Update from my solicitor

Further to our recent e-mail we write to confirm that we have had a meeting with the Concurso Administrators and the owners of Herrada del Tollo SL (San Jose).  In our meeting with them they stated the following:-

 

1.                  San Jose are now able to continue with the building works and they calculate that within 18 – 20 months the properties will be ready to hand over

 

2.                  They have assured us that the original price of the properties will be respected but some kind of extras will be included to compensate for the delay.  We asked what kind of extras they would be willing to include but they were unable to answer us at this stage.

 

3.                  They stated that shortly they will contact all of the buyers in order to confirm this and ask if they wish to continue to purchase the properties or whether they wish to cancel the contract.

 

Some of you have already confirmed to us your wish to cancel your contract with San Jose, however, if you have not already confirmed your instructions to us we ask that you now do so.  Although at this stage all of this information has only been received verbally, once the official letter has been received from San Jose we will need to take the appropriate steps according to your instructions.

 

On another note, we are aware that some firms of lawyers have started a rumour saying that they have managed to negotiate with San Jose for the quick return of their clients´ deposits.  Both the owners of San Jose and the Concurso Administrators have confirmed that this is not the case and it will be absolutely impossible to return any money to anyone at least until the Concursal proceedings finalise.

Wadge,
              Could you tell me who yous lawyer is as i have had the same update. 





Besr regards

Adam Storrie.

Could this be positive for everyone if true?

It's the most positive news we've heard in a long time, on this forum.

However, it is only verbal news, and we all know what's been said in the past, has not always been true !!

I have just heard from my Lawyer, and the main points are pasted below.



Last Court hearing

As you all know, last Friday was expected a Court hearing about those clients that were suing San Jose for their contracts to be reversed.

In the last minute, this Court hearing was cancelled as San Jose had reached an agreement with these creditors. This agreement to be approved by the Judge.

By this agreement, San Jose has accepted to reverse the contract of these clients with a very small compensation which mainly is to cover the fees of having had to go to Court to reverse the contract (For a 100.000 credit they have accepted 2.000 compensation). They have not accepted any amount as interest and the credit has now been classified as “ordinary credit”.

The effect for these clients is that, if they do have a bank guarantee, then they may now execute it without the bank being able to oppose it based on the fact that the contract has not been reversed. The problem is that the execution is limited to the main amount, not the interest. I will send each of you a spreadsheet with the interest so that you know what this means in economic terms.

Breach of contract / Resolution of contract

As a clarification and answer to many emails received in the last days, I must explain that the mere fact that the date of completion of the properties has well expired DOES NOT automatically mean that the contracts have been resolved. The effect is that San Jose is in breach of its obligations, but one has to either stay with the contract as it is or ask for it to be reversed. This resolution of contract can be done in two different ways:

1. Signing the agreement with San Jose: which has 0 cost in fees terms but means agreeing not to get any interest back apart from the amounts covered by the bank guarantee (for those that have a bank guarantee, of course).
2. Taking San Jose to Court for a resolution of the contract (as a sub case inside the main case) based on the breach of its obligations, together with the bank (for those with a bank guarantee) asking for the full amount, plus legal interest since they had the money, plus legal fees.
   

Ordinary credits / Credits against the mass

This is another point where I have been queried in the last days.

In an Administration process (like this one of San Jose), the Law distinguishes several types of credits:

1. Credits against the mass (Art. 84 LC). These are the first to be paid. Then, from the balance, the following are paid.
2. Privileged credits (Arts 90 & 91 LC): those with mortgages, finance, salaries of employees, taxes, social security, etc.
3. Ordinary credits (Art. 89.3 LC): All credits except the above ones and the ones below .
4. Subordinated credits (Art. 92 LC): Those that have been filed too late.
   

At the moment, no credit has been classified yet, although the administrators have announced all buyer’s credits will be classed as Ordinary, although we have specifically asked for them to be classed as “credits against the mass” recently.

If the contracts are reversed following the offer by San Jose, then these credits will be finally classed as “ordinary”, as this is also a condition part of the document.

If we sue San Jose to resolve the contract, the sentence will class this credit as credit against the mass. At least this is what has happened recently in the Administration process of Martinsa Fadesa company. This is also what article 84.2.6 of the Law says: “It will be included as a credit against the mass ... 6 ... Those credits from obligations of compensation or resolution either voluntarily or by breach of the obligations of the company”. (Please excuse my translation).

Why ? do we think it is a good idea to post on an open forum the info from our lawyers when we know every one including SJ  and the admin read these forums regularly .Lets tell them and pre warn them of all plans we have  and the options we are considering . Why  are  SJ always one step ahead of us  doooooh  ? 
This whole thing beggers belief  perhaps we should now consider changing lawyers to one with more autononmy regards SJ ,.this is information and  correspondance that clients have paid money for and have waited anxiously to hear .This and numerous other  client updates  from this law firm have  been  posted on this forum it is a farcical situation  .Other group litigation lawyers have won sucess by playing their cards very close to their chests ,eg  Irwin Mitchell  have published nothing  , all info is  secure and for clients only and they have at no  time found it necessary to meet with SJ or the Admin just the banks and the court . What the hell is going on here ?

 

Wadge and adamstorrie please clarify I know you are friends of Tony's but if this is false or untrue it is very unfair .

JA

I have, and will, only post useful information with regards to our predicament, for other forum members to peruse.

I don't post anything that I don't feel is suitable for what the purpose of the forum was meant for.

Some, on here, however, use the forum to vent their anger against other people and their opinions on here, which is useful to.....????

Some also use the forum to have a slanging match with others, and to try and gain the upper hand.

Some think that because they have a position of authority in their profession, that they are more entitled to their say, than others on here, and are very self opinionated !!

Some try to ram their opinions down others throats !

I've no doubt in my mind, that there are people who view the forum from SJ/HDT, but, as they are now in the hands of the Spanish legal system, ( corrupt or not........prove it ???? ), I can't see how they are going to benefit further from any info that some of us feel is useful to the cause, ( i.e. info received from Spanish Lawyers about SADM ), and wish to share with others on here, who value this knowledge.

I will continue to share any valuable info received, and , if you, or any others on here don't like it, then don't read it, Simple as !!

Hi Barry

I am sure you were doing this in the best intention but it would be better to share information in the way you can, without full statements from your lawyer though.

Im one of the first to post when i see anything that i think needs saying but i have to say, i havnt properly digested the info from my lawyer yet, and it was me who paid for the info, so i wont be placing the information on here until i at least fully understand the implications.  Your post is honest and can be confirmed though.

Following on from that, the first post from Wadge?.  It looked to me like language a lawyer....would not.....use, so im really sceptical about that information.  It talks about a meeting and not about an administrative ruling or development.

I really really dont trust that information and get the feeling its based on some sales driven information.   Come on guys, try to prove us wrong eh.

First of all, many thanks to those people who are sharing information on the forum.  I still remember the good old days when everybody shared their news and didn't just slag other people off!

As the information posted resulted from a meeting with SJ/HdT, I can't see how it is giving anything away, but it is still a bit early in the morning for me, so maybe I have missed something?!  If Wadge's lawyer is Spanish, that may explain why the language didn't sound quite right.  Some of the posts we receive from our lawyer are a bit stilted at times, as obviously English isn't her first language.  

Barry's post was giving helpful information to those people whose own lawyers aren't as forthcoming, so I am sure many people will appreciate it.  I didn't think it was giving away anything that wasn't common knowledge.

As for SJ/HdT reading the forum, surely people should take care what they post about the directors, especially about Almudena, as I would think they were in danger of being sued for defamation of character!  Of course many of us are extremely upset and angry, but as this is a public forum we should all think before we hit the send key.

For those of you who like a weather update from Jumilla, it's sunny with blue skies at the moment, however there are a few clouds gathering and it's definitely been colder over the last few days.

From your very own reporter in Jumilla, Sue




This message was last edited by suemac on 10/29/2008.

Many thanks to Barry and Wadge for the update, i for one am very grateful for ANY info i can get as SJ/HdT are so poor at communication.

I do not feel that anything has been said on here that would give SJ/HdT any insight into our cases against them.

All that has been posted isan explanation of how the legal systems work in Spain when dealing with a Concorso / voluntary admin process,something i am sure they already are fully aware of!!!!
The info may just help another forum member to make a decision as to which way they wish to proceed.

Thanks for the weather update Sue, hope you and John are still enjoying retirement in  Jumilla.

Hi

The point im trying to get across is the first posting is talking about a meeting between the administrators, HdT(san jose) and someone else who isnt named......in a language that dosnt fit that of a lawyer......I mean even if its a Spanish Lawyer, if they are dealing with a UK client, they have the means to communicate properly.  Some of it is in different typeface than other bits......its a bit like a ransom letter from newspaper cuttings lol

So.....im not trying to score points or anything and respect the posting, but it still dosnt seem to be something the administration has ruled on and its very different from the posting i can confirm from barry which is from a known lawyer.

Surely if its a forum for up to date good old honest knowledge as you imply, there is nowt wrong with telling people who said it and from what direction it came.

It seems to have very important points in it if they can be substantiated, dosnt it?

Again.....come on guys....back it up and prove my scepticism wrong eh

Anyway

Why would someone being really friendly, like Wadge.....who has only made 3 posts before now, suddenly appear with this information out of the blue without even introducing themselves and giving any salutation to their posting.


I am really really sceptical now........the more i look at it......

Maybe adamstorrie who has the same information can confirm where he/she received it......maybe?

Hi All, I think we should be discussing why at the 11th hour SJ/ HdT suddenly reached agreement  with creditors to avoid  court action. What are the implications of these actions, and how can they suddenly offer compensation, when allegedly they have no money? Is this good news for those of us who don`t have a BG and want our money refunded? Cheers Joanniemac

Jesus Christ, that was the e-mail I got from my solicitor/lawyer from Spain yesterday.  Next time I will know better than to post on this forum and try and let people know what I have been told.

Julie Anne whoever you are, I have no idea who Tony is????  I know no-one from this forum.  I don't read this forum very often I can remember now why I don't.

Briando55, that was from my solicitor who is based in Alicante, he is a lawyer,  not sure what else I can say.  Not sure why I have to justify my post, am I missing something?

For myself I think I would give more credence to the information from Wadge if he had been posting information on a regular basis on the forum, at least that way we would have some measure if the poster. Seem strange to me that he would post information from his solicitor after only 5 posts and once again it appears that this is information on the SJ/HdT party line you will get your house blah blah! Same old SJ spin we have no option but to go with the build. 

Think if they had managed to refinance for the build to go on everyone's solicitor would be providing us with updates and the news.



As to Baz posting this makes more sense to me than Wadge's and I thank him for it and shows that the real decisions are still with the judge and administrators.


Wadge letter also states that some solicitors have started a rumour that they have managed to negotiate with SJ for the quick return of their clients deposits but the solicitor does not mention Hdt which is strange because for the Concurso they are dealt with by different courts and different administrators. 

IWMMB or the directors of San Jose jailed for FRAUD.

Arlene

My belief is that people like wadge do not post much on this forum due to comments like that being made now from some individuals who try to disrupt any positive news that comes from other sources.

This forum is currently being owned by a few people who just want to bring negativity to any discussions being made and stops others from posting in fear of being shot down like in this instance.

well done to the cyber bullies.

i for one welcome any new items that come to this forum, that can lead to a positive chance of either getting some money back or having the house built.

Wadge,  when we read your post last night, my first thoughts were,  WHY NOW???
So the next thing we did was to send an e-mail to our lawyer and ask them about your post, we are waiting for a reply.

We also wonder if the thought of a stint in prison was the motivation.

Annjoe

Dave

First thing is first  thanks for your opinion about why Wadge dosnt post on here....but the fact is Wadge has posted and i have some reservations about the content..........thats OK isnt it?

I have been nothing other than respectfull of the post from Wadge and it seems to have hit some kind of nerve or something.

If i see anything that is as definate as that post......i have to......have to make sure its real and substantiated.  The reason is i have a lot of money wrapped up in this and im not going to believe anything thats shoved in front of me.

If you think that is bully boy or disruptive....i think your wrong.

I am now i think able to say that the first post was simply un-informative and not able to be substantiated in my opinion.

Come on guys prove me wrong

This is of course respectfully written with all the thank you for postings and everything else you want to hear that makes it a friendly request.

Brian

You actually have to be very brave to post anything on this forum now.  I for one would like to say thank you to anyone who can supply any information so that an informed decision can be made by all.

Regards

Chrissie1

4749annjoe  what are you suggesting??  I am a person who has no dealings with San Jose or anyone off this forum for that matter.  I live near Cambridge work in accounts, have 2 young sons, and an apartment on Polaris World as well.   I might have even posted something on the Hacienda Requelme site on this website some time ago.

Not sure what I am trying to avoid Prison for? Completing someones vat return wrong??  If you want to send me a private message and give me your phone number I will ring you and speak to you personally, even though I have no reason to justify posting what I thought was an innocent e-mail received from my solicitor in Spain.  And I do not appreciate you making me out to be some kind of criminal.

This forum is a joke really, someone posts something and you get ripped to shreds.  Some of you really are paranoid beyond belief and need to get over yourselves