Rough justice yet again!

maria

yes, that's a good thing. What we desperately need is for someone in government (if the banks won't compensate those they've cheated without taking them to court)  to look at this petition and accept the truth that everyone on it has been cheated and should be compensated for their loss as a result of not being provided with a  BG. Anything else is the government being as guilty as the banks for not implementing their own laws. 

In Good news in Spain! Dartboy said, in his post 30 Jun 2010 00:58
 

More good news i recieved an email today saying that you can now take out insurance when purchasing to protect you from it being illegal.

Sadly, it won't help you, goodstich, & others in your position but it could help new buyers.

Maybe Dartboy could be encouraged to elaborate.

Maria,

I have some questions relating to costs when making claims against the Banks and would be most grateful if you could provide some clarification.

What are the approximate total costs that relate to a lost case against the Bank,, bearing in mind that Banks' lawyers do not come cheap and if the case is lost then clients would have to meet not only their own lawyers fees but also the other parties' fees? We need a ball- park figure to at least gain an appreciation of the financial risks associated with any test case, as to date  we understand there is no case law associated with this type of legal claim against the Banks. Perhaps Keith can also comment on this from their group's perspective?

How many clients would have to join a group action for these financial risks to be minimised, and what sort of final financial outlay would each client have to make provision for if the case is lost?

Is each case against each developer's Bank going to accrue it's own costs? So will the group costs be split between clients on a particular development? Do you intend to notify clients of how many are involved in the group case and give an appreciation of the final costs to make provision for, should the claim not prove successful, before proceeding with the case? In fact have you established a minimum limit to the number of clients required for any one group claim, so as to ensure that the financial burden on clients is not prohibitive?

Does a client have to have won the developer's appeal before action can be brought against the Bank?

Are there any time constraints to taking action against the Bank after the succesful first instance judgement against a developer has been made?

Would you not consider that it would be wiser to only proceed with several cases AFTER an initial test case/precedent has been established? How long will it be before the first test case might reach a conclusion?

Hi maria

the answers to ads last post, will be most welcome, and could be very helpful?

Goodstich, Ads:

I am sure I answered those questions yesterday. It probably is I did finally not click on post reply!

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

 Maria,

I have some questions relating to costs when making claims against the Banks and would be most grateful if you could provide some clarification.

What are the approximate total costs that relate to a lost case against the Bank,, bearing in mind that Banks' lawyers do not come cheap and if the case is lost then clients would have to meet not only their own lawyers fees but also the other parties' fees? Both parties´fees are very similar. They depend on amounts being claimed and generally amount to 10% of amount being claimed. I would say I cannot see people losing this type of cases. We ahve gained information on existing Case Law vwery recently. And it is in our favour. We need a ball- park figure to at least gain an appreciation of the financial risks associated with any test case, as to date  we understand there is no case law associated with this type of legal claim against the Banks. Perhaps Keith can also comment on this from their group's perspective?

How many clients would have to join a group action for these financial risks to be minimised, and what sort of final financial outlay would each client have to make provision for if the case is lost? I can send figures to you but it is you who would have to ellaborate these answers really.

Is each case against each developer's Bank going to accrue it's own costs? Yes, it is.  So will the group costs be split between clients on a particular development? According to amounts being claimed by each one of them. Groups members need to be under iddentical facts to be part of a group action.  Do you intend to notify clients of how many are involved in the group case and give an appreciation of the final costs to make provision for, should the claim not prove successful, before proceeding with the case? Yes, we always provide general information and budget of legal costs in advance. In fact have you established a minimum limit to the number of clients required for any one group claim, so as to ensure that the financial burden on clients is not prohibitive? No, we have not.

Does a client have to have won the developer's appeal before action can be brought against the Bank? No, he does not. He can claim against the Bank once the property have not been finished on time, same day of completion deadline stablished on the contract. 

Are there any time constraints to taking action against the Bank after the succesful first instance judgement against a developer has been made? There is, in our opinion, a long deadline of 15 years.

Would you not consider that it would be wiser to only proceed with several cases AFTER an initial test case/precedent has been established? We have finally found what we ( and our Law Professor´advisor) consider a great precedent already. I am writing a post on this to be on the blog as soon as possible. How long will it be before the first test case might reach a conclusion? Case Law found now.

Thanks so much Maria,

Sorry you had to do this twice!

I forgot to ask, is the amount being claimed as per the first instance judgement?

I look forward to reading your updated blog.

This must be good news to Keith who sounds as though he has done so much behind the scenes.

May I ask a similar question that I asked to Keith.... are you concerned about the liquidity of the Banks given the ECB loan plan and would you be doing a financial stress test against the Banks in question before you would proceed? Are you concerned that the court delays might compromise the final outcome if enforcement becomes necessary and the liquidity of the Banks deteriorates? Could there ever be a situation where they won't have sufficient funds to meet the claims or might the government step in to protect their interests?

Hi Maria

I think you may find that the post you put on here corrupted the thread somehow. Many of us could not see the posts before yours & your post made no sense with funny text & symbols also many of us couldn't post after yours so I created a thread to alert Justin who tried twice to clear it before he managed. That could explain why it's not here. He needed to remove it.

Keith has done.... inmense, inmense work behind the scenes. He has been ( and is being) an extraordinary pivotal, lighthouse.. reference. I cannot tell.

He deserves almost all the merit ( the rest is for my dear people at the Costaluzlawyers team and  De Castro)

I am not a financial expert but I am not particuarly  concerned about financial capability of Banks to answer these claims.

The owner of AIFOS is found not guilty of fraud:
http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_26630.shtml

Well here we have the rather sickening and yet totally unsurprising news. Yet more proof how utterly corrupt the Spanish "justice"

System is. If do wonder what exactly you have to do to get convicted of fraud in Spain ? If ever there was someone as guilty as hell this man is it.

This this just about sums up how utterly hopeless the chances we have.

The sooner Spains membership of the EEC is revoked and their handouts stopped the better. 

This message was last edited by johnmfranci5 on 06/07/2010.

johnfranci5

yes, this sadly just confirms what anyone with common sense knows full well.  As you say, what chance justice with a farce like this?.  Compensation from the handouts from the EU, is the only fair way if Spain won't accept it's responsability to those it's cheated. Can't see that happening though?. The EU won't help, even though we are supposed to tow their line!.  Bloody pathetic.

One question........

Did he illegally remove assets after enforcement orders were placed following successful first instance judgements for breach of contract? (i.e. more criminal charges to face?)

ads

not sure on that one?. In our case, when we refused to complete due to several huge breaches of contract, Aifos wrote to my lawyer saying they had sold our apartment by 'mistake' , and offered us an alternative half the size and then wouldn't negotiate a discount. Just a bunch of liars from start to finish. Everyone knows that .........apart from the Spanish justice system of course!!

At last those poor misunderstood agents, developers along with their complicit lawyers and bank officials have something to cheer them up. Spains football team are providing an uplift in their hard times.

Good news for all of Spain and indeed everyone in Spain and I wish them every success.

More good news the weather is to continue to be hot and dry.

Would have posted this on Good news in Spain but felt that perhaps a little cross polution of threads was in order.

Good luck Spain and am looking forward to my impending move.

Well done Vilprano. Hope you feel much better now!

Tish

yes, great eh! .

For those of you who wants to know :)

 Legal tip 312. Banks are liable. Case Law
06 July 2010 @ 07:36

Hi maria

is provision 1.2 talking about current sales going through, or is it saying that because the banks broke the rules, that those who never had guarantees will be able to claim back their losses from the banks who cheated them?

Goodstich44:

Provision 1.2 says that it is the Banks´responsability to ensure the guarantees for the refund are in place. This can work in both of the scenarios you are describing

maria

as it's common knowledge now that under law 57/68, many people were cheated through not having a BG, do you think the goverment, under increasing prssure from those wronged, petitions, lobbying etc, will set up a legal government team or legal representative to stand up for those so clearly wronged?.  Without representation from a legal body then it seems all those without BG's could  face years of litigation with no guarantee of a win, despite everyone knowing they are very clearly in the right.  I guess some will give it a go, but I think with the current justice system, most will think the risk of timescale and costs too high unless enough on a particular development to form a joint action to make the risk viable as has been mentioned?