I want my house

Tracy,

I totaly understand your feelings and your response to the whole mess that we have all found ourselves in and it was not a rant but a very clear description of your angst. However, it is important to realise that SARC is not there supporting HdT but purchasers and trying to save their money by getting the SADM built. Yes you can throw money at a legal process and even try to get your status changed but there is still no money and if you get your status changed then i am afraid the rest will be able to follow and you are back to square one deviding nothing up with a lot of people. I to have paid a large deposit and I have just had to help my mother get a new home as she was going to have an annex of my villa but even though I have had all of this irritation I can still see that helping ourselves is not helping HdT.

So it is a very nasty situation we are all in but we all need to take a deep breath and step back for a moment and ask ourselves some  simple questions:

Is there money to pay me back?  It appears there is not as can be seen in the administrators report.

Will legal action make money appear ?   Not if there is none there

Do I want to lose my money?   Not really

Do I want something for my money?  Yes

If SADM goes ahead can I get my property? Yes if I want it

Who am I helping if I get my property?  Myself

If i do not get my property will I cause pain to HdT? No just myself and possibly other purchasers in the same position as me.

I think it is quite clear and SARC have said this all along there is no money and the only way to survive this whole awful mess is to get your property.  An asset in the hand is worth so much more than the pursuit of money that may never materialise.

I do have sympathy for all purchasers and  I consulted a chartered accountant at the start of this mess and he adviced get your property built you do not want them to liquidate.

 I WANT MY HOUSE AND FOR ALL OF YOU TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE YOURS TOO!  THIS IS FOR US THE PURCHASERS NOT THE COMPANY!

Tony R17 18

This message was last edited by TonyMal on 1/13/2009.

Sue/Sal/Ja - thanks for your positive and supportive replies

Tony

With respect.  There is no money in the client account.  That does not mean that HdT do not have it.  It means that our legal team needs to work hard er to find it.  The deposit monies did not belong to HdT and so if they have either moved it or spent it, that is ilegal.  I bet if seriously faced with the prospect of criminal proceedings, it will be magically found.  Of course HdT will not give this money up easily, and so they need to be effectively challenged.  HdT say there is no money - you say OK we will give you more to finish our houses - HdT have all their Christmases come at once!  If you personally wish to do this, then great, but count us out!

Is there money to pay me back?  Yes, somewhere.  We just need to look harder for it

Will legal action make money appear ?   It will be amazing what the serious threat of criminal actions can do

Do I want to lose my money?   Not really - we agree on that!

Do I want something for my money?  Yes.  I wanted a house on a golf course, but I am not going to get it - so I want my money back

If SADM goes ahead can I get my property? It's a big IF, and the best case scenario I can see is a handful of houses in the middle of nowhere, with very limited facilities for the foreseeable future

Who am I helping if I get my property?  I am helping to line HdT pockets, and to help crime pay

If i do not get my property will I cause pain to HdT? Yes I will.  They will not get their ill gotten gains from my hard earned cash.  If they they don't give me my money back they will be haunted by me in this life and the next.  I will be hanging on to their short and curlies for all eternity

I would also like to add that you seem to have a Chartered Accountant that gives out business advice.  If that is his professional opinion then it may be in breach of FSA rules, as my accountant won't give my any advice on where is best to put my money (when I had it) as it is a breach of professional conduct.  He can only tell me the tax implications, not if it is a good business/financial risk.  I need an IFA to get financial advise. 

Regards to all

Tracey

 Tony.. lets be clear..when the statement wa made there was money in the account.Now here is not..It does not take a genuis. Look at you reaching again.

Go tracey you are a star and always will be!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tony and Tracey

It is good to read civilised comments on the forum, and you both argue your cases well.  So who is right?  Have HdT acted illegally, or have they just acted foolishly and then become victims of the credit crunch?  Does anybody really know that they have moved the money illegally and that we have a chance of getting our money back, or is that just an educated guess?  It would be good to know if anybody has any proof.

I can see that there are several possible scenarios here:

1.  Everybody demands their money back, so SADM cannot be built by HdT, however there is no money so nobody gets any money back.

2.  Everybody demands their money back, it is discovered that HdT have the money (even though it was cleverly hidden) so we all get our money back.

3.  HdT get financial backing, SADM is built albeit on a smaller scale, people who want their money back get it back and, eventually, people who want houses get them.  By the way Tracey, SADM isn't exactly in the middle of nowhere, as we have walked from the middle of Jumilla to the development, and back again.  For anybody with a car, the trip to Jumilla would be quite quick, and many people live in the campo without any problems.  Of course it wouldn't be as attractive to purchaser if there are no facilities at all, however if scaled down I suspect many people would live there quite happily.

Does anybody have an alternative scenario?

OK.  We are off to Pedro's for a cafe solo, cafe cortado and tostada with our friend Juana Maria.  I don't think it is the same Pedro's as Twigit's though!

Sue

To build on Alans last post, Tony seems to have a Chartered accountant who gives out advice on business strategy for a client, and a barrister who says there is no argument to take to court and the builder has no funds left, based on a self declaration of accounts through a protective administration.

Alan is perfecctly clear about what should be happening and its as obvious to me as it should be to SARC 'members (whatever that means), Get them out of this administration and into a proper liquidation.  That is where you get the power to search properly and achieve fair results.

Give them the scope to build on without being completely sure of what is to happen............is the worst possible outcome.

If you cant get yout money back get as much as you can, as quick as you can, and move on...............thats what i have said for months, thanks to Alan for adding some more sanity to some of our advice.

Thanks

Brian

Hi Sue

The only proof (and it is enough for me) that HdT have acted illegally, is that there is no money in the client account, and that was clarified in the Adminstrators report.  Being foolish with other peoples money is not a legal defence.

If HdT had acted honourably and honestly throughout, and the money was in the client account, and the only reason that we are in this mess is because of the credit crunch and the bankers pulling out of finance, then all of Tony's logic would stack up.  Let's help HdT finance themselves out, and we will all end up winners.

The reality is that it is not as simple as that.  There has been lots of hearsay, rumours and opinions and it appears that even legal opinion is divided as to the best action to take.  What is as clear as the nose on my face is that money has been taken out of the clients account and 'disappeared'.  Now at best, they were foolish and I don't want to give even more of my money to fools.  At worst, they stole the money (either to finance other projects, or for themselves).  That makes them thieves.  Thieves that smiled whilst using one hand to shake our hands, and the other to stab us in the back.

When we all parted with our deposits, there was an element of trust.  Trust that our monies would be safe until the build completed.  Trust that we would receive Bank Guarantees.  Trust that we would be kept informed.  For us, that trust has well and truly gone, and so I will not be giving them any more money.  For us, it's that simple.

Tracey

Hi all,

              I have checked this one out it has taken a little time but here it is,

                            building companies can use clients deposits if they use it for the developement so if they spent the money this way then unfortunatley they are in the clear legaly. not best practice but allowable in law. if you can proove that the money was not used for the developement then and only then do you have a case against the company on those grounds.

Brianmags

R4 556

Brian

I think I read somewhere some months ago, that only E30,000 from the client account had been used for our developement.  I am more than happy to be proved wrong, and I think it should be up to the developers / administrators, to prove where the money DID go.  that would be the honourable thing to do, rather than creditors spending time and money finding out.

Tracey

Thank you all for some really good debate at last on  this forum .I wonder if we have all missed DYK's point .There are huge illegalities and there is plenty of money the other 10 companies in this group are trading on quite nicely thank you .Many of them involved in very lucrative civil building projects .

Has any one read the part of the report (HdT) which shows that  HdT made a large loan to SJ during the legal squabble at El Pinet .The report states it can not be reclaimed as SJ are also in administration .(no mention of it in the SJ report though funny that ) Yet SJ have been given permition by the court to sell assets to enable them to complete El Pinet .How do those purchasing on SADM feel about this when HdT now face imminent liquidation ,is this fair .

I have said all along as is the  position of the share holders  in the wider group the actions of this company (ALL branches ) must be treated as one . Then there is most certainly lots of money left .They acted as a group therefore must be made to go down as a group .If this were the case they would not be going down .They are only dropping the white elephants that are too much trouble to continue with .Make no mistake as DYK says there is plenty of money!!!!!!

Much of what I have said here will most likely make my own peronal position worse ,but I don,t care . The companies are one in the same as I have said from day one . Regards JA

Hi JA

You certainly can't make your position worse by telling the truth and stating facts?  In the end thats what will prevail.

Im interested in the comment you make about the loan from HdT to SJ, is this translated anywhere, before i ask my lawyer about it?  If, as you say, it can be found that dual trading exists and the loan was in any way improper, or still outstanding and not part of the companies assets (and the others liabilities), you may have something to persue.

At any rate you have a better argument than SARC's barrister!!!!!   Let us know what you have, PM or otherwise.

Hi Brianmags.........you have a barrister and you have a chartered surveyor but you still look up the information ojn the depositors account, and come back with the if's and buts and unfortunately etc.  Dont want to be too funny but we talked about this some months ago, you should know abouit this part of the accounts if you are running the SARC campaign.......i bet most of us know the answers to that one.............

Thanks

"Tony seems to have a Chartered accountant who gives out advice on business strategy for a client, and a barrister who says there is no argument to take to court and the builder has no funds left, based on a self declaration of accounts through a protective administration."

Ridiculous. How would you expect Tiger to know what you are talking about?

Fair comment FIN

We can but try

Hullo ta yer all,

Listen yer can go down ta legal root as much as yer like an give all yer money ta legal bod's ,but a tell yer this ye'll get nowt believe me a live ere not like most a you folk who think its like" good ole blighty" its not an am tellin yer now that over ere there's nowt or next ta nowt ta protect consumers. Ye'll lern, ave seen it all afore, oh' an a word a warnin... who's likely ta get most if builder can't build yon ousing estate, those wi bank guarantees a those without?

twigit

Living wherever is immaterial when you do not have a brain.

Twigit dear, could you type in proper sentences now as you have stopped the funny posts etc.  Your posts have changed from a joke to trying to say something (whether we agree or not).  Could you cut out the rubbish typo please.  I find im skipping everything your posting because I am not from up t'north and cant be arsed to decifer anymore???  If you could do a Worcestershire accent that may help a tad??

Hi All,

I hope that we can continue with polite expresion of opinions. Here is mine.

HdT is a company in its own right, what ever the other member companies of a group do or have is nothing to do with HdT, you can check with your solicitors.

How can those without BG's protect there intersets? It most definately is not by having HdT liquidated. If you want your house you need it built, if you want your money you need people to buy their houses to provide a source of income to pay you back. Remember there is no money to pay you back in HdT.

The only purchasers who could get there money back if SADM  does not go ahead and HdT is wound up are those with BG's. It could be that some with BG's beleive that they have a better chance of getting their BG's actioned if that happens and it could account for a few people with BGs attitudes towards SADM.

I can ignore the daft personal remarks but i am truly concerned that those of us without BGs would be left  with just a bad taste in our mouths if SADM fails to go ahead.  For us all we need SADM to proceed and  we should all be doing all that we can to get that to happen, no matter what your prefered out come is.

 I WANT MY HOUSE AND A POSITIVE OUTCOME FOR ALL.

Tony R17 18

Hi Sal

So wots wrong wi us from up t'north......i just got back from feedin me whippets and read wot yor sayin

sorry...oooooooooaarrr..........for the worcester lingo????

Sorry couldnt resist it.....................i agree, twigit, its not funny anymore..............

Hello to all i have been reading all what yo have posted; i am concerning only about this, may you can help me to find out:

Jumilla 1.700 houses 30.000 deposit each.....more or less :51.000.000€

El pinet  269 houses finished; medium price 142.000€ (Vilas duplex and apartments) 42.032.000 €

El Pinet 229 not finished with deposit and some like 50% paid medium 30.000€ each; 6.870.000€

Imperium 900 partners(company that some investor put money into, of 30.000 euros each) 27.000.000€

There are more companiesplus what SJ own to Providers people + partners (we do not know yet)

All this is making an account of 126.000.000€

So i live you this here to think about it.

This is just estimate, but not to far from the reality, may be more, but not less.

Pls let me know where you can hold all that anount of money.

Have a good think

DYK

Hi ALL,

I have just read down and read the silly remarks about my talking to a chartered accountant and getting his opinion about companies in Administration and the probabilty of getting your moeny back. Well I am sorry but who else would you ask about companies with financial problems but the profession that wind them up and audit their books!

I am sorry that Tracy thinks that they can find the money, that is no longer there.  You are basing your postion on the belief of a conspiracy rather than on facts. The adminisrtators are independant officers of the Court and the company is under the control and scutiny of the court, if was there they should of found it. As for going down a legal route trying to prove that they acted illegaly I realy think that you will fail and I truly believe that it is the banks and the legal proefession that has let us all down and desevere our anger.

I wish you all the best

 I WANT MY HOUSE AND A POSITIVE OUTCOME FOR ALL

Tony R17 18