Costa Luz Lawyers

Ads: You are fully right. Supreme Court doctrine is the way to deal with the problem you enunciate

Goodstich: There is no possible database of clients who have received money back using these strategies as all law firms dealing with this type of case, would need to add information.

In our Law Firm, we have won around 300 cases now and all are receiving their refunds when the judicial machinery produces the payment of them.

It is a safe action and of course, Banks are obeying Courts.

Hi Goodstitch,

There sadly at present appears to be no such gathering of information by lawyers who are in the best place to identify from client data.

There appear to be many and varied ploys being used by Banks, such things as issuing AVAL ( promise to pay) instead of monies placed into court for forward transfer, appealing with intent to delay, challenging SC clarification with intent to eliminate the interim award of costs, challenging inalienable rights by use of civil codes, the list goes on.... all with “ bad intent” to avoid their responsibilities from outset of deposit according to law.

Transparency can only be achieved in this regard by a commitment from lawyers to bring these ploys with obvious  malintent  to the attention of the Supreme Court rulers. Perhaps Maria can advise how this could be achieved....via the Judicial body that was previously identified?

The current piecemeal postings on EOS suggest that most are in excess of 10 years but even then it is difficult to determine if interest has been correctly backdated, which ploys have been used by Banks in the lengthy interim periods, how many delays are further exacerbated by under resourcing of courts being placed under immense stress by Banks ongoing ploys, which more importantly delay SC doctrine being achieved etc. Doctrine which appears essential to safeguard claimants rights.

IMHO, Banks need to be made fully accountable with due regard to claimants INALIENABLE rights....emphasis on INALIENABLE, if consistent justice is ever to be achieved.

Hi Maria

With regards to this part of your reply below

'In our Law Firm, we have won around 300 cases now and all are receiving their refunds when the judicial machinery produces the payment of them.

That's a great result winning around 300 cases and congratulations to you and all involved. I realise many cases are ongoing, but just wondered in how many of those 300 cases have the clients recieved their refunds so far?

All cases won have received their refunds or are on the way to receive them

That's really good to know Maria. Having known of so many cases in the past in Spain that have won but don't result in refunds recieved, I was starting to wonder if the whole Ley 57/68 situation was heading in the same direction.

Good news indeed as Supreme Court doctrine and pioneering endeavours by those determined to fight for justice over the years has thankfully improved the likelihood for return of principal monies ( with deduction of costs), but there is still much to be done to achieve consistent and timely return of correctly backdated interest and retrieval of costs given the ongoing and repetitive ploys by the Banks to fight and obstruct to the very end. 

Wouldnt you agree Maria?

This message was last edited by ads on 03/03/2018.

Fully agree Ads. 

Much to do already

Not just in these matters but also in repossessions procedures, abusive clauses.. The whole  finance industry needs to be treated in a completely different manner not just by Judges but also and mainly by politicians and governemnts.

The citizenship, by fighting their own cases, are claiming for a financial system with the person at the center. As everything needs to be in a democratic culture. 

Lawyers need to contribute through  hard-worked, brave, independent proposals of applications of law in favour of this approach.

Much to do. Little by little.

Dear Maria,

With a view to greater transparency ( and seeking positive ways forward) and with regard to Ley 57/68 claims, I have to ask are claimants still at risk from Banks challenges using “ late exercise of rights” as per the civil code?

Can civil codes be used in this way to undermine inalienable rights according to Ley 57/68 and also undermine SC clarification achieved to date, for those who have submitted late claims against the Banks due to delays and legal circumstances totally beyond their control within the system of justice?

Is there a legal hierarchy where inalienable rights with accompanying SC clarification can be overruled by civil codes? In other words do civil codes take precedence?

And in cases where a specific appeal court is supporting such challenges by the Bank in stark contrast to other courts, can the Council of Judiciary intervene or somehow counter this disparity if they are made aware of this circumstance and  the wider perspective?

In reality, in all cases where compromising delays have occurred prior to Bank claim, will innocent claimants in the interim be at continuing risk from Banks taking this legal argument to the Supreme Court, and therefore be dependent upon yet further SC clarification with regard to civil code challenges by the Banks, which will take years to achieve, and in the interim remain at risk of incurring major costs ( both their own costs and Bank costs) if rulings go against them in this regard?  Doesn’t this have implications for all of those innocent claimants who are being challenged or at future risk of being challenged, based upon civil code legal reasoning?

Do you feel sufficiently concerned by this to write on clients behalf to the Council of Judiciary? 

Many thanks.

p.s.

Could it not be highlighted to the Court of Judiciary that the use of civil codes under these circumstances are not warranted as they DO NOT demonstate lack of good faith on the claimants part...., moreover the lack of good faith has been on the Banks' part by their continual denial of their financial obligations to adequately administer and safeguard monies from the outset, plus their ongoing ploys to obstruct and disrespect SC clarification, if left unrecognised, has the potential to proliferate inconsistent rulings and thereby further compromise an already overstretched system of justice?

Under these circumstances it appears a complete anomoly and yet another ploy on the Banks part to "cloud" the issue, and further delay justice by insinuating a completely false premise, does it not?.

Q. but just wondered in how many of those 300 cases have the clients recieved their refunds so far?

A. All cases won have received their refunds or are on the way to receive them

LOL

Guy T, the courts enforce the money to be returned. There's no doubt this will happen, it's non negotiable. It's100% guaranteed, assuming they have money or assets equivalent in value. Seeing as they are banks, then they do, definitely. What's your agenda or chip?

I suspect the confusion comes from the variations to the length of time it takes to achieve enforcements and actual return of those principal monies, not to mention the tactical ploys employed by some Banks to delay this process ( such as use of AVAL , a promise to pay, as opposed to provision of actual monies into the courts). Then there are the delays by the courts to release the monies as they earn interest in the interim periods ( from which the claimant gain no benefit).....

Its sadly a system riddled in complexities that only accentuates confusion and distrust I’m afraid. But the worst aspect is that it plays into the hands of Banks whose intent appears to be as obstructive as possible in this ongoing abusively lengthy “litigious battle” where they arrogantly consider they have little culpability in the process to adequately administer and safeguard monies from the outset of deposit.

This message was last edited by ads on 04/03/2018.

I accept that Spain is somewhat a cowboy land incorporating ‘’the good, the bad and the ugly’’. But it is their country and of their making. We should respect their culture, their rules and their justice system. All expats including the British are here by invitation only and are not Spanish nationals. If things need changing then it is up to the Spanish nationals to do it, and not by invitation only moaning expats. If you don’t agree or like their ways then just leave and go back to where you came from. The Spanish never forced you to come here in the first place.

Expats are blind to the fact that whatever country in the world they go to, the invitation is for the benefit of that country and not the expat, generally you are only tolerated because you import wealth.

Divisive and unnecessarily provocative posting yet again Kavanagh?

The realities are as Maria has astutely acknowledged

"

The citizenship, by fighting their own cases, are claiming for a financial system with the person at the center. As everything needs to be in a democratic culture. 

Lawyers need to contribute through  hard-worked, brave, independent proposals of applications of law in favour of this approach.

Much to do. Little by little."

GuyT

Your 'LOL' response from the answer i got from Maria is what i was expecting from at least one person. I would think anyone who has won there case through Maria and other lawyers but is still waiting for funds to be recieved in to there bank accounts will be feeling the same way. What I'm trying to get to the bottom of is just how many who have won, have actually recieved their money?, but there seems to be no available database for this or real transparancy? Do you speak from personal experience or do you just have doubts that those who have won their case will recieve their money back?

GuyT

Your 'LOL' response from the answer i got from Maria is what i was expecting from at least one person. I would think anyone who has won there case through Maria and other lawyers but is still waiting for funds to be recieved in to there bank accounts will be feeling the same way. What I'm trying to get to the bottom of is just how many who have won, have actually recieved their money?, but there seems to be no available database for this or real transparancy? Do you speak from personal experience or do you just have doubts that those who have won their case will recieve their money back?

''The realities are as Maria has astutely acknowledged.''

Yes, but Maria is a Spanish National and has the right to seek change in her own country.

You are a visitor and have choices, if you do not like Spain justice systems, you can go back to where you came from.

Goodstitch.   Maybe think about asking your question in a different way?

Perhaps, how many people have gone into litigation and failed to win the case through courts, after all courts and appeals.    Each case can be different and contracts can be different, different bank accounts to receive money etc.

If you want to find out if your case can be successful then perhaps send María details for an appraisal?    What do you have to lose?

Kavanagh

Those who act honestly when buying in another country, follow the rules and are represented by those in that country who's job it is to ensure justice, should be able to expect justice. Nothing else is acceptable. If any part of a justice system that we all have to rely on at some stage when buying, is found to be slow, dishonest and tell downright lies, why the hell would you walk away and let the crooks win?  Thanks to good lawyers like Maria and pressure on the Spanish government from a few key people to force the Ley 57/68, it looks like many who would have been screwed by the dishonesty and lies of some corrupt developers, lawyers and the court system even (delays in cases being heard) might well now get justice in the real form of money recieved back. After many years it looks like many people should at least get the justice they deserve, but only through a long hard fight, not by running away because ''that's the way that country works''  It seems the issue now is what tricks the Spanish banks are trying to pull to avoid paying their debts to those screwed.

Brian
Maria has recently taken on my case and I have every confidence that if anyone can win it for us, it will be her company. What I don't have have so much confidence in is actually getting our money back if the banks try and pull all the tricks that ADS has shown concern about in her very thorough and frank posts. I am confident we will win one day, because we have been in the right, and honest from day one and I have to believe that justice will prevail.....one day?

The sad aspect is that the Banks are equally compromising Spanish nationals ( again recognised by Maria) and are doing a grave disservice  to the Spanish justice system by their obstructive approach to so many citizens,  which is placing immense strain on an already overstretched court administrative system. Already discussed to date.

The way forward is to be honest, never be afraid to address sensitive issues ( Maria's reference to being brave)  but with common aim to establish workable effective solutions that ensure laws established to protect are adhered to in as timely a fashion as to prevent proliferation of abuse , that all ongoing manipulative ploys are exposed and farly assessed, with a view to establishing an effective civilised structure that ensures true accountability, to the benefit of all in the longer term. 

Win win.

P s. Kavanagh your divisive and somewhat inciteful rhetoric sadly plays little part in achieving solutions. Working together and developing mutual trust with common aims has far more potential to achieve positive outcomes. ;)