San Jose into liquidation.

At the choosing of your lawyer for representation in the San Jose Administration procedures.... just check a couple of things:

1.- Independency from Developers and  Real Estate Agents.

2.- High litigation expertise and deep knowledge of Commercial Law and Bankruptcy proceedings.

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Maria. How do we do that please.  Is there a place to look or do we just ask the question and hope we get a truthful answer.

Kind regards.

Linda Needham

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Any reputable Lawyer, who is not known of having worked linked to developers or estate agents during the real estate boom, and with proved expertise in Commercial Law.

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Irwin Mitchell Abogados is a unique law firm, with offices in Marbella and Madrid.  We are part of Irwin Mitchell Solicitors, one of the largest law firms in the UK and recent winners of ‘National Law Firm of the Year’ at the 2007 Lawyer Awards.

As promised we are now circulating a memo referring to the meeting we held on Sunday May 25th, in Birmingham with attendance of 70 people, representing a total of 120 affected persons.

For those who did not attend the meeting there is no problem as the situation remains the same; however matters have moved on since and we have fresh information as well as a plan forward.

Before we start categorising the different people you must all understand that at this stage all the contracts are still live and valid. There may well be the situation that people will need to continue with payments as and when the developer continues and finishing the buildings (see category 5).

It was decided that there will be several categories of people.

 1.            Creditors without bank guarantees (this is the largest group).

2.             Creditors with bank guarantees.

3.            Creditors who will be in a position to complete their existing transaction as the property is almost ready to be signed off.

4.             Creditors who have no real hopes that their property will be built but wish to explore the possibility of switching to another property which could be on offer by the developer.

5.            Creditors who wish us to attempt to have their deposit returned or obtain what can be refunded from the Administration process. This is not an automatic right but can only be done sometimes with the agreement of the Administrator and the judge.

We have already indicated in previous correspondence that no matter which group you find yourself in, in order to protect your situation you MUST communicate your credit to the Court.

Time limits

It is paramount that once the time limitation of one month starts, and you wish to instruct Irwin Mitchell Abogados, you must do so at the outset. It is likely to take a while until all the documentation is gathered and it will take several days for a power of attorney to be granted.

We would like to advise that Irwin Mitchell will not be responsible for not meeting the deadline in the case of any person instructing us without the proper documentation which could result in substantial delays or instructions coming quite late, although we will try to speed up matters before the expiry of the statutory month.

COURT PROCEEDINGS CURRENT SITUATION

We have received a copy of the judicial Order which declares SAN JOSE INVERSIONES Y PROYECTOS URBANÍSTICOS, S.A. in administration (“Concurso”).

The main points of this judicial Order are the following:

(i)             SAN JOSE has been declared in administration (Concurso).

(ii)           Three Trustees have been appointed (Mr. Pedro Algarra –an economist-, Mr. José Luis García-Cañada –a lawyer- and CAJA DE AHORROS DEL MEDITERRÁNEO –a Bank creditor-).

(iii)          The company will be managed by the current Directors but under the supervision of the Trustees.  

(iv)          The Judge has ordered the publication of the judicial Order in the following media: a) BOE (official bulletin); b) LA VERDAD DE ALICANTE (a newspaper); and c)  internet site (only referring to the Trustees´ designation).  

(v)            Furthermore the Order gives a time frame of 30 days to communicate the credits to the Court. This deadline must be calculated from the last of the publications. 

 So the time limit is imminent

We have received a copy of the judicial Order which declares HERRADA DEL TOLLO, S.L. (mainly Jumilla's developments) in administration (“Concurso”).


The main points of this judicial Order are the following:


(i) HERRADA DEL TOLLO, S.L. has been declared in administration (Concurso).

(ii) Three Trustees have been appointed (Mr. Jose Antonio Pascual –an economist-, Mr. Abraham Garcia –a lawyer- and CAJA DE AHORROS DEL MEDITERRÁNEO –a Bank creditor-).

(iii) The company will be managed by the current Directors but under the supervision of the Trustees.

(iv) The Judge has ordered the publication of the judicial Order in the following media: a) BOE (official bulletin); b) a local printed copy newspaper - unkown at this time; and c)  site sanjosegrupo.  

(v) Furthermore the Order gives a time frame of  1month to communicate the credits to the Court. This deadline must be calculated from the last of the publications.



GROUP CORRESPONDENCE

Despite our best endeavours to communicate with all of you it is not possible for the team here to work efficiently if we answer all your enquiries as and when they reach us.

We understand that you will have many individual queries as the situation progresses. We suggest, based on our previous experience of Group Actions, that any questions are sent to us by email by the 20th of each month. We will then send one group email replying to all queries received in such time frame. Please do not include specific questions in your emails when sending the requested documentation; we would ask that your questions are sent separately unless of course they relate to the documentation you are sending us.

It is also clear that individual groups may have different interests or progress differently so these will be notified as and when action is required without having to wait for the monthly bulletin. 


POSSIBLE FUTURE CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Irwin Mitchell can anticipate a situation of conflict which may arise during the proceedings with its own clients. Although unlikely, where there is more than one client involved such situation can arise and we would like to deal with this at the outset so there are no potential future misunderstandings.

Different scenarios may occur during these proceedings. It is difficult to anticipate them but the most obvious one is for those who are still in the Concurso (in other words who have not had their property signed up before the stage of the Convenio or Liquidation) when we reach the stage of the Convenio and a proposal is made which may not be acceptable to everybody then we may find that one group of people wishes to object to the proposal and another is in agreement. Many of you on Sunday suggested that this is unlikely as if a valid proposal is put forward and accepted by the majority then it is almost certain that the people who were against it will align with the majority. Nevertheless it is important to anticipate this as some people may find that the proposal for agreement may totally prejudice their position.

At that stage we will only be able to continue acting for one group. We can only do so with the agreement of everyone. So in order not to have to ask each individual at the time we will be asking the clients who wish to instruct us from the outset that they give us authority to decline or to act for the group we will be choosing at the time to continue to act. We will be acting for the group which represents the highest financial interest already disbursed.

In the case that this group is formed and decides that they wish to vote against the majority or against a proposal which is likely to succeed, then there will be a period of time for the people who disagree to change lawyers and Irwin Mitchell will try their best to assist them to find another suitable lawyer. 

We look forward to hearing from you.

This message was last edited by Irwin Mitchell on 5/30/2008.

 

This message was last edited by Irwin Mitchell on 5/30/2008.

 

Time limit is imminent.

This message was last edited by Irwin Mitchell on 5/30/2008.

This message was last edited by Irwin Mitchell on 5/30/2008.

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Hi everyone involved in this story,

We would like to give you an update with regards to the current situation about San Jose. 

On Wednesday, the Judicial Administrators were finally named for the two companies involved in the procedure through the Trade Register of Alicante. San Jose has as Administrators to Mr. Pedro Agarra (Economist) and Mr. José Luis García (Lawyer). In representation of creditors, it is CAM bank (Caja de Ahorros del Mediterraneo). errada del Tollo has a Administrators to Mr. Jose A. Pascual (economist), Mr. Abraham García (Lawyer) and CAM bank in representation of creditors.  

The above mentioned Judicial Administrators accept and assume jointly the faculties of administration of the companies, being the ordinary exercise left to them to be judged and to authorise and show conformity.

 However, nobody should think or speculate with the idea that CAM bank would be having any sort of favour treatment towards their debts o the ones of their clients. They have the responsibility to watch over all creditors equally. We wanted to point this out in order to avoid clients going to CAM bank thinking they would be having any advantage.

 Administrators, apart from paying to creditors or negotiating with them the way they will be paid, they will be working to finish those projects pending to completion. It is even possible that a bank would be ready to finance the finalization of some projects in order for clients to complete the purchase and in that way, they would be getting cash money for the company. Therefore, not all creditors will be paid in cash or in properties. Each one will have a particular treatment.

 San Jose in the application for voluntary administration included some purchasers as creditors, mainly purchasers of El Pinet, due to this was the most problematic one from the urbanistic point of view. In fact, we were able to have access to this list and are able to check who and for what amount. The rest of people will have to present before the Administrators the receipts of their debt (with private purchase contracts, receipts of payment, etc). Nevertheless, we consider very interesting for some purchasers to present some sort of lawsuits to cancel contracts and claiming back for their money, something that will depend very much on the specific situation of each one. We have to take into account that as much the situation goes on, the resolutions will be more personalized.

 Bearing in mind that in notifications to Administrators or in the judicial procedure the documents to be presented must be originals, please give them just to professionals in whom you trust.

 Finally we would like to inform you that in case of having properties to both companies (San Jose and Herrada del Tollo), you will have to initiate two different procedures although parallel and linked.

 We will keep you informed about any news we could have access to.

 Regards

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

"Administrators, apart from paying to creditors or negotiating with them the way they will be paid, they will be working to finish those projects pending to completion. It is even possible that a bank would be ready to finance the finalization of some projects in order for clients to complete the purchase and in that way, they would be getting cash money for the company. Therefore, not all creditors will be paid in cash or in properties. Each one will have a particular treatment"

Interesting quote....

The main reason for the demise of San jose(in my opinion) is the fact that they started projects in several different locations without License.
Examples; Albatera,stopped no license,El pinet Half Built,license revoked,Jumilla never really started,again license issues.

The other problems affecting this are non issue of Bank Guarantee,again problems caused by San Jose,agents and lawyers.

So in essence they have been masters of their own destruction.
Now we are saying that the banks or other developers are going to take over the projects,get the appropriate licenses and finish all projects as stated.
Unless the banks/developers have powers to overturn government decisions regarding issue of relevant paperwork how is this going to happen?

I have absolutely no Sympathy with San Jose at all and every sympathy with all the purchasers wchich at best were mislead and at worst knowingly lied to.
I do hope there is a good out come for all purchasers involved,i fear it may be a long hard fight......

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Thank You plus advisors for one of the most informative posts i have read on this subject.

Brian

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

thanks from me too.

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Hi all,


FYI: I happen to know that the license issues at Santa Ana are no more. The resort as a whole is composed of several pieces of land owned by different people. There was one of those pieces of land where the owner reneged on the sale and this has caused the delays with achieving the full building licenses. The expropriation of this land has been a long process but finally got agreed in January this year. Santa Ana, in the meantime had already been granted licenses to start works in so far as the foundations (I have a copy of this). This is why they have built lots of foundations and haven't gone any further.
It was obvious that the town hall would not have granted a license to begin works if the full building licenses being granted was any more than just a paperwork issue.
Now that the expropriation has been fully agreed, the building licenses can be granted. The only hitch is that a deposit of several millions has to be made with the town hall to underwrite infrastructure costs before the full paper license can be issued.
Part of the liquidity that the developer needs at the moment is to cover this.
In financial terms, Santa Ana at the moment constitutes a load of deposits which is on average 30% of the total sum that would be received on completing the properties therefore it is logical that any reasonable effort would be made to turn all these 30%s into 100%s which means completing the properties. However, I do understand that this is purely conjecture because no-one can see into the future. This just seems to me the most logical option that an administrator would consider.

On the subject of El Pinet, the issue with the wetlands has now been ruled on in San Jose's favour. This means that the project can continue and be completed now.  The ruling was made in April (I have a copy of the "sentencia" in Spanish). Again, liquidity is required in order to complete the works. In effect, since most properties are betwen 70-90% complete, it would really only be a matter of a few months to a year in order to get things finished but of course this costs money.

I do understand the post made by Georgia but I think that the real fault lies with the banks reneging on their funding deal with San Jose. If it hadn't been for their banks back tracking a funding offer that had been made, the problems would be all resolved right now and we wouldn't even be having these conversations.

Let's hope that the administrators see sense - it's highly likely that they do - and that everyone gets their property!

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

I agree that your information was most informative. Thank you! 

However, there are quite a few cases, (those known to me are properties sold by Atlas and using Aroca as the legal service), where the full price has been paid by the purchaser, (usually part in a bank draft and part IN CASH direct to San Jose, all upon the instructions of Atlas), where, as yet, depite several requests from purchasers, the signing of title deeds has been avoided, (by SJ, and whoever else may be party to such procedures?). In some cases, the 'Final Liquidation' was completed 21 months ago, and still there exists some consequence that is preventing SJ and Aroca from arranging the signing of deeds. We suspect, (our own opinion!) that there may be some financial charge or mortgage in place against the property, despite our having paid in full. And WHY the 'Part Cash' issue??

I have specifically requested clarification regarding the legallity of such a practice, AND for a search to be initiated to check the existence or otherwise of any such charge, but so far, NO ONE WILL REPLY! I have a meeting with the lawyers early in June, and I will post the results so that any other unfortunate, in the same position, can draw their own conclusions. If anyone has a similar issue, we'd like to hear your progress.

PT

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

to life overseas

please provide proof of licences. this proof can then be given to any variety of lawyers, in fact i am sure maria would assist.

please make these available to the open forum as soon as possible.

i know four completely independent abagados who will offer comment on these documents

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Hi Life overseas,
I take it you have sold a few of these properties hence your dilligence on the update of license issue.
two questions i have are, do San Jose have the license for the golf course or supply of water to it and what ever happened to the Albatera development.?

I am sorry if this offends you but i do not beleive all the licenses are in place to finish Jumilla.

The most important question is why were all these developments sold WITHOUT license in the first place and were are the promised bank guarantee..........?

Just to fuel my cynical side,if a builder had received 30% of something for a purchase contract and no house(so in essence nothing)which he could walk away from then would it worth his while to plan,build and incur millions of euros of expense along with a lot of hard work to get the balance?????

Regards
Georgia
PS  "The only hitch is that a deposit of several millions has to be made with the town hall to underwrite infrastructure costs before the full paper license can be issued."

Thats a big hitch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Georgia it has gone quite. perhaps the forgery department is at lunch

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Hi Georgia.

Don't worry about offending. It's better to retain some cynicism than to be too credulous! You don't however, have to believe me. One phone call to the town hall will confirm the information regarding Santa Ana independently of San Jose or any agents.

I will let you know the information that I have been able to find out about the Albatera development in the Spanish press.
  - The licenses are still pending approval.
 - The reason for this is an environmentalist issue with part of the land upon which the resort is to be built being "protected"
 - San Jose has been negotiating with the local council in order to make the project go ahead .
 - The kinds of things they are suggesting is to invest themselves into rehabilitating parts of these protected areas in exchange for licenses to build around them. In addition they are proposing "giving back" some of the land as a type of swap to the local council for recreation areas.
 - This is something pretty common in Spain. Developers will build a school or rehabilitate a church or provide a park for the town or village where they want to build in exchange for getting to build etc.
 - The Mayor  of Albatera has been quoted in the press as saying that as far as he is concerned the project will go ahead and he has given full support to the go ahead during his election campaign.

This is information as per the 14th of May and I couldn't find anything more recent than this.

I don't really know how to answer any of your other questions because at this stage any answer would be purely conjecture.
If I can help in any other way, please let me know.

By the way... I'm not sure what alamred means by "it's gone quite". Maybe you are alarmed and you think it's gone quiet?
And yes, some people have other things to do than reply to posts immediately so sometimes there is a delay. I'm not sure whose forgery department you were speaking about??

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

With regards to the post from LifeOverseas.I could never get my head round the licence issues.Why would Jumilla town hall issue a licence to build to basement level and then not issue the final building licences? Would they be happy to just have all these blocks of concrete blotting the landscape? Cheers Joanniemac

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

I know. It did seem odd at the time to me too. I could only conclude that the town hall were partially issuing the license by doing this as you could not imagine that they would, as you say, allow a load of foundations to just hang around for archeologists in find in thousands of years.  It is undoubtedly a bureacracy issue rather than a logical sense issue. The two often don't go hand in hand.

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

hi lifeoverseas,

This all fine but as you should know the first thing that any agent should do is check for licenses BEFORE you sell anything,all GOOD developers will have on file for public viewing a full set,they are generally over keen to show this as it tends to seperate the wheat from the chaff.

My issue is and i keep getting the same reply from all sources is "the licenses are going to be issued when......." "the licenses were not issued but we will get them when either the sands of time run out or alternatively hell has a ground frost!!!"

No Bank Guarantee,against the law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Its a little like applying for the wings of a plane to be added as it taxis down the runway................................

You do seem on the ball and i hope your info can help people make the right decision to make the most of a bad lot.........

Regards
Georgia

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

life overseas - you really are very funny.

Albatera

Do you release Atlas sold plenty of this stock in 2002 - 2003. San Jose were peddling the same garbage about planning being imminent at Alberata six years ago.

I am happen to pm with my bank account details. You can send me 30% of 175000 euros (villa at albatera) - I can assure you i have a bit of land somewhere in Spain and that planning is imminent. All you need to do is send me 58000 euros, can you do that.

I doubt you will agree so why are peddling this rubbish about San Jose and still selling there properties, you would pay me 58000 on a wing and prayer, but you expect San Jose to still build at Jumilla. That is what San jose have been doing for the last 10 years

When you get fed up and ask for your money back six years later i will tell you some cock and bull story about i have plenty of assets in the name of farmers land and everything will be fine.

As stated if you genuinely have planning licence in your position put in public domain

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Sorry Alamred. I think you have made a mistake. I said that I was recounting something that I read in the Spanish press so I'm not sure where you get the idea from that I have made these things up. I thought that I had made this clear.  If you want to blame anyone for making things up, blame the paper I have translated from. http://www.laverdad.es/alicante/20080514/orihuela/albatera-plan-parcial-sierra-20080514.html
I have never sold property at Albatera. I was responding to a post that Georgia made which was asking what ever happened to it.


I believe that your complaints are being pointed in the wrong direction.
I have simply summarised a newspaper article in order to try and help people who may not have access to/understand the Spanish press.
If you don't like what you read, I suggest you don't read it.

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know

Georgia. I totally understand your point. I don't know if you know this but some people do have bank guarantees on Santa Ana...I'm not sure what the proportion is but there definitely were a number of bank guarantees issued (I have seen some of them). I do think that Santa Ana is a bit of a moot point. Having seen the licenses to begin works and the approved plan parcial allowed quite a lot of people to draw the conclusion that everything was OK. You would think that a council would not approve the building of foundations if they didn't intend to approve the rest! I do understand that some agents began selling on the site before this was even granted though but not all of us did. Of course, no one could predict that San Jose would apply to go into administration just before any of this was sorted out and the fact is, all we can do right now is go into "damage limitation" mode which is why this site is a good way of keeping informed and getting good legal contacts like Maria et al. Where we don't have the power to back track and cancel things that have already happened, we can at least retain the power of information!
I'm sure that this helps us all in protecting ourselves and our clients!

 Spam post or abuse? Please let us know