SARC /TONY

 

The report of your meeting is ridiculously slow, is there a reason for this? I could have had a whole  research paper written up in less time. What the hell are you doing massaging the facts or waiting on WHO to publish the next world convention on the rights of the world citizen .Come on Tony !  six days what are we waiting for a new UN resolution  on the rights of an EU citizen for jees sake get a move on or your report will just be  another , totally useless  , worthless non informative  , mis guided piece of spin  !!!!!!!!!!!
 "   But Almu said so !  therefore it must be  true   "

This message was last edited by julie anne on 11/4/2008.

Hi Julie Anne

I know we are all keen to see Tony's report, but to be fair to him:

a.  He was coming over to Spain for a week, and I doubt if it would have been easy to write up a report in an internet cafe;
b.  He does have a job, and I suspect a life, so after a week away will no doubt have lots to do to catch up;
c.  He has undertaken this role to help other buyers, but it's a voluntary role, done in his own time.

On the other hand, I'm as keen as anybody to read it - so get a move on Tony!

Sue

cant see what the rush is it will more than likely be slagged off by most people anyway.

I cant see what the rush is either Dave

It will be version of what we already know from our solicitors, with some extra padding added to make people lean towards buying their house...................which is what SARC want to to, and make no secret of it.

I keep saying be careful and i mean it ..............be careful....!!

Was it a holiday or business that the SARC guy went on?  i keep getting confused about it.......its a holiday to take his mum which just happens to take in a meeting with Almudena...is that it?

Shouldnt be too informative but will no doubt pass an hour reading it and looking at the replies.

Yours sincerely....confused of Yorkshire

My opinion of Tony and hence SARC has changed given the very indepth knowledge I have of the meetings that have taken place with san jose thus far and group lawyers. First I believed Tony to be very very optimistic, then slightly delusional. Since his post regarding his seeing a briefing from lawyers and a complete spin on the meetings which have taken place to the advantage of SAn jose I see him as devious and underhanded and no better than the developer themselves. My own personal opinion which I am entitled to and I wish Tony no ill harm. You wish to try and mislead and confuse does however disgust me. Your "report" will be no doubt equally as deceitful and people should be very careful whilst digesting its contents.

If this is how you all feel about it then if i was Tony i would not waste any more time and effort bothering to write anything on this forum and let you all get your information elsewhere. I think Tony should just put the information on the SARC site for the people who appreciate his efforts.


FAR

Thats a good point FAR

I wonder why he does continue to post on here and try to convince me that its best to continue with a purchase.

Would it be perhaps he has some kind of reason for doing it?

I also have to say i dont find any information from the visits that is worth the effort....do you?  i mean really do you?

I think that  is exactly what many people think about it .Most don't give a stuff for what SJ or SJ via Tony / SARC have to say anymore threfore it would be best if he didn't post it here as he only does so to annoy and antagonise those with different opinions After all anyone who is interested can go on the SARC website or telephone Almu to be lied to first hand with no need for a middle man. .Although I must admit  I am looking forward to it as I know I will split my sides laughing at how gullible some people still are where SJ are concerned .On the  other hand the sheer arrogance of SJ  and their persistant and continuing disregard for their customers or future reputation will only fuel my anger and disgust and tells me all I need to know about the real chance of any kind of future  for this disgraceful company  .Even in comparison with other developers who are also in Administration SJ and the Administrators have behaved appaulingly  .The admins insistance  that those who reverse the contracts are to be  listed as ordinary crediters instead of " crediters against the mass " is a blatant abuse of the  people  they have  already cheated .If  they had any decency all purchasers would be granted the privillaged  status of " crediters against the mass " as has happened in  the case of other developers in the same situation .
So someone please explain why we should give a flying f***  for what they have to say or for what they send Tony to tell us .  JA


This message was last edited by julie anne on 11/4/2008.

Hi JA,
It is a shame that you spend so much time and energy being such a nasty small minded little person. The report has gone out to the SARC members and yes it takes time to type up and as it is done voluntarily and i have a job etc it takes a little longer. As for posting it, I think that it we will continue as we have done in the past. First sent out to members and then psoted on to the SARC website.

AS for your comments I find them rather rich considering that you have a BG and have a very very good probability of getting your money back but still you try to manipulate those without BGs to act against their best interests. You have no shame!

All the best to you all

I  WANT MY HOUSE
Tony R17 18

Julie,
i cant work out your comments as you started this thread asking for the report, and then on your last post you moan and slag off the SARC group and say you dont want the notes.

make your mind up

But JA like others, looks forward to reading the "reports" as a bit of light hearted relief, as the "reports" are fiction, maybe even farce. That is if they can be understood.

I admit I found them highly entertaining previously but I find they get more misleading manipulative and devious as time progresses and therefore tony, YOU DISGUST ME

Joaniee66,
As all of the SARC reports have been objective and not written by me, I think that you are a rather stupid person. Your nasty arrogance and lack of rational participation in the forum is an insult to all. I have not nor will misrepresent or spin on information. As for Martin's posting  I am surprised that he goes on about refinancing of SADM in an email then implies that he did not. I am sure that all of his clients have a copy of it and could quite easly verify that. 

Wishing you all the best
I WANT MY HOUSE AND A POSITIVE OUTCOME FOR ALL
Tony R17 18

Tony it is you who is stupid you are not smart enough to know or acknowledge the fact that you have offended Martin I suggest you read  over the  last post  which  he directed to  you perhaps if you use a dictionary and think real hard you may just have the brain capacity to get it . You are going to be proven wrong very soon .The worse possible outcome for SADM and SARC  .You are not going to like it  the only question which will remain is did you or SARC affect the outcome .The answer may well be that you did but not for better  !!!!!

HI JA,

I read Marin's post and I think that it is you that has missed the point!  And as you have a copy of his email and his subsequent one that he sent out on Thursday. Oh and do you think that you will get legal costs back ?  I can assure you from my personal experience of solicitors and the courts that winning a court case and getting your costs are 2 totaly different things. The only people gauranteed to get money in a legal process are the solicitors, so be carefull.

 I WANT MY HOUSE

Tony R17 18 

I think the words be carefull may be the best ones you have ever posted T.

I intend to be very carefull..............and i keep my solicitors advice away from the public eye.  When you mention that your only posting the things in our solicitors e mails........your guessing, because they are private to us and our individual cases.

Be carefull, is exactly the advice you need to exercise T

Tony you are a disgrace !!!!!!!!! May God forgive you !!!!!!!

Hi Tony

On the report you say that 45% of purchasers are Spanish and only a few of these have expressed an interest in getting their money back.

Can you quantify what expressing an interest is please?  What kind of research has been carried out to establish that only a few have 'expressed an interest'?

Surely the main ambition of anyone involved in this is to secure their investment, which is why all the creditors have been recognised in the court.  All the people being recognised at court are expressing the interest, as you put it, to get their money back, secure their funds.

So how can you use such a loose statement, its completely absurd.  

How many is...only a few.?  10 perhaps, 500 maybe, 1000?.............and what is meant by expressing an interest, is it a conversation, or a voting slip system, or, well, what is it..............it sounds made up to me.

I started reading the report but this is around the second paragraph, i think, so i gave up with a bad feeling about your motives, yet again.............and it seems like its just fabrication to me.

Explain this one for me please, im curious

And of the 45%, what percentage of them have BGs and what other options, if any, are available to them, other than to sit it out and hope they will eventually see something..

Hi Tony

More questions for you

From the phone call update.  you say that the re-financing is at an advanced stage, this to be completed in the next few weeks.  Almudena being about to concentrate on her family event, who in the business sense, will be looking after the very important re-financing?

Also, if we said, the next few weeks, will be 3 weeks, that takes us to the 30th November, very close to the end of administration.

If the re-financing isnt done before the end of November, your on a very sticky wicket arnt you?  Also

Be honest...when you say the solicitor has only 4 people wishing to resolve their contract, its not true.....they have 4 people who have paid to resolve their contracts....others are waiting to see the admin outcome...then you will have a true picture of the ones wanting to resolve...........you are distorting the facts

And you have the means to access the facts, eh.still you distort

Why....you puzzle me