View Full Version : The Tenerife illegal lettings thread
Angusjim
24-06-2012, 12:33
I think this whole situation is going to get much worse before it gets better, if all agents ran their businesses like Loaded & Oasis then no issues but I am afraid with the likes of Konrad's set up the owners are in for a nightmare. And all this is meant to improve the current situation the government in Tenerife make the UK's Pinky & Perky seem quite sensible.:spin:
As far as the government is concerned they have a company in place calling the shots who they can speak to and dictate to at any time..... they also have a set of standards laid out that this company has to follow in order to give the tourists a good service.
Thats all they're worried about really, they don't care if the owner gets a rough deal of the sole agent.
From my experience the reality will be this: Kurt konrad will have built the development, at the time of building them he will have registered all 100% of the complex with the tourist board..... then he will have sold off a certain amount of properties and kept others perhaps.
Although it looks like he only has 30% of the complex I bet if you checked with the cabildo as to how many he has REGISTERED the figure will be over 50%+1.
Allow me to explain a little further...... when a property is to be rented to tourists the sole agents has to REGISTER it with the cabildo, if the owner decides not to rent the apartment any more the sole agent should DE-REGISTER the apartment - if they do not do this then they are likely to be fined if the cabildo realise.....
The problem is that the cabildo do not check which are actively being let out and wether or not the sole agent is still holding keys and in control of each unit (it's too much work) so the cabildo rely on the hoensty of each sole agent to keep their list up to date.
I have always kept our list up to date and regularly add and subtract units from our registration when the need arises, when I was at the cabildo recently taking some units off, the guy in the cabildo made a comment along the lines of "you're the only one who ever does it"..... this was a surprise to me and I replied that it's in my own interest to keep it up to date, particularly at the moment when I'm applying for 3 stars and an inspection was iminent, the last thing I wanted during that inspection was to asked to show the inspector 3 apartments selected randomly and have to say "sorry I haven't actually got keys for that one!".
The best thing to do if I were you is go to the cabildo with your escritura and ID and ask how many properties are registered to Konrad..... you could also ask if your property is registered there too, if it is then you can de-register it there and then - after this I would explain the situation to the other owners - if there is a sizeable amount you could then go to Konrad with a threat of a mass "DE-REGISTRATION" of the units he is not in control of...... but BE VERY CAREFUL BECAUSE:
This is pretty much what happened at Los Geranios and the problem after you've usurped a sole agent there has to be a plan in place as to who will be put in place or you will end up with a "dormant touristic" complex with NO ONE ALLOWED TO RENT AT ALL.
Before you do this I would try to know your enemy a little better, what are his overheads, how much does it cost him to run the reception, how much is he paying staff, what other overheads is he paying for the owners? (community, water, electrics etc)....... how much does he charge guests to stay? What are the commissions he pays - they will be from 10% to 25% of the booking fees, but knowing how most of them work it will be 25% most of the time..... what is his expected occupancy and based on that how much is he paying an owner based on that?
The problem is that it's easier for a sole agent to say to an owner "I'll pay you 350 euros a month wether it's full or empty and I'll pay all the bills for you" rather than the way we do it which is "we'll pay you x per day it's occupied but won't guarantee how much it's occupied because theres good times and bad times" - think about it from an accounting point of view how much easier it is to say "you get this a month regardless" where as we trawl through the months bookings and pay each owner accordingly.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Also re the "monopoly".... the tourist board aren't interested in individual owners having a choice who has their apartment, as far as they're concerned you "choice" is based on which complex you buy on, so if one complex pays buggar all, your choice is to buy on a complex that pays more.
The tourist board don't want competition between 2 companies on one complex - they want competition between one complex and another next door.
You have hit the nail on the head. I went to the Cabildo and he has 144 (out of 244) apartments registered with them. I have requested written confirmation of which actual apartments are on the list (via the administrator) and should be receiving that through the post this week. As you say ... the problems really do begin then. What to do with the information once I have it????? I don't know his overheads etc ..... just what he is offering owners ..............4,600€ per year, plus he pays the community fees and the basura tax. This would probably appear a fair amount to some ... but when you think some owners paid well over 300,000€ for a one bed apartment (if they bought in the past few years) so it is an horrendous return on their investment. Plus ... as the owners are not allowed to use the apartment themselves (apart from the four weeks to be taken at a specified quiet time of the year) the only way to look at it is as a "return on their investment" .... otherwise why buy in the first place??? Some on here would say that if you invest in property over here with the idea that you are purchasing a "holiday home" then you should buy on a residential site and use your apartment as a home from home. If that is the intent of the government then similarly, if you buy on a touristic site you should be looking for a return on your investment by letting out to tourists (via the sole agent ofcourse!) I can't see why anyone would bother to buy on a touristic site if these are the returns on offer ... why not just put your money in the bank and pay for a holiday each year?
Also re your point that the govt are looking to create competition between complexes ..... well there are no other complexes with a tourist licence in our area for Altamira to compete with!!! From Playa Paraiso to Fañabe, Altamira is the only complex with a licence!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
As far as the government is concerned they have a company in place calling the shots who they can speak to and dictate to at any time..... they also have a set of standards laid out that this company has to follow in order to give the tourists a good service.
Thats all they're worried about really, they don't care if the owner gets a rough deal of the sole agent.
I don't understand why a couple (or even a few) agents couldn't operate on one site, all be registered and all have to comply with the rules, regulatations and dictates from the tourist board. Surely as far as they are concerned it would make for a massive improvement to be offering a good service and choice to both the apartment owners and the holiday makers at the same time!!
Peterrayner
24-06-2012, 14:29
As far as the government is concerned they have a company in place calling the shots who they can speak to and dictate to at any time..... they also have a set of standards laid out that this company has to follow in order to give the tourists a good service.
Thats all they're worried about really, they don't care if the owner gets a rough deal off the sole agent.
and it is in their interests therefore that the potential owners dont realise the pitfalls of purchasing on a touristic site.
Lets hope for the sake of the majority, who arent fortunate enough to have purchased on sites run by the few decent agencies, that the new draft laws will address some of these concerns.
Isn't it possible for the owners to form their own company to operate as the sole agency? In this way each owner can (eventually) give the existing agent his marching orders and force out a poor agent?
and it is in their interests therefore that the potential owners dont realise the pitfalls of purchasing on a touristic site.
Lets hope for the sake of the majority, who arent fortunate enough to have purchased on sites run by the few decent agencies, that the new draft laws will address some of these concerns.
Peterrayner
24-06-2012, 14:50
Theoretically possible yes I believe so.
But then there is the issue of acquiring the 50%+1 requirement if an existing sole agent is in place
and perhaps a 100% mandate of owners if the touristic licence has lapsed ????
Theoretically possible yes I believe so.
But then there is the issue of acquiring the 50%+1 requirement if an existing sole agent is in place
and perhaps a 100% mandate of owners if the touristic licence has lapsed ????
Someone correct me if I'm wrong ... but I am lead to believe that the 100% previously required to resurrect a lapsed licence has been reduced to 50%+1.
the 100% was reduced to 50% +1 but now if the registration has been scrapped by the tourist board (something they were checking up on these last few months) then 100% are now needed again.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
You have hit the nail on the head. I went to the Cabildo and he has 144 (out of 244) apartments registered with them. I have requested written confirmation of which actual apartments are on the list (via the administrator) and should be receiving that through the post this week. As you say ... the problems really do begin then. What to do with the information once I have it????? I don't know his overheads etc ..... just what he is offering owners ..............4,600€ per year, plus he pays the community fees and the basura tax. This would probably appear a fair amount to some ... but when you think some owners paid well over 300,000€ for a one bed apartment (if they bought in the past few years) so it is an horrendous return on their investment. Plus ... as the owners are not allowed to use the apartment themselves (apart from the four weeks to be taken at a specified quiet time of the year) the only way to look at it is as a "return on their investment" .... otherwise why buy in the first place??? Some on here would say that if you invest in property over here with the idea that you are purchasing a "holiday home" then you should buy on a residential site and use your apartment as a home from home. If that is the intent of the government then similarly, if you buy on a touristic site you should be looking for a return on your investment by letting out to tourists (via the sole agent ofcourse!) I can't see why anyone would bother to buy on a touristic site if these are the returns on offer ... why not just put your money in the bank and pay for a holiday each year?
Hmmmm I would say the 2 issues are seperate, you're getting 4600 as a net return after all costs, this works out as 383.33 euros per month after electric, water, community, IBI the lot...... if you add all those costs up: (guessed figures) : Community fees: 1200, electriocs 600, water 200, IBI 400 = 2400 in costs... this means he's paying you 7000 per year less bills.
On Paloma Beach we reckon to achieve 40 weeks per year for owners which works out at 7000 euros, less their costs which are around 2250 per year= net return of 4750 which is a very similar figure to what Konrad is offering.
"AAAAAAAhhhhh but the apartments cost people 300,000 euros not 125,000 like on Paloma Beach" I hear you say....... well, yes but that is not the sole agents fault that people paid what they did - the sole agent can only pay owners based on what they can charge clients. I just did a search for a week in September at Altamira and it came out as 290 euros for a self catering 1 bed apartment, at Paloma Beach we're charging 325 for the same week...... so the 2 complexes are roughly equally matched as far as cost to client is concerned.
Lets assume Konrad can get 40 weeks out of an apartment as well, 290 x 40 = 11600 euros per year. there will be commission from 10% to 25%, and judging by Konrads websites natural search position I'd say most bookings are from a travel agent or tour operatour so lets say he pays 15% of that 11600 in commission: 11600 - 1740 = 9860.... he pays the owner 4600 and all the bills too 2400 so 9860 - 7000 (4600+2400) = 2860 euros.
He then has to clean it for each booking and change sheets towels etc (lets say 20 euros per booking and thats cheap!) = 40 x 20 = 800
So now we're on 2000 euros pre tax profit per apartment before we take into account any other costs he may have like:
Staff to work the 24 hour reception.
Website costs and advertising.
Someone to do basic maintenance in the apartments (change light bulbs, re wire plugs, fix random stuff etc).
Does he own the Reception or pay community a rent?
Office costs such as: paper, ink, pcs, electrics, uniforms for staff.....
Laundry costs
Accountancy costs
Public liability Insurance
Tax at 24% of the profits........
Suddenly not looking that bad an offer for the owner, particularly when you consider that we just did this based on 15% commission, most OTAs and TA's charge more than this.
Also re your point that the govt are looking to create competition between complexes ..... well there are no other complexes with a tourist licence in our area for Altamira to compete with!!! From Playa Paraiso to Fañabe, Altamira is the only complex with a licence!
Again, not Konrads problam that no one near this place has got a license - the government aren't going to create special rules for Altamira to have 5 management agents because theres no one nearby competing with them - they don't want competition between the complex!
I don't understand why a couple (or even a few) agents couldn't operate on one site, all be registered and all have to comply with the rules, regulatations and dictates from the tourist board. Surely as far as they are concerned it would make for a massive improvement to be offering a good service and choice to both the apartment owners and the holiday makers at the same time!!
Arrival at reception:
Me " Hi I'm checking in"
Receptionist: "whats your name please?"
Me "Fred Bloggs".
Receptionist "sorry you're not booked in with us, try the office next door".
Goes next door:
Me " Hi I'm checking in"
Receptionist: "whats your name please?"
Me "Fred Bloggs".
Receptionist "sorry you're not booked in with us, try the office next door".
me "I just did they said come here"
Receptionist "Oh ok, try the office over there then".
Goes over there
Me " Hi I'm checking in"
Receptionist: "whats your name please?"
Me "Fred Bloggs".
Receptionist "sorry you're not booked in with us, try the office back over there".
Me "I just came from over there."
Receptionist " have you tried Reception?"
ME "yes"
REceptionist "then try that one over there"
Goes over there
Me " Hi I'm checking in"
Receptionist: "whats your name please?"
Me "Fred Bloggs".
Receptionist "Ah yes you're here for one night and have taken so long trying to check in that it's now time for you to vacate, thanks for staying with us!"
junglejim
24-06-2012, 16:47
Interesting numbers Loaded - our information from Turismo is that as it's a "Dormant" licence we only need 50%+1 to vote in favor.
In Terms of returns , my understanding is his offers elsewhere (Panorama & Santa maria) are a lot less .
People who had this arrangement in Los Geranios previously had terrible trouble getting any payments .
As far as his costs go a great deal are bumped onto general community costs (Technicos, reception, general maintenance, Insurance) so that community were subsidising his hotel business - we had many fights with him over what should be paid and his threats to us were frequent.He aslo does the same in Panorama and Club Atlantis ( No majority).
To be fair, forming your own community sole agent is possible but the same arguments will arise as to who pays for what on the Touristic side etc.
We have a number of Spanish Residents in our complex who don't want to pay for anything!- not even a security guard!
Depends what you are doing:
If there is an existing license holder and you get 50%+1 then you can be the new sole agent.
If there is an existing license hodler who has dissapeared but the license is still in place you can get 50+1....
If there was an agent who has now gone and the tourist board has inspected the complex and no one was there, they will "close" the complex meaning a new license (not license holder) would need to be applied for. In that instance you'd need 100%
Peterrayner
24-06-2012, 17:31
If there was an agent who has now gone and the tourist board has inspected the complex and no one was there, they will "close" the complex meaning a new license (not license holder) would need to be applied for. In that instance you'd need 100%
and it could be ( stress "could be" its any ones guess really ) that they could now be considering relaxing for these dormant touristic sites, other wise they are going to find themselves short of legal touristic accommodation and with the enforced refurbishments of these sites this will also help the local economy.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
perhaps it might be clearer to refer to them as
1. legal touristic. Agent in place
2. dormant touristic. No agent but still licenced
3. lapsed touristic. No agent and no licence. So in effect a default residential.
[QUOTE=Loaded;192127]the 100% was reduced to 50% +1 but now if the registration has been scrapped by the tourist board (something they were checking up on these last few months) then 100% are now needed again.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Loaded x I'm not getting into a row with you x I appreciate you don't make the rules .. you just abide by them. My view is that the rules are not logical. Point 1 ... Irrespective of what he pays, if the govt wishes for foreigners to invest in the property market here, for anyone (now that all this has come to light) to look at touristic complexes as an investment opportunity, then the possible returns should correspond somewhat to the investment cost. I'm not sure where you found your example of a week in September (and I'm not doubting that you have found this special offer somewhere) but usually he charges 450€ per week. As I have said though..... most owners bugbare (sp?) is the fact that they can not use their apartment themselves. They were far prefer to be paid a set amount per night that is actually booked and then be billed for cleaning. maintenance etc etc.
Point 2 .... I didn't say it was Konrad's problem that there was no competition in the area .... (infact I'm sure he's delighted!!) .... purely that if there were competition allowed within the complex, owners would be free to choose a system that suited them, rather than the rigid system Konrad insists upon.
Point 3 ..... I suggested that more than one agent operate in the complex ... not that each agent would run their own reception! If the rule applied that each apartment could only be registered with one agent, then each agent would log each of their bookings onto a centralised computer base. Your Mr Bloggs would arrive at reception and all the information regarding his booking would appear on the receptionists computer screen in exactly the same way as if the booking had been taken by a sole agent. Any problem would be referred to the agent responsible for that booking/apartment. Reception would correlate all the information required about the booking to be passed to the tourist board.
Maybe I'm being naive ... but I can honestly see no reason why every complex should have one agent running the rentals. The entire system promotes corruption. Say the agent requires just a few apartments to obtain his 50%+1 are you telling me the likes of the Konrads of this world wouldn't give a little sweetener to encourage someone to side with him? I know people say that if you don't like what Konrad offers, then buy somewhere else ..... but it is not as simple as that. For most owners, in Altamira atleast, if he just offered a more flexible system .... or allowed another agent in under his umbrella to offer another scheme .... they would be happy. Most have bought there because they like the position, they like the complex, over the years they make lots of friends etc etc ... this business of having to go through the one specific agent is the only thing upsetting everyone.
At the end of the day though ... if the govt is so insistent on the fact that a sole agent is the only way to go ... then they should also insist that agents can not just offer a flat rate for the entire year .. take it or leave it. For those owners who wish to use their holiday homes themselves at times other than the four weeks in May/June/Oct/Nov that he allows them, they should be offered another option whereby the agent pays them an agreed amount per night's booking.
I also think that some mention of the fact that if you wish to holiday let your apartment you can only do it through the onsite sole agent, should appear in the escritura.
You seem to think that I am blaming the agent .. I'm blaming the govt for allowing such a law.
Hi foz - not taking this as an argument just healthy discussion. :wink:
The 290 I found was by going on tripadvsior and searching for a random week it was sept 1st.
I appreciate that the ROI is not good but Konrad can only charge clients what he think he can fairly charge them, if 300 per week is all he can get then yes it makes buying an apartment for 300,000 a poor ROI but to make it a good one he needs to charge 600 per week at least, but then owners would complain that they never get any bookings cos they're all of elsewhere that's cheaper.
Hi foz - not taking this as an argument just healthy discussion. :wink:
The 290 I found was by going on tripadvsior and searching for a random week it was sept 1st.
I appreciate that the ROI is not good but Konrad can only charge clients what he think he can fairly charge them, if 300 per week is all he can get then yes it makes buying an apartment for 300,000 a poor ROI but to make it a good one he needs to charge 600 per week at least, but then owners would complain that they never get any bookings cos they're all of elsewhere that's cheaper.
As I said ... I'm not blaming Konrad .. the point I was making was an attack on the govt system ... wish I hadn't mentioned it to be honest!!! As I've said a number of times .. most people are complaining about the fact they can't use their place themselves (apart from the four weeks he specifies) more than the amount he offers.
I could also mention that the apartments he has on his books are far inferior to the privately owned (illegally rented out) apartments. The private owners have put in new bathrooms and kitchens, air conditioning in a lot of cases, safes, washing machines, flat screen tvs, often leather sofas etc etc etc. His places are far more basic. If an owner puts their place with him, he removes their quality furniture and puts in his own basic stuff. (I don't know whether owners are charged for storage of their furniture or not!) Most people coming to Altamira (to the illegally let private places) are willing to pay more than other apartment complexes in the south because they feel that being amongst all the 5* hotels and on the del Duque beach, in a quiet area is worth paying a premium. Most rented their places out for 330.00 pounds a week. Then paid for cleaning and all other costs on top. Once you work it out it's not much different to the money offered by Konrad .... it really is the fact that owners lose all control of their own apartment, rather than being able to add their own personal touches and use their own place when and for how long they choose.
Whatever side of the discussion someone is on I cannot believe that everybody does not agree that an owner of a property should be allowed to use it whenever they wish. I also believe that providing an apartment meets the standard required by Tourismo then a sole agent should not be able to dictate what furnishings etc are in it - as happens on some complexes now.
Angusjim
25-06-2012, 12:45
Would it not be best to go back and start over where sole agents would have to re apply or new ones apply to the authorities to be a registered sole agent having to meet all criteria set out. The complexes would go thru a similar process then THEY would invite sole agents to apply for the licence to run the OWNERS complex. Would cause some pain for a while but at least it could be properly regulated for the benefit of both parties and sole agents such as Loaded who run good businesses will be welcomed back but others who currently run rough shod over owners can be booted out. Seems to me the current discussions do not seem to include the people who actually own the properties, I have probably over simplied the process but seems a good place to start
Arrival at reception:
Me " Hi I'm checking in"
Receptionist: "whats your name please?"
Me "Fred Bloggs".
Receptionist "sorry you're not booked in with us, try the office next door".
Goes next door:
Me " Hi I'm checking in"
Receptionist: "whats your name please?"
Me "Fred Bloggs".
Receptionist "sorry you're not booked in with us, try the office next door".
me "I just did they said come here"
Receptionist "Oh ok, try the office over there then".
Goes over there
Me " Hi I'm checking in"
Receptionist: "whats your name please?"
Me "Fred Bloggs".
Receptionist "sorry you're not booked in with us, try the office back over there".
Me "I just came from over there."
Receptionist " have you tried Reception?"
ME "yes"
REceptionist "then try that one over there"
Goes over there
Me " Hi I'm checking in"
Receptionist: "whats your name please?"
Me "Fred Bloggs".
Receptionist "Ah yes you're here for one night and have taken so long trying to check in that it's now time for you to vacate, thanks for staying with us!"
The above is what was permitted pre 1995 where you could have several agents operating on one complex. One of the reasons the law was brought in was to prevent this type of situation, also the many agents were asked to sign an agreement that they would help a guest if the agent who had rented the property was not present - guess what? they refused to sign! Also the tourist board required a single point of call as their inspectors had similar problems when visiting a site trying to speak with the agent responsible for a particular apartment.
Having several agents on one complex - has been tried and has failed. :(
[QUOTE=Oasis;192425]The above is what was permitted pre 1995 where you could have several agents operating on one complex. One of the reasons the law was brought in was to prevent this type of situation, also the many agents were asked to sign an agreement that they would help a guest if the agent who had rented the property was not present - guess what? they refused to sign! Also the tourist board required a single point of call as their inspectors had similar problems when visiting a site trying to speak with the agent responsible for a particular apartment.
Our current sole agent does not have an office based on site. A holiday makers only point of contact is the reception staff. So why can't a number of agents contribute to the cost of reception and the reception staff deal with queries/problems etc and report back to the relevant agent?
The above is what was permitted pre 1995 where you could have several agents operating on one complex. One of the reasons the law was brought in was to prevent this type of situation, also the many agents were asked to sign an agreement that they would help a guest if the agent who had rented the property was not present - guess what? they refused to sign! Also the tourist board required a single point of call as their inspectors had similar problems when visiting a site trying to speak with the agent responsible for a particular apartment.
Having several agents on one complex - has been tried and has failed. :(
well thats just palin wrong to say that. to start with you are assuming that all complex's operate with a reception, that famous essential part of the sole agent system. Most private renters are self catering without receptions. the customers often have keys posted to their uk address. They arrive in resort and just let themselves into their accomodation.
There are already sites with multiple agents as well, there are agents on our complex. Often they do airport pick ups and transport customers to accomodation. Either way the sytsem works well, all around the world it is poosible to stay self catering in a property without a reception.
You sole agents understanderbly want to keep the system going, thats fair enough. But please dont try to justify on any sort of practicle and necsary basis. A system of free choice of agent or individual renting would work fine, thousands of renters have been doing that for years with no problems and to the benefit of the canary economy.
We contribute towards the reception costs it works!
well thats just palin wrong to say that. to start with you are assuming that all complex's operate with a reception, that famous essential part of the sole agent system. Most private renters are self catering without receptions. the customers often have keys posted to their uk address. They arrive in resort and just let themselves into their accomodation.
There are already sites with multiple agents as well, there are agents on our complex. Often they do airport pick ups and transport customers to accomodation. Either way the sytsem works well, all around the world it is poosible to stay self catering in a property without a reception.
You sole agents understanderbly want to keep the system going, thats fair enough. But please dont try to justify on any sort of practicle and necsary basis. A system of free choice of agent or individual renting would work fine, thousands of renters have been doing that for years with no problems and to the benefit of the canary economy.
Firstly what I quoted is fact!!
Secondly what you are quoting is all illegal - that's why you are getting fined.
junglejim
25-06-2012, 15:18
How's about this Loaded? From Konrad
Me-"Hi I'm checking in !"
K "Fine , here's your keys "
Me - "There's no kettle"
K - "Oh you can rent it 20 euros please "
Me -"There's no safe"
K- "you can rent one - 30 euros please"
Me " there's no toaster"
K - " You can rent one - 10 Euros"
Me " The towels are threadbare, the matress is dirty and hard"
K " Tough"
Me " The TV doesn't do English"
K -" You've a TV!? That'll be 30 Euros - it shouldn't be there !"
Me "I've lost my receipt for safe key but here's the key - can I have my deposit back please?"
K " No!"
Been there , done that!
Firstly what I quoted is fact!!
Secondly what you are quoting is all illegal - that's why you are getting fined.
Couldn't be put any clearer.
The problem with Nelson is that she only sees what it suits her to see in any post.
Red Devil
25-06-2012, 15:39
How's about this Loaded? From Konrad
Me-"Hi I'm checking in !"
K "Fine , here's your keys "
Me - "There's no kettle"
K - "Oh you can rent it 20 euros please "
Me -"There's no safe"
K- "you can rent one - 30 euros please"
Me " there's no toaster"
K - " You can rent one - 10 Euros"
Me " The towels are threadbare, the matress is dirty and hard"
K " Tough"
Me " The TV doesn't do English"
K -" You've a TV!? That'll be 30 Euros - it shouldn't be there !"
Me "I've lost my receipt for safe key but here's the key - can I have my deposit back please?"
K " No!"
Been there , done that!
Can confirm that is 100% right . When we stayed there, in lovely privately owned apartment, double balcony, plush furnishings, new tv etc the poor couple next door were in one of Konrads apartments and were amazed cos we had a telly!
It was a sparse dingy place, all the furniture made of wrought iron, including the sofa, all for ease of cleaning, not a decent cushion anywhere, ripped sun blind- horrible! Why would Konrad care,he was getting the bookings - and they reckon this is the way forward for tourism in Tenerife. More like the 1980's
Firstly what I quoted is fact!!
Secondly what you are quoting is all illegal - that's why you are getting fined.
ok , I accept that there may have been problems back then with multiple agents all on reception all acting like John Cleese to other peoples customers.
But what i am saying is that independant travellors today can actually book an apartment/villa / cottage, anywhere in the world and travel to it with the keys ,and then let themselves in and have a great stay, without a reception at all.
I know you may wake up screaming at the thought oasis, but this does happen.
ok , I accept that there may have been problems back then with multiple agents all on reception all acting like John Cleese to other peoples customers.
But what i am saying is that independant travellors today can actually book an apartment/villa / cottage, anywhere in the world and travel to it with the keys ,and then let themselves in and have a great stay, without a reception at all.
I know you may wake up screaming at the thought oasis, but this does happen.
I don't dispute that one little bit and they are doing it completely legally in any property they book, even in Tenerife, but on Tenerife the person letting the property has to let the property in compliance with the Law - they can't holiday let a property on a residential complex at all and on a touristic complex, they have to do it according to the law EVEN IF THE LAW IS A TOTAL ASS
That seems to be the part you either don't understand or are just ignoring when it's pointed out to you.
I don't dispute that one little bit and they are doing it completely legally in any property they book, even in Tenerife, but on Tenerife the person letting the property has to let the property in compliance with the Law - they can't holiday let a property on a residential complex at all and on a touristic complex, they have to do it according to the law EVEN IF THE LAW IS A TOTAL ASS
That seems to be the part you either don't understand or are just ignoring when it's pointed out to you.
no bobmac, dont be daft, I know that it is against the law, you tell me often enough.
But I always say the same thing back, the law is wrong and should be reformed, suadi women drivers etc.
Trust you to come into a debate about whether people need to have receptions in self catering accomodation or not with your ususal battlecry;
NO DEBATING ALLOWED, REMEMBER ALL WHAT MATTERS IS THAT IT IS ILLEGAL IN THE CANARIES.
If we all took any notice of you bobmac, this thread would have never got into the guiness book of records.
Try breaking your habit and think of reasons why people must be complelled to have receptions or agree with me that they perhaps do not.
well thats just palin wrong to say that. to start with you are assuming that all complex's operate with a reception, that famous essential part of the sole agent system. Most private renters are self catering without receptions. the customers often have keys posted to their uk address. They arrive in resort and just let themselves into their accomodation.
There are already sites with multiple agents as well, there are agents on our complex. Often they do airport pick ups and transport customers to accomodation. Either way the sytsem works well, all around the world it is poosible to stay self catering in a property without a reception.
You sole agents understanderbly want to keep the system going, thats fair enough. But please dont try to justify on any sort of practicle and necsary basis. A system of free choice of agent or individual renting would work fine, thousands of renters have been doing that for years with no problems and to the benefit of the canary economy.
SO why can't M&S and Sainsbury sell each others products, and why can't I take my faulty washing machine(bought in Carrefor) back to Al Campo?It wouldn't work,didn't work and doesn't need to work.The single rental office will work with some modifications.
How's about this Loaded? From Konrad
Me-"Hi I'm checking in !"
K "Fine , here's your keys "
Me - "There's no kettle"
K - "Oh you can rent it 20 euros please "
Me -"There's no safe"
K- "you can rent one - 30 euros please"
Me " there's no toaster"
K - " You can rent one - 10 Euros"
Me " The towels are threadbare, the matress is dirty and hard"
K " Tough"
Me " The TV doesn't do English"
K -" You've a TV!? That'll be 30 Euros - it shouldn't be there !"
Me "I've lost my receipt for safe key but here's the key - can I have my deposit back please?"
K " No!"
Been there , done that!
Exactly ... the notion that having a sole agent on each complex is so that the quality of tourism will increase is just ludicrous. Ensuring that every owner HAS to hand over their holiday home to the one sole option of agents, can, in a lot of cases, mean that the quality is lowered. Over the past few years, owners on our complex have increased the quality of their apartments to such an extent that some are really quite luxurious. They try to out do each other in the service they provide to ensure repeat bookings. (Providing welcome packs, leaving as much information as possible in the apartment to ensure their guest has a great stay etc etc. Regulars get treated to their favourite tipple being left on arrival. Apartments are decorated with Christmas trees with prezzies for Christmas guests. Bottles of cava left for those celebrating a special birthday etc etc. Non of that would happen with out competition.
no bobmac, dont be daft, I know that it is against the law, you tell me often enough.
But I always say the same thing back, the law is wrong and should be reformed, suadi women drivers etc.
Trust you to come into a debate about whether people need to have receptions in self catering accomodation or not with your ususal battlecry;
NO DEBATING ALLOWED, REMEMBER ALL WHAT MATTERS IS THAT IT IS ILLEGAL IN THE CANARIES.
If we all took any notice of you bobmac, this thread would have never got into the guiness book of records.
Try breaking your habit and think of reasons why people must be complelled to have receptions or agree with me that they perhaps do not.
You seem to have trouble grasping the idea that I actually agree with you that this law is a complete C??k up and needs to be amended; where we differ is that I don't agree with you that totally scrapping any level of control on holiday lettings is the way forward - I actually think that that would make the situation even worse.
The fact that this law is an complete ass doesn't however mean that you can totally ignore it, it is a Canarian law and until they get round to changing it, everybody has to work within it's ludicrous constraints. The main thing that needs to be changed is the farcical position that this law creates with the single agent per complex which leads to some of the agents taking the p?ss out of the owners.
How's about this Loaded? From Konrad
Me-"Hi I'm checking in !"
K "Fine , here's your keys "
Me - "There's no kettle"
K - "Oh you can rent it 20 euros please "
Me -"There's no safe"
K- "you can rent one - 30 euros please"
Me " there's no toaster"
K - " You can rent one - 10 Euros"
Me " The towels are threadbare, the matress is dirty and hard"
K " Tough"
Me " The TV doesn't do English"
K -" You've a TV!? That'll be 30 Euros - it shouldn't be there !"
Me "I've lost my receipt for safe key but here's the key - can I have my deposit back please?"
K " No!"
Been there , done that!
Good customer service ! What you moaning about???
It should ll be there included in the rental price hes the Ryan Air of apartment rental.
saravanan15
26-06-2012, 09:38
Thanks for your valuable information. Nice Post.
golf birdie
26-06-2012, 10:11
makes me laugh when I hear that the complexes have to reach 3 star by law. If my experience of some 4 and 5 star place here is anything to go by to achieve 3 stars would require 4 walls, a roof and a door. Would not worry too much about much else.
Well the truth is its actually very hard to get up to 3 star as I've found out it's taken me 18 months of hard work bending every owners arm to do really basic things like let me put in full length mirror , a hairdryer etc.... One even insisted on not changing their 1m80 beds which are 15 years old at least....
Then there's community side, persuading all of the owners who don't let not to vote against things you need the complex to have that's out of your control as sole agent.... Very difficult
Others arguing that there existing mirror "shows all of the body if you stand far enough back"....
Our 800w hair dryer from 1986 still works, why do we have to pay 25 euros for a new 2000w one?
What do they require in 3* apartment then?
Too much to list it's in decreto 142/2010
golf birdie
26-06-2012, 12:57
What do they require in 3* apartment then?
let me help, 4 walls, a roof and a door. Plus on some sites maybe a brown envelope:laugh:
Funny this lass came into the office just the other day, started asking for all sorts a kettle, a safe, toaster, English TV, deposits back etc etc
Warraya think is is love a residential complex?
Check out The Mail on Sunday this weekend. Should be an an interesting article on all this .......... so I hear!
siliconephil
28-06-2012, 09:52
Can anyone point me in the direction of the law that states it is illegal for me to rent out my property for a week?
Philip
Can anyone point me in the direction of the law that states it is illegal for me to rent out my property for a week?
Philip
Here are all the relevant links
http://noticias.juridicas.com/base_datos/CCAA/ic-l7-1995.t2.html#
http://noticias.juridicas.com/base_datos/CCAA/ic-l5-1999.html
http://noticias.juridicas.com/base_datos/CCAA/ic-l14-2009.html
http://www.gobiernodecanarias.org/boc/2010/204/001.html
It is only illegal to let out your property for a week if it is on a residential complex. If it is on a touristic complex, as long as you let it within the legal guidelines, it is perfectly legal to let it for a week.
You should also read this article from Loaded's website - http://www.propertyforsaleintenerife.com/all-articles-re-holiday-lettings-in-tenerife.asp which explains it
junglejim
28-06-2012, 13:04
Too much to list it's in decreto 142/2010
Here's a link
http://www.gobiernodecanarias.org/boc/2010/204/001.html
and goole translation
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.gobiernodecanarias.org/boc/2010/204/001.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3Ddecreto%2B142/2010%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DRdZ%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-GB:official%26prmd%3Dimvns&sa=X&ei=2UzsT-ysH4qy0QX-_J36DA&ved=0CFgQ7gEwAA
Be sure to download the PDF as the tables aren't in the online version
siliconephil
29-06-2012, 00:22
Hello to everyone,
Wow, really it is a minefield this law. Basically if you follow logically what it says it leads you to a conclusion that is contradictory. It is a very badly thought out law that contravenes laws already in existence.
If your apartment is not in a complex that operates under the unity of exploitation you can only rent your apartment according to the ley de arrendamiento urbano, which actually permits short term rental. In Title I, Article 3 the law states that a residence can be used for purposes different to that of a dwelling and can bet let for 'terms' whether that be summer or another timeframe.
Here is a statement from the ley de arrendamiento urbano:
Para ello, en la regulación de los arrendamientos para uso distinto al de vivienda, la ley opta por dejar al libre pacto de las partes todos los elementos del contrato, configurándose una regulación supletoria del libre pacto que también permite un amplio recurso al régimen del Código Civil.
Translated it states "In this case, the regulation of rentals for use other than for a residence, the law opts to leave at liberty the pact between all parties ALL THE ELEMENTS OF THE CONTRACT, usage of which permits free ample use of the civil code.
This is often refuted by the usage of Article 42b of the ley de ordenacion turistico, but it is taken out of context, the law only applies to exploitation exclusively for tourism. A rental agreement between two private individuals, to lease the use of an apartment for a specific amount of time, making a free pact according to civil code, is not tourism.
The way i understand it is that the ley de oredenacion turistico only applies to complexes dedicated 100% or 50%+1 to tourism and unity of exploitation. Any complex that does not meet those criteria can be let according to the ley de arrendamiento urbano and that does not prohibit short term lets. I also think that the terminology used in ley de ordenacion de turismo Article 42b that states the property can not be used for tourism is often taken out of context. It means it cannot be exploited by an agency or company that would exploit it solely for tourism. It says nothing about a property owner renting his property out for a week so long as it is done according to the ley de arrendamiento urbano and the codigo civil, i.e both parties are in agreement and sign a contract to the effect.
That is the way the law reads, if everything is read in context.
If anyone can provide any information about property owners being fined i would be grateful to read them, to see exactly why they are being fined. I have seen examples of agents being fined for breaking the unity of exploitation law, but cannot find any evidence so far of fines for private rentals. Can anyone help me with that?
Philip Dodd
Yeah sure just go through the fines on the boletin oficial there's been hundreds
Peterrayner
29-06-2012, 10:27
Initially the notifications for fines were for owners advertising openly ( ie commercially) on the internet for tourisitc exploitations, around May June 2011.
It must have occured to them that this might not be a strong enough legal basis and might be difficult to prove any exploitation had actually taken place and it would appear that most of these case have been allowed to lapse due to time limits.
The later fines then seem to be based on exploitations a) without a complaints book and b) without displaying a notice that a complaints book was available.
These have attracted fines of a "grave" status at about the mid level ie 18,000E which appear to have been reduced on first appeal to about 13,000E.
siliconephil
29-06-2012, 12:33
So basically fines have been issued because people have advertised their apartments for touristic use, when they should have been advertising them for private rental, however long that private rental happens to be.
If i place my apartment on a rental website (a general rental website, not one dedicated to tourism) i have committed no breach of the law, just as many people do when they wish to rent out their apartment. When someone contacts me and says they want it for a week, i say sure, and i rent it to them according to the ley de arrendamiento urbano, perfectly legal.
I still can't find in the BOC any fines for private renters, maybe because i don't know exactly what to search for. What law are they breaching to help my search? Does anyone have any links stored that could take me directly to an example?
So the later fines were for lack of a complaints form. How does that fit in, were the fines for apartments on touristic complexes or non touristic complexes? I can understand the fines if they were on touristic complexes and they have no complaints forms but on a non touristic complex they are not necessary and there is no reason for a fine to be placed.
Philip Dodd
So basically fines have been issued because people have advertised their apartments for touristic use, when they should have been advertising them for private rental, however long that private rental happens to be.
If i place my apartment on a rental website (a general rental website, not one dedicated to tourism) i have committed no breach of the law, just as many people do when they wish to rent out their apartment. When someone contacts me and says they want it for a week, i say sure, and i rent it to them according to the ley de arrendamiento urbano, perfectly legal.
I still can't find in the BOC any fines for private renters, maybe because i don't know exactly what to search for. What law are they breaching to help my search? Does anyone have any links stored that could take me directly to an example?
So the later fines were for lack of a complaints form. How does that fit in, were the fines for apartments on touristic complexes or non touristic complexes? I can understand the fines if they were on touristic complexes and they have no complaints forms but on a non touristic complex they are not necessary and there is no reason for a fine to be placed.
Philip Dodd
You can try to twist the rules anyway you wish but to offer your apartment to somebody for a short term let, who is defined as a tourist, is illegal under the current legislation. The complaint form is a protection for the tourist and is only available to those properties that are legally registered with cabildo. Failure to comply is resulting in fines of circa €18'000.00.
Try this link Philip, Item 3129
http://www.gobcan.es/boc/2012/119/index.html
Hope your Spanish is good!
siliconephil
29-06-2012, 13:12
Oasis, thank you for your reply. I'm not trying to twist the rules, i personally own no apartments and therefore am not affected by this law, it just seems that a lot of people are running scared of something that is so ambiguous. If i let my apartment according to the urban letting laws i am perfectly entitled to do so, and for the length of time i desire, provided myself and the rentee are in agreement. The law itself clearly says so. Whether it can be proved that it is for tourism is highly dubious.
Thank you also to Toto. The fine was for letting the apartment for tourism and not having the claims forms, or displaying a sign that claims forms are available. It is unclear whether the apartment is 'touristic' as defined in the ley de ordenacion turistico but from a brief look on Google maps the building appears to be a regular apartment block. So if he had had the forms would he have been fined. It would appear not. Touristic letting in a non touristic building is OK provided you have the claims forms. Yet another ambiguity in the law.
I don't see how any of these fines can stick, any half decent lawyer could pick holes in these laws. A definite change is needed, a clearer law that specifies exactly how non touristic apartments should be regulated. Otherwise this debate is going to go on forever.
Philip Dodd
junglejim
29-06-2012, 13:13
Look up arrendiamiento de temporada under 1994 law for short term , non commercial contracts!
siliconephil
29-06-2012, 13:30
Thanks JungleJim, that is exactly what i am referring to, according to the ley de arrendamiento urbano, for dwellings that are used for purposes other that a permanent dwelling, i can make a contract for ANY time period. Provided the apartment i am letting is not going to be used by the rentee for his habitual home, ie he/she has another home to return to.
Obviously all this has to be declared to Hacienda, and to be able to have the claims forms i have to registered with the form 036, which basically means i have to be registered as autonomo. It samcks more of a loss of tax than actual illegal letting.
Philip Dodd
Peterrayner
29-06-2012, 13:39
I currently let my residential apartment on a Arrendiamiento de Temporada signed contract and on legal advice which has been checked with the tourismo that is for a minimum of 3 months which they are currently accepting has legal and not in breech of of the Ley7/1995.
I do occassionally also allow limited use by close family and friends but without advertising or charging of any commecial rent, which again on legal advice is OK.
junglejim
29-06-2012, 13:54
Peter I understand that Turismo's "opinion" is 3 months minimum for short term - 1994 law does not specify any minimum time .
We have been discussing this before (and probably will again) but until it is tested in court , we will never have the correct answer!
seanocelt
29-06-2012, 13:55
There must be a loophole for the loophole seekers. There simply must. (yawn).
Thanks JungleJim, that is exactly what i am referring to, according to the ley de arrendamiento urbano, for dwellings that are used for purposes other that a permanent dwelling, i can make a contract for ANY time period. Provided the apartment i am letting is not going to be used by the rentee for his habitual home, ie he/she has another home to return to.
Obviously all this has to be declared to Hacienda, and to be able to have the claims forms i have to registered with the form 036, which basically means i have to be registered as autonomo. It samcks more of a loss of tax than actual illegal letting.
Philip Dodd
good to hear your constructive comments on the law. It could be though, that guests would have to pretend not to be tourists if they were doorstepped by the inspectors. We have some swallows who might play along with that, but at the end of the day what a farce.
The new draft letting law is going to stop residential living on touristic complex's , so for residents there the opposite is true , they are going to have to pretend to be tourists or face eviction. People are going to have to go to work everyday in beachwear and then change clothes at work, for fear of inspectors spotting that they are not tourists. This may involve them carrying inflatable sharks and other pool/ beach toys around as decoys. Then on their return home they will need to change back to beachwear.
siliconephil
29-06-2012, 14:07
Thanks Peterreyner, so turismo have advised you that the minimum time possible for Arrendamiento de Temporada is 3 months. That's interesting and certainly something i'm going to look at.
It's a shame the laws seem to vary so much and nothing is 100% clear.
Philip Dodd
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
People are going to have to go to work everyday in beachwear and then change clothes at work, for fear of inspectors spotting that they are not tourists. This may involve them carrying inflatable sharks and other pool/ beach toys around as decoys. Then on their return home they will need to change back to beachwear.
Fantastic, would be worth seeing this new law come in just to see that! On a serious note however, if it is true what you say about a new draft of the law, why waste time on another law that solves absolutely nothing really and only causes more problems. Are all of the apartment owners who use it as a permanent dwelling going to have to leave? That is ridiculous, but nothing new, look at all the evictions because all of a sudden it was decided that you could not have a building within 20 metres of the shoreline. Homes that have been used for decades demolished and their inhabitants evicted.
Do you have any links to this new draft?
Thank you for your comment about my views, i just think a lot of things get blown out of proportion on this island, especially among the ex pats. :sorry:
Philip Dodd
Thanks Peterreyner, so turismo have advised you that the minimum time possible for Arrendamiento de Temporada is 3 months. That's interesting and certainly something i'm going to look at.
It's a shame the laws seem to vary so much and nothing is 100% clear.
Philip Dodd
it all sounds funny philip, but the illegal residents wont be laughing if they get 18,000 euro fines.
You need to go to the JA site , a good source of info on tenerife matters, there is a report about the new draft law. The lady who runs that website is on the comitee of alotca, the campaign group to reform the letting laws. There was some reporting on the draft law a couple of weeks ago.
The canary government are sort of saying that the illegal renting to tourists in residential complex's , is to a degree because so many people are now living residentially in the former touristic complex's. When a complex stops having a sole agent and loses its licence it becomes residential by default, we often refer to these complex's as dormant touristic.
In the case of our small complex in los cristo though, this is not the case. We are dormant touristic and we are a complex of 80 apartments. Of the 80 about 10 are residential, 10 have swallows who dont otherwise rent and the other 60 are all active renters. But as I say the new draft law seems to presume that there are too many residential people in these dormant touristic complex's.
reality and the canary government do not come together much in this mess.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Fantastic, would be worth seeing this new law come in just to see that! On a serious note however, if it is true what you say about a new draft of the law, why waste time on another law that solves absolutely nothing really and only causes more problems. Are all of the apartment owners who use it as a permanent dwelling going to have to leave? That is ridiculous, but nothing new, look at all the evictions because all of a sudden it was decided that you could not have a building within 20 metres of the shoreline. Homes that have been used for decades demolished and their inhabitants evicted.
Do you have any links to this new draft?
Thank you for your comment about my views, i just think a lot of things get blown out of proportion on this island, especially among the ex pats. :sorry:
Philip Dodd
We can all only hope that reality gets a look in further along the campaign.
Thanks Peterreyner, so turismo have advised you that the minimum time possible for Arrendamiento de Temporada is 3 months. That's interesting and certainly something i'm going to look at.
For someone who does not own an apartment in Tenerife you seem to be taking a great, and in depth, interest! :whistle:
Peterrayner
29-06-2012, 16:36
Peter I understand that Turismo's "opinion" is 3 months minimum for short term - 1994 law does not specify any minimum time.
Thats not quite what I understand they have declared bur rather
a minimum 3 month let on a temporada contract would be considerd and accepted as a residential letting by the tourismo.
This was confirmed by ALCOTA during their discussions I am advised.
Our community lawyer and administrator has advised and requested that we lodge such lettings and the contract details with them to protect the community form any possible action.
For someone who does not own an apartment in Tenerife you seem to be taking a great, and in depth, interest! :whistle:
He's a Tourist agent - http://los-cristianos.costasur.com/sites/infoagent-92515/es/index.html
junglejim
29-06-2012, 16:48
Peter, I heard what Alotca said at meeting, our ex President , a Canarian lawyer, had discussions and correspondence with Vice Consejero De La Puente on this point of timescale - it is their " opinion " not a fact expressed in any law - it has yet to be challenged in court. I think you'll also find Jose Escobedo has a viewpoint on this and what the law says( or doesn't say).
Don't want to keep going round in circles on this but it may prove significant in future.
Peter, I heard what Alotca said at meeting, our ex President , a Canarian lawyer, had discussions and correspondence with Vice Consejero De La Puente on this point of timescale - it is their " opinion " not a fact expressed in any law - it has yet to be challenged in court. I think you'll also find Jose Escobedo has a viewpoint on this and what the law says( or doesn't say).
Don't want to keep going round in circles on this but it may prove significant in future.
time has nothing to do with it, 1 day or 1 year. If the stay is touristic , for tourism , then the letting has to comply with tourism law or it would be illegal. Tourismo are making up the law with a 3 month cut off. We all know there are swallows on three month and longer stays, but these are tourists just longer term. Its often hard to enforce daft laws , this is a daft set of laws, but I think I know what they mean by a tourist renting as opposed to a none tourist.
Peterrayner
29-06-2012, 16:57
JIm yes I accept it is a stated "opinion" at this stage and that Tourismo are merely accepting such lettings as residential under their interpretation of the current laws.
I can only take the advice of our community lawyers as it currenlty stands. If things change then we will be notified accordingly.
siliconephil
29-06-2012, 17:34
He's a Tourist agent - http://los-cristianos.costasur.com/sites/infoagent-92515/es/index.html
Damn you caught me. :twak: My interest is purely to understand the law as it is. I want to be able to advise my clients the best i can. At the moment i can't see any reason to warn any of them not to advertise their apartments for rental. I do not wish to be one of the unscrupulous agents who just takes the money and doesn't care about the consequences of the clients.
I hope it will all be cleared up soon, and people and the Canarian government can make money from letting out their apartments. It's a shame to have such confusion and loss of revenue both for apartment owners and the Canary isands.
Philip Dodd
Damn you caught me. :twak: My interest is purely to understand the law as it is. I want to be able to advise my clients the best i can. At the moment i can't see any reason to warn any of them not to advertise their apartments for rental. I do not wish to be one of the unscrupulous agents who just takes the money and doesn't care about the consequences of the clients.
I hope it will all be cleared up soon, and people and the Canarian government can make money from letting out their apartments. It's a shame to have such confusion and loss of revenue both for apartment owners and the Canary isands.
Philip Dodd
Philip
It is actually quite straightforward how to advise them.
If they are on a residential complex, they are letting illegally and risking a big fine.
If they are on a touristic complex, they must comply with the rules in this law and let through the onsite agent whether they like it or not, otherwise they risk being fined.
If there isn't an onsite agent they can't let without risking a fine.
This law is a total c**k-up but we all have live and work within it until they get round to actually amending it.
siliconephil
29-06-2012, 18:15
Philip
It is actually quite straightforward how to advise them.
If they are on a residential complex, they are letting illegally and risking a big fine.
If they are on a touristic complex, they must comply with the rules in this law and let through the onsite agent whether they like it or not, otherwise they risk being fined.
If there isn't an onsite agent they can't let without risking a fine.
This law is a total c**k-up but we all have live and work within it until they get round to actually amending it.
But thats the problem isn't it BobMac, it isn't that straightforward. According to the law, if you own on a touristic complex as defined by the ley de ordenacion turistico you have to abide by the unity of exploitation and hence rental has to be through the sole agent. If you own on a non touristic complex any rental you do is covered by the ley arrendamiento urbano, one part of which is the letting for a non permanent residence. If i let my property as a non permanent residence i can let it for any length of time, provided it isn't used for tourism.
So it is not so clear. Especially as the spanner in the works is the use of the word tourist. What exactly constitutes tourism or not. It is very gray and not at all straighforward. If it were so, we would have seen court cases and fines decades ago and the 'illegal' rentals would have been a thing of the past.
It is worth noting as well that the Canary islands are not the only autonomos region of Spain to have the same confusing laws, Galicia and Andalucia also have similar laws, with similar problems.
It is a great discussion though, and has given enough fuel for this fire to burn, and to keep burning for a long time more!!
:spin:
Philip Dodd
seanocelt
29-06-2012, 20:24
It seems fairly straightforward to most of us who respect it, some may want to twist it. We wish them well.
But thats the problem isn't it BobMac, it isn't that straightforward. According to the law, if you own on a touristic complex as defined by the ley de ordenacion turistico you have to abide by the unity of exploitation and hence rental has to be through the sole agent. If you own on a non touristic complex any rental you do is covered by the ley arrendamiento urbano, one part of which is the letting for a non permanent residence. If i let my property as a non permanent residence i can let it for any length of time, provided it isn't used for tourism.
So it is not so clear. Especially as the spanner in the works is the use of the word tourist. What exactly constitutes tourism or not. It is very gray and not at all straighforward. If it were so, we would have seen court cases and fines decades ago and the 'illegal' rentals would have been a thing of the past.
It is worth noting as well that the Canary islands are not the only autonomos region of Spain to have the same confusing laws, Galicia and Andalucia also have similar laws, with similar problems.
It is a great discussion though, and has given enough fuel for this fire to burn, and to keep burning for a long time more!!
:spin:
Philip Dodd
If you check back through this thread, you will find references to people being fined before they actually started to clamp down in a major way, so there have been fines issued in the distant past.
But thats the problem isn't it BobMac, it isn't that straightforward. According to the law, if you own on a touristic complex as defined by the ley de ordenacion turistico you have to abide by the unity of exploitation and hence rental has to be through the sole agent. If you own on a non touristic complex any rental you do is covered by the ley arrendamiento urbano, one part of which is the letting for a non permanent residence. If i let my property as a non permanent residence i can let it for any length of time, provided it isn't used for tourism.
So it is not so clear. Especially as the spanner in the works is the use of the word tourist. What exactly constitutes tourism or not. It is very gray and not at all straighforward. If it were so, we would have seen court cases and fines decades ago and the 'illegal' rentals would have been a thing of the past.
It is worth noting as well that the Canary islands are not the only autonomos region of Spain to have the same confusing laws, Galicia and Andalucia also have similar laws, with similar problems.
It is a great discussion though, and has given enough fuel for this fire to burn, and to keep burning for a long time more!!
:spin:
Philip Dodd
there is a simple reason why there were no mass fines in years gone by from these crazy laws, and it is not because the laws were a grey area and the government was unsure if a prosecution would succeed. These laws came about in 1995 at the demand of the hotels. In the early 90 's the recession then made the hotels quiet, they demanded these laws to attack competition from self catering apartments. The unity of exploitation and the hotel style requirements of 24 hour reception and maid service, gave the hotels comfort that they were competing against nearly hotels. Then as the economy picked up the hotels were full and the apartments were full, the canary economy boomed and these dafts laws were largely ignored. Just a few petty denouncias between people, but the rest of the canaries got on with individual private renting and the daft law was forgotten.Then with the major downturn of the crissis of 2008 the hotels once again cried fould and demanded the crackdown. In 2008 they could now see hundreds of thousands of apartments openly advertised on the internet, with calendars showing full bookings. The hotels imagined that all these so called illegal customers were their lost customers. The canary tourism minister in charge of the crackdown senor de la puente, worked previously for ten years for ashotel, the hotel association.
The lack of previous enforcement of the laws has nothing to do with grey areas, its to do with hotel protectionism.
Wow back to this again, Phil we've been through every one of your arguments at least 4 times in this thread..... What's a tourist??? It's in the tourist law from 7/1995 ..... It's all in the laws, any argument you can possibly think of has already been argued in this thread and shot down with the various parts of the laws...: rather than dig it all out I suggest you read through this very long thread and then advise your clients accordingly.
Btw : what is a tourism professional??????
And, sorry of I sound glib but as a "tourism professional" you should have been at your current knowledge level about this whole thing at least 1 year or 18 months ago. The fact that you weren't worries me....
"Tourist activities are are those companies that lend a service of accommodation from an establishment open to the public for a price.
It is understood that lending a service of tourist accommodation is when a stay in an establishment is offered liberally and of a temporary form, without the person accommodated having changed their permanent residence (source 9)."
The law also defines a tourist in Article 15 source (10):
"A tourist user or tourist is understood to be a person who uses tourist establishments and goods or receives the services these company's offer, and as a client they can demand and enjoy those services."
In article 42 (source 11) it mentions the consequences of non compliance:
"1. The accommodations that do not follow the unity of exploitation remain excluded from offering tourism in the canaries with the following consequences:
a) They are not authorized for tourist accommodation.
b) They can only be rented in accordance with the Civil Code (Codigo Civil) or the law of Urban rentals and in no case can they be used for tourism.
c) They cannot be included in catalogues or commercial material in travel agencies."
This part of the law also negates many owners argument that they can rent out the apartment to guests so long as they sign a rental contract as found in the civil code - as Article 42 part b expressly forbids this.
http://www.propertyforsaleintenerife.com/the-1995-letting-law-in-tenerife-and-the-canaries.asp
Live in today not was has been
or you may get fined again
The word professional is well overused
In this case it's meant to sound like a certain person is on the ball with knowledge
Peterrayner
30-06-2012, 13:54
This part of the law also negates many owners argument that they can rent out the apartment to guests so long as they sign a rental contract as found in the civil code - as Article 42 part b expressly forbids this.
i might be misreading that post but to me of course private residential owners can rent out their property long term with a contract...and the tourismo have stated that they will accpet a 3 month contract has a long term residential letting.
My last tenants have been
Chef
Shop worker
Driver
Diving Instructor
Property Purchasers
and in November
Pensioners from mainland Spain wishing to spend 6 months living on the island during the winter.
None of these meet the definition of a "tourist"
The Arriendamiento de Temporada contract is expressly provided for these uses and in my view is perfectly legal.
i might be misreading that post but to me of course private residential owners can rent out their property long term with a contract...and the tourismo have stated that they will accpet a 3 month contract has a long term residential letting.
My last tenants have been
Chef
Shop worker
Driver
Diving Instructor
Property Purchasers
and in November
Pensioners from mainland Spain wishing to spend 6 months living on the island during the winter.
None of these meet the definition of a "tourist"
The Arriendamiento de Temporada contract is expressly provided for these uses and in my view is perfectly legal.
the overwintering spanish people sound a bit iffy to me. Bit like swallows . They seem to be a bit in grey area ground to me. Suppose wanting to live in the canaries through the winter may be ok in a residential ? its shows how daft the is, too mantrips to the beach and hey presto 18,000euro fine. keep away and watch tv all day, just residents then.
The other point that you are missing is that short term rental would be ok as well, so long as it was not touristic, the long stay talk is just the government making it up as they go along.
i might be misreading that post but to me of course private residential owners can rent out their property long term with a contract...and the tourismo have stated that they will accpet a 3 month contract has a long term residential letting.
My last tenants have been
Chef
Shop worker
Driver
Diving Instructor
Property Purchasers
and in November
Pensioners from mainland Spain wishing to spend 6 months living on the island during the winter.
None of these meet the definition of a "tourist"
The Arriendamiento de Temporada contract is expressly provided for these uses and in my view is perfectly legal.
Yes Peter and the last few clients I've had have been:
Butcher
Baker
Candlestick maker
Civil Servant
Police officer
Fire man
Nurse
Doctor
Train driver
Bus driver
Shop assistant
Bomb disposal expert
Barman
Politician
Estate agent
Pro golfer
Airline pilot
Mortgage advisor....
None of them are tourists either when THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOBS PETER.....
Eeeeeeeeeesh the pain
Peterrayner
30-06-2012, 16:18
Eeeeeeeeeesh the pain
Not sure what your problems is Jon ???
The Chef (from Ireland) worked in the Corner Bar Parque la Paz. 18 month vivienda residential contract
The Shop Worker (English) worked for Iceland 6 month vivienda residential contract
The Driver (Divorcee fleeing ex wife) was working for a food delivery firm. 6 month temporada residential contract
Rhe Diving Instructor was on a Padi Course before moving to the Red Sea. 3 month temporada residential contract
The property purchasers (have sold up in Sheffield) are looking for a permanent residence. 3 month temporada residential contract
The Pensioners are currently legal full time resident in mainland Sapin and just wanting a 6 month break. 6 month temporada residential contract
None of these would seem to fit the "tourist" definitions and are not covered by the Ley 7/1995
My point being that of course such rentals can be taken on a residential complex.
Sorry Peter Misinterpreted your post, although it seems you've done the same with the one you quoted me on .
You know that I know you can rent an apartment to people for the terms you're talking about.
junglejim
30-06-2012, 19:03
Peter , we have Spaniards , Italians , Scotsmen who rent/have rented out their apartments on what was at time a licenced touristic complex using same contracts for varying amounts of time , using Spanish Lawyers.
They are still doing it now whilst we progress resurrecting our licence .
Peterrayner
30-06-2012, 20:07
Jim
I suspect that the tourismo plans are looking at reinstating the licences for dormant or lapsed tourisitc sites. The cost will be perhaps substantial upgradings so they are on a par with facilities often found in private residential properties and that residential long lettings will be prohibited.
Thats not to say owners couldnt use them long term themselves but that residential long lets might not be possible (legally)
I was told at the Cabildo that anyone renting for longer than 3months would have to give NIE/NIF details on their contract. If they are "residing" in Tenerife they need a residencia apparently. Swallows wouldn't qualify.
carpenter
30-06-2012, 21:41
I was told at the Cabildo that anyone renting for longer than 3months would have to give NIE/NIF details on their contract. If they are "residing" in Tenerife they need a residencia apparently. Swallows wouldn't qualify.
I wouldn't worry, if you submit a NIE it will take between 20 years and never to find it's way onto a database.
junglejim
30-06-2012, 23:50
Peter our complex had a licence until a couple of years ago and we complied - we are going through process of resurrecting via Turismo and as Loaded has alluded to , we will have an inspection to ensure compliance with 2010 law.
The main issue for community will be who pays for tourist compliance costs when we also have residential apartments on the complex as well as private long-term lets .
Peter our complex had a licence until a couple of years ago and we complied - we are going through process of resurrecting via Turismo and as Loaded has alluded to , we will have an inspection to ensure compliance with 2010 law.
The main issue for community will be who pays for tourist compliance costs when we also have residential apartments on the complex as well as private long-term lets .
And if you do separate those costs you will always have problems jim.
junglejim
01-07-2012, 05:51
Loaded , we had the same issues on costs with Konrad - why should owners who don't let, subsidise Touristic Activities and requirements to put money into someone else's pockets ?
We have covered this at our AGM and have "assurances" that Touristic Costs will be paid by the "Letting Cartel"- it will be problematic but there is a significant amount not in Cartel to get their point across .
Our biggest issues and problems come with the 2 entities on our complex that rent out to tourists - damages, maintenance, cleaning, noise ,violence, staffing levels, safety.
Nice to see ALOTCA has decided to get story into UK newspapers at last !
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2166981/Britons-facing-15-000-fines-Canaries-letting-homes-breaking-law-thats-enforced-years.html
I stopped reading at this point
The tough line could also soon apply to foreign owners of villas on Majorca, Ibiza and Minorca where the fines could be up to £32,000.
Peterrayner
01-07-2012, 07:10
@ Jim
I dont think they envisage a Non Letting or a Letting Cartel on a touristic site.
If its touristic you will I suspect be required to make it available for touristic lettings.
Angusjim
01-07-2012, 07:40
@ Jim
I dont think they envisage a Non Letting or a Letting Cartel on a touristic site.
If its touristic you will I suspect be required to make it available for touristic lettings.
So how would JJ stand with his apartment that is for his own use ? they cannot be serious in telling people that they MUST rent out their apartments that they have invested a lot of money into. Another downside about letting your apartment via a letting agent you have no control about who they let YOUR apartment out to. Will they dictate how many weeks and dates you can use YOUR property
Peterrayner
01-07-2012, 08:20
We will have to wait and see AJ
but all the feedback from those who have had direct contact with the tourismo that I have spoken to seem to think this is the way they want to go or something very similar.
Resurrect all the lapsed and dormant touristic sites that are currently being used residentially by default and make them touristic only. The "enforced" upgradings will make them meet minimum standards and they will only be allowed to take touristic bookings through a sole agency who they must appoint or presumably one will be forced on them
Owners can of course use the accommodation themselves but if they want to live there fulltime ie residentially then they will have to put up with the costs and disturbances from holiday makers.
The defaulting of lapsed touristic sites to residential use is one of the reasons (has they see it) why the illegal lettings on residnetial sites as flourished over the past 10 years or so.
Angusjim
01-07-2012, 08:39
We will have to wait and see AJ
but all the feedback from those who have had direct contact with the tourismo that I have spoken to seem to think this is the way they want to go or something very similar.
Resurrect all the lapsed and dormant touristic sites that are currently being used residentially by default and make them touristic only. The "enforced" upgradings will make them meet minimum standards and they will only be allowed to take touristic bookings through a sole agency who they must appoint or presumably one will be forced on them
Owners can of course use the accommodation themselves but if they want to live there fulltime ie residentially then they will have to put up with the costs and disturbances from holiday makers.
The defaulting of lapsed touristic sites to residential use is one of the reasons (has they see it) why the illegal lettings on residnetial sites as flourished over the past 10 years or so.
Below about sums up where Tenerife tourism is heading
"In practice, a banana republic is a country operated as a commercial enterprise for private profit, effected by the collusion between the State and favoured monopolies"
junglejim
01-07-2012, 08:51
Peter- I have read the Boletin and other people's "opinions" - the feedback I am getting from our President & Community Lawyer does not reflect what you are suggesting .
Angusjim
01-07-2012, 09:05
Peter- I have read the Boletin and other people's "opinions" - the feedback I am getting from our President & Community Lawyer does not reflect what you are suggesting .
Will it be OK to eat bridies on your complex:wink2::cheeky:
junglejim
01-07-2012, 09:13
Will it be OK to eat bridies on your complex:wink2::cheeky:
Only if they're Fae Forfar AJ! :wink2::yum::yum:
canary boy
01-07-2012, 11:15
Nice coverage in the Daily Mail today, Just the coverage we wanted to scare off potential investment in the islands and scare of any holiday makers, just need to be on holiday homes from hell and that should do the trick, The banks are going to stop all foreign mortgages? Because the risk is too high? The queue for the job centre in the Valdes centre is going to be out the door and around the corner
welshman
01-07-2012, 12:11
Found it a bit
Nice coverage in the Daily Mail today, Just the coverage we wanted to scare off potential investment in the islands and scare of any holiday makers, just need to be on holiday homes from hell and that should do the trick, The banks are going to stop all foreign mortgages? Because the risk is too high? The queue for the job centre in the Valdes centre is going to be out the door and around the corner
Found it a bit of damp squid more interesting quote from the paper on sat travel agents becoming exstinct 7 out ten brits book holiday through internet With individual letting the canarian government are restricting their market going forward
So how would JJ stand with his apartment that is for his own use ? they cannot be serious in telling people that they MUST rent out their apartments that they have invested a lot of money into. Another downside about letting your apartment via a letting agent you have no control about who they let YOUR apartment out to. Will they dictate how many weeks and dates you can use YOUR property
That is the situation in Altamira for those who wish to let their properties .... as an owner you have no control about who uses your apartment, and the owner can only use it themselves in the four quietest weeks of the year.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Loaded , we had the same issues on costs with Konrad - why should owners who don't let, subsidise Touristic Activities and requirements to put money into someone else's pockets ?
We have covered this at our AGM and have "assurances" that Touristic Costs will be paid by the "Letting Cartel"- it will be problematic but there is a significant amount not in Cartel to get their point across .
Our biggest issues and problems come with the 2 entities on our complex that rent out to tourists - damages, maintenance, cleaning, noise ,violence, staffing levels, safety.
Nice to see ALOTCA has decided to get story into UK newspapers at last !
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2166981/Britons-facing-15-000-fines-Canaries-letting-homes-breaking-law-thats-enforced-years.html
If a lot of people log onto that story and leave a comment it may get more coverage in the Uk. Just a thought ....
Angusjim
01-07-2012, 13:00
That is the situation in Altamira for those who wish to let their properties .... as an owner you have no control about who uses your apartment, and the owner can only use it themselves in the four quietest weeks of the year.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
If a lot of people log onto that story and leave a comment it may get more coverage in the Uk. Just a thought ....
I think the huge difference is you bought yours knowing the rules on the complex what is now being discussed is forcing the changes on existing owners. As for coverage in UK it should be a simple message DONT buy in Tenerife until this fiasco is sorted out
it sort of makes sense though from the canary government point of view. It is almost impossible for them to sensibly argue against all this individual private renting that has gone on and developed naturally over 15 years. Thet could never hope to keep the whole sole agent monopoly system going when so many people had managed to rent out without sole agents for so long. The thing is if they say that we never intended for these touristic complex's to become part residential , part rented and part just occasional holiday homes then it makes their standpoint a bit more sensible. Its like you would not expect to stay in a hotel and down the corridor there was 4 private rooms with residential people in them. You would not expect to stay in a hotel with a few rooms empty because they were privatley owned for holiday home occasional use. If you apply that logic to touristic complex's then the demand for sole agency with all the hotel services 24 hour reception and maid service is not quite as ridiculous. Its like they are saying we never imagined that these touristic complex's would break up into residential,rented and occasional holiday home. The sole agent monoploy position makes sense if the entire complex is to be run as a self catering hotel, with no exceptions. The owners of these apartments are now going to be just investors in a property based hotel business with few rights to live or holiday in their apartments.
I think the huge difference is you bought yours knowing the rules on the complex what is now being discussed is forcing the changes on existing owners. As for coverage in UK it should be a simple message DONT buy in Tenerife until this fiasco is sorted out
Sorry I don't see the difference. I bought in 1999 when I was totally unaware of the situation (as were the majority of my fellow owners on the complex) and we only found out in November 2011! You could argue that it's a touristic complex so we should have been aware .... but the fact is it was never mentioned at any AGM until I brought it up at the 2012 one, nor was it ever mentioned by the tax office who happily took tax of owners on rental income for years, nor was it mentioned by our Gestor etc etc. So similarly this situation has come as a shock to many of the owners on our complex ... just as any new changes will come as a shock to anyone owning on a dormant site.
Angusjim
01-07-2012, 13:27
Sorry I don't see the difference. I bought in 1999 when I was totally unaware of the situation (as were the majority of my fellow owners on the complex) and we only found out in November 2011! You could argue that it's a touristic complex so we should have been aware .... but the fact is it was never mentioned at any AGM until I brought it up at the 2012 one, nor was it ever mentioned by the tax office who happily took tax of owners on rental income for years, nor was it mentioned by our Gestor etc etc. So similarly this situation has come as a shock to many of the owners on our complex ... just as any new changes will come as a shock to anyone owning on a dormant site.
Foz I don't think its right what is happening on your complex but the rules were in place when you bought but it's a huge difference to having this forced on you when you have bought under a different set of rules.
junglejim
01-07-2012, 13:35
Nelson , there are many people who are permanent resident in hotels all over the world including UK & Spain.
These complexes in Tenerife (as well as Timeshare) were marketed as such (why are they classed as Aparthotel?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartment_hotel)
We have a fair number of people including Spanish on our complex who are resident and are quite adamant about their right to reside there!
Peterrayner
01-07-2012, 13:42
IMHO the plight of owners on tourisitc sites doesnt concern the Tourismo.
Why should it?? Their brief is to protect the tourism industry and the tourists.
If thats at the expemse of people who purchased on touristic sites but who dont want to rent out you can sort of see their point of view.
The President has also stated that another advantage of reinstating the lapsed/dormant touristic sites will be the huge boost to the local construction industry with the envisaged enforced upgradings and refurbishments.
junglejim
01-07-2012, 13:48
Don't quite get the logic in that Peter - a resident is there all year round , spending money , paying rates , taxes , community charge , etc.
Some tourist apartments struggle to get 70% occupancy and the tourists bring their own Corned Beef and Tea Bags!
Who spends more overall do you think?
Angusjim
01-07-2012, 13:51
IMHO the plight of owners on tourisitc sites doesnt concern the Tourismo.
Why should it?? Their brief is to protect the tourism industry and the tourists.
If thats at the expemse of people who purchased on touristic sites but who dont want to rent out you can sort of see their point of view.
The President has also stated that another advantage of reinstating the lapsed/dormant touristic sites will be the huge boost to the local construction industry with the envisaged enforced upgradings and refurbishments.
Can they / will they force owners to pay for all this upgrading / refurbishing works ?? this is turning 360degs from a whitch hunt against owners on residential complexes to owners on Touristic complexes.
If your are considering buying in Tenerife then DONT because you will never really own it, the " Banana Republic" will decide what & when you can use it for.
it sort of makes sense though from the canary government point of view. It is almost impossible for them to sensibly argue against all this individual private renting that has gone on and developed naturally over 15 years. Thet could never hope to keep the whole sole agent monopoly system going when so many people had managed to rent out without sole agents for so long. The thing is if they say that we never intended for these touristic complex's to become part residential , part rented and part just occasional holiday homes then it makes their standpoint a bit more sensible. Its like you would not expect to stay in a hotel and down the corridor there was 4 private rooms with residential people in them. You would not expect to stay in a hotel with a few rooms empty because they were privatley owned for holiday home occasional use. If you apply that logic to touristic complex's then the demand for sole agency with all the hotel services 24 hour reception and maid service is not quite as ridiculous. Its like they are saying we never imagined that these touristic complex's would break up into residential,rented and occasional holiday home. The sole agent monoploy position makes sense if the entire complex is to be run as a self catering hotel, with no exceptions. The owners of these apartments are now going to be just investors in a property based hotel business with few rights to live or holiday in their apartments.
What your saying makes sense if they were still not trying to sell off touristic complexes to private owners for example the one next to you its going to end up up a mix of private and hotel owned the trend seems to be sell them and then just act as sole agent.
Don't quite get the logic in that Peter - a resident is there all year round , spending money , paying rates , taxes , community charge , etc.
Some tourist apartments struggle to get 70% occupancy and the tourists bring their own Corned Beef and Tea Bags!
Who spends more overall do you think?
Most residents won't spend as much on a weekly basis as someone on holiday in local bars and restaurants - I live in Tenerife and I usually eat out or dinner once a fortnight on average, and lunch out about 3 times a fortnight when I go on holiday I eat out every night.
Here I go out to bars once or twice a month but when I go on holiday I go out almost every night.
While I'm not saying local residents trade isnt important - bar and restaurant owners in los cristianos and las Americas rely much more on tourism than local trade.
For these types of businesses it would be more beneficial of the residents were ousted from tourist blocks .
thats the point though. If you want to purchase a touristic apartment you then accept that the sole agent for the complex will rent it out and you will get whatever return that arrangemnent might produce. In addition you may enjoy a capital growth over the years before you decide to sell it. You are just a hands off property investor and you certainley will not be allowed in future to be come resident in the apartment and forget about holiday renting.
The whole thing is complete insanity. The apartments next to ours would sell well even now and are perfect for individual owners to buy and make a sucess of as private individual renters. This was a natural trend anyway , many closed down failed hotel/aparthotels have been sold on and come back to life as private rented apartments. The apartments near ours have struggled for years, its not easy running a hotel and keeping the place full, what with all the wagesand other overheads. The canary government are trying to force their system to exist when market forces will not allow it. The modern trend is for internet booking and private renting based on low overhead private renting. There is still a demand for hotels but the alternative to a hotel needs to be self catering without hotel style costly add ons. The canary goevernment are trying to fly in the face of natural progress by standing by their daft system.
Basically they want to restrict competition for their hotels to nearly hotels, and their attack on residents on touristic complex's is so as to say, renting on residential complex's only happens due to loss of tourist beds on touristic complex's.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
yes loaded tourists would be better for the bars /restuarants etc, just like they are if they stay in el mirador for the bars/restuarants around that complex
People keep mentioning that "Internet bookings are the future" and an article about travel agents beginning to become obsolete was referred to.
It's important to remember that travel agents in a physical sense are becoming obsolete but they very much exist online - when you read about "Internet bookings are on the up" this is mainly referring to online forms of bookings such as booking.com, onthebeach, Expedia and more - these sites are responsible for far more tourism than the owners direct sites will ever manage purely because of the difference in how rooms are booked. With the owners direct method you have to trawl pages of different apartments , find one you like , find one you can afford , find one that seems available, email the owner. Wait for a reply , blah blah blah.... The OTA (online travel agents) have the ability to present all of this information instantly and immediately bookable, they couldn't do this is they had to work with 200 different owners in a complex.
junglejim
01-07-2012, 19:24
Tried your method for PDLA in August , best it could come up with was Paraiso del Sol (3 star!!- no laughing at back!) at £570pp for a studio , 2 weeks no flights!
My friends have stayed there and would not go back , they stayed in a luxury 2 bed apartment in our complex for £400 per week and were raving about it's facilities !
1 x 4 minute phone call and it was booked .( They were lucky it was available )
golf birdie
01-07-2012, 19:27
People keep mentioning that "Internet bookings are the future" and an article about travel agents beginning to become obsolete was referred to.
It's important to remember that travel agents in a physical sense are becoming obsolete but they very much exist online - when you read about "Internet bookings are on the up" this is mainly referring to online forms of bookings such as booking.com, onthebeach, Expedia and more - these sites are responsible for far more tourism than the owners direct sites will ever manage purely because of the difference in how rooms are booked. With the owners direct method you have to trawl pages of different apartments , find one you like , find one you can afford , find one that seems available, email the owner. Wait for a reply , blah blah blah.... The OTA (online travel agents) have the ability to present all of this information instantly and immediately bookable, they couldn't do this is they had to work with 200 different owners in a complex.
all very well but if you want a room with a sea view or pool veiw they cannot guarantee it 100%. You are allocated whichever room they decide you want. With a private apartment you get what it says on the tin.
Tried your method for PDLA in August , best it could come up with was Paraiso del Sol (3 star!!- no laughing at back!) at £570pp for a studio , 2 weeks no flights!
My friends have stayed there and would not go back , they stayed in a luxury 2 bed apartment in our complex for £400 per week and were raving about it's facilities !
1 x 4 minute phone call and it was booked .( They were lucky it was available )
Glad to hear the rest of the legal accommodation is already full then!
Glad to hear the rest of the legal accommodation is already full then!
Although I just looked on booking.com and found loads of 3 star places for 485 pounds for 2 weeks from 1/8-15/8 for 2 people.... Maybe you just need more
Practice ????
all very well but if you want a room with a sea view or pool veiw they cannot guarantee it 100%. You are allocated whichever room they decide you want. With a private apartment you get what it says on the tin.
That's true and a fair comment, but from personal experience it's not worth not getting people what they ask for as the moan like hell until you move heaven and earth even of they booked the day before and didnt tell you what they wanted.
Peterrayner
01-07-2012, 22:13
For these types of businesses it would be more beneficial if the residents were ousted from tourist blocks.
and if you think about it it is an inevitable consequence of enforcing "residential only" on residential sites, therefore touristic sites by necessity MUST become touristic letting only and the quickest way to achieve this is to reinstate the lapsed and dormant sites.
It would seem this is to be with sole agencies but maybe with more say for the community owners.
From their point of view it has spin offs which also creates jobs and employment
welshman
01-07-2012, 22:17
People keep mentioning that "Internet bookings are the future" and an article about travel agents beginning to become obsolete was referred to.
It's important to remember that travel agents in a physical sense are becoming obsolete but they very much exist online - when you read about "Internet bookings are on the up" this is mainly referring to online forms of bookings such as booking.com, onthebeach, Expedia and more - these sites are responsible for far more tourism than the owners direct sites will ever manage purely because of the difference in how rooms are booked. With the owners direct method you have to trawl pages of different apartments , find one you like , find one you can afford , find one that seems available, email the owner. Wait for a reply , blah blah blah.... The OTA (online travel agents) have the ability to present all of this information instantly and immediately bookable, they couldn't do this is they had to work with 200 different owners in a complex.
But this is what the customer wants choice see the photos read the reveiws and decide where they want to spend their money have their holiday. They are a bit more savey now, what can you provide for my money, british TV, iron, hair Dryer, safe , washing machine, ceiling fans, this what people expect for their money. The days of treating holiday maker like cattle and sheep are long gone.
junglejim
02-07-2012, 09:22
and if you think about it it is an inevitable consequence of enforcing "residential only" on residential sites, therefore touristic sites by necessity MUST become touristic letting only and the quickest way to achieve this is to reinstate the lapsed and dormant sites.
It would seem this is to be with sole agencies but maybe with more say for the community owners.
From their point of view it has spin offs which also creates jobs and employment
God Peter, almost like "Ethnic Cleansing"! Have we learned nothing from the Nazis and the Balkans?
But this is what the customer wants choice see the photos read the reveiws and decide where they want to spend their money have their holiday. They are a bit more savey now, what can you provide for my money, british TV, iron, hair Dryer, safe , washing machine, ceiling fans, this what people expect for their money. The days of treating holiday maker like cattle and sheep are long gone.
I can provide all of those or except washing machine and ceiling fan, but do have onsite laundry and fans available
Peterrayner
02-07-2012, 09:49
@Jim
I dont think personally that any new arrangment could or should infringe on an owner of a touristic apartment using it for themselves fulltime, but they could if they wished enforce a touristic lettings only through a sole agent, and prohibit any "residential" lettings.
@Jim
I dont think personally that any new arrangment could or should infringe on an owner of a touristic apartment using it for themselves fulltime, but they could if they wished enforce a touristic lettings only through a sole agent, and prohibit any "residential" lettings.
think you may be wrong there peter. The press release on the new draft states that the residential renting has come about due to touristic sliding into residential., not their original intended purpose. It reads like they are going to get the touristics fully back to touristic use, how could they do that if say residential owners did not back the 50 plus 1 vote? The complex's must have a sole agent to get the licence back and if they dont get one the government is going to appoint one and improvements will be madatory. How could none participating residentials stay on with all that happening? Would they still pay for the improvements though they were not part of the renting?
This would all help make work job creation , but rememeber in the real world these nearly hotels have been closing down because they cant get customers and make a profit. The crazy canary government is planning their system based on assuming the sole agent can make money here , or they are just hoping that this system fails and it helps the hotels get more customers. Either way thats what the nutters are proposing for touristics.
Peterrayner
02-07-2012, 11:57
@ Nelson
Regarding owners living residentially on a touristic site thats just my personal view.
I dont see them passing laws that would or could infringe the rights of such owners but I stress thats just a personal view.
also regarding this and the costs to owners of the required upgradings who dont rent I would repeat that the Tourismo dont care about the implications or costs to individual owners renting or non renting.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
The Canarian President, Paulino Rivero, has championed his government’s plans to continue towards a “third generation” of tourism to contribute to the transformation of the Canarian economy. Speaking in Parliament in response to a question about the plans for touristic moderization, Sr Rivero said that one of the biggest challenges facing the Canaries in the coming decade is to make its economic model more competitive, more productive, and more capable of generating employment.
He said that the government had therefore committed to a higher quality tourism that respected the environment, and that “innovative elements” were needed to commit to a territorial equilibrium which modernized the sector without using more land. Finally he defended the plans to strengthen the knowledge-based economy and to boost the possibilities open to the Canaries in their geographical environment, particularly in West Africa, an extraordinary area of opportunities for Canarian businesses.
this is what I mean about the Tourismo not caring about the effects on owners. Their primary concern is only about tourists and tourism modernization.
The highlighted section is what some commentators are interpreting has returning the lapsed and dorment tourisitc sites to their original intention.
Not sure how that fits with the current 50+1% mandate.
That may well be need to be removed on such sites so that the plan will function and allow them to "impose" a sole agent and refurbishments.
I have been following this thread for a while now and would just like to ask the question ‘who is going to want to buy a property in Tenerife’
This ongoing farce may have throttled the property market
If you are fortunate enough to have a spare 150,000 euros and want to buy on a Residential complex you will be able to stay with the other Residents right in the hub of the tourist areas. If you stay out here for say12 weeks of the year the remaining 40 weeks of the year your apt will stay empty…this is because the government has passed a law to say you will not privately let your apt on a Residential complex.
If you own on a Tourstic complex you have to let your property out through the sole agent and be given a percentage return on your apt all because the government has said you will not privately let your apt on a touristic complex.
There is nowhere in Tenerife or the canaries where you can legally be allowed to let your property (for short lets) not even if you own a detached villa.
Who in these difficult times has enough spare cash to buy buy on a residential or touristic complex .The returns on a residential complex will be nil and the yield on a tourist complex will be approx 3 or 4% .As property prices tumble with not many buying and not much selling the outcome for this lovely island could be bleak.
It keeps getting stated this is the law of the land but laws are also meant to be changed and challenged, if it wasn’t we would all still be driving our cars at 4mph behind a man walking with a flag and the eating of mince pies on Christmas Day would still be illegal….
Things move on and laws change all the time.
Change this silly law before its too late.
welshman
03-07-2012, 22:26
Hi Loaded could you give me some information regarding renting through on site agent.
1. Do you reg the apartment on their behalf.
2. Do they receive a licence from aurthorities granting a letting liecence.
3. Do you notify the aurthorities of their earnings Quarterly or for the year and hold any tax to be paid.
4. Or is it up to the individual to declare earning themselves.
Just interested how things work
Hi Loaded could you give me some information regarding renting through on site agent.
1. Do you reg the apartment on their behalf.
2. Do they receive a licence from aurthorities granting a letting liecence.
3. Do you notify the aurthorities of their earnings Quarterly or for the year and hold any tax to be paid.
4. Or is it up to the individual to declare earning themselves.
Just interested how things work
Hi welshman,
1. Yes
2. No, the license holder receives a letter confirming the addition of a new unit after inspection.
3. No.
4. Up to the individual to declare earnings .
I am a point of contact for one of my clients who has bought on a touristic complex and receive their quarterly statements on their behalf. They always have a standard non residents tax reduction of 24.75% - should they not be deducting this then?
welshman
03-07-2012, 23:53
Many thanks for your information. So the government is no better off with your system, as there is no cross check if all owner are declaring their rental earnings off you. Its still a bit of a black hole. You are totally legal and run a tight ship but your owners can still possibly get away with not declaring earning. The same as Joe bloggs illegally letting its daft system. Open to abuse.
I,m sure that many of your owners do declare thier earnings like wise do some illegal letters but the whole system needs tightening up, and cross ref with liecence
should result in a rental tax return.
Like uk, you got a car you need a road tax, you need it mot, you need insurance all cross ref with in seconds. Some people get away with not having the relevent doc,s but not for long. Just seams such a loss of revenue when they could be pulling in much more with tighter control.
You can't have tighter control on something that isn't regulated in the first place
This is going towards regulation and standardisation
The rest will come sooner than you and i think
I am a point of contact for one of my clients who has bought on a touristic complex and receive their quarterly statements on their behalf. They always have a standard non residents tax reduction of 24.75% - should they not be deducting this then?
You can do it that way too
welshman
05-07-2012, 10:24
Hi welshman,
1. Yes
2. No, the license holder receives a letter confirming the addition of a new unit after inspection.
3. No.
4. Up to the individual to declare earnings .
I find this information only just confirms what people have been saying all along.This law had nothing to do with contoling tax revenue. Its been from the out set to protect the Hotels. Up until approx 18 months ago you had to pay tax on gross lettings, you could not deduct any expences at all. So it made the system easier for the tax to be paid and collected. So deduction staight 24% tax off any payment made to owner. This was simple because owner up untill approx 18 months ago could not offset any cost against rental income.
This was not done by agents!!! seams a total lack of contol of tax revenue. This law regarding gross tax was challenged in europe and brought inline with other countries and now owners can now off set some of the running cost against their letting. This has made the tax collection a little more difficult from that date, but up until them the tax should I see have been deducted by the agent at source. :crazy::crazy::crazy:
I dont remember it being about tax in the first place, it's always been about unlicensed letting
I appreciate your effort you did to write this thread.
Sundowner
05-07-2012, 14:46
It would seem that the Canaries government are not the only ones trying to make money out of peoples 2nd homes!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/offshorefinance/9377307/Francois-Hollande-announces-French-tax-grab-on-holiday-homes.html
I hope the Portuguese do not follow suit............
thats interesting. the french position is not the same as the canary government though. The french are proposing to impose the tax on the weekly rentals of 35%. so if you were charging £ 250 per week in the canaries for a 1 bed apartment the french government would demand 35% of that in tax, so around £ 87.50.In the canaries the government is just slapping out with huge fines and demanding that the renters stop renting altogether. It would be great if the canary government were to suggest a rate of tax and let people try to get on with renting, but as it is they are not actually thinking like that. The canary crackdown is all about hotel protectionism.
If commensense set in and the canary government decided to legalise the individual renting and tax it, then it is to be hoped that they might start with a reasonable rate of tax, not so high as to put off the paying customers. The french may have done this with their high tax rate, but any tax rate offer for us to legally let would be better than the position we are in now.
The hotel mafia/ canary government are not considering the potential tax raising potential of the private renters, just hotel protectionism
thats interesting. the french position is not the same as the canary government though. The french are proposing to impose the tax on the weekly rentals of 35%. so if you were charging £ 250 per week in the canaries for a 1 bed apartment the french government would demand 35% of that in tax, so around £ 87.50.In the canaries the government is just slapping out with huge fines and demanding that the renters stop renting altogether. It would be great if the canary government were to suggest a rate of tax and let people try to get on with renting, but as it is they are not actually thinking like that. The canary crackdown is all about hotel protectionism.
If commensense set in and the canary government decided to legalise the individual renting and tax it, then it is to be hoped that they might start with a reasonable rate of tax, not so high as to put off the paying customers. The french may have done this with their high tax rate, but any tax rate offer for us to legally let would be better than the position we are in now.
The hotel mafia/ canary government are not considering the potential tax raising potential of the private renters, just hotel protectionism
That isn't quite true.
You should be declaring the income that you receive in rent and paying tax on it anyway at 24.75% if paying in the Canaries and at whatever your tax rate is if paying in the UK
The fines have nothing to do with the payment of tax, they are for letting illegally
seanocelt
05-07-2012, 20:12
thats interesting. the french position is not the same as the canary government though. The french are proposing to impose the tax on the weekly rentals of 35%. so if you were charging £ 250 per week in the canaries for a 1 bed apartment the french government would demand 35% of that in tax, so around £ 87.50.In the canaries the government is just slapping out with huge fines and demanding that the renters stop renting altogether. It would be great if the canary government were to suggest a rate of tax and let people try to get on with renting, but as it is they are not actually thinking like that. The canary crackdown is all about hotel protectionism.
If commensense set in and the canary government decided to legalise the individual renting and tax it, then it is to be hoped that they might start with a reasonable rate of tax, not so high as to put off the paying customers. The french may have done this with their high tax rate, but any tax rate offer for us to legally let would be better than the position we are in now.
The hotel mafia/ canary government are not considering the potential tax raising potential of the private renters, just hotel protectionism
I admire your passion on the subject but you dont half bark up the wrong tree a lot. Tax is payable wherever you are resident, this law (protectionism as you see it, level playing field as some hoteliers see it) has nothing at all to do with that issue. Where did /do you pay tax on your rental? You will see no change to that (unless , erm you didnt declare it!). You will find it hard to l, without being caught, do tourist lets on a non registered legal complex. And that's about it.
thats interesting. the french position is not the same as the canary government though. The french are proposing to impose the tax on the weekly rentals of 35%. so if you were charging £ 250 per week in the canaries for a 1 bed apartment the french government would demand 35% of that in tax, so around £ 87.50.In the canaries the government is just slapping out with huge fines and demanding that the renters stop renting altogether. It would be great if the canary government were to suggest a rate of tax and let people try to get on with renting, but as it is they are not actually thinking like that. The canary crackdown is all about hotel protectionism.
If commensense set in and the canary government decided to legalise the individual renting and tax it, then it is to be hoped that they might start with a reasonable rate of tax, not so high as to put off the paying customers. The french may have done this with their high tax rate, but any tax rate offer for us to legally let would be better than the position we are in now.
The hotel mafia/ canary government are not considering the potential tax raising potential of the private renters, just hotel protectionism
You should not confuse the issue of income tax with Canarian law. Tax on earnings is collected separately by central Government, the rate of which is set by Madrid and all income from it is used centrally. Part of it is returned to the islands in the form of the annual grants - as it is to the other regions of Spain.
The situation in France is not that a new tax on rental income is being introduced, just that the existing rate is being increased - a very different picture than the one you are painting.
I admire your passion on the subject but you dont half bark up the wrong tree a lot. Tax is payable wherever you are resident, this law (protectionism as you see it, level playing field as some hoteliers see it) has nothing at all to do with that issue. Where did /do you pay tax on your rental? You will see no change to that (unless , erm you didnt declare it!). You will find it hard to l, without being caught, do tourist lets on a non registered legal complex. And that's about it.
we are self employed in uk and account for our canary letting with that. as previously posted we dont actually make any taxable profit from apartment letting with consideration to overhead costs. We pay annual taxes to canaries as non residents.
The point is correct I think, the french allow letting, its not illegal,why should it ever be? Tax levels are another issue in any country. Completely banning private renting and wanting a system of sole monopoloy agent is a canary thing.
we are self employed in uk and account for our canary letting with that. as previously posted we dont actually make any taxable profit from apartment letting with consideration to overhead costs. We pay annual taxes to canaries as non residents.
The point is correct I think, the french allow letting, its not illegal,why should it ever be? Tax levels are another issue in any country. Completely banning private renting and wanting a system of sole monopoloy agent is a canary thing.
But private letting in the Canaries is not illegal provided you abide by the law??
I thought you had to pay the tax on rentals in Tenerife and account for it on your UK tax return by using the reciprocal agreement? If you are non resident in Tenerife of course.
If you dont do this surely the tax officers in Tenerife may go after 'non letting' tax from you, they will expect tax one way or the other!
I thought you had to pay the tax on rentals in Tenerife and account for it on your UK tax return by using the reciprocal agreement? If you are non resident in Tenerife of course.
If you dont do this surely the tax officers in Tenerife may go after 'non letting' tax from you, they will expect tax one way or the other!
not sure what you mean by tax on rentals? We have to pay income tax on our earnings. If you do that in the uk you dont do it in spain, that would be a case of paying twice.
back to the tax increase in france, yes you can legally let in the canaries in the sole agent system, but in france and all around the world you just get on with letting on your own individualy if you want to. thats the diference.
we are self employed in uk and account for our canary letting with that. as previously posted we dont actually make any taxable profit from apartment letting with consideration to overhead costs. We pay annual taxes to canaries as non residents.
The point is correct I think, the french allow letting, its not illegal,why should it ever be? Tax levels are another issue in any country. Completely banning private renting and wanting a system of sole monopoloy agent is a canary thing.
I agree that it should be better controlled in the Canaries, but you seem to be missing the point yet again.
It doesn't matter whether it is legal in France or not, until such time as the Canarian Government actually amend the law, it is illegal to holiday let any property unless you do it within the guidelines laid out by this law.
not sure what you mean by tax on rentals? We have to pay income tax on our earnings. If you do that in the uk you dont do it in spain, that would be a case of paying twice.
A little worrying for you if you have not been paying tax on the rental income from your 40+ weeks each year in Tenerife. After the Tourist Board have had their money from you for illegal letting maybe the tax office will consider the lost revenue on this Island also!
The difference between letting in France & letting in Tenerife is quite simple - one is in France and the other is on a Spanish island. Different countries just like Portugal, oh we seem to have moved on from this country now, are you now going to move to France?
:spin:
I think you should pay the tax on the profit you earn from renting in Tenerife to the Tenerife tax office not the UK one. If you are a non resident here you should then add the net income to your UK tax return but you dont actually pay any tax in the UK because the UK and Spain have a reciprocal agreement.
But private letting in the Canaries is not illegal provided you abide by the law??
This seems to be the point she can't understand !!
its amazing on this thread sometimes how daft a lot of the pro the existing law people can be when you point something out that goes against their position.
In france , as in probabley everywhere else around the world, you are often quite free to rent out touristically a single property, without being in a larger group and having to get involved with a monoploy sole agent.
It does not matter if france wants to charge 35% tax on the rental income or 95% or 10%. That is not the main point. The point is that private indivdual renting just happens in france, as it does all around the world.
Yes you can rent out your property in the canarys also, but the laws in the canaries are designed to make that dificult and to protect their hotel industry from competition.
This is a small point, hardly worth mentioning really, thank you to the poster who mentioned the french tax increase, it is interesting, but it also highlights how private individual renting is basically normal and evryday and commonplace all around the world.
Canary government take note.
its amazing on this thread sometimes how daft a lot of the pro the existing law people can be when you point something out that goes against their position.
In france , as in probabley everywhere else around the world, you are often quite free to rent out touristically a single property, without being in a larger group and having to get involved with a monoploy sole agent.
It does not matter if france wants to charge 35% tax on the rental income or 95% or 10%. That is not the main point. The point is that private indivdual renting just happens in france, as it does all around the world.
Yes you can rent out your property in the canarys also, but the laws in the canaries are designed to make that dificult and to protect their hotel industry from competition.
This is a small point, hardly worth mentioning really, thank you to the poster who mentioned the french tax increase, it is interesting, but it also highlights how private individual renting is basically normal and evryday and commonplace all around the world.
Canary government take note.
As someone who is of the opinion that this law is an absolute farce, I take exception to your comment that a lot of people who are pro this law are daft. I am against this law and admit that it urgently needs to be amended but if anyone is daft, it's yourself for kidding yourself that somehow you are in the right and everyone else is wrong.
I repeat; at the moment it doesn't matter what any other country does or doesn't do regarding holiday lettings; until such time as the Canarian Government actually wake up to the reality of the fiasco this law has become and change it, you have to accept that it is illegal to holiday let any property in the Canaries unless you do it within the confines of the law.
If you can't accept that, I hope you've got a big bank balance if you are still ignoring it.
no bobmac not saying your in the daft pro existing law camp. Your in your own odd camp, you disagree with the existing law but you consider that no one should try to campaign against it to get it changed and reformed.
I was not aiming my point at you , more the pro sole agent people who often come on this thread. They have posted earlier about the french tax increase on letting, but they are turning deaf ears to my comments that at least individual private renting is legal in france, as it is most everywhere around the world.
no bobmac not saying your in the daft pro existing law camp. Your in your own odd camp, you disagree with the existing law but you consider that no one should try to campaign against it to get it changed and reformed.
I was not aiming my point at you , more the pro sole agent people who often come on this thread. They have posted earlier about the french tax increase on letting, but they are turning deaf ears to my comments that at least individual private renting is legal in france, as it is most everywhere around the world.
I'm in your camp actually - I disagree with the law as it currently stands but I don't disagree with principle of campaigning to try and get it changed. My point is that until it does get changed, you have got accept it being applied as it currently stands whether you like it or not.
As to other countries laws on Holiday Letting, they are totally irrelevant to the position in the Canaries as the only law which applies there is this law which we agree is a total ass - this seems to be the point you have the problem understanding - the only laws which are relevant in the Canaries are the laws passed by the Canarian Government - whether they are good, bad or complete asses.
There seems to be various thoughts on where you should pay the tax on the income from this renting - being illegal or not - is there an accountant on here that knows for sure rather than just personal opinions? Obviously I am talking about non resident owners.
After all, you may be a non resident here but your property is here. To take it to a total extreme, if the whole of the rental income was earned by non residents of any country and the income tax was paid in those other countries the Canary Islands would be losing out on a lot of income.
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 12:56
http://www.canarias7.es/articulo.cfm?id=267109
seems the sole agency mandate of 50% +1 might be increased to 75% ???
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Cabildo and tourism entrepreneurs agree that the new Emergency Law prepared by the Canarian Government will "condemned to illegality" to between 25,000 and 30,000 beds in apartment complexes in the South.
Instead of 50% plus one of the beds, they must now unite 75% to operate and market openly.
The rule is to come in force next Jan. 1 to replace the Emergency Law.
One particular modification, which increases to 75% the percentage of non-hotel complex beds that need to allocate to tourism use to operate in the market, could make "illegal" between 25,000 and 30,000 beds in apartments South , according to the president of the employers tourist Las Palmas, Fernando Fraile. Until now the operator of these apartments should unite 50% plus one of the beds.
Very interesting if it becomes law. And flies in the face of the previous theories of bringing the illegal ones back into line, this will just create more illegal beds.
Angusjim
07-07-2012, 13:19
Very interesting if it becomes law. And flies in the face of the previous theories of bringing the illegal ones back into line, this will just create more illegal beds.
Seems they are further in the pocket of the hotels than 1st thought it must have been a very very big brown envelope
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 13:28
Very interesting if it becomes law. And flies in the face of the previous theories of bringing the illegal ones back into line, this will just create more illegal beds.
It is very interesting and would seem to add credence to the view that this is very much a purley protectionism move on behalf of Ashotel.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Very interesting if it becomes law. And flies in the face of the previous theories of bringing the illegal ones back into line, this will just create more illegal beds.
It is very interesting and would seem to add credence to the view that this is very much a purley protectionism move on behalf of Ashotel.
The article refers to it replacing the current Emergency Law from Jan 1st (2013 I presume)
golf birdie
07-07-2012, 13:32
seems like the penny has dropped................
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 13:45
I can only conclude that they want ALL TOURISTS in AI HOTELS. :(
Angusjim
07-07-2012, 13:46
I can only conclude that they want ALL TOURISTS in AI HOTELS. :(
Well they'll no get this one:spin: ( Peter can I be your friend do you have any Scottish relations :whistle:)
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 13:51
You already are Jim. My son was conceived in Scotland does that count.
golf birdie
07-07-2012, 13:55
[QUOTE=Peterrayner;195536]I can only conclude that they want ALL TOURISTS in AI HOTELS. :([/QUOTE
be careful what you say. Another who has dared to speak like this on here was hung, drawn and quartered before being burnt at the stake:laugh:
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 14:01
Oh I have been well roasted on here a few time..(probably deservedly)
If this report is accurate and it comes from a local Canarian source, Then I dont know how else to interpret the move.
Touristic apartment complexes seem to struggle to retain a sole agent and the 50%+1 mandate seems difficult to acheive, so such a huge increase to 75% is hardly likely to help the lapsed sites and might well drive some of the currently "legal" sites outside of the law. :confused:
Undoubtably it will make
It harder for dormant ones to get back in, and for existing ones to comply - I imagine there would be a time frame to achieve the 75% - even in 1995 they gave everyone until 1998 and the last "new
Law" gave 3 years too.
Also there are already some places operating without 50% so I'd expect them to turn a blind eye to complexes with a little under 75%
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 14:19
If Ashotel are pushing this as hard has it seems they are then the blind eye might make a miraculous recovery and the need to increase revenues (fines) might also play a huge hand in this still.
I dont want to say I told you so but there you have it, blatent hotel protectionism.
The other point which I said a long way back was my warning to the many sole agents on here who have argued/insulted me over this mad crackdown. I warned them not to crow about getting increased bookings from this crackdown on the illegal renters. I told them that the crackdown was never meant to increase customers in legal apartments , rather the intention was to increase hotel customers.
Now its time for you sole agent guys to start adding up the numbers, you now need 75% plus 1.
I must admit this robert mugabwe canary government takes some believing with its ashotel minister and the hotel mafia running the show. But thats the truth of the matter, and some of us knew that from the start.
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 14:47
Assuming the report is accurate ...then it is not taking effect till Jan 1st and even then there may well be a grace period for those currently operating legally as Loead pointed out.
They did so in 1995 with the letting Laws which were not fully enacted till 1998 and the same with the swimming pool enclosures, communities were give 2-3 years to comply.
Assuming the report is accurate ...then it is not taking effect till Jan 1st and even then there may well be a grace period for those currently operating legally as Loead pointed out.
They did so in 1995 with the letting Laws which were not fully enacted till 1998 and the same with the swimming pool enclosures, communities were give 2-3 years to comply.
how very reasonable and civilised of these nasty bandits. Only after the 3 years will they then start imposing massive fines for none compliance. Meanwhile whats the effect going to be on the resorts. With hardly any legal apartment accomodations for visitors to stay in? Do these insane bandits have no consideration for the wider canary tourist economy with these insane proposals? How can they now say to my friends on here who have loyaly supported this outrageous robert mugabwe crackdown, sorry lads we think you should have 75% plus 1 in your agency or just close down please.
There actually care about nothing except their insane vision of hotel protectionism, and as I have said earlier on here, if they could get a bit more trade for their hotels they could not care less as to the wider damage they might inflict on the canary economy and people.
This is the classic spannish corrupt political economic way of doing things, this was the way before and during the dictatorship, and it seems its still the way in 2012.
Lets hope alotca has some good lawyers when we get to europe and that these bandits have to get real at that point. At least with these even more protectionist reforms it makes alotcas case clearer, so maybe the canary government is acting to mess itself up when these crazy laws get looked at in europe.
If you are so fed up with Spain why don,t you get out.
golf birdie
07-07-2012, 16:39
Undoubtably it will make
It harder for dormant ones to get back in, and for existing ones to comply - I imagine there would be a time frame to achieve the 75% - even in 1995 they gave everyone until 1998 and the last "new
Law" gave 3 years too.
Also there are already some places operating without 50% so I'd expect them to turn a blind eye to complexes with a little under 75%
don't know how many % on you complex have signed up with you but would this effect you if true and if so how difficult do you think it would be for your company to comply?
don't know how many % on you complex have signed up with you but would this effect you if true and if so how difficult do you think it would be for your company to comply?
Think it may affect most complexes, however if they are going to enforce this rule will they also enforce the ruling that owners have to sign their property to the sole agent if they have purchased on a touristic designated site?
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 17:47
Think it may affect most complexes, however if they are going to enforce this rule will they also enforce the ruling that owners have to sign their property to the sole agent if they have purchased on a touristic designated site?
I think so yes.. its the only way this makes any sense at all.
junglejim
07-07-2012, 17:49
Think it may affect most complexes, however if they are going to enforce this rule will they also enforce the ruling that owners have to sign their property to the sole agent if they have purchased on a touristic designated site?
Where is the source for this ruling ?
This proposal to raise the threshold to 75% might explain Konrad's recent activity in Panorama to get his percentage up and the strong rumour he is pulling out of Club Atlantis as he has less than 50% at present ?
The raising of the threshold may force sole agents to "bully" other renting owners into conforming to the letter of the law or risk being denounced so that the sole owner can get the threshold .
So they did learn something from the Nazis after all !
We've got just under 65% so obviously it would affect us of
It happened - however if they actually did something about all the illegal ones we'd be up to 75% no problem really.
A lot of complexes will find it difficult to get 75% ours would also in my situation would you want to give your apartment to the licence holder for 4000 euro,s a year (yes i know some give more)only get to use it when they tell you. Yes they pay the community fees maintain it ect but the figures still dont add up 8000 euro a year mortgage for a start who in the future would want to buy on a tourist complex if the rules are strickley enforced on them all.
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 18:14
Where is the source for this ruling ?
http://www.canarias7.es/articulo.cfm?id=267109
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I think pssibly they see it as a trade off
dormant or lapsed touristic sites regularised, ie made legal touristic again, but at a cost.....full upgradings and touristic lettings useage only.
delderek
07-07-2012, 18:31
If this actually happens, I pity any future buyers. OK the situation on Residential complexes is now clear, and enables a buyer to make an informed choice. But for any potential buyer on legal Touristic complexes (at present), to be faced with future uncertainty, i,e, upgrade costs, not achieving the 75%, and maybe losing the tourist licence. Any Informed buyer would run a mile. So its now going to depress the property prices on these complexes, possibly to a lower level than the Residential ones. (I did stress Informed).
What about people that purchased many years ago with a view to just holidaying, being a tourist a few times a year and letting their kids holiday and be tourists in their apartments. Surely these people will be classed as tourists on a touristic site. My point is there are many complexes that have these people that own on a complex and in many cases these people make up more than 25 % of the people on a complex. Surly if I owned on a touristic complexand I am a non resident and just "holidayed" 4 times a year I would be classed as a tourist and would not want any sole agent involved in my 3 holidays a year in my own apartment.
junglejim
07-07-2012, 18:49
http://www.canarias7.es/articulo.cfm?id=267109
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I think pssibly they see it as a trade off
dormant or lapsed touristic sites regularised, ie made legal touristic again, but at a cost.....full upgradings and touristic lettings useage only.
That's a newspaper article Peter , not a law/ruling - it hasn't been passed yet and is out for consultation. From the article it appears that the Gran Canarian officials oppose it as it will be detrimental to their Island Tourism Model.
Quote:-
José Miguel Bravo de Laguna, presidente del Cabildo, consideró que «el tratamiento de la oferta extrahotelera es perjudicial para Gran Canaria y puede dejar fuera de ordenación un buen número de camas»
Wouldn't surprise me if it happened though and I can see why they'd do it
Peterrayner
07-07-2012, 21:41
yes its an article !
its quoting the new law I believe.
I can sort of see where they are going with this and it fits what appears to be a plan.
Residential is residential,
although exactly how non-resident private owners, and their family and friends, fit into that category isnt yet clear.
Touristic is touristic,
although exactly how resident private owners, and their family and friends, fit into that category isnt yet clear.
Maybe private owners will form a special category.
I would imagine perhaps human rights protection isues regarding the unfetered use of your own private property might have an influence.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
and to quote JA
Janet says:
7 July 2012 at 1:53 pm
Bear in mind this legislation is still in consultation stage, and I’ve not seen anything in writing yet. But yes, I don’t see how this will help – and I think this is what the GC island authorities were suggesting!
People have been asking how much say/power/control the Cabildos have in touristic policy. Now we’ll get some idea depending on whether they are listened to, or ignored!
What about people that purchased many years ago with a view to just holidaying, being a tourist a few times a year and letting their kids holiday and be tourists in their apartments. Surely these people will be classed as tourists on a touristic site. My point is there are many complexes that have these people that own on a complex and in many cases these people make up more than 25 % of the people on a complex. Surly if I owned on a touristic complexand I am a non resident and just "holidayed" 4 times a year I would be classed as a tourist and would not want any sole agent involved in my 3 holidays a year in my own apartment.
You own the apartment so as long as you don't let it you're fine
Any truth in the runour that the annual inspectors vs cabildo football match(sponsored by ashotels) has had to be called off due to repeated moving of the goalposts
seems like there's a lot of ideas floating around thats for sure, so far in the last few weeks we've had:
A draft law that appears to somehow want to "re-touristify" complexes that have become residential. Which would possibly be a way of encompassing the "illegal owners"
A newspaper article speaking of upping the 50%+1 to 75%.... which would not only create further trouble for the "illegal owners" but also throw a major spanner in the works for the "legal owners"......
junglejim
08-07-2012, 11:08
Any truth in the runour that the annual inspectors vs cabildo football match(sponsored by ashotels) has had to be called off due to repeated moving of the goalposts
I think they're getting a lead from SFA in Scotland !
Peter , as you quoted fro JA's article
Bear in mind this legislation is still in consultation stage, and I’ve not seen anything in writing yet.
It's not a law, it's out for consultation and feed back and GC have shown their opposition to the proposal !
We've been round the houses on these topics before !
They want me to invest say €180,000 in an apartment to allow an unregulated sole letting agent control it , earn from my investment and give me an income less than it would cost to maintain it ,have no control over who stays in it , have no control about when I can enjoy it ?
For a country on it's knees financially looking for inward investment , that seems like a plan!
Corruption , pure and simple as far as I can see- Obviously Ricardo de la Puente is paying back some old favours to his Ashotel friends!
http://www2.gobiernodecanarias.org/turismo/viceconsejeria/curriculum.htm
Think it may affect most complexes, however if they are going to enforce this rule will they also enforce the ruling that owners have to sign their property to the sole agent if they have purchased on a touristic designated site?
There is no such ruling under the current 1995 law. I think what Oasis is trying to say is that IF such a ruling came into effect then it would make things easier for sole agents. But it’s more a case of wishful thinking I’m afraid, as there is no mention in the new draft legislation for such a proposal either.
I bought an apt 25 years ago in Los Cris (I have a legal background so I am familiar with the laws concerning all of my properties, including the one in Tenerife). Fortunately I’m in a position where I don’t have a mortgage and I can use my apt for my own holidays and for my children and grandchildren.
Many of my friends in Tenerife are in the same situation, and many of them are not even aware of these laws. As far as they are concerned they have as much rights over their Tenerife properties as their UK homes.
I cannot even begin to imagine the level of outcry if they were told they have to register their apartments for letting purposes!
I understand that the Cabildo is very reluctant to upset this category of owners, who are in effect ‘tourists’. They are putting money into the Tenerife economy and not taking any out. They are also among the wealthiest of the visitors to Tenerife, and could create a lot of difficulties if upset.
I think what Oasis meant is :
If we read into the draft law from June it seems that the tourist board want to re-establish complexes that have lost their license by expropriating residents from the area and creat more tourist accommodation - how they'd do this is anyones guess (i would say thats impossible) but if that happened and owners were forced out of their homes to make way for tourist it would be easier to achieve 75% because those new units would by law have to sign up to the license holder....
All pie in the sky at the moment but who knows????????
When the owners' representative group Alotca met with the VP of tourism recently, the VP told them that the sole agent system will be reformed in the new legislation due to come into effect Jan 2013. This is what they said he told them and I quote:
"What is clear, however, is that the sole agent system is to be changed in some ways, with a new concept of a “condominium” coming into play alongside a type of shares system in the running of touristic complexes."
Is it just me or does this talk of ‘shares’ and ‘condominiums’ sound like the kind of set-up that timeshares operate on? Reading between the lines I think they want to turn the touristic complexes into aparthotels or ‘condominiums’, and the owners will have a ‘share’. Will having my ‘share’ of the property mean a four-week allowance per annum? Will I have to maintain my apt to certain standards or, more likely, will the ‘condominium’ management (aka sole agent), tell me to maintain my apt to a certain standard, and very kindly arrange to have it done for me, possibly via a special firm set up to do the upgrades? Will I get a cut which is about 50% less than I would have got if I had been allowed to independently let my apt? (I'm speaking hypothetically here, as I don't let my apt, but it will affect me as an owner on a touristic complex.)
The latest news is that the sole agents will have to get 75% + 1 of the owners on the complex to register with them in order to continue as sole agents. This at first might seem to be bad news for the sole agents: if you don’t like your sole agent you think he’ll never get it, and that’ll be the last you’ll see of him. Maybe the complex will even get back to being residential and you can at least get long-term lets. Think again.
My prediction is that if the existing sole agent doesn’t get the 75%, the gov will be able to say shove over, and they’ll appoint their own guy. Then magically the requirement will go back to 50% + 1, which the new agent should get with ease.
Does anyone want to finish the story? People might say that this will result in people closing their apts but in the end people will have to comply, they have to pay their mortgages and they have to obey the law. It’s one thing to talk about taking protectionist laws to the EU court, which is the next step for Alotca, but this could take years.
The only thing I can’t figure out is what they are going to do with people like me who don’t want to let their properties on a touristic complex. Are they going to tell them they are breaking the law by not registering their properties? And if they don’t go along with the deal they will be subject to large fines?
I don’t want to start scaremongering, rather I’d call it being prepared for a very real possibility.
Or the 1 and 2 keys complexes that didn't come up to 3 star get a new agent imposed on them and owners forced to let ?
Got to be a reason why they didn't make the 1 and 2 key places upgrade- what's the point of a voluntary upgrade????
Maybe they think that those who didn't go for 3 star don't have not really got anyone running the place?
Going with the Canarian VP's use of the word 'condominium' in relation to touristic complexes, maybe they're looking at something along the US model:
From Wikipedia:
A condo hotel, also known as a hotel-condo or a Condotel, is a building used as both a condominium and a hotel.
These hotels have condominium units which allow someone to own a full-service vacation home. When they are not using this home, they can leverage the marketing and management done by the hotel chain to rent and manage the condo unit as it would any other hotel room.
Rental revenue is shared with the management company, and owners typically pay no upfront fees for management, which includes the marketing and reservation of the units. Typical monthly fees for units in the rental pool include FF&E (Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment) reserve and resort fee(s). Although the revenue splits between owner and management company do vary from project to project, most hover around 50 percent.
Interesting. Doesn't actually sound so bad after all! I wonder if this would make touristic complexes more or less valuable?
Going with the Canarian VP's use of the word 'condominium' in relation to touristic complexes, maybe they're looking at something along the US model:
From Wikipedia:
A condo hotel, also known as a hotel-condo or a Condotel, is a building used as both a condominium and a hotel.
These hotels have condominium units which allow someone to own a full-service vacation home. When they are not using this home, they can leverage the marketing and management done by the hotel chain to rent and manage the condo unit as it would any other hotel room.
Rental revenue is shared with the management company, and owners typically pay no upfront fees for management, which includes the marketing and reservation of the units. Typical monthly fees for units in the rental pool include FF&E (Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment) reserve and resort fee(s). Although the revenue splits between owner and management company do vary from project to project, most hover around 50 percent.
Interesting. Doesn't actually sound so bad after all! I wonder if this would make touristic complexes more or less valuable?
its just a compulsary sole agent system. Nothing to be happy about at all. The customer has to pay extra for the hotel ad ons, 24 hour reception,maid service etc, or the owner has to take less money out of the deal. Many sole agents now will not take on new renters as they can not fully rent out their existing controlled apartments. Private individual renting , permited subject to an annual fee , is the best system. The portugese model. many renters have let out their apartments like that for many years. Ashotel and the government are cracking down on this renting because they themselves want the customers in hotels. The new proposals , based on sole agency, are just a wind up, ashotel wants to compete against nearly hotels , they fear lower cost self catering accomodation. they are distorting the market to the detriment of consumer choice and free market price competitiveness.
We dont need a system of compulsary collective monopoly sole agency to be part of renting out private apartments to tourists any more than we need a man to walk in front of motor car carrying a red flag.
ashotel/canary government get real, all artificial unfair laws dont last. Your unfair system is not going to stand up to scrutiny for long. Your dictatorship ended 37 years ago, start acting like you want to live in a free world.
Thing is Nelson, you can harp on about the old days and how the new days should be, but you are very much a lone voice.
The challenge to the 1995 law which resulted in the current 50+1 ruling was granted to the Canaries by the EU because of their "peripheral status" as has been explored and discussed before.
Given that only a couple of days ago the Canaries were given the green-light by the EU, and for the same reasons (positive discrimination), to allow Canarian businesses to give preference to "locals" over others in the recruitment of workers shows, to me at least, there isn't a cat in hell's chance of any relaxation of the letting laws any time soon, nor any chance whatsoever of a challenge to the laws being succesful in any European court.
It may seem like a dictatorship from your point of view, and to a degree you are pretty close to the mark, but it is in fact the result of a passionatly Nationalist Government who, rightly or wrongly want to maintain control and run things their way and interestingly it seems that they have the support of the EU to do so.
The real point though is that this is the way they want to run things, this is the way they have been running things for 16 odd years, and the black-market letting industry which has grown up before their eyes in the past 5 ish years is something they plan to stop. Your only real option is to get out, and get out quickly!
You may be correct that the effect on local businesses will be a bit painful, but there always have been too many restaurants on the island per capita. I suspect though that your real reasons for being so vocal is that the effect on you and your pocket(s) is even more so.
Thing is Nelson, you can harp on about the old days and how the new days should be, but you are very much a lone voice.
The challenge to the 1995 law which resulted in the current 50+1 ruling was granted to the Canaries by the EU because of their "peripheral status" as has been explored and discussed before.
Given that only a couple of days ago the Canaries were given the green-light by the EU, and for the same reasons (positive discrimination), to allow Canarian businesses to give preference to "locals" over others in the recruitment of workers shows, to me at least, there isn't a cat in hell's chance of any relaxation of the letting laws any time soon, nor any chance whatsoever of a challenge to the laws being succesful in any European court.
It may seem like a dictatorship from your point of view, and to a degree you are pretty close to the mark, but it is in fact the result of a passionatly Nationalist Government who, rightly or wrongly want to maintain control and run things their way and interestingly it seems that they have the support of the EU to do so.
The real point though is that this is the way they want to run things, this is the way they have been running things for 16 odd years, and the black-market letting industry which has grown up before their eyes in the past 5 ish years is something they plan to stop. Your only real option is to get out, and get out quickly!
You may be correct that the effect on local businesses will be a bit painful, but there always have been too many restaurants on the island per capita. I suspect though that your real reasons for being so vocal is that the effect on you and your pocket(s) is even more so.
Can I ask how do you "get out quickly". Who in their right mind would attempt to buy property in the Canaries at this present time?
Angusjim
11-07-2012, 10:14
Can I ask how do you "get out quickly". Who in their right mind would attempt to buy property in the Canaries at this present time?
Who will buy in Tenerife people with plenty cash for a life style choice or gamblers who think there is a future in letting out to tourists, the government obviously care nothing about people who invest in Tenerife property so my advise is don't. I have said before if you are buying for investment the UK is a much safer bet and you are helping your own economy. THINK BRITISH AND FORGET TENERIFE FOR INVESTMENT
Can I ask how do you "get out quickly". Who in their right mind would attempt to buy property in the Canaries at this present time?
Someone who wanted to purchase a holiday home for example
Can I ask how do you "get out quickly". Who in their right mind would attempt to buy property in the Canaries at this present time?
Remember the adverts - "The value of your investment could rise or FALL"
Angusjim
11-07-2012, 10:47
Remember the adverts - "The value of your investment could rise or FALL"
But the lunatics who are currenty running the Asylum ain't helping
My guess is that the hotels want to eventually take over the touristic complexes so they can run them themselves as condo hotels. Then they would eliminate the competition. I think that’s why they are rumoured to be increasing the sole agent requirement from 50% +1 to 75% + 1. That way, only the very best sole agents will make it, and if the rest don’t make the quota with whatever time frame they’re given, they will be out, and someone else will take over, i.e. someone with connections to the hotels.
Hardest part is getting the owners to agree to anything - i have a resident complaining about paying for part of an 8000 project because its for the touristic side - he complains that he pays 4000 euros a year in community fees already.....
What he doesn't mention is that he's smashed a 2 bed and a 1 bed into one apartment and then bought the local below and a garage ......
And lives with his wife only
Peterrayner
12-07-2012, 12:46
How is it for the touristic side...??? surely any improvements are for the benefit of all.
And lives with his wife only
its all a puzzle. clearly you can never get agrement with communities. The government proposal appears to hint at ending residential living in the touristic complex's anyway, and making sole agency compulsary and with it improvements.
Seems to me that they are trying to keep their daft system alive in the face of reason, and at the same time they are unconcerned about the delcine in their visitor numbers .
The info I am getting at the moment is that the resorts are very quiet and the taxi men are commenting that they are not doing fares any more to el mirador.
I cannot see how they can implement such a law if ever it was brought in. Retired owners living on dormant touristic for the past 15 years in their own homes being told to up sticks, get out and leave the keys with the new bloke running reception so he can rent it out to all and sundry??!
Can you imagine the negative publicity? It would be a complete and utter disaster for Tenerife and Spain's image.
seanocelt
12-07-2012, 13:43
its all a puzzle. clearly you can never get agrement with communities. The government proposal appears to hint at ending residential living in the touristic complex's anyway, and making sole agency compulsary and with it improvements.
Seems to me that they are trying to keep their daft system alive in the face of reason, and at the same time they are unconcerned about the delcine in their visitor numbers .
The info I am getting at the moment is that the resorts are very quiet and the taxi men are commenting that they are not doing fares any more to el mirador.
What utter dross. I live on El Mirador, get taxis often. How can you expect people to take your posts seriously with RUBBISH like that?
cause Nelly make it up as she goes along
How is it for the touristic side...??? surely any improvements are for the benefit of all.
The last thing we need to achieve 3 star is a to install a play area for kids and because he doesn't let he thinks all the owners that let should pay for it instead.
two problems with that:
1. there are owners that say they don't let but do - do we make them pay or let them off even though they're lying through their teeth?
2. By that logic people that let shouldn't have to pay for things that only benefit residents....... can of worms.......
its all a puzzle. clearly you can never get agrement with communities. The government proposal appears to hint at ending residential living in the touristic complex's anyway, and making sole agency compulsary and with it improvements.
Seems to me that they are trying to keep their daft system alive in the face of reason, and at the same time they are unconcerned about the delcine in their visitor numbers .
The info I am getting at the moment is that the resorts are very quiet and the taxi men are commenting that they are not doing fares any more to el mirador.
Visitor numbers for first half of 2012 down 2% overall on last year, however June 2012 up 1.6% on last June
Obviously these are the official hotel and "legally" let apartment figures.
Visitor numbers for first half of 2012 down 2% overall on last year, however June 2012 up 1.6% on last June
Obviously these are the official hotel and "legally" let apartment figures.
That probably reflects the cost of flights in School holiday times - October half term this year the cheapest Easyjet flight from Gatwick comes in just under £500, other carriers are dearer than that.
junglejim
12-07-2012, 15:21
The last thing we need to achieve 3 star is a to install a play area for kids and because he doesn't let he thinks all the owners that let should pay for it instead.
two problems with that:
1. there are owners that say they don't let but do - do we make them pay or let them off even though they're lying through their teeth?
2. By that logic people that let shouldn't have to pay for things that only benefit residents....... can of worms......."
Peter , Loaded - surely under the Law of Horizontal Properties , members of a community do not have to pay towards non essential improvements e.g. Sattellite Systems , heated pools ,play areas - if they don't pay they cannot enjoy the improvement except for example you couldn't stop them from using a communal pool.
Article 11- a translation
"11th Clause
1. None of the proprietors will be able to demand new facilities, services or improvements that are not required for the proper community maintenance, habitability and safety, according to its nature and features.
2. Whenever some agreements are adopted in order to carry out non-required innovations under the previous paragraph provisions, and whose installation quota exceeds the amount of three ordinary monthly payments of common expenses, the dissident neither will be forced, nor his quota will be modified, even whether he cannot be deprived of the improvement or advantage.
If the dissident wants, at any time, to participate of the advantages of the innovation, he will be obliged to pay his quota concerning fulfilment and maintenance expenses, properly up-to-dated by applying the corresponding legal interest.
3. Innovations which become useless for some part of the building for the proprietor's quiet enjoyment, will require, in any case, the express approval.
4.Calls for contributions to the payment of finished or future property improvements will be at the expenses of the one who is the proprietor at the moment of the liveability of affected quantities for the payment of such improvements."
Does this also mean that you need 100% approval for material change of layout of complex?
Peterrayner
12-07-2012, 16:50
and whose installation quota exceeds the amount of three ordinary monthly payments of common expenses, the dissident neither will be forced, nor his quota will be modified, even whether he cannot be deprived of the improvement or advantage.
As I understand it thats the crucial part
so an 8000 E improvement for example spread over say 100 apartments would only be 80E each and then if thats less than 3 months community fees payment is required by all owners ????
or have I misunderstood. ???
thats usually for costs that are done as a Derrama where owners are asked to put in money on top of their community fees, this is using existing community funds.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
relative cost per owner is about 25€
Visitor numbers for first half of 2012 down 2% overall on last year, however June 2012 up 1.6% on last June
Obviously these are the official hotel and "legally" let apartment figures.
yes those are official hotel figures so wont include the illegal lets which I think will be considerabley down. My contacts in resort are telling me that its very quiet, and they specifically told me taxi men are commenting on el mirador fares. Of course taxi fares will not be zero but they may be significantly down.
I am naturally iinterested to know if the crackdown has reduced visitor numbers in los cristo or not ? I can accept the outcome even if it goes against my expectation. Any sort of feedback on that would be useful from people living/ holidaying there at the moment.
yes those are official hotel figures so wont include the illegal lets which I think will be considerabley down. My contacts in resort are telling me that its very quiet, and they specifically told me taxi men are commenting on el mirador fares. Of course taxi fares will not be zero but they may be significantly down.
I am naturally iinterested to know if the crackdown has reduced visitor numbers in los cristo or not ? I can accept the outcome even if it goes against my expectation. Any sort of feedback on that would be useful from people living/ holidaying there at the moment.
It can't include people who are staying in illegal holiday lets as the people producing the figures have no idea how many of them they are.
As I said in 4462 (http://www.tenerifeforum.org/tenerife-forum/showthread.php?23-The-Tenerife-illegal-lettings-thread&p=197296&viewfull=1#post197296) though, it is not all down to the crackdown, the price of the flights, particularly if you are stuck to having to travel in the school holidays, are bloody ridiculous now.
My contacts in resort are telling me that its very quiet,
Around here it seems to be quite busy.
Angusjim
12-07-2012, 18:18
Around here it seems to be quite busy.
Then get a bigger house then dear !!
delderek
12-07-2012, 19:05
Just from a personal point of view, a year ago you could get a flight for 120 pounds,,now for the next few months, it's a struggle to find anything under 200 pounds. Result. I am not visiting. So nothing to do with letting/illegal letting, just silly flight prices.
Hey Del 200 odd isn't really that expensive is it ?
Just from a personal point of view, a year ago you could get a flight for 120 pounds,,now for the next few months, it's a struggle to find anything under 200 pounds. Result. I am not visiting. So nothing to do with letting/illegal letting, just silly flight prices.
Tell me about it, at the Easter holiday this year, we paid just over £1000 for 4 adults, at the October half term it would cost us just under £2000 for 4 adults.
We've booked a week B&B with flights to the Algarve in a 4* hotel for 4 adults for less than the cost of the flights to Tenerife.
delderek
12-07-2012, 22:26
Hey Del 200 odd isn't really that expensive is it ?
It is when, your'e used to paying a lot less.:whistle:
It is when, your'e used to paying a lot less.:whistle:
from what I have seen with flight prices bobmac is right , the october holiday rates this year are very expensive, even when compared with normal price hikes for school holidays. At the moment though flight prices for out of school holidays are not that much different from normal periods. I know of friends who have recently got flights from doncaster to ten south with ryan air at £ 130 each return. The doncaster airport is not a busy airport and ryan air probabley will struggle to fill those planes more than the bigger airports. The company who own the airport have probabley given ryanair discounts to get them in, the airport has struggled with atracting flights. The prices that ryan air are offering appear to reflect a slowdown at the doncaster airport for tenerife flights, and clearly ryanair is carrying many illegal let customers.
we have to watch for these low cost airlines pulling slots , if that happens then that will indicate a definite slowdown in apartment tourists due to the crackdown.
junglejim
13-07-2012, 08:52
Hey Del 200 odd isn't really that expensive is it ?
Try flying from Scotland !
Ryanair have cut out a lot of their peak time flights to Tenerife , they are using the off peak days but still charging high fares.
If you are flexible you can get a decent price one way , but school holidays are just a rip-off and should be investigated!
macdonald5
13-07-2012, 09:26
Try flying from Scotland !
Ryanair have cut out a lot of their peak time flights to Tenerife , they are using the off peak days but still charging high fares.
If you are flexible you can get a decent price one way , but school holidays are just a rip-off and should be investigated!
Agree , and next years prices are even higher, with increased flight prices and (legal) apartment costs the dreaded AI starts to look the cheaper option
Peterrayner
13-07-2012, 11:47
Getting back on topic there are a couple of interesting notices last week on BOC for owners on Malibu Park.
Presumably on a tourisitc site but not using the sole agency and the notice mentions advertising via owners direct picked up on an inspection dated March 2012 it seems.
Violation of the principle of unity of exploitation, since the reference complex consists of 247 accommodation units authorized under the ownership of "Operations Tourism Tenerife Sur, SA", with the apartment No **** exploited touristically as a unit independent from which it follows is explotation.
All above the search results form web page www.tenerife-apartments-villas.com, the inspection report No. 19612, of its consultation, the Cabildo de Tenerife, dated March 19, 2012.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
the clink has been suspended !!!
Agree , and next years prices are even higher, with increased flight prices and (legal) apartment costs the dreaded AI starts to look the cheaper option
sounds like its just market forces.Ryanair must have already reduced the scottish flights overall, that would be due to reduced demand and points to illegal apartment customers falling off. The airplane companies all have their models for trading, this involves manipulating seat prices for maximum profit, they sell some tickets for more whenever they can, school holidays are always a sore point. The thing is though, in their book a full profitable plane is what they want , and if overall visitors decline they will still rack up their prices to the few pasengers that remain wanting to travel. Its a win situation for the airplane company but loose loose for the canaries, as overall this will reduce visitor numbers.
The question is when will the canary government wake up to this mess of their creating? Their hotel protectionist model, which is not giving them an increase in hotel customers but seems certain to cause massive harm to their economy due to a large decrease in self catering apartment visitors.
welshman
13-07-2012, 13:21
Tell me about it, at the Easter holiday this year, we paid just over £1000 for 4 adults, at the October half term it would cost us just under £2000 for 4 adults.
We've booked a week B&B with flights to the Algarve in a 4* hotel for 4 adults for less than the cost of the flights to Tenerife.
Nice to have you hope you have a good time may the crack down continue
sounds like its just market forces.Ryanair must have already reduced the scottish flights overall, that would be due to reduced demand and points to illegal apartment customers falling off. The airplane companies all have their models for trading, this involves manipulating seat prices for maximum profit, they sell some tickets for more whenever they can, school holidays are always a sore point. The thing is though, in their book a full profitable plane is what they want , and if overall visitors decline they will still rack up their prices to the few pasengers that remain wanting to travel. Its a win situation for the airplane company but loose loose for the canaries, as overall this will reduce visitor numbers.
The question is when will the canary government wake up to this mess of their creating? Their hotel protectionist model, which is not giving them an increase in hotel customers but seems certain to cause massive harm to their economy due to a large decrease in self catering apartment visitors.
As has been explained to you here, and in other places too, the special status granted to the Canaries which allows them to do things the way they want to would suggest that they do not agree with you that they are creating a mess, so the answer to your question is "no time soon".
It also seems that any challenge in the European courts to the direction they are taking is a) likely to fail, on the grounds that permission has been given to the Canaries by Europe to do what they are doing, and b) that you are somewhat on your own in putting together such a challenge since the lobby group(s) is well aware of the above.
Off you go to Portugal
xx
As has been explained to you here, and in other places too, the special status granted to the Canaries which allows them to do things the way they want to would suggest that they do not agree with you that they are creating a mess, so the answer to your question is "no time soon".
It also seems that any challenge in the European courts to the direction they are taking is a) likely to fail, on the grounds that permission has been given to the Canaries by Europe to do what they are doing, and b) that you are somewhat on your own in putting together such a challenge since the lobby group(s) is well aware of the above.
Off you go to Portugal
xx
ha ha, yes this extra peripaphal stuff seems to be going the governments way up to now. However given the damage that their crackdown may do to their economy and given good representation from our lawyers then we can still press a good case.
The much quoted 2005 victory for sole monopoly agency , seems to have been achieved due to the case that sole agency was good for consumer protection. That case was not based as it would be today on thousands of private renters who have a good record of satisfied customers.The 2005 case was a dispute between rival agencies on a certain complex. Also the portugese system is up and running today, which was not the case in 2005.
However i have to admit that the canary government has managed to play the poor peririfal argument to its advantage up to now, the recent employment for canarians ruling shows this. I would also admit that the euro politicos can be anti commonsense business like in their own mindsets. We can look at projects like the euro to see where these euro plonkers can take things with their un real world attitudes and sympathies at times. The canary government might be able to plead that their crazy system is vital to this important industry of theirs, we have to give them credit for their cunning.
To our advantage however, I sense that the new PP government in Madrid may start to loose patience with the canary government. The madrid government has to send large money cheques across to the canaries to keep up with dole payments etc. The fact that the canary government are by their own policies damaging tourism and increasing unemployment in the islands appears to be something that the madrid government is getting impatient about. Being a self governing part of spain is fine, but he who pays the piper calls the tune. The pp government has more free market sense and knows that spain has to work its way out of recesion., a protectionist economic plan that seeks to help one sector but detroys another is never going to help the wider economy.
ha ha, yes this extra peripaphal stuff seems to be going the governments way up to now. However given the damage that their crackdown may do to their economy and given good representation from our lawyers then we can still press a good case.
The much quoted 2005 victory for sole monopoly agency , seems to have been achieved due to the case that sole agency was good for consumer protection. That case was not based as it would be today on thousands of private renters who have a good record of satisfied customers.The 2005 case was a dispute between rival agencies on a certain complex. Also the portugese system is up and running today, which was not the case in 2005.
However i have to admit that the canary government has managed to play the poor peririfal argument to its advantage up to now, the recent employment for canarians ruling shows this. I would also admit that the euro politicos can be anti commonsense business like in their own mindsets. We can look at projects like the euro to see where these euro plonkers can take things with their un real world attitudes and sympathies at times. The canary government might be able to plead that their crazy system is vital to this important industry of theirs, we have to give them credit for their cunning.
To our advantage however, I sense that the new PP government in Madrid may start to loose patience with the canary government. The madrid government has to send large money cheques across to the canaries to keep up with dole payments etc. The fact that the canary government are by their own policies damaging tourism and increasing unemployment in the islands appears to be something that the madrid government is getting impatient about. Being a self governing part of spain is fine, but he who pays the piper calls the tune. The pp government has more free market sense and knows that spain has to work its way out of recesion., a protectionist economic plan that seeks to help one sector but detroys another is never going to help the wider economy.
Nelson, when are you actually going to grasp the point that it doesn't matter an iota what the system is in any other country, the only thing which applies in the Canaries are the laws passed by the Canarian Government, whether they be good, bad or indifferent, or like this one a total c o c k-up - they are still the law and are the only laws which apply at the moment and have to be respected.
When they actually change them, it will be interesting to see what alterations they actually make.
Until then, keep smiling
I'd also recommend being careful what you wish for from the Madrid Government; there are a lot of people on the Canaries who might get a bit touchy if Central Government starts interfering in the day to day running of the Canaries.
golf birdie
13-07-2012, 17:07
I'd also recommend being careful what you wish for from the Madrid Government; there are a lot of people on the Canaries who might get a bit touchy if Central Government starts interfering in the day to day running of the Canaries.
to be fair, they could hardly do a worse job.
Does anyone read Nelsons posts ?
Tom & Sharon
13-07-2012, 23:17
Does anyone read Nelsons posts ?
Depends on whether or not you need a good laugh after a few vinos......
Depends on whether or not you need a good laugh after a few vinos......
Or a cure for insomnia!
And the rest of you regular posters on this thread produce rivetting reading,vino drinkers or insomniacs,or self proclaiming self interest groups,especially. Keep up the good work, the clampdown continues............
slodgedad
15-07-2012, 00:20
If a couple of mods with a couple of weeks spare spent some time on this thread they could probably whittle it down by 70% to make it more readable.
But hey ho...Keep the OTs coming..:bowdown:
But hey ho...Keep the OTs coming..:bowdown:
OK Cool................ www.ten-diez.com
cheers
x
KirstyJay
15-07-2012, 11:28
If a couple of mods with a couple of weeks spare spent some time on this thread they could probably whittle it down by 70% to make it more readable....Yeah right. 449 pages? We'd have to take on a new mod just for this thread!!!
Yeah right. 449 pages? We'd have to take on a new mod just for this thread!!!
Or one that worked for their wage
x
KirstyJay
15-07-2012, 11:33
Or one that worked for their wage
x
You mean one that GOT a wage. ;)
slodgedad
15-07-2012, 19:39
Yeah right. 449 pages? We'd have to take on a new mod just for this thread!!!
Sarcasm, my dear. Sarcasm.:doh:..
seanocelt
19-07-2012, 12:46
http://content.yudu.com/Library/A1xnst/APlaceintheSunAugust/resources/index.htm?referrerUrl=http://free.yudu.com/item/details/558405/A-Place-in-the-Sun-August-2012-issue
good link folks, click it, go to bottom right of magazine, turn to page 40, read to page 43. I N T E R E S T I N G
junglejim
19-07-2012, 23:00
A bit more publicity but unfortunately doesn't offer any solutions just some publicity for Jose Escobedo .
It's another popcorn situation!
:popcorn:
seanocelt
20-07-2012, 03:23
Oh, people want "solutions"? On a FORUM? Ha Ha. Ha Ha Ha. Oh! ...and HaHaHa!. There are people who are going down the route of, " i protest, here is what im going to do " and...........well, there are THEM, the ones who DEMAND the wicked Gov change their ways. Reading the publication, its a wait and see game, it is not meant to encourage coronaries brought on by indignation. But.........................feel free.
No idea how many have read the piece, but so quiet feedback wise.
for those that missed this update on the 75% thing, http://www.laprovincia.es/canarias/2012/07/28/turismo-afirma-pretende-fuera-mercado-establecimiento/473127.html
The president of the Association of extra-hoteleros, Tom Smulders said that "the Deputy Minister has told us that it was never the intention to wipe out beds and that we, the entrepreneurs, have misinterpreted the text of the proposal, when there is no other interpretation ". For his part, De la Puente said that "from 1995 all the complexes built had to devote 100% of their apartments for tourist operations for a license, and now we are saying the rule is that these complexes can have a lower operating by 25% (ie 75% of total), but the principle of operation of 50% plus one prevails ".
So basically all the old complexes carry on with 50%+1 and all the new complexes can get a license with 75% if the law goes through.
Peterrayner
02-08-2012, 18:07
So basically all the old complexes carry on with 50%+1 and all the new complexes can get a license with 75% if the law goes through.
Just to clarify do you mean that
the 50+1% will still apply to all the existing touristic complexes that have a current legal licenced sole agent ie Paloma Beach etc
and that any dormant or reinstated touristic complexes ie Sur Y Sol will have to have 75% registered to reinstate the licence.
There cant be any new touristic complexes can there as the moritorium is still in place. ???
???
Hi Peter,
Yes correct re Paloma beach / royal palm..... The older ones which still have a license but no one running it like sur y sol I would suppose still only need 50%+1 unless they've been inspected and "closed" recently.
Complexes that have been "closed" or new ones built as tourist accommodation before moratorium (built after 1995) would need 75%.
Brand new complexes that aren't tourist such as el mirador could theoretically become touristic is this new 75% law comes in AND if the moratorium is lifted AND if the council allow that land to be reclassified - Janet would know more about the land classification than myself.
Any news on what the inspectors have been up to recently? Most owners on my complex seem to still have their head in the sands re the severity of the situation. Most believe that as long as they don't advertise on the internet they can still quietly continue to rent to regulars and through word of mouth. Trying to get the sole agent to offer a more appealing rental package to entice them to operate legally has proved fruitless. It all feels a bit like "stale mate" at the moment!!
canary boy
05-08-2012, 18:33
Its all going to the courts now with a timeline of One Year to reach a conclusion and then I should expect to go to European court and on and on and on:stupid::stupid::stupid:
Hi Peter,
Yes correct re Paloma beach / royal palm..... The older ones which still have a license but no one running it like sur y sol I would suppose still only need 50%+1 unless they've been inspected and "closed" recently.
Complexes that have been "closed" or new ones built as tourist accommodation before moratorium (built after 1995) would need 75%.
Brand new complexes that aren't tourist such as el mirador could theoretically become touristic is this new 75% law comes in AND if the moratorium is lifted AND if the council allow that land to be reclassified - Janet would know more about the land classification than myself.
What does this all mean to the average human being that just likes to holiday in Tenerife?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.