Costa del Sol
The couple made the purchase in good faith and the bank received their money from the real estate promoter which called in the receivers some years after.
Dec 14, 2016 - 11:46 AM
A British couple have won compensation of 227,000 € for buying an illegal flat in Marbella
The couple made the purchase in good faith and the bank received their money from the real estate promoter which called in the receivers some years after.
Dec 14, 2016 - 11:46 AM
Although the sentence is open to appeal, the nightmare for this British couple whose dreams were to enjoy retirement in Spain could be reaching its end. A court in Málaga has condemned Banco Popular to return the money it received, 227,000 € to married couple now back in Great Britain who had paid in advance for a flat which was never granted an accommodation licence for town planning irregularities.
The case dates back to 2003, when the couple acquired a home in Los Lagos de Santa María Golf, a real estate promotion as so many others during the mandate of Jesús Gil in the Marbella Town Hall.
The amount was paid off–plan and the buyers deposited the amounts into the promoter’s account in Banco Popular.
Three years later, when the escritura had to be established, the scandal of the massive municipal corruption in Marbella was at full tilt and the Town Hall was then supervised by an outside manager, resulting in all the building licences awarded in 2002 and 2003 were submitted for revision as outside the urban regulations in the PGOU.
The project of terraced homes was built on land classified only for detached houses, with public areas, parks and gardens. The licences were not conceded to the promoter which finally took over the building, but to the Sur Inversiones Sema SL, which was owned by the Italian businessman Giovanni Piero Montaldo, condemned in the ‘Malaya Case’ to eight months in prison and a fine of 150,000 € for the crime of fraud.
The residential estate lacked the first occupancy licence, which the promoter had assumed was valid because of the administration silence. When the British couple understood their situation, with other foreign couples, that their homes were unable to be registered they demanded the promoter to return the amounts.
The couple were neglected and turned to the courts, represented by the lawyer’s office Ley 57. When the judges agreed and declared their contract null, and ordered the repayment, the promoter had already applied for bankruptcy protection and was unable to comply with the sentence.
The lawyer’s office decided then to charge Banco Popular, the bank holding the money. The bank then alleged the law obliged it to the amounts paid as a deposit into a special account, but the regulation ‘does not impose the obligation to supervise the payments made from the seller, being alien to the obligation for repayment in the case of non-existence’.
However, the First Instance Court 7 in Málaga ruled in favour of the purchasers, considering the lack of individual guarantees cannot motivate an unsatisfactory prevision of said guarantee.
Therefore the bank was called on to return the money to the British couple, 227,696 € plus the interest obtained since Sept 8 2015, date when the demanders required the money to be repaid. The bank, which can appeal, has also had to pay to court costs.
Los Lagos de Santa María Golf
|
The case dates back to 2003, when the couple acquired a home in Los Lagos de Santa María Golf, a real estate promotion as so many others during the mandate of Jesús Gil in the Marbella Town Hall.
The amount was paid off–plan and the buyers deposited the amounts into the promoter’s account in Banco Popular.
Three years later, when the escritura had to be established, the scandal of the massive municipal corruption in Marbella was at full tilt and the Town Hall was then supervised by an outside manager, resulting in all the building licences awarded in 2002 and 2003 were submitted for revision as outside the urban regulations in the PGOU.
The project of terraced homes was built on land classified only for detached houses, with public areas, parks and gardens. The licences were not conceded to the promoter which finally took over the building, but to the Sur Inversiones Sema SL, which was owned by the Italian businessman Giovanni Piero Montaldo, condemned in the ‘Malaya Case’ to eight months in prison and a fine of 150,000 € for the crime of fraud.
The residential estate lacked the first occupancy licence, which the promoter had assumed was valid because of the administration silence. When the British couple understood their situation, with other foreign couples, that their homes were unable to be registered they demanded the promoter to return the amounts.
The couple were neglected and turned to the courts, represented by the lawyer’s office Ley 57. When the judges agreed and declared their contract null, and ordered the repayment, the promoter had already applied for bankruptcy protection and was unable to comply with the sentence.
The lawyer’s office decided then to charge Banco Popular, the bank holding the money. The bank then alleged the law obliged it to the amounts paid as a deposit into a special account, but the regulation ‘does not impose the obligation to supervise the payments made from the seller, being alien to the obligation for repayment in the case of non-existence’.
However, the First Instance Court 7 in Málaga ruled in favour of the purchasers, considering the lack of individual guarantees cannot motivate an unsatisfactory prevision of said guarantee.
Therefore the bank was called on to return the money to the British couple, 227,696 € plus the interest obtained since Sept 8 2015, date when the demanders required the money to be repaid. The bank, which can appeal, has also had to pay to court costs.
Comment Form is loading comments...
