Keith Rule, Maria de Castro and SpanishReclaim

Just in case the links posted below create some confusion:

http://www.spanishreclaim.com/keith-rule-spanish-property/

http://www.spanishreclaim.com/daily-mail-spanish-deposit-refund-article/

Nor Keith Rule or me ( both names are included in that article) work for that company

Also, despite the telegraph mentions him in this article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/buy-to-let/new-hope-for-spanish-property-investors-i-lost-an-89000-deposit/

Keith does not work for SpanishLegal Reclams either

Just in case that info can create some confussion.

Maria you should do something about this, there are too many of these ambulance chasers setting up, when it can be easier using an established lawyer, with experience of specific developers, who will advise you up front if you have a case, without you having to pay the upfront admin fees

I had unsolicited approaches from these people to refer clients on a commission deal which I rejected

Thanks Roy.

I hope people to be cautious and wise and look into history of the law firm, won cases.... because it is very easy to set up a website and say you have won thousands of cases.

It is also very easy to pay for marketing ads, so, I hope people have learnt from past experiences and do a good check of the history of the Law Firm in regards to those actions before hiring them.

No costs, no risk sounds attractive BUT.... its is  necessary ,wise and sensible to know well who you are entrusting your interests to. 

I do know of a number of well established Spanish lawyers, in this area, who act on a no win no fee basis, but only if they have experience and are pretty certain they are going to win the case

Agreed Maria, it is essential to use EXPERIENCED lawyers, those most specialised in this area of law that have proven case wins and wide knowledge of legal arguments etc.

But  Roy, how can you be  "pretty certain" that they will win the case when there are still ongoing different interpretations by the judiciary in differing regions of Spain and even within different courts in the same region in Spain? If only it was as black and white as you suggest!

Plus Maria, are there still SC rulings outstanding ( to act as jurisprudence) with regard to clarifying the award of interest ( I.e. whether it is backdated to date of claim or backdated to date of deposit)? 

P.S. Thank you for all that you do Maria to educate, advise, and forewarn us all in this regard. 

Ads, despite the important Supreme Court decissions ( dated 21/ 12/2015, 09/03/2016 y 17/03/2016) on liabilities of Banks when receiving off plan deposits mention that interests period starts the date the payments were made and most of the Appeal Courts establishes the same, THERE IS STILL NO Supreme Court doctrine on this. 

Maria (I hope this question is written in a way that makes sense).

If a person wins a case and the bank chooses to appeal on the interest / costs (either, or), does the appeal for these items give the bank the ability to withhold the capital payment to the winning party?

I ask this because it seems the banks can place further pressure on a persons funds by adding costs, without having to pay out on a 'winning outcome'.

But logically and I suppose in the interests of natural justice the SC has stated in effect that the Banks should have issued Bank Guarantees in accordance with the law and the law states, as I understand it, that interest for Bank Guarantees runs from the date the money was lodged with the Bank

The SC is in effect putting the buyer in the same position as if the Bank had complied with the law and issued a Bank Guarantee and the buyer neither wins extra compensation nor loses out by the Bank not so complying

Perhaps this is the reason why the Banks generally but not always do pay interest from the date the deposit was paid

I exercised a Bank Guarantee and received interest from the date I paid the deposit without argument which supports the principle and I’m sure that the predominant Spanish legal opinion is that the SC would agree

Ok.   Agreed, like case law over here in the uk.   So what is 'doctrine' in a Spanish legal sense?

Please have answers below in bold green ( same text as your email): 

Briando 55: If a person wins a case and the bank chooses to appeal on the interest/costs (either, or), does the appeal for these items give the bank the ability to withhold the capital payment to the winning party? It does not. The party can request an interim enforcement of the Court Decision.

Case Law Doctrine is a source of Law, produced by two Court decisions of the Supreme Court interpreting a legal precept in the same way. 

Spanish punter: Yes, it is what the majority of Appeal Courts are interpreting and what the Supreme Court also has in those important Court decisions. What we still lack is a Court decision where Supreme Court is asked about that specify matter ( interests and Law 57/68). 

Maria,

In reality aren't preliminary enforcements in the majority of cases now resulting in courts preventing clients access to their monies until such time as appeals achieve a final ruling?

And once monies have been deposited into courts by the Banks ( or an AVAL acting as guarantee is issued) isn't it the Spanish Treasury that gains interest on those monies in the interim, which is irrecoverable by clients and could take several years before clients gain access to their monies, given the major and growing delays?

Isn't this system in all honesty therefore acting as a form of witholding monies from clients to the benefit of the Spanish Treasury?

Also Is there anything that lawyers can do to address what appears an unfair practice, acting as potential disincentive for clients to appeal against an interest ruling ( I.e. endeavouring to gain additional interest backdated to date of deposit, as opposed to date of claim, as per Ley 57/68) in full knowledge that they will have no access to their monies for abusive lengthy periods of time, and no ability to gain interest in the intervening period, EVEN WHEN THEY HAVE ACHIEVED A SUCCESSFUL UNOPPOSED FIRST INSTANCE RULING?  

In this instance could this unfair lengthy witholding of monies be brought to the attention of the ruling judge and request this be re-evaluated so that monies associated with the unopposed first instance ruling can be released from the courts?

Ok. Thanks María.  

Maria,

You observed "

Yes, it is what the majority of Appeal Courts are interpreting and what the Supreme Court also has in those important Court decisions. What we still lack is a Court decision where Supreme Court is asked about that specify matter ( interests and Law 57/68). "

Please could you advise if there are any cases that you are aware of, currently outstanding and awaiting SC ruling on this specific matter relating to additional interest backdated to date of deposit?

Also, is it possible to get a judge to review and gain return of monies from a successful unopposed first instance ruling ( currently guaranteed by an AVAL), in the interim whilst awaiting an appeal for additional interest to be backdated to date of deposit? 

Is there a risk that even if the additional interest  appeal is won, that the Bank could delay even further by appealing to SC ( hence the disincentive to continue with appeal for additional interest because the client will be denied access to their monies from the unopposed first instance ruling for years)?

Many thanks.

This message was last edited by ads on 09/03/2017.

Dear Ads:

Cases in interests at the Supreme Court: We have submitted a case on this matter to the Supreme Court. Of course, we will be informing you here on how it goes.

Provisional enforcement of Court decisions while an appeal on interest happens: yes, it is possible.

Banks can still appeal to the Supreme Court till they set doctrine on interests. 

Kr,

M

Many thanks Maria. 

If an enforcement has already been done resulting in an AVAL, is there nothing more that can be done to regain actual return of monies from the unopposed first instance ruling in the interim period whilst the appeal for additional Interest is ongoing?

Hi all. 

I know it's really useful to keep an eye on the legal meanings of cases going through, but if a basis of trust is good between client and lawyer it gives the client the opportunity to concentrate on what matters to them.

From my point of view it's better to know what we are entitled to claim and when, and the timescales of each potential payment.

we have to structure our lives rather than the legal system, the lawyer has to use all in their powers to do the best for us at the quickest possible opportunity, we negotiate any fees and make sure we pay them on time.

Thats the deal from my view and regular information and possibilities of dates and payments back to us is key.    

If the legal system doesn't support the law, we don't have our money to spend, banks, builders and developers take the blame and part of the finance world stops until the money is back in circulation.   No winners.  

Ads: You can enforce the Aval, of course

Briando55: Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do when a Court takes its time !

Hi María.  Only the best you can do, comply and make sure they have no excuses for delaying perhaps!!

you have the knowledge and expertise, we count on you

Thanks Briando. We recourse to send notifications to the General Council of Judicial Power when a delay seems excessive

Have a great weekend

M

Dear Maria,

What responses have you had from the GCJP from your notifications?

Just wondering if they have taken any positive action to date in this regard to make a difference and whether you have noticed any improvement in those areas and courts most affected by the delays?