Corvera Solicitors letter received - Breach of Contract

Hi All

We have received a Solicitors letter this morning re breach of contract for non-completion and requesting full payment to be made, if this is not done a court order is to be obtained requiring we pay the debt plus interest and costs.

Interested to know if anyone else has received anything similar, but also to inform anyone not completing the possible implications.

We will be in touch with our spanish solicitor on Monday morning as we have not had any news regarding this from them.

Clarkson.

I assume that you are in dispute with the developer and the dispute is not settled.  Proceedings in the UK cannot be issued for an unresolved  dispute in another country.  For a UK agency to obtain a court order, a legally binding decision from the overseas court must be made.  Was this letter from a UK based or foreign based solicitor?

I would also be surprised if the developer has sufficient UK resources to take legal action in the UK.  A case assessment should include consideration of each sides assets and whether they have the ability to pay costs etc.

The implications of not completing are that you should expect demands for completion to be made and that a legal battle will ensue.  You have I assume signed an agreement to purchase the property but without wishing to pry, you need to have a firm argument for not completing.

Judging by what I have just read on this forum, I imagine that there are several arguments that could be adopted although you would need the services of your Spanish lawyer to take this on.

Best of luck to you.

Hi Clarkson,

The letter you have received is a debt collection letter from a solicitors in the UK. I have also received emails regarding this issue from buyers seeking advice and who are not part of the Legal Action Group. Some people have also received telephone calls from a debt collection company. Please note:

1)   Any case concerning a Spanish legal issue needs to be fought in a Spanish Court. The debt collection letter is invalid as no Spanish Court has issued a judgement stating that there is a debt to collect. Please seek advice from your current solicitor.

2) In the UK if a debt collection agency contacts you, you can specifically ask them to only contact your solicitor who can advise you of the validity of their demands. The debt collection agency cannot harass you or insist on speaking to you - if they do so they can be reported to the relevant authorities.  

Many thanks for your post Lawyerman. I gather that most solicitors now taking action against Corvera are doing so on the grounds of non-compleion of advertised facilities eg 5 star hotel, 'Living the Dream' pamphlet etc etc. As far as I am concerned, this is just another example of the type of tactics that Corvera uses and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Regards,

Ash 

i would have thought using a debt collection company prior to court procedings and a judgement being issued smacks of underhand bullying tactics and desperation on the part of calidona .

afterall nothing is enforcable untill a court case has been decided , i would suspect these are no win - no fee debt collecters in which case that is likely to be a cost cutting exercise by calidona .

Most, if not all, companies use DCA's before proceeding with any legal action. The charges are usally a small percentage of the collection so - I guess Calidona are trying to recoup some debt the easy way before they initiate any legal recovery, which of course will attract higher costs.

they cannot use legal recovery untill a court judgement has been given , you cannot legally persue for a debt that has not been proven , these debt collection companies are nothing more than high pressure tele sales operations with no legal course of action .

 Yes, using an aggressive debt collection agency better than resorting to Court or negotiation settlement talks about high weakness! This is very simple an obvious.

I wish there was a solution accepetable for all parties involved, with full respect towards consumers rights which has been so ignored during the high sales period.

I am sure than buyers, developer and Bank should reach a valid agreement through a due and respectful dialogue. No fear making, no threat: that always make things worse.

With all my respect to everyone involved,

Maria

I have just had an interesting chat with one of the Solicitors who sent out these letters.  When I mentioned that there was no Hotel built and no sign of it .  His reply:

The De Vere Hotel, yes, building of the hotel was nearly finished and would be very soon

He also said:

PGA status was going through anytime now

All facilities were in place

really I said, thats news to me. When I asked him where he had got that information from, well you can guess his reply !!

E

I think they must be referring to the little model village in the showroom as I don't believe that this organisation would ever mislead anyone in this way.

1) May 2006:  Signed a contract for an off plan property, estimated delivery date 18 months from the building permit.

2) January 2010: No building permit, no brick.

3) I have no interest in that purchase ... can I cancel?

According to the Civil Law doctrines of "loss of the thing due" we can affirm that the delay of the start of construction for a period of several months, without good cause and non expressly allowed by the consumer, gives ground for contract cancellation.

According to Sentence of the Provincial Appeal Court of Valencia dated September 2009, Case law has broadly held and established that a situation of abnormality, resistance or excessive delay opens the gate to cancellation. As these irregularities break the interest in the contract originally agreed, or  turn it into useless and even harmful, frustrating  the contract's inherent economic order  which is  within the cause, breaking the mutual  contract good faith”  ( FRAGRANTE FIDEM, FIDES NON EST SERVANDA”.



The Supreme Court, as it is mentioned in the referred Sentence of Valencia "has set that time deadlines as an essential term of the contract (STS 15/11/1977, 27/5/1987, 13/3/1987, 6/6/1991, 16 -3-2009).

Continuing the Valencian Court saying that "it is irrefutable under the rules of logic and sound criticism, that the inordinate delay in fulfilling the contract defeats the purpose, because the future purchasers can not be left indefinitely to the developer´s will, being this also expressly prohibited by article 1256 of the Civil Code, which says: “The validity and enforceability of contracts can not be left to one party"

Similarly, the Supreme Court ruled in 1998 (14 November), that "The seller is not an arbitrator who can decide when a contract needs to be fulfilled, depending on his interests or conveniences, provided the buyer complies its obligations”

How is this all covered by Real Estate Consumer Law?

Firstly and again: Articles 2 and 3 of Law 57/68 so forgotten and much-criticized at times, to whose I make now a reminder of their last rationale, or ratio iuris: the protection of large sums of money advanced by the client to the developer for the construction of a very important good as housing is “These two articles empower the consumer to decide between extending timeframes or cancelling the contract if the house has not been started or completed on time”.

Considerations on the speculation on real estate unit and the economic crisis lying on developers can not languish the protective force of these provisions from 1968.  Being this Law a great tool for a sustainable urban development (so much being on discussion these days).

Secondly:  The model contract (stipulation first) signed under the roof of the National Consumer Institute in 2001 to buy / sell off plan and its General Conditions (General condition Six A, Second Paragraph). They ask for clarity on the start date and delivery date.

Thirdly: Under the present legislative decree on Consumers rights this uncertainty in the start and delivery dates are considered “abusive2 terms (Article 85.1).

In my opinion the declaration of the abusive character of a clause which puts beginning or finishing under indetermination, as these timeframes are deemed essential by the Supreme Court, should lead to the possibility for the consumer to the reduction in the price or termination of the contract.

Saying this under the doctrines on object contract loss, essential terms and cancellation, Articles 83 and 85 of Consumers Act Integration of contract clauses and article 2 and 3 of Act 57/68.

Winter Surf Day. Gijón. Spain by Todo-Juanjo at Flickr.com

I bought into a 5* Country club, with sports facilities, Horse riding, mountain bikes etc. not just PGA golf status and the Hotel.  None of which exist.  I  think these dept collection people perhaps need to go and look at the site for themselves and see why no one is completing.  Even they would then have to agree that we were right.  We have all been fed a lie with no excuse for all not being fully completed in due time BEFORE the recession hit.  Which makes me think  that it was perhaps never intended to be completed and just a lovely model in the sales room to con us all.

As far as I am concerned even if they produce a hotel now it still isn't what I agreed to sign up for.  Funny though I haven't heard a peep out of Corvera or the debt collection company - I wonder if they are just picking on certain people?  Anyone else think this?

 Take a look at the development Gran Mirador golf and country club in Alicante. A development of apartments, town houses and villas.

To include a 18 hole golf course, country club , horse riding , spa etc etc. This development was completed 2 years ago. 

Its just a load of aptmnts villas and town houses in the middle of know where.

Hi Milkey4,

Took your advice and clicked on to Gran Mirador. See below section taken from the forum.. sounds like a great place ????

Just returned home after 3 weeks at Gran Mirador and with the help of other owners on holiday/living at Gran Mirador the pool is looking good along with the gardens etc. Together we all worked to clear the dead plants, purchase chemicals to clean the pool and repair the watering system. Mario would not do anything to help. The Norwegian community who have purchased approx 12 apartments have a mini community set up and they have paid towards the upkeep of the failing electricity system. We change the locks on the electrical supply room and the pool pump house as Mario was medling with equipment stating things were broken when he had only turned them off.

Some arguments and explanation in order to bring tranquility to those who have received la latter from Lawdit solicitors regarding Corvera Golf and Country Club:

1. - There is no debt.  Till a Judge passes a decision declaring who is the debtor.   

2.- Claims against Corvera are not merely based on the delay but on the lack of facilities which were advertised as part of the product in publicity and have not been provided. To this date it is uncertain which of them and when they will be provided. There is enough Law and Case Law to defend that the breach is by their side.

3.-The Court decisions sent by Lawdit are focused on the fact of delay, none of them refered to the non-existence of elements publicited. They are from First Instance Courts and therefore do not make Case Law. 

4.-  There  are many ongoing claims against Corvera based on lack of advertised facilities and lack of starting and finishing dates  which have not yet been solved by Courts.

I know that Maria is correct in what she says that the money cannot be collected unless the buyer is taken to Court and the developer first gets a judgement in Spainand then  this can potentially enforced anywhere in Europe against any assets and they seem to be using UK debt collection agencies

I know that a number of developers first start by checking what assets the Uk buyer has before even starting any action

There is however one question that people seem to want answered, and so far the lawyers are reluctant to answer, based on the case that is being presented regarding the lack of facilities, and that you have seen and I believe are representing some buyers. what is the percentage chance of you winning the case against Corvera 

When are the lawyers expecting the first case, based on this argument to reach Court and  ss there is not a no win no fee option for buyers I believe that the answer would help people

I also believe that they may be about announce the dates for the equestrian centre and noticed that onsite Monday a horse box and some other items had been delivered so, what happens if when the case reaches court the facilities are under construction  as with waht happened at Polris I believe when a similar case wnet to Court

Callidonia have also now located the legal team onsite

Apologies to all as I am not a buyer but this is only what people have been asking me and I am not a lawyer so couldn´t answer 

Dear Inspectahome:

The case for lack of advertised facilities is very strong.  I do hope the case will be solved before getting to the Supreme Court ( first and appeal judicial stage), but of course due to the clearlty and uncontested doctrine of the supreme Court regardng linking character of publicity I am 100% sure of a success in Madrid.

Of course a settlement where consumers can have their rights compensated ( price reduction) and clearity on what amenities are finally being build, with status of licenses will be a way of solveing the problem sooner and for the benefit of many. I am sure many people wolc consider completion if they were restored on their rights as consumers.

We do hope to have a Court Decission based on the lack of advertised facilities within some months, hopefully before the summer time, but Courts are being very , extraordinary slow.

I certainly wish and am sure we will be able to reach a solution for the benefit of all involved.

Best regards,

Maria L. de Castro

Thank you Maria for your normal prompt response

Am I right in sayomg that if you have to go to the Supreme Court in Madrid that this will be a very expensive action and that, after the initial case locally that it will take a number of years to reach court and by that time the economic situation may have chenged and the facilities developed

What about the clas action brought against Polariis at Hacienda Requelme for the lack of facilities that the buyers lost in the Murcia Courts des this effect things

I also think that the vast majority of people do´t want compensation but they want refunds and to cancel their contracts

hart  , well said here we go again vested interest , roy do the people you purport to represent not have access to a lawyer or this forum as you appear to be speaking for a lot of people ?????  or is it a vested interest in scare mongering and trying to frighten people with the costs involved ?

i tend to agree with hart you are not a buyer on either resort and have a vested interest in people completing , perhaps this is not the place to air your concerns on behalf of other people .

please do not take this as a personal issue as it clearly is not as these opinions have been voiced many times in the past .

Was very surprised to learn some time ago that a portakabin constituted a commercial centre - even more surprised to hear that a horsebox constitutes an equestrian centre!  No need to import a donkey....