Am I liable for my husbands debt in spain?

Hi there,

If you are using Andersons to represent your case against Huma, and IF you have decided to go through the courts, would you mind sending me a PM  - no names necessary if you're not comfortable with that, but we are trying to find out the following info from as many clients as possible:

1)     The amount you've paid Huma so far  (please state deposit plus installment separately)

2)     The amount Andersons have quoted you for taking your case through the courts

3)     The amount Andersons have quoted you for settling on your behalf, if you have chosen NOT

         to take your case to court

4)     The amount Andersons have told you that you are entitled to (compensation, interest etc)

5)     Have you at any point, been offered some kind of reduction of fees by Andersons?

Please don't post info on here  - if you want to send me a PM that's fine.

I should explain that  several of us (who post on Viva) are trying to ensure that we are all on the same page in regard to this matter.

Thanks

H

 If you're not happy with Andersons, and you think that they're ripping you off, then sack them.  Haven't you had enough problems with Huma, why stick with a doggy solicitor?

Hi Mick

No offence, but if you're not with Andersons then this doesn't apply to you.

I have not said in my post that anyone is unhappy with Andersons.

Good luck, whatever you have decided to do

Fair enough, HeyHo, just wondering why anyone who had the vaguest feeling that their solicitor was ripping them off, was still with that solicitor.  You mention that you are 'from' viva, but you haven't posted your request for info. on there - any particular reason why not?

Hi Mick

Seeing as you seem so concerned (!) and have gone to the trouble of logging onto Viva - I am in contact with quite a few posters on there, by PM.  I am not part of /in any way connected with, Viva - apologies if my post led you to suppose otherwise. 

There is nothing sinister in my request - if people want to contact me, they will.  If they prefer not to, that's their choice.   I do hope that clears things up for you.

You seem to be getting your knickers in a twist about my post, and are coming across as fairly agressive (or so it seems to me) 

Apologies if I am misinterpreting your posts.

Good luck, whatever you decide to do

Folks,

Have edited my original post, so that there's no confusion.

I do not work for, or represent the Viva site in any way - I am merely a humble poster on that site - and I have purchased at the ACC!

Thanks for the messages so far, I will get back to you both tomorrow.

Posted by MickMeMate on "Don't Shoot the Messenger" thread  17/10/07

"Do any of you, that have info. from other sources, know how Andersons got on with their meeting with Huma yesterday?

Apparently, they are representing 30+ clients.  It must have been a very long meeting - imagine trying to do 30+ different deals with someone who is very reluctant to deal.

They are charging 3900€ per client, and are asking for a 50% deposit. 

For all you who want your money back, who do not want to wait, and are getting no joy from your present solicitors, I suggest you contact:

Miguel Gonxalex Rayer
Anderson & Asociados Abogados
Roquetas De Mar
Telephone; 0034 950 321 787
Fax; 0034 950 319 440
e-mail mgonzalez@andersonabogados.com

Me, I'm sticking with ACC

MickMeMate then posted on this thread, 23/10/07:

"If you're not happy with Andersons, and you think that they're ripping you off, then sack them.  Haven't you had enough problems with Huma, why stick with a doggy solicitor?"

                                                                   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Mick, I presume you meant to say "dodgy" solicitor - If that's how you feel, why are you giving out their contact details?

It does seem a little odd.

HeyHo, now who's being aggressive?

It was you who suggested that there was something wrong with the way Andersons are treating their clients, was it not?  I would imagine that Andersons are a very professional firm who put their client's interest foremost.

Mick

BTW, I see that your original post is doing the rounds of the other forums.

Sorry if I seem aggressive - it's just that I am confused as to your position re: Andersons

You are recommending them in your first post.........and calling them "dodgy" in your second post

I don't have a problem with you copying and pasting my posts onto other forum sites, I understand on Viva, people regard you as a plant for Huma, or an agent of Huma.  I've just been on Viva and read some of your posts, and you seem to want to create discord, which quite frankly is pointless and destructive (if you have genuinely purchased a plot on ACC)

I am mystified as to why my intitial post provoked such aggression from you, especially as you are not pulling out of ACC  - you say that you are happy with Huma and are sticking with ACC, so I wish you luck with that

I would add (to anybody who is pulling out of ACC)  Please do not post anything publicly on these forums which you do not wish Huma to know about.  According to Andersons, Huma are watching the forums, in order to gauge people's feelings, and of course to gain some idea of what people are willing to settle for (compensation wise)

I'm sure we've all suspected Huma of watching the forums for quite some time now - so let's be wary of what we post, eh?

If you read my post again you will see that I never called Andersons dodgy, I merely questioned why you were still using them if you had the slightest inclination that they weren't completely above board.

I didn't copy your posts onto Viva (I have never, and would never, post on that forum), it was another member (reidpj).   Who certainly doesn't think highly of Andersons and would certainly not recommend them (check out the forum on almanzorarentals).

Mick

I think many people on Viva are assuming that MickMeMate and Reidpj are one and the same.  There's no law against it, so don't feel embarrassed.  Of course if you are and Reid are not one and the same, then hopefully Reid will post on Viva and put people straight.

You asked me why I was sticking with a "doggy" lawyer - I assumed you meant dodgy

Perhaps you know something I don't - I didn't see any canines in suits at their office, when I met with them recently.......

As for not being impressed with them, they are (to my knowledge) one of the few law practices to actually get more than just people's original investment  returned to them - which is why  so many people from Viva and other forums are using Andersons to represent them against Huma.

As your previous post recommended Andersons,  may I ask why you now call them doggy/dodgy?  I kind of assumed that you knew someone who had had a positive outcome with Andersons -

otherwise, why on earth  would you advise people to contact Andersons, you even provided their contact details!

As I have said before(!) Good luck with whatever you choose to do in regards to Huma.

Firstly,  I would like to apologise to everyone on this forum for making a spelling mistake .  I will say 3 Our Fathers, and 5 Hail Marys - now can we leave it?

I think that my previous posts answer all you questions.

Could you please just answer one question?  If you haven't a problem with Andersons,  why the original post? 

reidpj   Mick

Mick,

None of your previous posts have answered my question.

Firstly, you recommend a solicitor, and then you call that same solicitor dodgy - I think anyone with half a brain would wonder why you would do that.  You still haven't explained why you did just that.

You seem intent on making much of your assumption that people are unhappy with Andersons - is it not natural for people who are sharing the same legal representation to ensure that they are in contact with one another?  If you were being represented by a solicitor, wouldn't you prefer to be in contact with other clients, if it was a "class action" type of situation? 

Information/ knowledge is power, and the more of us that  are in communication with eachother, the better.

The more frequently that genuine posters engage in these petty arguments,  the more Huma will be laughing at us, which is the main reason that I won't be responding to your next post - the second reason is that this is fast degenerating into a "tit for tat" thread, which was not my intention.

Remember, people (whether they are staying with ACC, or pulling out) are jittery enough, without you or others trying to cause unrest and trouble where there is none.

I think it's best if we leave it there, however I do genuinely wish you all the best, whatever you choose to do.

To quote your original post (before you changed it):

I should explain that several of us (from viva) are trying to ensure that we are all getting a fair deal and that we are being told the same thing.

Now if you were completely happy with Andersons, why would you post the above?  I don't blame you for not trusting Spanish solicitors - I don't.

Anyway, I don't expect an answer for the above (why break a habit? ), and I also wish you all the best.

Mick

p.s.  I would be a little suspicious of dunedin's motives on viva.  The going rate for referrals to solicitors is 10%, so 40 clients paying 3900€ each x 10% = 15600€ - nice work if you can get it

Phew!  What a thread!

Mick you seem to enjoy making trouble, you little devil........I am a long standing member on here and on Viva - I can tell you Dunedin is not on any commission system, his/her dealings with Andersons are not even related to Huma.    He does however know for a fact that Andersons have won several out of court settlements - all with interest, compensation etc.  He has been nothing but helpful to many on that thread as far as I can see. 

As for your question - Heyho answered it in the post - why shouldn't we all communicate with eachother, even if it's to check that Andersons are applying the same fee structure.  I think we Brits are suspicious of everything to do with the Spanish legal system, aren't we?  After what Huma have done to us, I think it's the only way to go - question everyone who you give money to!

As for you Micky, don't think  you have explained why in one breath you're recommending Andersons, and then contradicting yourself in the next and calling them dodgy.

Anyway, not here to get into an argument with anyone (before the fur starts fly!)

As I said a few days ago on the "Dont shoot the messenger thread", I was waiting to see what happened with my sister's case.

She is represented by Andersons, and after much deliberation, I've decided to join her.  I don't know if they are the best law firm in Spain (I've never had to use one before, and hope to God I'll never have to again)  but they've certainly got a large number of clients who are claiming from Huma, which makes me feel a lot  more positive about things, especially after my last solicitor who could barely be bothered to answer my emails.

Heyho, I'll send you a private message with the info you requested, and would request the same info in return. I'm also on Viva, but haven't received a message from you about this, unless you use another name, in which case you've already got mine and my sisters info  

I would agree that we don't need to be arguing with eachother about this, as it's not us that have caused this problem in the first place -

It is of course HUMA

Val

I posted the following:

If you're not happy with Andersons, and you think that they're ripping you off, then sack them.  Haven't you had enough problems with Huma, why stick with a doggy solicitor?

Now, anyone with an open mind, could see that I was asking why HeyHo was sticking with Andersons, if she though that they were acting in an inappropriate way.  I was not myself calling them dodgy.  But of course you are free to interpret what I wrote literally, in which case I did call them dodgy.

But, if we are taking what is written literally - when did I actually recommend Andersons?  All I actually did was to post their details, I never recommended them.  So, to answer your question - I didn't recommend Andersons in one breath and then contradict myself in another.

Do you, actually, have the details, or do you know of anyone personally, who Andersons have helped to get interest and compensation (I'll take your word for it if you post that you have),  or are going on what someone (who has nothing to do with ACC) has written on a forum?  I mean, if I was to post that my solicitor had arranged interest and compensation for x number of clients, would you send them your Power of Atorney, and 2000€ ?  That's what 40+ people have done so far with Andersons.

Mick,

I'm not here to get involved in who said what - that's my impression of things, that you recommended a particular solicitor,  and then called em dodgy.

I totally agree with the point that Heyho made about sharing information - I am with Andersons and don't trust them 100% - I no longer trust anyone involved in Spanish property or law -  but I trust them more than my last lawyer  and have checked their background out.  They seem to be a reputable law firm as far as I can tell.  And thinking about it, I have never trusted any lawyer I've dealt with in the UK 100%!  I must just be very sceptical.  So, yes, I'm happy to tell a fellow client what I've paid (to Huma and Andersons) if I'm paying more, then I will ask Andersons why, and maybe there will be a reasonable explanation.  They will also know that as clients are in contact with eachother, their  charges have to be 100% accurate for each client.

I have received pms from several people who say they have settled out of court and have received interest and compensation.  Are they lying?  What would be their motive?  If someone was posting on behalf of Huma, they would say they'd got nothing back.

I've also had pms on viva from people who say they've taken it through the UK courts- suing the uk branch of the company who introduced them to ACC/Huma.  I don't know if these people are lying or not, and I guess I never will.

So I'm as sure as I can be - let's face it, you have to trust someone at some point.

If I honestly thought that the next deadline for re-starting building that Huma are talking about would actually happen, I would stick with it.  I personally see another year of delays at the very least, and for me personally, it's too long a time span, especially considering the state of the half built properties, that look as if they need pulling down.

I could be wrong - Let's face it, who knows what will happen?

Life's too short, and I don't think we need to be squabbling amongst eachother.