Court case against La Caixa / Trampolin Hills

Post reply   Start new thread
:: New - Old :: Old - New

Pages: Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next |

Forum home :: Latest threads :: Search forums
The Comments
18 May 2013 10:44 by lobin Star rating. 247 posts Send private message

 Hi, Ads

The Spanish Authorities are more than aware of the fact that few, if any, Courts in Spain is able to work within the time limits provided for in the legislation and that the delays to get issues resolved is increasing exponentially recent years.  The Bar Associations and other groups dealing with the justice systems have been bringing this to the attention of the Ministry of Justice for years.

Unfortunately, as many things today, this problem can only be started to be resolved by funding the justice system with substantial moneys.  There is an immense shortage of judges and resources in Courts,  There is barely no technology assisting in the organization and development of legal processes.  Most judges have to issue an average of 4 or 5 rulings each day, in addition to hearing, analyzing and motivating these decisions and this is just impossible to deal with with the resources available.  Although this situation is somewhat endemic and has been developing for many many years, the economic crisis and the increase in litigation has extended waiting times to an unbearable situation.  Believe me, the Spanish authorities are aware of this.

The Ministry of Justice has announced that a plan is currently being developed and implemented to ease (not to resolve) the backlog of cases.  For example, many of the non-contentious proceedings Judges have to deal with (for example marriages, divorces by mutual agreement, inheritance estates where all parties agree, among others) are in the process of being transferred to Notaries and Property Registrars who have seen their workload diminish with the crisis as opposed to that of Judges.  Plaintiffs will now have to make payment of Court costs up-front and these costs have been seriously increased this year (although the legal profession is opposing this because in a way it is a means of making justice much more expensive and less available to the poor).  The position of the legal profession is understandable but it is also true that a very substantial investment of funds into the system is required to only start dealing with the issues.

It seems to me from some of your posts that you believe that nothing is being done to remedy the situation and that Bar Associations are resigned to accept the current state of affairs.  This is far from the truth but in the present economic climate where the Goverment have had to make and still has to make substantial costs to public spending, it is going to be very difficult, if not impossible, to invest the amount of funds required to resolve this mess.

I am confident that eventually things will start to improve but I am not sure when this improvement will become noticeable enough to people waiting for justice.  So a few years of waiting and, therefore, of injustice are still ahead.  The backlog of cases is huge and, obviously, not only regarding property issues but regarding proceedings of all kinds brought before the Courts.

I am sorry to have to recognize it as it is but I wanted to let you know that you do not need to appeal to the legal professionals to bring the situation to the attention of the authorities.  They are doing what they can to assist clients with this, which is not very much in the current circumstances.

 





Like 0      
18 May 2013 12:29 by Keith110 Star rating in the UK and I am lead.... 682 posts Send private message

Well explained Lobin, unfortunately what you describe is the reality of the situation.  Excellent informative posting.

Kind regards

Keith



_______________________

LEY 57/1968
CLICK HERE FOR THE BANK GUARANTEES IN SPAIN WEBSITE

       
      

fpag@btinternet.com




Like 0      
18 May 2013 12:38 by ads Star rating. 4024 posts Send private message

Thanks for the informative post Lobin.

I am aware of the increasing up-front court costs which means that those now endeavouring to claim their inalienable rights will be made partly financially responsible for the many years of underfunding of the Spanish Justice system, under funding which for many ironically compromised their legal position in the interim (allowing time for developers to asset strip and/or declare bankruptcy, or having to deal with collusion between conveyancing lawyers and developers, inconsistencies with interpretation of Ley 57/68 etc). This situation relating to compromising court delays was identified many YEARS ago, way before the economic downturn, and as for the Bar Associations, can it be demonstrated that they are taking a proactive approach to deter legal negligence/ lack of due diligence/failure to provide requested information by those members who have brought their profession into disrepute?

I wonder how many of these outstanding cases relate to the failure to address inalienable rights associated with offplan property purchase and correct implementation of Ley 57/68?

Does this now mean that fast tracking and specialised courts and an official ombudsman to deal specifically with claims relating to offplan deposits, BG's and implementation of Ley 57/68 (as advocated by Keith in his BG petition) is now dead in the water, or could this be a viable means of speedily clearing the backlog of related cases?

 





Like 0      
27 May 2013 13:03 by pff001 Star rating. 126 posts Send private message

Lost the case



Like 0      
27 May 2013 18:21 by ads Star rating. 4024 posts Send private message

Can you advise on what grounds the case was lost?





Like 0      
28 May 2013 02:58 by pff001 Star rating. 126 posts Send private message

 The judge said that for the bank to be liable the deposits must be paid into a special account.





Like 0      
28 May 2013 08:44 by Keith110 Star rating in the UK and I am lead.... 682 posts Send private message

Pff001 Was that the only reason? There is Case Law where it is clear that the funds do not have to be paid to the special account by the buyer. It is not the buyers responsibility to ensure the funds are in the special account. The buyers inalienable rights cannot be harmed due to the developer and bank failing to pay the funds to a special account. Finca Parcs - the deposits were not paid to a special account I think you should appeal. It would be interesting to see the full sentence. Was it a group action or for a single buyer? Which First Instance Court? Kind regards Keith

_______________________

LEY 57/1968
CLICK HERE FOR THE BANK GUARANTEES IN SPAIN WEBSITE

       
      

fpag@btinternet.com




Like 0      
28 May 2013 09:03 by pff001 Star rating. 126 posts Send private message

Hi Keith

i have sent you an e mail with further information. It was a group action. Will the appeal be in front of the same judge or a different one.



Like 0      
28 May 2013 09:30 by Keith110 Star rating in the UK and I am lead.... 682 posts Send private message

Hi, ok I will check your email. I am away from office this week. Your Appeal will NOT be in front of the same Judge. The Appeal will be in the Provincial Appeal Court and will be with 3 Magistrates. It is a higher court with more experience of these issues. Kind regards Keith

_______________________

LEY 57/1968
CLICK HERE FOR THE BANK GUARANTEES IN SPAIN WEBSITE

       
      

fpag@btinternet.com




Like 0      
28 May 2013 09:45 by pff001 Star rating. 126 posts Send private message

Hi Keith it was the 38 first instance court in Barcelona.

The charges for the appeal are only 143 euros so i will go ahead with it.



Like 0      
28 May 2013 09:53 by Keith110 Star rating in the UK and I am lead.... 682 posts Send private message

OK. As you are part of a group you must be sharing the Tasas Judiciales (Court Taxes) between you. And also probably the Procurator Fees and your Lawyers fees.

_______________________

LEY 57/1968
CLICK HERE FOR THE BANK GUARANTEES IN SPAIN WEBSITE

       
      

fpag@btinternet.com




Like 0      
28 May 2013 12:26 by ads Star rating. 4024 posts Send private message

As this appears another case where judicial misinterpretation may apply (it appears to be an ongoing educational process by the judiciary), is there a case to say that all new actions against a Bank should also include the developer/conveyancing lawyer so as to ensure that the purchaser will receive a ruling to ensure the ley law is fully adhered to (no matter who is made ultimately responsible) and thereby not have to incur appeals/Supreme Court/ongoing negligence cases etc.

In cases such as this relating to inalienable rights the purchaser appears to be at risk of having to incur more and more financial obligations to meet ongoing justice..... this is exactly why I was hoping that your analysis from your BG petition should be recognised Keith, where you stipulate the need for specialsed fast track courts.... surely the innocent purchaser should not be subjected to this failure to recognise inalienable rights (whether this be first instance, appeal etc) or be financially compromised in the interim, (especially those not protected by group action).

Failure to recognise rights as per the law also clogs up an already overstretched court system with appeals etc, and without specialised judicial knowledge this only magnifies the problems that we are sadly witnessing within the Spanish system of justice at this time.

 


This message was last edited by ads on 28/05/2013.



Like 0      
29 May 2013 02:22 by ads Star rating. 4024 posts Send private message

Pff001,

Does this first instance ruling have anything to do with Cajamar not signing a collective guarantee with Trampolin Hills?

I noticed on your thread back in 2011 that there was some outstanding query in this regard. http://www.eyeonspain.com/forums/posts-long-13351.aspx

 





Like 0      
29 May 2013 03:42 by pff001 Star rating. 126 posts Send private message

Hi ads i have sent you a pm.



Like 0      
15 Jul 2013 11:28 by billyboy99 Star rating. 11 posts Send private message

How did this buyer (Alec John Edwards)  get his money back when me and all of the others i have spoke too didnt ?

 

I can not post the link from GM Legal Experts blog but here is part of the article.

 

Although the details change, there are many more customers who, against all odds, are recovering the money they gave for promotions ghost. Alec John Edwards is a fire service technical Liverpool in 2009 gave 150,000 euros as a deposit for a house in the Trampolin Hills, in a tiny town in Murcia: "As we are not asked to run the support built, but the bank refused ". Two months ago, after a lawsuit, regained the 150,000 euros, and still can not believe. His lawyer, Guadalupe Sanchez, says that the British are more accustomed to plead: "For the Spanish find it harder to go against the dealer. The Anglo-Saxons have more internalized it. " Antonio Flores, Malaga lawyer specialized in serving foreign customers in real estate, agrees: "They insisted much more and demanded a response from the system."





Like 0      
15 Jul 2013 11:33 by billyboy99 Star rating. 11 posts Send private message

 My apologies i have just read it again and this buyer had a BG where as we did not.





Like 0      
15 Jul 2013 23:50 by fazarelli Star rating. 282 posts Send private message

The existence of a bank guarantee shouldn't make any difference to the outcome, and you are right to question why he (Alec John Edwards) got his money back and you and others did not.


 


This message was last edited by fazarelli on 16/07/2013.



Like 0      
18 Jan 2014 20:25 by brennank Star rating. 3 posts Send private message

What happens if Judge did not cancel our contract

 





Like 0      
19 Jan 2014 15:14 by GuyT Star rating. 497 posts Send private message

you are right to question why he (Alec John Edwards) got his money back and you and others did not.

 
Perhaps he was a smart Alec?




Like 1      
10 Jun 2015 11:17 by Joe1 Star rating. 135 posts Send private message

Joe1´s avatar

Lost the latest appeal as well. Crazy!

 

Is it really worth persuing yet another appeal, this time to the High Court, on the back of these set backs?

Could be costly!

 

 

 

 


This message was last edited by Joe1 on 10/06/2015.



Like 0      

Pages: Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next |

Post reply    Start new thread


Previous Threads

Forced to complete after loosing court battle. Please help!!! - 15 posts
Sale of Goods - 7 posts
Change of Utility Provider - 2 posts
Energy performance certificate - 4 posts
Spain's Risk Premium falls and Stock Market rises - Sign of improvement? - 3 posts
FOOTBALL - La Liga - Bundesliga - Premier League ... Who Rules in European Football? - 21 posts
Samsung Galaxy Note 2 for sale - practically unused! - 0 posts
Community Accounts? - 2 posts
Asset reporting - 23 posts
jetXTRA - NEW LOW COST airline to Alicante - They promise no hidden charges!! - 9 posts
alicante airport - 12 posts
Furniture storage - 4 posts
Moving to Spain, Need some advice!! - 37 posts
Condadorentals web page - 0 posts
wanted, good quality furniture and kitchen appliances - 3 posts
Phone Internet Shop Cabo Roig - 1 posts
Urgent CAR help! - 6 posts
Market at Hipodromo .. what a shambles - 4 posts
Trampolin Hills - 0 posts
static caravan - 5 posts
Selling my home bankers draft - 6 posts
AP7 TOLL FEES ESTEPONA-MALAGA AIRPORT - 5 posts
Mooving To spain - 45 posts
Mini One - 0 posts
Support a Spanish foundation crowdfunding project. - 0 posts

Number of posts in this thread: 45

DISCLAIMER:  All opinions posted on these message boards are the opinion solely of the poster and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Eye on Spain, its servants or agents.


1 | 2 | 3 |
Our Weekly Email Digest
Name:  
Email:
   


This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More information here. x