Hi AEC,

That clause is always abusive; the completion date cannot depend on 18 months after getting the building license. It doesn´t matter if you have been waiting either 3 months or 5 years.

What doesn´t make any sense is to wait for 5 years to complain, especially when the property is finished. You should have asked to change that clause either before signing or after signing, you can get it from the builder as these types of clauses can be economically punished.

People can either be positive or pessimistic depending on the personal experience, I just make comment about legal issues and I don't have any interest in criticizing this resort.

Hi Shannon,

Why are you so curious?.

I was never in any forum before, I client from Corvera told me about it, so I went in and read some comments. I just couldn´t avoid to paticipate and give my proffesional opinion.

Kind regards.

O.Palacios

As you probably have heard before, the signed contract establishes parties’ obligations, so if people want to get out of a contract because of the facilities, people should make sure that the promised facilities are properly described in the purchase contract. People can also ask their lawyers to check the building project and see if those facilities are also included. If the expected facilities aren’t included in the purchase contract and you cannot prove that the builder’s project was including those facilities, there isn’t much to do.

 I agree mainly with Mendez, if you have a Certificate from the Town Hall confirming that the property hasn’t got the necessary building license, it’s really easy to execute the bank guarantee.

I have got several executions for my clients in similar cases with no problem; the only negative side of it is that it takes some time due to the usual proceeding duration, so I usually try to avoid it by negotiating with the bank in first place.

 In my negotiations I usually show the bank  favorable sentences that prove that is always better to return money voluntary than going to Court and end up with the procedure cost plus interest for the proceeding time.

However, we have to look at each case independently, and in this  particular case, this third phase  in Corvera doesn´t have a  license approved and the construction hasn´t even been started, which shows the fund return as very probable.

In case the builder tries to say that the contract cannot be resolved as there was no breach of contract because, according to its content the agreed period of time for construction and delivery of the property depends on the approval of the building license.  We can legally request from the builder the cancelation of that clause as it’s abusive, according to the Spanish Consumer Law,  and  get it changed by an exact period of time that doesn´t depends on the builder’s will , which is also required by the Civil Code, Código Civil, art.  1.256.

 After that change in the contract the builder’s excuses can be reduced and make it more favorable for us in case we claim the resolution of the contract and  the following execution of the bank guarantee .

The cases where Corvera won in Court, was because the dwellings were completely finished, and there was just some delay in the completion date.  According to well known precedence a delay isn’t important enough to get out of the purchase contract especially   when the property is basically finished and the completion date isn´t consider an essential aspect in the contract. From some judge’s point of view it’s like the buyer has just change his/her mind and considers the purchase a bad investment.

I also saw some comments about the contract being written only in English. As a simple answer, private contracts are determined by what the parties want, it means that as a difference with the notarized documents, title deeds, private contracts can be written in the language that has been chosen by the parties.

O.Palacios