for them.
Unless there is some means of communication from SJ, to me as a customer, i dont believe anything thats placed in front of me from a psuedo organisation like SARC, much as i respect your efforts.
I am looking at the current statement from my solicitor and gathering information to sue for credit against the mass........as quickly as possible.
But i do want you to have your house...
Regards...Brian
_______________________
Best wishes, Brian
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Hi All,
The report has gone out to the SARC members and will be posted onto the SARC website ASAP for all to see and make of it what they will.
As for feelings regarding SJ or HdT it is understandable that some if not all purchasers are very anoyed by what has occured, however, I and others are trying to get a positive outcome for us purchasres, save our deposits and get what we paid for, If those of us who want our houses get them that should provide an income to fund the repayment of deposits to those who want their money back.
All the best to you all
I WANT MY HOUSE
Tony R17 18
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
So, those low price houses (which is what the development was marketed on), can now be sold and cover all costs for the site, the design and licence, pay off creditors, carry out construction works, pay for the land, pay for the licence, pay all labour and advisors and STILL have money over to pay off those who want their money back.
YET, it couldn't be done when there were not any that wanted their money back.
Now this doesn't make sense.
Sell a couple of thousand preoperties and the development cannot proceed. Lack of funding, which means figures didn't stack up to support borrowings.
Now, part development can stack up and make sufficient to justify funding and paying off those who do not want their properties.
Obviously company profits will be zero, as they will be doing the development just for the kindness.
ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY - but amusing.
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
|
Tonymal,
Please do not put words in my mouth that I have not said: "The refinancing of SADM mentioned in LInda's report was confirmed by Martin of Abolex and even my solicitor."
All I said was (and this is in writing): "Please note the following information comes from San Jose representatives. Apparently San Jose are currently negotiating with foreign investors to take over Santa Ana del Monte development or, at least, part of the development where all clients that wish to have their house built would be concentrated". I cannot confirm this information, as this is what I was told by them. This was a private letter sent to our clients which should have never been copied and pasted in the first place.
Having clarified this point, according to the documents that are continuously being submitted by other Solicitors in the Court process, many creditors are requesting the Court to have their contracts resolved and their credits be classified as "against the mass". This will complicate things more for those that wish to have the building site completed.
I do not believe or subscribe a word of the post by "wadge" in the board "update from my solicitor". This is not us and the information in that email is not ours.
It is public knowledge now that the company SAN JOSE INVERSIONES SL has requested the Court to authorise a sale of an asset to be ready to continue works, finish houses, and raise funds. Unfortunately, this is not the case for HERRADA DEL TOLLO SL.
Kind regards,
Martin
_______________________
Martin de La Herran Sabick
Abogado / Lawyer (reg. 851 Jerez)
www.abolex.es
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|