I want my house

Hi All,

I notice that now we are entering the final phase of this awfull mess, that the usual suspects are throwing mud about.  It is now time for the silent majority, who have had to suffer loads of nasty postings and abuse to have their say. Every purchaser has the right to their own opinion and decision, the important issue is will those with BG's who keep on trying to get HdT liquidated contiue to try to mislead purchasers for what appears to be their own gain?

I have read what Brian posted and the comments they were placed in reply. Why is there no comment on how some purchasers who have not got BG's were adviced and led into spending money trying to become privaledged status creditors? 

The good thing is that each of you can vote without them being able to comment or know what you have done.

Save your money, save your house, save SADM

 I WANT A POSTIVE OUTCOME FOR ALL

Tony R17 818

Tony said

I have read what Brian posted and the comments they were placed in reply. Why is there no comment on how some purchasers who have not got BG's were adviced and led into spending money trying to become privaledged status creditors? 

Tony let me explain,,,,,,,,,  as has already been said many times before any lawyer worth their salt tried to get a privileged credit  status  for their clients it would have been negligent not to as in many other administrations this has been achieved for all purchasers under  consumer protection law  .

Perhaps the question you should be asking is why it did not happen with SJ/HdT .I think you will find it had quite a lot to do with your friend Almu and her admin puppets .As for the legal costs for this there were none  it was a standard part of the procedure to register as a creditor .So pleeeease Tony stop talking crap !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ps I would love to hear from the" silent majority " and give my word if they want to post on this forum I will not post anything at all in reply to their views . MM/JA julie anne
 

This message was last edited by julie anne on 27/03/2010.

Hi All,

JA has tried to defend the bad advice that SHE SUPPORTED and cost purchasers money. I qoute ..

"Tony let me explain,,,,,,,,, as has already been said many times before any lawyer worth their salt tried to get a privileged credit status for their clients it would have been negligent not to if the lawyers as in many other administrations this has been achieved for all purchasers under consumer protection law "

 I am sorry but how crassly niave, there was very very little chance of any success and the solicitors did not undertake the actions for free. No purchasers paid for these actions, hoping to improve their position and not only did not but  were further out of pocket.

What I really noticed is JA's lack of sympathy for those who lost money trying to improve their position and perhaps she should realise that a solicitor should give you unbiaised advice on the probabilites of outcomes not just take your money.

 SAVE YOUR HOUSE,SAVE YOUR MONEY, SAVE SADM

Tony R17 18

Tony once again you are talking crap it is you who is naive. If your lawyer charged you extra for this you have been robbed  (but then you are used to being robbed and even befriend those who have robbed you )  I can assure you most lawyers did not  charge extra for this .There are other cases of developers going into admin where privileged status has been granted  .

dear JA and all,

                    Those of you with BG's are well and truly sorted your monies are secure. But you still believe in spouting the same thing get SJ liquidatted how in earth would i or anyone else without the benifit of a BG get anything out of that?

Tthe answer is I wouln't so the only ones to benift would be the minority with BG's that have already or are in the process of getting all their funds back thanks but no thanks.

So i for one will sign up to the new deal just to ptrotect mine and my families money one way or another. and remenber 65% of what was paid as deposit in sterling will still be the same at the  current exchange rate  I paid £25K that was then 42K euros and at todays exchange rate 65% of 42K  euros works out to be £27k so wether I take my house or the money I wount have lost to much either way.

So for me and my family the best thing is to sign up and work it out from there which ever i want to do

Brioanmags

I still want my House

Brianmags

I would agree with you if the 65% was going to have a bank guarantee to ensure that when San Jose go into liquidation again further down the line you would then have your money secure. However having been to SGR, the major finance company that gave out the few bank guarantees today, I asked them if they would be guaranteeing the continuation of San Jose buildings at Jumilla if the company were continuing to trade. After the Director dealing with bank guarantees had finished laughing he said that under no circumstances would they, are any other finance company give out bank guarantees to a company in administration. They arev not allowed too.

So how would your 65% of the original deposit be protected? Your increase looks great on paper but its meaningless. Its just another way of delaying liquidation by San Jose. All the legal people I've spoken to today have even expressed suprise that San Jose have contacted us direct to make an offer when they really should be going through the administrators.

So do you trust this company, I know I don't and I don't think many others including those without BG's do either just look at the Nthread where they are all voting NO!

Dave

Brianmags, I do not have a Bank Guarantee, and I want this company liquidated! When are you going to realise we are all going to end up with nothing. SARC are being led up the garden path by HdT, and I`m sure that you are doing us all a dis-service by continually spouting out  their propoganda. Do you not think HdT have deliberately picked the figure of 65% precisely because of the exchange rate? What ever way you dress it up they are doing alright out of the deal,not so us. Cheers Joanniemac

Firstly, we will all make our own decision based on the information we have at our disposal, and on what we know and believe.  I have made my decision based on my experiences, knowledge and experience of San Jose and I also have the full proposal from the courts on which to base it. 

However Brian, once again I have to question your figures and misinformation.  I may be repeating myself here, but don't want you slipping things through the back door.

£25000 converts to €42000 ONLY if you had a rate of 1.68 euros to the pound.  It has never been that high.  The highest it's been in the last four years is around 1.45.  (2007). 

65% of €42000 is €27300 (euros NOT pounds).  Convert this to GBP at todays generous rate of 1.10 gives you £24810.  Again a shortfall.

So you are either not telling the whole truth about how much you paid or maths was never your strong point. We know you want your house and you are welcome to it, but please give people information they can work with, not useless drivel.

If you want to pursuade people to do something, give them facts and useful information, let them decide for themselves.  Although I do believe you may have helped people with their decision.

Regards.

brianmags.

I would be very interested to hear your reply to Dave and redman because i really would like you to justify your opinion in an inteligent and factual reply.

Ken.

Ken as much chance a a squadron of flying pigs passing your window , Brianmags does not do intelligent or factual  

i got 1.44 euros to the pound when i purchased my tulipan and paid my deposit of £21,000 x 1.44 = €30,240

65% of €30,240 is €19656  divide by the current approx rate of 1.08 to the pound = £18,200

i for one would rather lose £2800 than everything thats why i vote yes.

Dear Kayam and redman

              thanks for the maths lesson but as i said paid £25000 so your maths comming up with a figure of £24810 as a repament is not to much of a loss £190

Thanks redman i knew that those with BG's would answer my question for me

Exchange rates change and depending on what you do with the euros €27300  is still better then

 €000000000000  /  £000000000000

is this simple enough because if they are liquidated thats what I will more than likely get back  a big fat Zero

regards Brianmags

 and I WILL VOTE YES

bm.

Thanks for replying to red but what about Daves concerns about bank guarantees still not being issued. This in my opinion is a very large stumbling block. If you voted yes and you were promised a lgitimate bg it would make a far stronger asgument in your favour. But without them i feel you are jumping out of the frying pan into the fire.

Ken.

Maybe Brianmags and Tonymal have some sort of guarantee....??

Of course it would be great news if bank guarantees were to be issued, however I think the whole point is that if the majority of people vote NO the company will be liquidated. 

If SJ/HdT is liquidated, people who want their houses won´t get them and will lose every penny.  If the company is liquidated, people who want their deposit back won´t get any money back and will lose every penny.

If SJ/HdT is liquidated, people who have voted NO and caused this and who have bank guarantees, will at least be entitled to their money back and hopefully will get it back and won´t have lost anything.

John and I have now managed to buy a property in Spain, however we cannot afford to lose our deposit as we have used most of our savings in buying our new home.  We don´t have a bank guarantee so the only possibility of getting something (rather than nothing) is to vote YES.  We cannot afford to take further legal action so this is our only chance.  Those of you with bank guarantees, please understand that you have been fortunate if you have now won your case and received a cheque.  We don´t begrudge you that, but all we ask for is a little bit of understanding of our predicament.  Yes, we may be clutching at straws, but we are clinging to the hope that we may get 65% back in 5 years´ time and can´t you see that for us 65% is better than 0%?

Good luck to all, whether you want your house, want your money back or have already had your money back!

Out of interest, I checked the Spanish version on the HdT website, and we can go to a notary in Jumilla to vote.

Sue

I don't know how it works, but my guess is if you have executed and suceeded with your Bank Guarantee, you are no longer a creditor as the creditor would then become the bank.  And therefore it suggests you wouldn't have a vote.  Also, voting No is a simple process of not turning up at the signing.  So anyone with their money back would be highly unlikely to turn up, so by default would be a no vote should they have one.

Another point is that the major creditors will be banks, including CAM bank who are owed over 9 Million by SJ, and I guess there will be many other Banks who have become major creditors in one way or another so their vote would cast more weight than ours.  Remember that for each vote cast it's the amounts owed that will be calculated not how many votes either way.

Also,  in the proposal there is no mention of Bank Guarantees, or new property prices.  They mention staged payments of 30% and 70% but of what. What's to stop them increasing the prices once the proposal is accepted.  Their repayments back to creditors is based on them not only selling the land at Calasparra etc, but by selling properties at Jumilla, and who is going to take a chance and buy here, the chances are they won't fulfill their quota and the proposal and development will fail and they will be liquidated in the future after they've squandered and laundered more of their assets and finances.

The reality is, I can go an buy a Tulipan for €71000, a Marbella for €95000 or  Azucena for less than €100000, so if I wanted to I could buy one of these at todays prices and feel like I got some of my money back.   Anything else would be a bonus.

The bottom line is nobody knows what will happen, but how much longer can you live in limbo.  Ask yourself, what have they done that's legal so far and do you think they will change?

I want an end to this and them now and thats why I voted NO.

Hi Redman

Totally agree with what you are saying. There is also the question of how purchasers are going to fund their properties. It is very difficult for non residents to be granted a mortgage in  this current climate. Do you really think the banks will be willing to lend on any properties in SADM? Everyone has to look at the bigger picture and not just make their decision on the proposal. I have voted no ,as I am not prepared to be strung along for another 5 years with the very real threat of them jumping back into Administration, just when you think you are going to get a 10% return on your money. This company have treated us all appallingly all along,  do you really think that is going to change over the next 5 years? I don`t think so. Their apology was nothing short of pathetic, after all the stress we`ve been through. Cheers Joanniemac

Has anyone seen a list of their assets & what they are supposed to be worth ?

Selling their assets now at low prices would probably leave nothing left for San Jose but may well pay out a decent sum to the creditors, which is why San Jose would be keen for everyone to agree to the proposal

Having a ball park figure for selling the assets would be helpful.

Instead all I keep hearing is, it is unlikely you will see much return.

Hi Wakemans

You have raised some valid points. Also if they are liqiudated then as a creditors we are still entitled to 100% of our deposits, which might end up returning more than the 65% HdT are offering, hence their eagerness for us all to agree to the proposal.. Cheers Joanniemac