DISCRIMINATION AND INJUSTICE IN ESTEPONA TOWN HALL

Where are planning regulations documented and kept for reference? Is this information not required to be held for reference from the Town Hall? Surely a Town Hall cannot remain in ignorance of these planning regulations? Is an architect or lawyer therefore required to check this criteria from the Town Hall as part of their legal or professional responsibilities when a lawyer / architect are instructed to act on a client's behalf? Surely as part of their legal responsibilities the lawyer and/or architect should have been required to enquire from the Town Hall what the planning regulations were, and if this particular extension fell within the existing criteria? The Town Hall would purely have been acting as a reference point would they not?

Likewise is it not the responsibility for the lawyer to seek approval of the community on behalf of their client as part of this process? So how can any of this "responsibility" be denied by the lawyer/architect after the event, when it forms part of any legal process?

Is the suggestion that the Town Hall has not notified the client of  their reasons for demanding demolition of the extension? This doesn't make any sense? Were the Town Hall not in effect suggesting that demolition of the extension must occur as the actual extension build fell outside of existing planning regulations (which should have been picked up by the lawyer/architect)?

Then once demolition had taken place the Town Hall informed that a new extension could be built within the identified criteria and at this point the question falls back on the community.. But how can the community subsequently deny the owner extension approval when an identical build precedent has already been set by others within the community? None of this makes any sense and doesn't this ultimately come down to procedures not being followed by the lawyer and/or architect as part of their due diligence from the outset and this failure has significantly compromised the client? In which case does this sequence of events not act as sufficient evidence to qualify for a claim against the lawyer/architect via their legal indemnity insurance?

Perhaps I have misunderstood?

I've only had little involvement with Town Halls in Spain, but I was surprised by the lack of written documentation from any party, be it from solicitors or the Town Hall themselves. 

I don't feel comfortable with verbal assurances, which is all I initially received when I applied for a licence for an extension I had a couple of years ago.  The Spanish architect had to make several trips to the Town Hall over a period of 2 months or so to collect the licence before we started building work.  During the process I fell out with the architect as he told me I had insulted him by not accepting his word (but he hadn't put anything in writing either).

The question about Town Hall rcords seems a very good one to me.  But I get the impression that the paperwork often follows several months later, if you are lucky.

As mentioned you need to be able to show the court that the professional you are suing made a negligent act, error or omission.  Presumably the defendant will be able to show that they followed the normal, customary procedure and will blame the Town Hall on reneging on the undertakings given to them. 

For sure if I was in Terttu's position I would most certainly be asking them to explain themselves, in writing, prior to considering any court action.  When their defence statement is received it will be a matter of opinion if there is a valid case.  In the UK this is reasonably predictable, in Spain I don't know and have no experience whatever. 

One point, as regards others having got away with doing what you have been told you can't do. For example we often looked at houses currently being built in our area that seemed huge compared with size restrictions imposed on us. But there was always some sort of explanation, eg,  they had applied for permission at a time when larger houses were allowed, hadn't gone ahead with the building, then, when word got around the regulations were going to be tightened up, they all started building hammer and tongs. So, in the same period our application was being restricted, our neighbours all seemed to be building  hotel-sized houses. "Ah, but they get permission before....."

We've found our town hall to be great. They keep all the current regulations, which any architect would in any case be abreast of as it's his bread and butter. We found the town hall sometimes bumped applications up to the Comarca, a sort of local/regional planning centre, and they, in turn bumped it up to the Junta if there were any tricky aspects to the proposals. (In our case there was/is an ongoing saga as to whether putting a toilet/shower into an agricultural building...meant we had fired our wad as concerns only being allowed one dwelling per 25,000 sq m. We were unlucky, we got caught...the ayuntiamento, being strapped for cash, sent a team all over our areas taking photos of anything and everything and compared with their records. First we got a reasonable sort of "rates bill" for our upgraded barn.....which wasn't a problem...but then came the dreaded letter from the Junta saying they'd learned we'd converted a barn into a dwelling. But to be fair, there was no fine, they just told us that we had to cancel our ongoing application to build a house, as it was only one dwelling allowed....or we could demolish our barn. We are still arguing that ripping out the toilet/shower ought to take us back to where we started. Unfortunately sorting out this small detail has taken four years, lol.

The Spanish do seem to have a multitude of laws and rules.  Most of them make sense, but the officials that carry them out don't always seem to know them, or have their own interpretations.

I have personal experience of prejudice against me as a Brit, which is the reason I felt obliged to use a Spanish architect as mentioned below.  I did so reluctantly as I dislike giving into such pressures, but if you don't you take a bigger risk.

Dear All..sorry have not been able to reply due to my circumstances had no internet .

I THANK EVERYONE  FOR ALL YOUR OPINIONS , COMMENTS AND VALUABLE ADVICE..

However I want to make my pointS clear about discrimination and injustice that I have set my petition for and addressed it to Mayor himself.

I did trust legal people , had an architect , paid for licence which WAS NEVER APPLIED ..so built in good faith trusting all be well and licence to take its time to be authorised as was told so and started to build with my immediate neighbourgh as the others have already done before us in community .

3 years later was served court order to demolish and pay the fine of 24.300.. the truth came out  , MY LICENCE was nevr applied.

DISCRIMINATION AND INJUSTICE IS ON POINT THAT WHY ONLY ME HAVE BEEN SUED AND FINE NOT MY IMMEDIATE NEIGHBOURH OR THE OTHERS ????

THIS cant be right and lawfull..If other SPANISH have built the same WITHOUT LICENCIA so why town hall has left them untouched and only taken me as a victim of injustice ..??

I am addressing my petition to Mr Mayor himself as he is NOTARY and a man of law and honor who has promised to crack down corruption and injustice in town hall that as we all know happened in big scale under previous Mayors

I trust that once he is aware of my discrimination he will look into it and put it right..as he must believe like me in equal rights and law to all no matter of race , colour or nationality..

IN FACT , FOREIGNERS ARE HIS BREAD AND BUTTER and he wants Estepona to be the number one turist destination but but he must make the laws the same and place the safe to live for forigners too when buying the property 

Mayor has made Estepona the most beautiful town OUTSIDE AND i HOPE HE WILL DO THE SAME JOB INSIDE TOWN HALL..

Please sign my petition and support equal rights if you believe into them like I do..

With many thanks

TERTTU 

Looking to the wider picture there is something terribly wrong with a system that allows FROM THE OUTSET the following pattern of events to occur.

Non issuance of deeds, licences, guarantees. Illegal builds and mortgages. Non compliance with existing law and planning regulations. Inconsistent  law enforcement  Lack of accountability and effective deterrents. Maladministration and an overstretched court and justice system. Unregulated Banks. It makes for very uncomfortable reading....

And all as a consequence of a system that fails to prevent failures from being addressed at source due to lack of effective monitoring, lack of effective independent regulatory bodies (including Bar Associations) to control and deter malpractice, corruption, collusion and instill moral authority fom the outset.

Don't you all see a pattern occurring here, where methods being employed are all too frequently after the event, when it's too late, and the costs to those affected, both financially and psychologically, are becoming crippling in terms of innocent lives having to be put "on hold" until such time as recognition of the true facts are made fully available (if you are lucky)?

Innocent people are picking up the pieces and literally paying the price for lack of regulation and a "broken system" that allows these failures/malpractice/maladministration (whatever you wish to call them) to occur.

To be honest, perhaps this shouldn't be a petition just about one aspect, perhaps it should be a petition to bring to light the need for greater regulation of an industry/system that is sadly failing all too many innocent purchasers and owners alike.

I wish you all the best marjatta and pray that something good can come from this exposure of some very uncomfortable truths.

Some of the comments on Change.org are highliting that this is not an uncommon occurence.

Only 18 more signatures required to reach 500. Please sign if you agree what has gone on is wrong and not fair so at the very least the Mayor of Estepona will hear a louder opinion.

https://www.change.org/p/jose-maria-garcia-urbano-discrimination-and-injustice-in-estepona-town-hall