| The Comments |
ads
I asked Antonio on Belegal what his reasons are for being so critical of Keith's petition and reading between the lines he seems convinced that Keith's petition is a way for lawyers supporting the petition to make money out of hopeless cases with regards to law 57/58. Is this sour grapes for some reason, I don't know?, but clearly Lawbird, rightly or wrongly feel the route of trying to get justice through law 57/58 is at present a waste of time, and feel the lack of won cases supports that.
Suzzane's petition he thinks is the only one without a financial motive?
As you say, what ever the situation, we need everyone to pull in one direction with this. We need legal proffesionals and the buying public to support moves to change the law or at least to make sure the law is worth while enough for lawyers to be able to advise action, while being confident of a positive result when the law is clearly breached as is so often the case.
0
Like
|
I guess that some lawyers who worked actively during the real estate boom for foreign people, mainly british and irish, through the referals gained through agents and developers will not like Keith´s petition.
I know that my words could be considered questionable as coming from a Law Firm but, as a citizen and as a lawyer, yes, we have contributed to Keith´s petition and yes, we have contributed because of the independency, transparency and honesty of Keith and because we share his approach on the whole issue.
I cannot be more clear. I am sure Keith is available to show accounts between him and me along all these years, as we also are. I am sure that he, that only one, who accuses us of being fraudulnet will not want to see them.
Cheers :)
This message was last edited by mariadecastro on 02/12/2010.
_______________________
Maria L. de Castro, JD, MA
Lawyer
Director www.costaluzlawyers.es
0
Like
|
If we are not careful this will become a divide and rule scenario which will benefit no purchaser caught up in this scenario, so my advice would be to support BOTH petitions www.bankguaranteesinspain.com and www.spanishpropertyscandalpetition.co.uk.
Keith's petition provides a very detailed questionnaire which is aimed at collating evidence not only relating to provision or non provision of BG's but also details relating to legal procedural timescales etc. If we are ever to bring all the facts together to the attention of the powers that be, whether they be in Spain, the EU, or our own government, then it's essential that everyone provide the detailed evidence, and I fail to see why any good lawyer would suggest otherwise.
0
Like
|
ads
I replied to Antonio on Belegal with the post below. I very much agree with you about the evidence that everyone should supply, and i'm still angry that Keiths fantastic efforts to do right for those so clearly wronged have been criticised so harshly. What's the alternative?, wait 'till Spain makes the changes on it own?.
Antonio
while I share your caution on trying to get justice through law 57/58 due to a historic lack of success, surely that points to something else very wrong in the system as a requirement for a BG is the law?. Why are the banks not being taken to task and punished for not providing a BG?.
As Keith’s petition provides a huge amount of evidence to support claims against the banks who haven’t provided a BG, then surely everyone on the right side of justice should be trying to get this ineffective law changed, so that it has a useful purpose!
As you said ‘there is no such thing as a free lunch’ so I would think any petition must be funded by someone at some stage if it’s ever going to have teeth.
Why is this being left for the cheated public to draw up petitions though, when lawyers have had the evidence for years?. I feel it’s about time all decent lawyers in Spain got together and spent a little of their money gained through countless cases of litigation, (mostly taken on due to the lack of regulation and hopeless laws like the BG one we are talking about) on trying to get the laws changed so that common sense regulation and punishment for the crime would go hand in hand. Although this would hugely reduce Spanish lawyers work load,I would think at least some lawyers would prefer to work on genuine cases of injustice, rather than working for most people who are merely victims of lack of regulation followed by the very poor legal/justice system many of us have been cheated by.
I don’t know the answer?, but all the victims of this system need to be heard, not through more expensive and often painfully slow litigation that often leads to nothing, even when cases are won, but through enough people pulling together and shouting loud enough not to ignored any longer by those who can make the changes!!
0
Like
|
Goodstich:
Please kindly allow me this explanation so people will not confused
There is no such " historical lack of success" regarding the action we are proposing for those who were not given Bank Guarantees or Insurance policies when they bought off plan.
There is a good number of Court decissions to back the action and most importantly there is a Law with a very clear Preamble and provisions to br brought to Courts for the defense of those who needs the defense.
As an addittion, we also encourage people to add Suzanne´s petition: we have always done so far. in our opinion, the two of them are complemantary : Suzanne is being brought in the "British Government and the European Union in Brussels" and Keith is a petition mostly before Spanish Anuthorities.
Yes,let´s keep the work together.
Maria
_______________________
Maria L. de Castro, JD, MA
Lawyer
Director www.costaluzlawyers.es
0
Like
|
I would ask the question is this BG law ineffective or has it been allowed to be abused within the existing legal system and it is only now that it is truly being tested? What is the point of having laws in place if they are not followed through? Why should you have to keep revising a law just because it is not being correctly administered? The onus lies ultimately on the Banks to consistently recognise this law and the requirement to provide Bank Guarantees for all offplan deposits from the outset, and they should be made accountable if they do not either provide the guarantee or if they refuse to follow their legal obligation to enact it, if breach of contract applies thereafter. This after all was the reason the law was established in the first place. TO PROTECT THE CONSUMER FROM ABUSE.
Just like the abuse that is taking place relating to the actual application of law (i.e. return of monies as per successful judgements), where lack of timescale constraints on legal procedures are consistently compromising purchasers as developer appeals lie unresolved by the judiciary, allowing all manner of further financial abuse to ensue.
Laws appear to exist but without effective timescale constraints, consistent judgements, and swift recompense (accountability) they will always be perceived as useless.
Everyone needs to wake up to the fact that any civilised justice system should provide these basic requirements for it to work effectively and thereby gain the respect and faith of consumers. So long as these basic requirements are ignored in Spain then we will sadly have to resort to every means possible to bring these matters to the attention of not only governments and the EU but to rigorously forewarn everyone of the lack of consumer protection that continues to exist in Spain.
0
Like
|
maria
my comment of 'historical lack of success' on the BG issue was based on an answer from Antonio as follows
''The only ruling I am aware of, as well as most property lawyers in Spain, is a Court of First Instance ruling obtained by a Madrid lawyer on a specific case, which we published. If I am wrong I would love to be corrected, for the sake of the hapiness of hundreds of victims of the Spanish property off-plan fiasco''
If this statement is as incorrect as you suggest, then I apologise for not getting my facts right?. I'm not trying to catch anyone out or cause divisions, I'm just trying to understand the reality of winning a case against the banks for nor being provided with a BG? There is clearly a difference of opinion on this matter.
I'm fully behind both petetions.
ads
couldn't agree more with your last post. If it was anything like a civalised justice system, the vast majority of cases wouldn't reach court, and the whole property industry wouldn't be in such a bloody mess. This was all very wrong long before the recession gave it a cloak to hide under!!
0
Like
|
Maria and all lawyers,
Would it be possible to gain greater transparency re these court decisions and understanding of this particular law, if you were to all confer together on this, to identify and debate the causes for concern relating to this law, and thereby work together (in harmony?) to ensure accountability and effective justice, not to mention "the hapiness of hundreds of victims of the Spanish property off-plan fiasco " To put aside old wounds (whatever they may be) and work to improve the justice for all your clients?
Isn't this what we are all striving for at the end of the day?
(Please don't forget alongside this analysis the need to ensure effective administration of justice, or it will all be in vein).
This message was last edited by ads on 03/12/2010.
This message was last edited by ads on 03/12/2010.
0
Like
|
|