RETRIEVING OFF PLAN DEPOSIT FROM SABADELL BANK

Expatica - Health
Post reply   Start new thread
New - Old :: Old - New

Pages: 1 |

Almanzora Country Club forum threads
The Comments
14 Jun 2018 5:36 PM by Gurker69 Star rating. 5 forum posts Send private message

Hi everyone,

                    Anyone on this site trying to recover monies from Sabadell Bank, and using solicitor Pilar Alonso  for this

purpose? . I'm attempting to get some update on what the present situation is but finding it difficult .  The last update was 

last year stating that it would be a lengthy process!!!

                                                                                   Gurker 

       

      

 

                     




Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

29 Aug 2022 10:35 AM by danaswift637 Star rating. 3 forum posts Send private message

I am following the same




Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

27 Sep 2022 7:09 PM by Gurker69 Star rating. 5 forum posts Send private message

For anyone who is in the process of attempting to recover their off plan deposit from Sabadell Bank here is some

update information on the matter.  My case is due to be heard in a Spanish Court this Thursday, 29th September 

2022. I would rather not mention my legal representative at this point, but I was staggered to receive an email a few

weeks ago from them stating that I had to prove to the Judge in the case that I was not a property investor rather 

than just as in my case a retired person just wanting to retire in the sun. The legal team representing me were 

requesting that a family member or friend would be needed to attend the Court in Spain and give evidence that i

was buying the property on Almanzora Country Club purely as a normal buyer rather than me being a property 

investor.As you can appreciate I stated that if the Sabadell Bank legal representatives thought I was a property 

investors, surely it was for them to prove that, not for me to prove I wasn't. The idea of someone attending a 

Spanish Court on my behalf to give evidence to prove this I thought was ludicrous in the extreme and I made it

clearly known that this would not happen. I now await what happens on the 29th September, but after the latest 

Email my faith in the Spanish Justice system has taken a severe knock !!!!




Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

30 Sep 2022 2:19 PM by ads Star rating. 4134 forum posts Send private message

It would appear that the Spanish Bank(s) are trying once again to be as obstructive as possible and using every ploy at their disposal to delay justice, seeking and finding procedures that proliferate delays. 

If the truth be known these sort of ploys have been ongoing for YEARS. 

The reality is that the justice system in Spain is highly procedural and as such has sadly been open to abuse of this nature at various stages in the judicial system.

What has happened is that it took years for supportive judicial doctrine to be established in favour of claimants against the Banks (and during that time the Banks endeavoured at every opportunity to delay by proliferating appeals against supportive rulings in full knowledge that the justice system would be overloaded). 

In some cases they submitted appeals to the Supreme Court and withdrew their appeals at the last moment in full knowledge that this would delay the advancement of doctrine which would have benefitted claimants still awaiting justice.

And then once doctrine had been achieved they tried to undermine the supportive rulings by refusing to abide by "voluntary payments" to the courts which resulted in yet more procedural delays relating to enforcement processes. 

Then under the complexities of return of awarded costs and interest they even on occasions have been known to forward awarded monies to the court but purposefully fail to submit the necessary administrative detail which required the court administrators to request monies be returned to the Bank and " corrected" with the necessary accompanying detail. YET AGAIN MORE DELAYS! 

But sadly during all of this time there appear to have been little EFFECTIVE recording and monitoring processes to highlight the pattern of this Banking abuse.

Sadly it would appear that legal firms are either struggling to deal with these uncomfortable realities or they just accept the status quo and consider it has become par for the course. 

But now more worryingly a more recent challenge relating to "investor status" as described by Gurker is now being exploited by the Banks as they attempt to yet again undermine all judicial progress made to date. 

In effect they appear to be generalising that individual claimants are " property investors"..... inferring presumably that their intent was to exploit the property market place in some way. As Gurker rightly pointed out it is for the Banks to substantiate their claim with evidence as opposed to subject the innocent claimant to what can only be described as yet more bad intent to subject the claimant to exhorbitant expense and unnecessary stress to defend against UNSUBSTANTIATED  claims. 

 

To put not too fine a point on it, the failure to provide adequate reporting and monitoring processes to ensure justice prevails and is enforced in a timely manner without purposeful intent to delay, appears to have led to a set of circumstances where the Banks have been allowed ( some might suggest incentivised) to run roughshod over the Spanish justice system, which in effect has been tantamount to UNDERMINING THE RULE OF LAW. 

 

We all surely deserve better in this day and age.

Perhaps all claimants struggling under this scenario should be pushing for their legal teams to ensure the facts relating to abusive behaviour of this nature that compromises the rule of law ARE FULLY RECORDED TO THE GENERAL COUNCIL where applicable, so that judicial directives can be established to ensure that Bank evidence must be CONSISTENTLY made available and substantiated at point of claim re investor status, otherwise it makes a complete mockery of effective justice.

Likewise for instances where actions on the part of Banks that have been demonstrated to purposefully compromise timely justice are actively and effectively disincentivised via judicial directives to ensure that adequate compensation in the form of judicial awards of ADDITIONAL interest and costs to the claimant are truly reflective of Banks  purposeful bad intent culminating in serious attempts to undermine the rule of law. 

 

 


This message was last edited by ads on 9/30/2022.


Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

04 Oct 2022 11:54 AM by mariadecastro Star rating in Algeciras (Cadiz). 9419 forum posts Send private message

mariadecastro´s avatar

Indeed, the issue of the consideration of Law 57/68 purchases as investment purchases is one of the points that, in our opinion, is not yet clear in the Supreme Court Jurisprudence.

The most important turning point in this area has been when the Supreme Court has established Case Law which  affirms:

From Case Law of this court it is clear that the application of Law 57/1968 depends, in accordance with its art. 1, not on the consumer status of the buyer, but on the fact that the dwelling in question is intended as a domicile or family residence (judgments 360/2016, of June 1, and 420/2016, of June 24), a purpose that must be alleged in the
 and, in the case of a commercial company as in this case, it must be duly proven ( judgments 360/2016, of June 1, and 420/2016, of June 420/2016).(Judgments 360/2016, of June 1, 40/2016, of June 24, 675/2016, of November 16, and 161/2018, of March 21, among others).

This recent Case Law leaves all the claimants of the law 57/68 outside the protection of Consumer Law which states that the profit motive of an operation is not outside its scope as long as it is not done habitually, as part of the professional or commercial traffic of the individual

Thus, for instance: a doctor who buys three houses in order to keep one and re-sell two and thus pay for the first one, would fall within the scope of Consumer Law, because this is not the doctor's usual professional or commercial traffic.

If we limit the application of Law 57/68 to purchasers of first or second homes, then the above case would fall outside the protection of the Law.

We wrote an article about this some time ago:

https://www.legaltoday.com/practica-juridica/derecho-civil/civil/debe-interpretarse-la-ley-5768-a-la-luz-del-derecho-de-consumo-europeo-2020-01-17/

Regarding the burden of proof of investor status: It is the Bank's unless there is  some index/evidence of the investor nature of the buyer (buying two or more homes,  company as buyer) in which case, the burden of proof is reversed, being then on  the buyer/claimant

 



_______________________

Maria L. de Castro, JD, MA

Lawyer

Director www.costaluzlawyers.es

El blog de Maria


Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

04 Oct 2022 2:59 PM by ads Star rating. 4134 forum posts Send private message

Thank you Maria.

To summarise as this is a little complex, is it correct to say therefore that those who only purchased one home and are making a rightful claim against the Bank under Ley57/68 should NOT have to prove their investor status, but it is for the Bank to substantiate evidence if they suggest otherwise?

And for those with more than one property purchase the Bank have the right under Ley 57/68 to request the purchaser to prove their investor status?

In terms of consumer law only those who have commercial interests re multiple property purchases will not be protected by Ley57/68 law?

Or perhaps I have misunderstood?




Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

04 Oct 2022 5:22 PM by Gurker69 Star rating. 5 forum posts Send private message

For those interested in updates on the recovery of off plan deposits from Sabadell Bank, heard today via my legal

representative that as a result of the court hearing today, the matter has now been adjourned to Wednesday 11th

May 2023, for its final hearing !!! ( The wheels of the Spanish legal system turn painfully slow )




Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

04 Oct 2022 6:13 PM by mariadecastro Star rating in Algeciras (Cadiz). 9419 forum posts Send private message

mariadecastro´s avatar

Anne:

Answering you below in bold green:

Thank you Maria.

To summarise as this is a little complex, is it correct to say therefore that those who only purchased one home and are making a rightful claim against the Bank under Ley57/68 should NOT have to prove their investor   first or second residency status , but it is for the Bank to substantiate evidence if they suggest otherwise? Correct, unless the buyer is a company or it is buying a unit classified as touristic, in which case, the residential character needs to be proved even if just one unit is being bought. Anyhow, there are always many particularities in each case for which a deep and profuse knowledge of Case Law is of the essence.

And for those with more than one property purchase the Bank have the right under Ley 57/68 to request the purchaser to prove their investor status? In those cases,  from the beginning, from the moment of filing the lawsuit, the arguments proving the residential status of the unit, need to be present.

In terms of consumer law only those who have commercial interests re multiple property purchases will not be protected by Ley57/68 law? Yes, correct. European and national Consumer law undertsands that an act is not under consumer protection if it is part of a professional or commercial trade.

Or perhaps I have misunderstood? You quite understood it in full!



_______________________

Maria L. de Castro, JD, MA

Lawyer

Director www.costaluzlawyers.es

El blog de Maria


Like 1

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

04 Oct 2022 6:29 PM by ads Star rating. 4134 forum posts Send private message

Just out of interest did you have to get someone else to appear at the hearing as originally suggested by your legal team Gurker? Or was that completely abandoned?

 What reason did the judge give for the adjournment? Are they waiting for further evidence to be submitted by the Bank or was there some other reason for a further delay?

Have you been kept informed of such detail?

Good luck.

 

 




Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

04 Oct 2022 8:10 PM by Gurker69 Star rating. 5 forum posts Send private message

Hi, no I left my legal advisor in no doubt that no one on my behalf would be attending a Spanish Court to give evidence,

I heard nothing back on this matter. The email I received today informed me a Court hearing in a place called Totana

was held today in which all the evidence and documentation was admitted by the presiding judge. My legal representatives requested that Sabadell Bank provide our legal team with all their accounts documentation covering

all the clients involved. The case was adjourned for all this information to be gathered from Sabadell Bank and be

avaiilable for the judges information on a date referred to as the " Final Hearing " , given as 9-15am 11th May 2023.

My legal advisor Marta Hughes works for a Spanish Firm of Solicitors based in Bolton ( 01204 328460 ) called

Alonso & Haro, who in turn has been liaising with her Spanish based colleagues who attended court. My legal 

represenative commented  that proceeding today went " quite well "

 

I can't give you any other information other than what I've related. Marta Hughes based  at their Bolton office may

be willing to give you further advice on the matter . Hope this helps !

 




Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

05 Oct 2022 5:33 PM by ads Star rating. 4134 forum posts Send private message

Well done Gurker for standing your ground.

 

This information from both yourself and Maria will hopefully help those struggling to comprehend the ongoing realities and complexities associated with Ley57/68 claims and investor status, So thank you for that.
 

Is it correct to say that this is only at the hearing stage where the judge decides if there is a case to answer based upon the evidence provided? Are you still going to be subjected to first instance Court if you have no Bank Guarantees?

A question for Maria.

If the Bank do not provide the required evidence as requested and in sufficient detail, what options are open to the judge? 

 

 

 




Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

28 Nov 2023 3:10 AM by seekborrow Star rating. 7 forum posts Send private message

Here are some resources for anyone trying to get their off-plan deposit back from Sabadell Bank. Current details on the issue.  This Thursday, September 29, is when a Spanish court is scheduled to hear my case 2022. I was shocked to get an email a few days ago, however I would like not to discuss my legal counsel at this time. Weeks prior, they informed me that I needed to demonstrate to the judge that I wasn't a real estate investor but Rather than merely someone who wants to retire in the sun, like in my situation. 

free games
 




Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

28 Nov 2023 9:21 AM by ads Star rating. 4134 forum posts Send private message

The justice system has also been beset by many delays due to strikes which have accentuated the problems for timely judicial resolutions and retrieval of monies. 
 

https://www.eyeonspain.com/forums/posts-long-25152.aspx

Over the years there also appears to have been a postcode lottery with regard to major delays to achieving judicial resolutions as some regions are impacted more than others. For years we have been highlighting the problems beset by lack of  resources to ensure that the Spanish Justice system is truly fit for purpose and meets the criteria relating to the rule of law.


But also of GREAT concern has been the court administration which appears to be "holding" monies retrieved from the Banks in the interim following successful claims, which is now exacerbating actual retrieval of monies owed, thus further compromising innocent claimants. And it would appear that no further interest on these monies  can be claimed from the court during these interim time periods which in some cases can be YEARS.

Maria, where does the rule of law stand in this regard?
What legal rights exist to protect claimants and ensure that the COURTS are bound by fair time constraints to return of monies where monies have ALREADY been retrieved from the Banks into the courts safekeeping?

Is this now a growing problem and are good legal teams proactively striving for greater protection of their clients interests and protection of the Spanish Justice system as a whole for that matter, by calling upon their professional legal bodies at the highest levels to effect change and make the courts better accountable?

Or are there other extenuating circumstances that clients are unaware of?

 

 

 


This message was last edited by ads on 11/28/2023.


Like 0

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

Pages: 1 |
Post reply   Start new thread


Previous Threads

Case against the bank - 2 posts
ACC going to court - 4 posts
Reclaims for the refund of deposits paid off plan. New Success in Almanzora Country Club. - 0 posts
Clarification Required - 4 posts
Yayyy All our money returned with interest and costs - thank you White & Baos - 7 posts
Fuster - 5 posts
attend court - 4 posts
Question re interest payments Ley 57/68 and SC rulings plus question on AVALS - 1 posts
Anyone got lat long for ACC? - 3 posts
PARTIALLY WON CASE - 12 posts
New successes against Huma Mediterraneo - 4 posts
Money Returned! - 20 posts
Receivership payouts??? - 2 posts
HUMA ACC. GET DEPOSITS BACK WIHTOUT BANK GUARANTEE. NEW SUCCESS - 12 posts
Alonso Haro Solicitors. - 0 posts
Banks accept the latest sentences and pay back the money to those affected in Almanzora Country Club (Huma Mediterraneo) - 11 posts
New Law - 7 posts
Appeal Court of Murcia confirmed th responsability of Banco Popular to pay the money back for the purchasers at ACC - 31 posts
cam bank -almanzora country club money return via pilar alonzo - 3 posts
Case won - 7 posts
Fingers crossed everyone! - 8 posts
appeal - 1 posts
NEW SUPREME COURT RULING on 15.12.15 - 0 posts
NEW! WON CASE in FIRST INSTANCE COURT AGAINST BANCO POPULAR FOR OUR CLIENTS WHO PURCHASED OFF-PLAN PROPERTIES FROM THE DEVELOPER HUMA MEDITERRÁNEO S.L. AT ALMANZORA COUNTRY CLUB - 20 posts
NEW! WON CASE in FIRST INSTANCE COURT AGAINST BANCO POPULAR FOR OUR CLIENT WHO PURCHASED AN OFF-PLAN PROPERTY FROM THE DEVELOPER HUMA MEDITERRÁNEO S.L. AT ALMANZORA COUNTRY CLUB - 34 posts

13 posts were found:


1 |
Our Weekly Email Digest
Name:
Email:


This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More information here. x