Question for Justin ?

Hi Justin .

This question relates to the Santa Ana Del Monte Community Forum   .

I am not sure if you are up to speed with this thread as I am aware you can not follow every  thread on EOS  .

I just wonder how you can justify  hosting a link to the SARC  web site  when it now turns out that SARC are/were in cahoots with the developers and  that they and their SARCO site have offered very  bad advice to purchasers at Santa Ana Del Monte . 

If they were paying customers then so be it you have to do what you have to do to support the continuation of EOS  !!! 

If  however you allowed the link as a courtesy ie as a good source of support  ie on  a good  " for our users " basis I would suggest you consider removing the link immediately as it has already given very poor advice and  damaged the chances of a good legal outcome for many EOS users . Thank you JA

This message was last edited by julie anne on 07/04/2010.

Hi Julie

To be honest that banner was first put up there when things started to go wrong with SADM.  I think it must have been 2 or 3 years ago.

It is not paid for, it was put up as a favour.

I don't know the ins and outs of what's going on with SADM, I find it all a bit overwhelming and have lost touch with it in recent months.

As you know I intervene very little in the community forums and just let everyone get on with it.  I only step in when I receive a complaint.

In this situation, can I suggest that you start a thread on the SADM community forum and ask people to vote if that banner should come down or not.  At least that way it's a fair process.  Your's is the only compaint I've received about it.  If the majority of people want it to come down then we will remove it.

Hope that's ok.

Justin

Hi Justin,

                 You are correct in saying that you put our banner on the sadm forum about 21/2 years ago as we stated in our request the web site would only be used for information about sadm and for members / purchasers to have a voice in the concorsa process. while i acept that normally a vote on this is a good thing except that the person who requested is in fact no longer a purchaser and has no intrest in the inform process going on as she has had 3 bank gaurentees honoured and therefore is never going to be a resident of SADM.

                 In the last 2 1/2 years we have and our members have put up with a lot of abuse from JA and others mainly those who hold a bank gaurentee while the vast majority of purchasers do not have that luxery including myself we have only posted information and up to date reports on our site and also any valid information which is freely accessable in a format that can not be tampered with.. we have upheld the agreement we made with you in stating that we would not have a forum which would be counter productive for EOS and also uploaded your weblink as well.We still get purchasers whishing to join via this link and we have both those who want their money and those who want their house.

So please be carefull as the process is at a vital stage where the company are offering a proposal to be able to complete the project and also have offerd those who wish not to continue a 65% return of their deposit and discounts to tose who wish to continue. there will be meetings held next week in both UK and Ireland where those purchasers can vote on this proposal that has the backing of the courts and administrators.

regards Brian & Margaret Dornan aka brianmags

As I understand things from various JA and MM posts. JA/MM had Bank guarantees, but also had other properties WITHOUT bank guarantees, and she has managed to get her money back.  Her advice and experience is invaluable to all of us who DO NOT hold a bank guarantee and who do not what our property.

It would appear that the SARC Executive don't wish anybody who does not agree with them and the way that there wish to carry on to post of this site.  The whole purpose of this site, surely, is to put all points of view.

I think that now it wouldn't hurt to take the banner down.  Those who are in the SARC Camp (if you like) no doubt have all got their letters, and are receiving emails bringing them up to date on London meetings etc.  So there would appear to be no need for the link.

Somebody who has managed to get a positive conclusion to their dealings with SJ?HdT are very few and far between and all of us who do not have the safety net of a Bank Guarantee need to hear of them and how they did it.

Eye on Spain is not purely a SARC site.

Hi All,

As most have probably noticed JA is not a creditor of SADM and has said recently that she would watch with interest what happens to SADM. However, rather than doing this she is trying yet again to remove access to information for purchasers  at a crucial time.  As for JA's remark about SARC being in cohoots with HdT that is completely untrue ( could Justin suplly us with JA's details so that we can look  into taking action against her for this slanderous remark?) but is what we have come to expect from her.  SARC is and has allways been a purchaser group independent of HdT and  working on behalf of its member purchasers for a positive outcome.  The SARC Executive have  NEVER  tried to prevent or stop any view point being posted but have themselves endured  continual nasty remarks.

I therefore,  ask that the link remains so that purchasers have ease of access to the SARC site whilst we go through the final few weeks of the administration process.

SAVE YOUR MONEY,SAVE YOUR HOUSE ,SAVE SADM

Tony R17 18

Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see what is going on. Did SARC not have JA banned therefore stiffling any reasonable debate? SARC never reply to any questions raised, all we get is moans about JA posting!

Do you really think that people are relying on SARC for information? I`m sure like me they are taking legal advice.

SARC are coming across as almost hysterical trying to promote the acceptance of this proposal, it makes people ask why?

The proposal is heavily loaded in SJ/HdT`s favour not ours. Why are they going to the expense of coming to Britian to try and convince us this is a good deal when they have only 966 live contracts?

I don`t care if the link stays or goes, anyone thats listening to SARC is going to end up with 5 years more grief and nothing else, in my humble opinion. Cheers Joanniemac

hI Joanniemac

                   Please don't make statments that are untrue it was not anyone from sarc who got JA banned but herself as Justin explained at the time.

As for your other comments about SARC we give our opinions and we always seek advice from our barrister before publication of those comments or opinions we have people who are in both camps and all we ever wanted was to try and get the best result for all of us who do not have bank gaurntees not just those that want their properties but also those who may have different objectives as their circunstance have changed with time. if in doubt please read our mission statement on our website.

regards

Branmags

There have also been many slanderous and libelous remarks made by Tony and Brianmags about me, In fact most of Brianmags last post is completely untrue as are the things Tonymal has said about me  in the past. Perhaps Justin  could  also supply me with Brianmags and Tonymal's details so that I can look into taking action against them ?)

Don't bother Justin  I don't want their details .I can keep my dummy in my pram I am a big girl now

Tonymal has threatened many people on EOS with litigation both publicly and in Private messages .This may be why very few with different  views to SARC and those currently in group action  don't post on the open forum anymore  .In my book  SARC have used  a form of  bullying to silence  those  who disagree with them  . The chance of good debate and meaningful discussions have been stifled for years now and it is my opinion that by doing this SARC also diminished the chances of others finding out about and following other good legal options  .  The big question is why ?

Most serious discussion  and advice regards the  HdT /SJ  situation now takes place by PM and e mail   .   

Good luck all JA

Brianmags, SARC have never given a balanced view of the situation, in my opinion. You have consistently banged on that our only hope in salvaging anything from this mess is to put our unwavering support  behind the continuation of SADM. How blind are you and your Barristers? Just for the record I don`t have a BG and guess what I also joined SARC ! Cheers Joanniemac