Hi All,
I am not a purchaser at this development.
The solutions available to purchasers of Evemarina products are very long expensive drawn out legal matters for new communities to embark on.
We had an 18 month delay for the first occupation licence (FOL). You will need the FOL to get connection contracts for electricity, gas, and water meters. In our case the delays quoted in obtaining the FOL were due to flooding because of heavy rain delaying construction work, pumping out the foundations and underground car park. Electricity suppliers not completing work at specified dates. Quarry strikes. Delays by Town Hall inspectors for signing off the FOL. Delays by the Mayors office for not signing off the FOL.
Your delays for the FOL will never be the fault of Evemarina they will justify all outcomes so the option of going to court and blaming them for any delay will be difficult. Individual compensation claims have been entered into court by some owners here and they have won the case! No compensation was awarded by the judge or any legal costs.
The FOL will not be granted if the infrastructure is not completed and signed off.
Evemarina has handed over our new community La Hacienda de Mijas Golf with many defects for example the swimming pool showers drainage piped back into the skimmers and returning to the swimming pool water! Our community paid for this repair so that the swimming pool could be used this is an obvious construction defect but for some strange reason was the responsibility of the community. The claim is outstanding with the numerous necessary defect repairs paid from the inadequate community funds.
As a community we were being told that defects were the responsibility of the community even before the development was handed over! For example the whole residence had rain water stains from the planters on the finishes of the facades. The facades were supposed to be finished in quality water proof paint. The whole residence is not painted at all.
Brochure incentives missing. For example a gymnasium. Totally against consumer law try telling Evemarina that. This another outstanding claim.
Non disclosed additional community charges before contract. During our first AGM for the constitution of the community it was discovered in the presented budget (our administrator was the appointment of Evemarina) that our community had to pay 27000.00€ per year to the administrator of the golf course. This administrator has control over the golf course budget with contributions from all the individual communities in the urbanization. For example similarly sized residences pay tens of thousands of euros less than we are being asked to contribute.
At this meeting we were told this would be for the provision of services, for example security guards and upkeep of access roads etc.. No services have ever been provided.
A main road passes between our development and the golf course and we are a separate entity but on the urban plan we are in the boundary of the urbinization. Later at subsequent community meetings it was decided by majority not to pay this money as no services were provided.
Demands have been made for this outstanding debt by the administrators of the golf course . A meeting has been requested by our president and administrator, we have had no response except demands for payment! Included with the demand is paper work (contract) signed by Evemarina at the notary that these payments would be made by our community when the construction was completed and handed over.
Our boundary of the construction falls within the urbanization of the golf course the ground which was previously light industrial a fabrica. So a ground rent/charge was agreed for the construction to go ahead albeit tens of thousands of euros more than the fabrica was paying.
Was this divulged to prospective purchasers by the developer. No it was not because any purchaser of these off plan properties would question the value for money that the community fee would be used for to enhance the upkeep of the community and the higher on cost for the individual in community fee.
Easy you might say! The community has even had a returned burofax from the promoter in answer to the large list of defects where they will remedy the concerns most of them in 15 days! This was last December 2007 our community has now paid for an independent professional architects report and advice from a lawyer who is competent in construction law, our president has signed the papers for the administrator to start the court proceedings for the defects to be repaired we await a hearing date which is 1 to 2 years. Embargos have been entered into court for the non payment of the community fee for empty properties still owned by the developer.
As you will be aware the building industry is in crisis and promoters/developer will seek protection from the court against creditors. Yes they can apply for this. This allows them to still function and employ people and of course make a profit. (no comment)
Lawyers give professional opinions on interpretation of the law. Judges make decisions and create precedent.
- A developer has won a court case enforcing buyers of illegal off plan properties to complete the contract even though they are under threat of demolition.
- Purchasers in another development have won a court case against a developer for a full refund of deposit plus interest. The counter claim of non completion was thrown out. The promoter has appealed the decision.
The Spanish Supreme Court is making a decision on this matter.
Individual court cases against the developer are in my opinion high risk because of the potential costs. Joint actions are a way forward before contract. You will need to be professionally advised on this particularly regarding your contract for specified completion of contract for full payment and completion to the developer once the FOL is obtained. There will be a time limit for you to pay up or lose your deposit. It is possible you have agreed to this in your contract.
Community action against the developer is a costly business especially with the current crisis in construction and the future viability of the developer. What money can a community risk for these actions?
The costs for these actions are the burden of the payers of community fees. The non payers do not contribute. The empty properties still owned by the promoter do not contribute. So the dividable cost rises with those who do contribute.
Your forthcoming budget for the year when you are handed over the community does not include any of these actions. Therefore upkeep suffers as a consequence.
All community matters at an AGM or EGM are approved by majority decisions voted by the owners. Small annual inflationary increases of 2.5% for community fees are difficult to get voted through by majority.
The politics and finances of the community and the importance of the work of a good president and administrator are unimaginably difficult.
I would strongly recommend that your future president takes out indemnity insurance paid for by the community.
Philip