Costa Luz Lawyers

Ads,

I understand your wishes but that role is more covered by Consumers Associations than by Law Firms in Spain.

There is not a culture of that type of lobbying by Law Firms in Spain and actually, I honestly think that it is not what Law Firms are called to.

Our main role as lawyers is to protect the individual interests of our clients out of Courts and in Court;  through this, we lawyers play our part in changing society.

We can also contribute to general forums and legal forums, write legal articles, take part in conferences in order to contribute to the deepening of the pro-consumer orientation of the financial system. Big job already!

As you know, in regards to Court delays, we commonly communicate that to the General Council of Judicial Power which, at the end,  and in regards to this particular aspect, are who needs to take measures.

I understand your perspective Maria but are lawyers currently calling for swift doctrine to act as protection for their clients in this current climate of proliferation of appeals? 

Are they not in the best position to identify a pattern of  inconsistent rulings that currently compromise their clients in the interim and report back their findings to act as protection for their clients going forward? 

Are they not in the best position to bring the aspect of a bank acting in bad faith to the attention of the judge?

These do not appear as consumer issues they are compromising legal issues that need to be brought to the attention of judges and  CGJP as required and as such they surely contribute to protect the individual interests of clients don't they?

Ads why not give poor Maria a rest, you have pestered and attacked her enough. The Judges are fully aware of what’s going on and so is everyone else. You seem to think you are the only person aware of the justice system shambles in Spain.

I have every respect for Maria Kavanagh and with respect I am NOT attacking Maria.

Please don’t imply something that is a complete mistruth.

You have completely misinterpreted the intent.

Best we leave it there......

P.S. My intent is sincere and in no way is this intended to be divisive or confrontational with any individual, but just the opposite . 

Lawfirms have the potential to really make their mark at improving this scenario against the Banks ploys, by coming together to highlight the need for greater judicial consistency to tackle this in the best way possible which depends upon a concerted and supportive call for speedy explicit doctrine.

This is why I was so hoping that they would recognise their important role in this regard in this ongoing struggle against the Banks.

No worries. I have never felt attacked. Thanks Kavanagh for the care though.

In answer to what is debated: same answer: what you are proposing is more the matter of think tanks than law firms. In Spain, some organizations of financial consumers are doing a great job in that respect: https://www.adicae.net/

The respectful debate continues Maria. ;)

Thank you for the adicae website. Unfortunately however the assumption that this is a consumer issue has been contested by the EU....perhaps I should explain....

Many years ago I was in touch with various MEPS with regard to Bank Guarantee abuse, highlighting lengthy legal battles and the need for consistent protection of property rights according to Ley 57/68, with emphasis on appropriate and effective enforcement I.e. enforcement of existing law in its entirety, inconsistencies in legal interpretations, court and judicial delays that were impacting the rule of law, and the failure to provide adequate monitoring/ reporting mechanisms within the current justice system.

One conclusion they reached was that “ it is important to recognise that this must be framed as a property matter, NOT a consumer issue”. (They placed emphasis on the word “not”). 

They suggested that it was up to the member state to be given the opportunity to put its own justice system in order...

So to hear several years later the suggestion that this is a matter of consumer protection, you can no doubt appreciate how frustrating this is!

If law firms are therefore unwilling to fight for timely enforcement, for timely explicit doctrine to ensure consistency of rulings within their own justice system, where does this leave those clients who in the interim and in the absence of supportive doctrine are being subjected to a legal lottery?

I fear that without this collective support to call for essential timely action with regard to doctrine going forward, from legal professionals who are in full knowledge of the above, that all too many will continue to be compromised, as Banks continue with their manipulative ploys to obstruct the justice system in their endeavour to avoid accountability.

 I am sure you know by now how extremely grateful I and many others are for your continuing educative endeavours, your courageous stance in the early days when others refused to believe it was possible to take on the Banks and win. 

But I also hope that you appreciate the frustration, and most importantly the financial vulnerability in the interim, from the impact of delays to gaining necessary doctrine, that all too many have been subjected to this past decade and beyond. and the wish for greater pro activity by good law firms to influence change within their own justice system.

To therefore witness a repeat of Banks ploys to obstruct timely enforcement and achievement of doctrine once again ( now with regard to interest and costs), without a willingness from those professionals representing their clients best interests, to fight to improve their own justice system from within, sadly only adds to the frustration and upset.

To suggest this is a matter for think tanks relating to consumers doesn’t seem relevant somehow, when it appears to be an issue relating to the effectiveness of timely and consistent enforcement of a law intended to protect within the system of justice in Spain.

This message was last edited by ads on 09/02/2018.

ads, had it not occurred to you that if Spanish law firms fight for timely enforcement, for timely explicit doctrine to ensure consistency of rulings within their own justice system it would be like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Ads: Thanks for the information on European Authorities´ approach to these matters.

I agree the problem is not entirely a financial consumer´s problem but a combination of: 

-  Lack of regulation and discipline by financial authorities and bar associations.

-  Slowness and lack of resources of the judicial system

-  Need for new regulation of Civil Cassation Appeal 

to mention the most important ones to my mind.

Kavanagh: Role of lawyers is to achieve justice in the most effective and timely manner for the interest of the clients. Something we can certainly forget as lawyers and that it is always good to be reminded.

Better instructions on professional ethics and values for us all as legal operators would also make a difference in this society that so strongly leads us all to disorientation.

Have a lovely weekend

Maria

Thanks Maria for your honest appreciation.

Kavanagh

With respect, did you not read my previous observation...

“  It pains me to say so, but until they do so, the temptation ( rightly or wrongly) is to conclude that they are somehow benefactors in this scenario where proliferation of appeals both at High Court and Supreme Court level leaves innocent claimants at the mercy of  costly ongoing litigation. And the Banks appear to be playing and exploiting the system with this fully in mind.”

So of course I recognise it, but I don’t want this to become a divisive issue but something that lawyers remain willing to consider from a more ethical perspective, a productive way forward. 

Maria’s observation has great potential to lead to better mutual respect, and for that, I for one am sincerely grateful.

“ Role of lawyers is to achieve justice in the most effective and timely manner for the interest of the clients. Something we can certainly forget as lawyers and that it is always good to be reminded. 

Better instructions on professional ethics and values for us all as legal operators would also make a difference in this society that so strongly leads us all to disorientation.”

The global world of countries are mainly run by bureaucrats, purposely in a somewhat system of chaos. This ensures that the public remain detached and confused by these systems. It would never do for the public to know as much as the bureaucrats, if they did the bureaucrats may become redundant and would loose their privilege of having their nose in the trough.

The legal system is a prime example, they live in their own world, talking gobbledegook and Latin quotes meant to be beyond the understanding of the public peasants.

The only way the public can deal with bureaucratic chaos is to do as they are told and pay as required. The legal profession priority is to look after itself first and the client a long way second, anyone who thinks it’s the other way round needs medical attention.   

We can all still strive for better Kavanagh.

The skill comes in recognising how best to achieve a less chaotic, more transparent and accountable structure going forward that realistically strives to reach the needs of the majority, not the few, where we all benefit from a better and more balanced regulated order that act as necessary control to counter the extremes and corrupt self interested elements that all too often act as a downward negative spiral.

One step at a time as they say, but so reliant on the need in the interim for good role models with positive self belief, humility, intellectual capacity and rational open minded thoughts to strive for a more flexible approach that adapts to changing needs and circumstance that are sometimes born form unintended consequences....

Its a tall order of course, but in a world of more open communication it becomes an educative process where good rational positive belief can hopefully triumph over negative purposeful attempts to disrupt progress in this regard...

I for one still live in hope.

I also live ( and fight) in hope!

Dear Maria,

With that fight in mind, would you please consider the following....

Many claimants are increasingly concerned by the continuing lengthy period between lawsuit submission and return of monies to include not only principal but also costs and correctly backdated interest.

The bottom line as things stand at present is that until such time as doctrine is achieved on backdated interest, the risks going forward are that claimants will once again be subjected to inconsistent rulings and protracted litigation, just as they have been during the last decade and beyond. 

The call for timely doctrine with regard to backdated interest ( which impinges on retrieval of costs) therefore becomes integral and essential to ensure that Banks are made fully accountable for their negligences and malpractices from outset of deposit. 

With this in mind it becomes increasingly important that law firms now recognise claimants’ financial vulnerability and understandable frustrations going forward and look to proactive ways of assisting in this regard.

Your observation “Role of lawyers is to achieve justice in the most effective and timely manner for the interest of the clients. Something we can certainly forget as lawyers and that  it is always good to be reminded. “ becomes critical to this scenario. 

Rather than this be perceived as rhetoric ( albeit with good intent) , is it not time now in the interest of clients for law firms to demonstrate a more proactive commitment, by collectively calling for timely doctrine otherwise all too many clients will be subjected to yet another 5 to 10 years of protracted litigation.

To summarise, rhetoric  alone ( albeit with good intent) in this regard sadly has the potential to be be perceived by claimants as law firms ignoring the “reminders” that you speak of so eloquently.

Ads,

An initiative for  law firms to "collectively calling for timely doctrine" would be good, of course it would. 

Maria,

Some time ago Lucas Asociados identified the problem re the excess of appeals by the Banks which he suggested were connected to too many equal claims, where claimants fall under a "set of facts". He went on to suggest that an "adhesion to an existing ruling" might be a solution and that this was due to be discussed at a meeting of the Andalusian Forum on Justice last November.

Do you know what transpired from that forum and do you see this forum as a means of good legal professionals effecting a collective voice calling for timely doctrine with regard to legal backdating of interest to date of deposit?

Dear Ads:

No idea about this. Are you in contact with Lucas Asociados?

Cheers

M

No Maria.

It was an EOS thread that covered this topic.

Kind regards.

I found the detail Maria. Hope this helps.

Lucas Asociados wrote the following back in October 2015 on the thread titled "great news supreme court confirms bank liability for deposits under ley 57/68":

" 

Dear ads, 

You are right. And let me tell you that last friday we assisted, appointed by the Popular Party (the actual in the Spanish government), to the Andalusian Justice Forum in Sevilla.

In the Forum we met, appart from many professionals from all over Andalusia, and some relevant polititians, the General Secretary in Andalusia of the Popular Party, several high charges of the Ministry of Justice and the spokesman of the Popular Party on Justice in the Parliament and one of the heads of the Legislation Commission of the Spanish Parliament.

The general feeling was that the actual situation of the Justice Administration is really poor, and the charges from the Government and the Parliament admited Justice was too slow. In this point, they said that one of the reasons was the high litigiousness, the great number of claims the Courts have to resolve, and said that this was the reason of the litigation fees they imposed.

We alleged that, from our point of view, it's not so easy to assure if "the hen was before the egg" or vice versa. And that perhaps there are many claims that could be avoided with an effcient and fast Justice Administration.

After that, we asked them to work hardly on the improvement of the Justice Administration in two directions: 1) Provide more and more appropriate resources (both human and material); and 2) A much more strict management of the actual ones, as sometimes the question is not the resources but how the resources are handled, quite uneffciently most of the times.

We specially emphasised on how useful it would be to incorporate to our legal system the "adhesion to an existing ruling", as it would avoid many and many equal claims. Say, for example, the Supreme Court states, in the case of the latest ruling about BGs, that any buyer under a certain set of facts (amoounts paid thriugh a bank account, subscription of a general policy by the developer, properties not delivered, etc) can adhere to the ruling. This would avoid hundreds of claims that, at last, come into a heavy workload for Courts.

The idea was welcomed by the spokesman on Justice of the PP in the Spanish Parliament, who said they would explore this possibility.

We have been appointed as permanent members of this Forum, and there will be another session for mid-november, with the attendance of the actual Minister of Justice.

We must admit that, when we were appointed, we were not very optimistic on the practical utility of the Forum, but after the meeting, considering how participative it has been, the attendance of on-site professionals and the continuity it's going to have, we are really hopeful about how influential it could be.  "

Remember this.

Hi Ads
David here from many years ago. (Re: Aifos) Maria and her team are now taking my case on following the 'due dillenges' procedure being carried out and finding we 'should'? be able to get our money back. Your recent posts on the continued difficulty of actually getting money/interest back, even when your case is won, fills me with horror once again! I really do despair at the fact that though it's so obvious that the banks are doing everthing they can to avoid paying the full amounts due and just as importantly in reasonable time, that the fact is not being recognised and acted on now by the justice system.

Once again it's all starting to stink of corruption to be honest, from the banks/government this time instead of the developers.
I really applaud your expectation of all decent lawyers to get together on this and do everthing they can to force change, otherwise is does look like they might be complicit, or at least not doing everything possible to force change?
I don't mean to attack Maria and her team, because I believe she will do what she can to get justice for us, but until some ruling is made that the banks have to pay up with interest within a limited time constraint, then the law that's supposed to be providing victims of injustice with justice, is starting to look like little more than a scam in reality.
I still hold out hope that Maria can get justice for us, but if her hands are tied by a crap legal system, what chance i wonder?
David.