View Full Version : The Tenerife illegal lettings thread
What does this all mean to the average human being that just likes to holiday in Tenerife?
No different really as long as you have a few Uncles with accomodation :wink2::whistle:
seanocelt
06-08-2012, 03:46
What does this all mean to the average human being that just likes to holiday in Tenerife?
For now, i THINK it means....a bit less choice accom wise?
junglejim
06-08-2012, 11:16
The British Embassy finally catch up with the news ! What a waste of an organisation, jobs& jollies for the boys !
http://ukinspain.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=796729682
The British Embassy finally catch up with the news ! What a waste of an organisation, jobs& jollies for the boys !
http://ukinspain.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=796729682
Having read the document, it doesn't seem to say anything other than confirm what most people commenting on this thread have been saying since this thread started on the old forum and this forum - You have to conform to Canarian Law or risk a fine.
That's probably not going to be what some people want to see or hear but it is sound advice.
jogger321
06-08-2012, 12:54
Having read the document, it doesn't seem to say anything other than confirm what most people commenting on this thread have been saying since this thread started on the old forum and this forum - You have to conform to Canarian Law or risk a fine.
That's probably not going to be what some people want to see or hear but it is sound advice.
Ha, Ha what an utter total waste of space this lot are!. When was it the inspectors first went in???? If they were actually doing anything useful they would have posted this on their site around 8 months ago and maybe the gullible, stupid or ill informed might have avoided fines.
Ha, Ha what an utter total waste of space this lot are!. When was it the inspectors first went in???? If they were actually doing anything useful they would have posted this on their site around 8 months ago and maybe the gullible, stupid or ill informed might have avoided fines.
Totally agree with you - this information should have issued as soon as the inspectors started working.
Unfortunately, I don't think it would have helped everybody who is involved as by their own admission, a lot of them were fully aware of the law when they bought the properties but ignored it - usually claiming that they were told the law was there but they could just ignore it as it had never been enforced, which with hindsight wasn't particularly good advice.
They should have taken independent legal advice at the time, it would have saved them a lot of money in the end, given what's now happening.
I think it's a bit unfair on the Consulate to complain that they didn't jump in straight away. Bottom line is that the Consulate are not here to campaign for changes in local laws, it's not really what they do. Their advice has always been that if you fall foul of local laws they will try to help, but their powers of influence are quite limited.
The common sense rules on buying property, at home or abroad are the same the world over - buyer beware.
What is interesting though is that the Consulate are clearly becoming concerned about "Brits" getting caught up in the Canarian letting laws, and have issued a timely reminder that homework is necessary and proper independant advice is highly recommended from experts rather than "geezers dawn de pub innit". Worth noting too that the Consulate are clearly not expecting any significant changes to the laws, other than the tweaks we have learned about so far from the usual informed sources.
To those who believe the Consulate services are a waste of space - think carefully about what you say - one day you may need their help!
junglejim
06-08-2012, 14:39
Muppet from what I have seen of them in action , I wouldn't hold my breath!
Good evening, I've read the first and last couple of dozen pages on this thread, but couldn't find out whether someone knows roughly how many fines have been levied. "A Place in the Sun" suggests 7000, but I really can't believe that. So, sorry if the info is buried elsewhere, but if it is, could someone point me to it.
Thanks.
That's the figure from about 9 months ago
timmylish
14-08-2012, 15:26
I think it's a bit unfair on the Consulate to complain that they didn't jump in straight away. Bottom line is that the Consulate are not here to campaign for changes in local laws, it's not really what they do. Their advice has always been that if you fall foul of local laws they will try to help, but their powers of influence are quite limited.
The common sense rules on buying property, at home or abroad are the same the world over - buyer beware.
What is interesting though is that the Consulate are clearly becoming concerned about "Brits" getting caught up in the Canarian letting laws, and have issued a timely reminder that homework is necessary and proper independant advice is highly recommended from experts rather than "geezers dawn de pub innit". Worth noting too that the Consulate are clearly not expecting any significant changes to the laws, other than the tweaks we have learned about so far from the usual informed sources.
To those who believe the Consulate services are a waste of space - think carefully about what you say - one day you may need their help!
In the 23 years of resident of Tenerife I have NEVER heard of any situation where the Consulate Service here has been of any benefit to anyone. Inept some say. Bloody useless is my description. Each and every time I sought advice on immigration of my then Russian wife, birth of my child to her and the consequential advice on Nationality which I sought, to cases of Brits finding themselves on the wrong side of the law, no-one was able to assist me or the poor unfortunates in need of help. The UK staff are just here earning a lovely wee salary doing the minimum of passing papers around their offices and improving their use of Spanish. Just try to get an appointment with an official from your home country, the UK for example. It took me speaking to The F & C O in London (thru' a former work mate) to just see the stuck up toffy nosed madam who was in situ at that time. Advice, well the bar tender in the cafe downstairs would have given better advice! Never have any hope of help 'cause it will not be forthcoming.
I can honestly say that over the years Mary, Christine and the rest of the team at the British Consul have always been there when needed.
11 years ago I had a stoke, heart attack and brain bleed and there were no MRI scanners in the South and I have to be transfered first to Candelaria intensive care followe by intesive care and brain surgery in University Hospital.
Mary from the British Consul kept in touch daily with my parents to translate the doctors report with them.
I was also the Clinic Rep for My Travel for 4 years during which time I had a great deal of assistance from the British Consul for all the deaths, rapes , victims and criminals of My Travel passengers.
The Consul are not there to loan money, bail people out of trouble and a list of what they can and cant do is very clear on their website.
I have been on the island for more than 30 years and have never had a problem that the Consul have not helped me with to the best of their ability
They helped us to convince the Lanzarote Health Service that our early retiree E106 entitled us to 30 months of the same care as if we paid seguridad social, and not just EHIC emergency care.
very good article this week in canary weekly newspaper, page 38. You can read it online. This writer has got it spot on.
tfs_longlets
19-08-2012, 10:47
To save having to search, click here
http://www.canarianweekly.com/tourist-rental-laws-fact-fiction/
junglejim
19-08-2012, 12:49
very good article this week in canary weekly newspaper, page 38. You can read it online. This writer has got it spot on.
The first part of the fiction was in last week´s edition.
very good article this week in canary weekly newspaper, page 38. You can read it online. This writer has got it spot on.
Which you would expect from a lawyer touting for business ??!!
Complete load of toss! only interesting bit was towards the bottom headed "British Embassy Warning: Beware the pitfalls of renting"
Alternative ending:
The utopians took legal advice from a well known local lawyer and decided to vote against the sole agents at an AGM.
Unfortunately these property owners found out they’d been given bad advice and couldn’t actually remove a sole agent from office at an AGM, this was because the sole agent had acquired the 50%+1 needed by all of the individual owners signing their express permission for said sole agent to register their apartment with the Utopian Tourist Board – ie: it was not a community meeting decision, it was a private contract between the owner and the sole agent and therefore not a community matter per say. Much like the community AGM could not decide which beer the pool bar served to customers as the pool bar was a private business.
The Utopians had wasted money on bad advice, but they found out via a local blogger that the only way to remove the sole agent from office was to one by one de-register their apartments from the sole agents registration until the sole agent fell below the 50%+1 needed – they all did this and were successful in getting the sole agent out of their complex, soon all the other tourist complexes started doing this too.
One by one all of the owners who could previously rent out their apartments legally now couldn’t – but neither could the sole agent – they had finally achieved what they wanted, to NOT be able to rent out their apartment in Utopia Island just like all of owners of residential properties who were being persecuted by the evil Utopian Government inspectors.
The Sole Agents all folded and many honest Utopian workers were put out of work and all of the formerly legal apartments on formerly legal touristic complexes were now sitting empty. The owners who brought this upon themselves loved having no income and they felt great that they’d stopped the naughty sole agent from making money out of them. They also felt a sense of solidarity between them and the owners on residential complexes who had been victimised previously.
Afterwards, the Utopian owners began exploring ways to stop hotels from operating legally, more on that next issue!
carolethatch
26-08-2012, 17:19
Gosh you said the magic words "stopped the sole agent from making money out of them". At last.
thats the whole idea of it isn't it? it's not a charity
welshman
29-08-2012, 09:05
Looked at BOC today Tenerife Royal Garden . This complex has everything have stayed there. Could this be the rental agent dobbing in people renting direct not through the complex. Sole agent total control you buy they control not a bad business model. I,d like to try it in UK.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Looked at BOC today Tenerife Royal Garden . This complex has everything have stayed there. Could this be the rental agent dobbing in people renting direct not through the complex. Sole agent total control you buy they control not a bad business model. I,d like to try it in UK.
Tenerife Royal Garden have no sole agent, that's why they're getting fined
I can see Royal Tenerife Country Club ( golf del sur )
but I can't see any mention of TRG?
hackney58
29-08-2012, 14:31
trg is on the front next to the sir anthony
Its in las Américas next to compostella beach
Sorry guys, I meant to say I can't see it on BOC.
It was in answer to Welshman's post. I think he might have mistaken RTCC for TRG.
Hi Guys
Great to be back amongst you all!
I just thought I'd share this with you. From the Lanzarote press:
Rita Hernandez, the Director of Tourist Regulation and Promotion in the Canaries, has stated that the legislation of tourist villas that fulfill certain requirements is included in the White Paper of the forthcoming Law of Tourist Renovation and Qualification. Those requirements will include the location of the villas, their fitness for use, and whether legalising them is likely to improve competitiveness.
So having been ridiculed by many on here for saying that the Tourist Authorities had no intention of stopping ALL illegal holiday letting in the Canaries, and further ridiculed for outlining many months ago that the laws were going to be changed, those people are looking a little bit silly now. Apologies will be accepted.
In particular, a prominent female contributor to other forums, who advised all villa owners in the Canaries to stop holiday letting immediately some time ago. This has been proven to be bad advice, and shows a complete lack of understanding of the economy and holiday letting market on other islands, as well as showing that my contact line to the Tourist Authorities is much shorter than hers, if she has one. Had we taken her advice, myself and other villa owners would be bankrupt by now.
Anyway, lets review the latest progress by our hardworking inspectors given the task of stopping all illegal holiday letting in the Canaries. Since the last review, the number of properties being advertised on the 3 main rental websites is 8719, an INCREASE of 315 since the end of May, and a massive INCREASE of 1746 properties since February 2011.
The clampdown continues.
seanocelt
05-09-2012, 20:14
Lo Siento. Y gracias.
My Scottish isn't that good, but I'll take that as an apology.
Accepted.
seanocelt
06-09-2012, 01:14
My Scottish isn't that good, but I'll take that as an apology.
Accepted.
Could you PLEASE post a link to this, its the most interesting developement in a very long while? Thanks.
My Scottish isn't that good, but I'll take that as an apology.
Accepted.
It isn't Scottish - It's Spanish
Hi Guys
Great to be back amongst you all!
I just thought I'd share this with you. From the Lanzarote press:
Rita Hernandez, the Director of Tourist Regulation and Promotion in the Canaries, has stated that the legislation of tourist villas that fulfill certain requirements is included in the White Paper of the forthcoming Law of Tourist Renovation and Qualification. Those requirements will include the location of the villas, their fitness for use, and whether legalising them is likely to improve competitiveness.
So having been ridiculed by many on here for saying that the Tourist Authorities had no intention of stopping ALL illegal holiday letting in the Canaries, and further ridiculed for outlining many months ago that the laws were going to be changed, those people are looking a little bit silly now. Apologies will be accepted.
In particular, a prominent female contributor to other forums, who advised all villa owners in the Canaries to stop holiday letting immediately some time ago. This has been proven to be bad advice, and shows a complete lack of understanding of the economy and holiday letting market on other islands, as well as showing that my contact line to the Tourist Authorities is much shorter than hers, if she has one. Had we taken her advice, myself and other villa owners would be bankrupt by now.
Anyway, lets review the latest progress by our hardworking inspectors given the task of stopping all illegal holiday letting in the Canaries. Since the last review, the number of properties being advertised on the 3 main rental websites is 8719, an INCREASE of 315 since the end of May, and a massive INCREASE of 1746 properties since February 2011.
The clampdown continues.
Fines are still being issued to owners of villa's, if and when the law is changed only then will they be exempt from prosecution for illegal letting.
Maybe the advice was not bad advice!
It has been well known for some time that the letting law was and is to be reviewed this autumn and part of the planned review could see modifications with respect to Villa owners amongst other rumoured changes.
So Hugh - Nothing new here
For the moment, and until any modifications are put into law, the existing law still stands - I would suggest that the previously given advice not to advertise villas or apartments on residential complexes/apartments on touristic complexes outside of the appointed and registered sole agent remains the most sound and appropriate advice that can be given at this point.
Sadly, any owner of a villa or apartment who is currently facing bankrupty through not being able to pay their mortgage as a result of having to stop letting because of fear of falling foul of the legislation, which has been in force for over 16 years now, only have themselves to blame for not doing their homework, or should at least take their situation up with the agent they used.
It has been well known for some time that the letting law was and is to be reviewed this autumn and part of the planned review could see modifications with respect to Villa owners amongst other rumoured changes.
So Hugh - Nothing new here
I would suggest that the previously given advice not to advertise villas or apartments on residential complexes/apartments on touristic complexes outside of the appointed and registered sole agent remains the most sound and appropriate advice that can be given at this point.
Of course there's nothing new here!!!
I told you on here this was going to happen a long time ago, and many months before Alotca claimed to have persuaded the authorities to change their minds. :rolleyes:
And if you think it's good advice for a villa owner to voluntary bankrupt themselves when the chances of a villa fine are remote (evidence of villa owners in Lanzarote paying any fines are welcomed), and when they can earn enough to pay a fine with a few months rental income, then you need a financial advisor.
I can see where you're coming from Hughsyb but if you owned a website that was dishing out advice to owners do you seriously think that you'd advise someone to break the law?
I can see where you're coming from Hughsyb but if you owned a website that was dishing out advice to owners do you seriously think that you'd advise someone to break the law?
I'd agree - it always has been a case of determining the risks and making a decision based on your conclusions - especially if one had set out to deliberately and blatently break the law as it currently, and continues to, stand.
It is very unjust however to be critical of someone offering well advised guidence to people caught up, or in danger of being caught up in the current situation - perhaps even irresponsible - IF the law is changed to bring the majority of villa owners inside the law, then I would expect that advice to change in due course. However, I would suggest that any change to the current law is still some distance away.
Thank you for your advice regarding the employment of the services of a financial advisor too, I am pleased to say that this is not necessary in my current circumstances, although of course any future changes in the laws of the land may alter this, much like the letting situation.
I can see where you're coming from Hughsyb but if you owned a website that was dishing out advice to owners do you seriously think that you'd advise someone to break the law?
Absolutely not.
You present the facts and say "you decide".
It's important though that you know the facts for all the Canary Islands before giving advice.
seanocelt
06-09-2012, 17:27
No link to this story then? It would give it much more credibility :-)
No link to this story then? It would give it much more credibility :-)
have a look at this link in this weeks canary news. Significany article about august hotel occupancy, severe decline as many have predicted. A real problem when we add in the downturn in illegal renters.
www.canariesnews.com
seanocelt
06-09-2012, 18:06
Its been a poor summer, but my friends in Portugal, Fuertevenura and Ireland , all in the tourism sector, say the same. Hughsyb's story is a potential hint at a game changer, hence the need for confirmation.
Its been a poor summer, but my friends in Portugal, Fuertevenura and Ireland , all in the tourism sector, say the same. Hughsyb's story is a potential hint at a game changer, hence the need for confirmation.
there is a crisis everywhere. However the canary government are reducing their own tourists by their own actions with their crazy crackdown. In the canaries you are looking at downturn due to the crissis made worse than it need be by the direct crazy actions of the canary government.
I know from my own poor august and many friends who have also suffered the same. All those internet ads were very important to the canaries, we need them back online asap.
There will probably be some changes to the villa aspect, this has always been a logical argument and to be honest all that has stopped villas from being legal is the moratorium not the letting law.
I can see (stand alone) villas (not part of communities) being allowed to register from January 1st.
Can't see a change in residential complexes but can see the possibility of residential complexes becoming "touristic" without 100%, they will likely need 75% to change but still need to apply to "unity of exploitation".
I expect the moratorium to be lifted for
Independent villas but nothing else.
The moratorium will remain closed for everything else (except 5 star hotels) and the cabildo will focus on "renewable tourism".... This will involve the re-touristification of dormant and ex - tourist complexes.
there is a crisis everywhere. However the canary government are reducing their own tourists by their own actions with their crazy crackdown. In the canaries you are looking at downturn due to the crissis made worse than it need be by the direct crazy actions of the canary government.
I know from my own poor august and many friends who have also suffered the same. All those internet ads were very important to the canaries, we need them back online asap.
I totally agree with you on this Nelson - there is major crisis in tourism and much of it can be laid at the airlines doors.
The price of flights to places like the Canaries during school holiday times, which is when a lot of people have to travel , is absolutely ridiculous now. We were in Tenerife at Easter this year and our flights cost us just over £1000 for 4 adults, when we looked at flights for the October half term, the same flights were coming in just under £2000 for 4 adults.
To put that in context, we booked a B&B package in a 4* hotel in Lagos on the Algarve for 4 adults, including flights, for just over £1800 which gives a start of about £200 on our spending money.
golf birdie
06-09-2012, 20:39
I totally agree with you on this Nelson - there is major crisis in tourism and much of it can be laid at the airlines doors.
The price of flights to places like the Canaries during school holiday times, which is when a lot of people have to travel , is absolutely ridiculous now. We were in Tenerife at Easter this year and our flights cost us just over £1000 for 4 adults, when we looked at flights for the October half term, the same flights were coming in just under £2000 for 4 adults.
To put that in context, we booked a B&B package in a 4* hotel in Lagos on the Algarve for 4 adults, including flights, for just over £1800 which gives a start of about £200 on our spending money.
did you price up a package deal in Tenerife or was none available? Be of interest to hear how they compared on price. Flights this winter are very expensive by the looks of things.
did you price up a package deal in Tenerife or was none available? Be of interest to hear how they compared on price. Flights this winter are very expensive by the looks of things.
Package prices were starting at around £580 per person
golf birdie
06-09-2012, 20:49
Package prices were starting at around £580 per person
you could get a better deal in Florida.
your october experience is very similar to ours bobmac. We have been out in tenerife every october half term since 2000, first in hotels and since we bought our apartment in our place. We expect a penalty premium for the school holidays, we can pay up to £ 1400 for flights for the 4 of us either easter or october half term. This year the best we could find for us 4 in october was around £ 2000 ! So for us we are going to have to stay at home this october.
After half term in November the flights appear reasonable, so I cant say that the airlines are spoiling all the potential bookings. It does seem that they have for whatever reason gone over the top with the october half term premium this year.
What I feel is more significant, is if low cost airlines start to pull slots due to fewer passengers due to the crackdown. Once gone these flights will be slow to replace and the remaining seats will be more expensive. This will create a further downward spiral for visitor numbers, affecting illegal and legal renters.
The canary government needs to get real quickly.
seanocelt
07-09-2012, 11:13
I totally agree with you on this Nelson - there is major crisis in tourism and much of it can be laid at the airlines doors.
The price of flights to places like the Canaries during school holiday times, which is when a lot of people have to travel , is absolutely ridiculous now. We were in Tenerife at Easter this year and our flights cost us just over £1000 for 4 adults, when we looked at flights for the October half term, the same flights were coming in just under £2000 for 4 adults.
To put that in context, we booked a B&B package in a 4* hotel in Lagos on the Algarve for 4 adults, including flights, for just over £1800 which gives a start of about £200 on our spending money.
BUT; Lagos, or anywhere in the Algarve in October, is low season, chilly at night, very quiet and damn expensive dining out. (ex resident). Tenerife still good value in comparison at 50 quid each extra.
golf birdie
07-09-2012, 11:24
BUT; Lagos, or anywhere in the Algarve in October, is low season, chilly at night, very quiet and damn expensive dining out. (ex resident). Tenerife still good value in comparison at 50 quid each extra.
50 quid if they wish to sleep on the beach. The 2k was just for flights.
There will probably be some changes to the villa aspect, this has always been a logical argument and to be honest all that has stopped villas from being legal is the moratorium not the letting law.
I can see (stand alone) villas (not part of communities) being allowed to register from January 1st.
Can't see a change in residential complexes but can see the possibility of residential complexes becoming "touristic" without 100%, they will likely need 75% to change but still need to apply to "unity of exploitation".
I expect the moratorium to be lifted for
Independent villas but nothing else.
The moratorium will remain closed for everything else (except 5 star hotels) and the cabildo will focus on "renewable tourism".... This will involve the re-touristification of dormant and ex - tourist complexes.
So just so I understand, in your opinion, villas currently in residential community developments will not be allowed to holiday rent at all?
BUT; Lagos, or anywhere in the Algarve in October, is low season, chilly at night, very quiet and damn expensive dining out. (ex resident). Tenerife still good value in comparison at 50 quid each extra.
at the end of the day from october onwards no where europeon has the canary cliamate. Bobmac may get a better bit if weather but there is no guarentee up there in October. The worst of the letting crackdown for the canaries is the months we have just had, april to august, when the canaries have to compete with all those nearer northern resorts and during those months they have equally nice weather.
The facts are the facts. Those of us in the anti crackdown camp said clearly last winter what was going to happen. Once people pulled their internet ads the summer bookings would nosedive. The stupid simplistic view that hitting the private renters would get more customers into the legal accomodation was never likely to actually happen. We now know that the legal occupancy numbers are badley down, we can read the numbers. We have the experience of people like myself to say how far down the illegal lettings have been this past summer.
The decline in legal occupancy was unavoidable, due to market conditions. The decline in illegal customers has been entirely manufactured by the canary government , due to a crazy protectionist policy. An insane attack on a massive part of the canary tourist economy. No sane government could have considered a full blown attack on an vital industry like that involving hundreds of thousands of apartments, at a time of world economic crisis.
You have to pity the canary people affected , which is everyone trying to earn a living in the canaries. This is not just the direct tourist service jobs, taxis, shops,restuarants and bars etc. The supply chain behind them is massive and affects everything in the islands economy. The canary government have dropped a nuclear bomb on their own economy for sure. Even the buying and selling of these apartments, which of course has slowed down now, created construction industry jobs , a lot of refurb work for builders etc.
Lets hope some canary politicians start to recognise this insanity. They should be speaking up for their people, surely they can not all on all political parties be asleep to this madness. The ruling PP party in Madrid have politicians in these islands, they seem to believe in free market economics. The canary government has to go cap in hand to madrid to get money for the unemployed in these islands, the highest in spain. Surely Madrid is entitled to question the wisdom of this insane crackdown? The canary economy would not have suffered as bad these past months if they had left the internet apartments online and accepted their normal summer visitors.
Whats needed is some reaction from politicians in these islands. Of course if all these private rentersw had obeyed the canary government and stopped letting totally, well the canary economy would have collasped.
seanocelt
07-09-2012, 13:14
So just so I understand, in your opinion, villas currently in residential community developments will not be allowed to holiday rent at all?
If he is i think he is right. Many Canarian residents in villas will not want tourist lets in their communities, so i would expect that to be acknowldged. I have asked you for a link to the info you posted and have had a couple of PMs asking me what i think of your post. Can you dig up any printed info, on what you told us, even if its scanned? Thanks.
BUT; Lagos, or anywhere in the Algarve in October, is low season, chilly at night, very quiet and damn expensive dining out. (ex resident). Tenerife still good value in comparison at 50 quid each extra.
50 quid if they wish to sleep on the beach. The 2k was just for flights.
You seem to be missing the point.
If we came to Tenerife, the flights only price is nearly £2000. On top of that we would normally be spending around £600 per couple on food, drink and ancillaries and £350/£400 on renting a villa/apartment, giving a total spend of about £3500 for 4 adults.
The Algarve price of £1800 is for B&B in a 4*hotel plus flights which means we only need to pay for lunch, dinner & drinks. If we spend £500 per couple on food, drinks & ancillaries (our accommodation is already included in the price), giving a total spend of £2800 for 4 adults; which is £700 less than it will cost us in Tenerife for the same dates.
Even if the weather is not quite as warm, it's going to be better than in Britain
The facts are the facts. Those of us in the anti crackdown camp said clearly last winter what was going to happen. Once people pulled their internet ads the summer bookings would nosedive. The stupid simplistic view that hitting the private renters would get more customers into the legal accomodation was never likely to actually happen. We now know that the legal occupancy numbers are badley down, we can read the numbers. We have the experience of people like myself to say how far down the illegal lettings have been this past summer.
The decline in legal occupancy was unavoidable, due to market conditions.
Occupancy on this complex was up by nearly 20%!!
Occupancy on this complex was up by nearly 20%!!
congratulations on that. remember though, that ashotel/tourismo wanted greater hotel occupancy not any form of apartments, so crowing about your increse can be dangerous.
The problem with an increse like you are stating is that what realyy matters is the overall situation. I always have said that a protectionist policy can benefit the few, you may be an example of this. But if overall many more apartments are suffering reductions then the canary economy is going to suffer, even though a few are gaining in prosperity. Its a classic spanish mess, a few people enjoying a benefit whilst the majority suffer. Given the high levels of unemployment in the canaries if the crackdown is hurting the economy overall , then what we we see next is a decline in the resorts and an increase in social problems. Crime rates will start to rise , closed bars/resuarants and shops will start to make the resorts look shabby. These events will then start to put off even your clients, they will start to feel uncomfortable outside the complex. Its very much a no win situation, and your increase against overall decline may be less rewarding a little further down the road.
We are all in this together, the canary economy needs all its tourist beds full if the canary people are going to get through this crissis. Urgent action is needed. There is no room here for a few to prosper while the rest struggle and suffer.
we went to Thailand from September 2011 to April 2012 with my wife in Koh Samui it was cheaper to travel to here even with the flights being £1400 return, we rented a house over looking the sea and beach and the bedroom had A/C and we had TV cable and free wifi (very fast to ) and we only paid £160 month and then they was the food minimum 0.50p to anything up £20 to £30 for a 5 course meal,and this place was the dearest place in Thailand.Weather hot day and night, all the time no need for a jumper in the winter months here.It was so much cheaper to stay here we saved so much money each month meant we could travel about as i brought a motorbike to get us about on the island.and with the cheap flight from air Asia we ended up in Bangkok twice, Cambodia. Bali. and even went on the mainland to.we are going back to Tenerife this year only as i need to go hospital so its less flight times and it will be cheaper.I love both places but Tenerife is pricing it self out of the market i believe.if my condition was not getting worse i would just go else were, 400 to 600 euros for a 1 bedroom apartment? flights are going up to,food i think its the same as the UK, the only think that is cheaper is the drink but again you can pay up to 4 euros for any spirit yet the price in the local shop is only 10 euros,we can get cheaper here that home.Tenerife is not becoming a cheap place to come for the winter months anymore i would advise to venture out you will be surprised what is out they,yes the flight might be more expensive but the cheapness of anything else covers much more than the flight then come to tenerife.We also opened a bank account over there no problem to and had a card we could use in the shop's and so on.
Which in spain you have to go to police to obtain NIE and so on. The world is a big place so do some home work and you will be rewarded.
P.S i was surprised to meet so many Uk people that go here for the winter that used to go to Tenerife all said the same and even would come back to Tenerife.
Sorry
we went to Thailand from September 2011 to April 2012 with my wife in Koh Samui it was cheaper to travel to here even with the flights being £1400 return, we rented a house over looking the sea and beach and the bedroom had A/C and we had TV cable and free wifi (very fast to ) and we only paid £160 month and then they was the food minimum 0.50p to anything up £20 to £30 for a 5 course meal,and this place was the dearest place in Thailand.Weather hot day and night, all the time no need for a jumper in the winter months here.It was so much cheaper to stay here we saved so much money each month meant we could travel about as i brought a motorbike to get us about on the island.and with the cheap flight from air Asia we ended up in Bangkok twice, Cambodia. Bali. and even went on the mainland to.we are going back to Tenerife this year only as i need to go hospital so its less flight times and it will be cheaper.I love both places but Tenerife is pricing it self out of the market i believe.if my condition was not getting worse i would just go else were, 400 to 600 euros for a 1 bedroom apartment? flights are going up to,food i think its the same as the UK, the only think that is cheaper is the drink but again you can pay up to 4 euros for any spirit yet the price in the local shop is only 10 euros,we can get cheaper here that home.Tenerife is not becoming a cheap place to come for the winter months anymore i would advise to venture out you will be surprised what is out they,yes the flight might be more expensive but the cheapness of anything else covers much more than the flight then come to tenerife.We also opened a bank account over there no problem to and had a card we could use in the shop's and so on.
Which in spain you have to go to police to obtain NIE and so on. The world is a big place so do some home work and you will be rewarded.
P.S i was surprised to meet so many Uk people that go here for the winter that used to go to Tenerife all said the same and even would come back to Tenerife.
Sorry
So all it needs now is a few "proper" British bars with a couple of tribute acts, then Tenerife may as well shut down !
not saying but for my money go goes further else were and not just in Thailand, there is a lot British pub there to .
The facts are the facts. Those of us in the anti crackdown camp said clearly last winter what was going to happen. Once people pulled their internet ads the summer bookings would nosedive. The stupid simplistic view that hitting the private renters would get more customers into the legal accomodation was never likely to actually happen. We now know that the legal occupancy numbers are badley down, we can read the numbers. We have the experience of people like myself to say how far down the illegal lettings have been this past summer.
The decline in legal occupancy was unavoidable, due to market conditions. The decline in illegal customers has been entirely manufactured by the canary government , due to a crazy protectionist policy. An insane attack on a massive part of the canary tourist economy. No sane government could have considered a full blown attack on an vital industry like that involving hundreds of thousands of apartments, at a time of world economic crisis.
You have to pity the canary people affected , which is everyone trying to earn a living in the canaries. This is not just the direct tourist service jobs, taxis, shops,restuarants and bars etc. The supply chain behind them is massive and affects everything in the islands economy. The canary government have dropped a nuclear bomb on their own economy for sure. Even the buying and selling of these apartments, which of course has slowed down now, created construction industry jobs , a lot of refurb work for builders etc.
Lets hope some canary politicians start to recognise this insanity. They should be speaking up for their people, surely they can not all on all political parties be asleep to this madness. The ruling PP party in Madrid have politicians in these islands, they seem to believe in free market economics. The canary government has to go cap in hand to madrid to get money for the unemployed in these islands, the highest in spain. Surely Madrid is entitled to question the wisdom of this insane crackdown? The canary economy would not have suffered as bad these past months if they had left the internet apartments online and accepted their normal summer visitors.
Whats needed is some reaction from politicians in these islands. Of course if all these private rentersw had obeyed the canary government and stopped letting totally, well the canary economy would have collasped.
It seems everything conspired together against Tenerife this year - maybe as part of the crackdown. From early in the year, Flights were considerably dearer than previous years (we have been coming for 15 years on and off and for the last 8 years without fail).
Nice apartments in Legal complexes went very early this year, leaving ones either older (shabbier) / without views / without sun on the balconies etc.
Then of course there was the lack of 'illegals' available, were yes I ADMIT I would probably have found something, with the lack of availability in the legals (naughty boy that I am )
So, in the end, the flights ended up at over £500, apartments were expensive and less desirable, so we went to Lanzarote for our two weeks!
The flights and accommodation cost less than the flights to Tenerife would have cost, we still spent the same while we were there as we would in Los Cristianos, it's just that Lanzarote Bars and Restaurants got our money this year instead of Tenerife's!
Why the prices were so much dearer in Tenerife than Lanzarote I don't know, but as per Nelson's post I think I can have a b****y good guess and whatever the reasons they didn't help the Taxi Drivers, Bars , Restaurants, Boat trip companies that didn't get our cash this year!
flying out october half term plus easter 4 adults each trip sub £900 each trip . try 2 diff carriers eg easy jet out ryain air home
So just so I understand, in your opinion, villas currently in residential community developments will not be allowed to holiday rent at all?
That's my theory, I may turn out to be wrong. It's possible they will separate the apartments from villas/townhouses etc and open the door for them but I doubt it.
We'll soon see though, changes coming January 1st
This year hasn't been a bad one for us either , not crowing but we've seen a good increase in occupancy and have managed to maintain owners apartments at over 80% so far and we're about to hit the best months.
The rise in igic has bitten us a little as we'd already published out prices based on 5% so had to absorb the rise.
The increase in category to 3 star has taken longer than planned and unfortunately come too late (of it even comes) for us to increase prices for next year.
Our rise in occupancy and turnover has been because of us diversifying again and entering new markets - we haven't relied solely on the Brit market and certainly not the swallow market (which regular readers will know I am not keen on).
We've totally revamped out website and in the coming weeks and months we will be investing in it heavily to ensure a continual strong occupancy for the owners and our own apartments.
Just as a matter of interest, I've been looking at squeezing an extra trip in next year but couldn't get an apartment in January. As an alternative I checked all the hotel sites including LateRooms and Trivago etc. who are all showing vacancies but have certainly gone up in price since I last looked a couple of months ago.
As an example; 7 nights (Jan 15-23) in Tenerife/Christian Sur would cost nearly £500 for a couple. Same in March.
It's no wonder the private apartments are busy.
Just as a matter of interest, I've been looking at squeezing an extra trip in next year but couldn't get an apartment in January. As an alternative I checked all the hotel sites including LateRooms and Trivago etc. who are all showing vacancies but have certainly gone up in price since I last looked a couple of months ago.
As an example; 7 nights (Jan 15-23) in Tenerife/Christian Sur would cost nearly £500 for a couple. Same in March.
It's no wonder the private apartments are busy.
I find the hotels not bad really try here, and our flights were £258 this year one way, we paid less then that last January return?
Tenerife will have sort it self out as family's will go else where if prices do not drop as they is a lot of alternative place's to go that are cheaper.
In the in long term peoples pension will be lower and the cost of retiring we go up,so who will take up the short fall of the O.A.P who are coming now for the winter month if the prices are out of reach for the next gen of the O.A.P'S.I think what i have read about this, people are already looking else were even to the other islands and are finding it cheaper and then they start to think why?if you can get what you want else where cheaper then they will go and already some one said they have and i would guess that their are not the only ones,but you cannot just blame the Spanish gov and over priced apartment is down to owners and the agent's a like as the boom days have long gone. if i wanted a 2 week holiday i looked on the net and it was cheaper to go A.I in Cuba,Florida fly drive, and more for 2 weeks in Tenerife is a no brainer, for a holiday wise.
I would like to settle down and invest in something here but i cannot see anything working for long plenty place to get as they are closed down but at this rate the number's i think will keep falling if something is not done and soon which is a great shame as its a great place but money and feet talk.
http://www.holidaynights.co.uk/
r
Just as a matter of interest, I've been looking at squeezing an extra trip in next year but couldn't get an apartment in January. As an alternative I checked all the hotel sites including LateRooms and Trivago etc. who are all showing vacancies but have certainly gone up in price since I last looked a couple of months ago.
As an example; 7 nights (Jan 15-23) in Tenerife/Christian Sur would cost nearly £500 for a couple. Same in March.
It's no wonder the private apartments are busy.
in the real world it should be all about providing choices of accomodation for the many different types of tourist. There is nothing wrong with hotels, we used to enjoy hotel holidays before buying our apartment. when the kids were little it gave us a break staying half board. There is always going to be customers who prefer hotels. Likewise there are customers who prefer self catering apartments and eating out where they want. loaded can not commercially accomodate swallows as cheaply as the private rented apartments. He has the canary sole agent nearly hotel overheads so quite naturally he needs to rent at higher rates per week. Private renters only trying to cover costs are happy to get swallows in for 1/2/3 months for even £ 200 per week.
This was the reality of canary tourism up until the crackdown, a diverse offering to several markets, all contributing to the economic welfare of the islands, and all very necesary. For the canary government to contemplate taking all the private renters of the market was insanity. If they could have got all the apartment clients into hotels, well that would be different, but since that was never going to happen we are left with a self inficted damaged canary economy. The damage we are seeing today is only in respect of lost internet ads and summer bookings, if the apartment renters had all completely stopped renting completly the canary economy would have completley colasped.
r
in the real world it should be all about providing choices of accomodation for the many different types of tourist. There is nothing wrong with hotels, we used to enjoy hotel holidays before buying our apartment. when the kids were little it gave us a break staying half board. There is always going to be customers who prefer hotels. Likewise there are customers who prefer self catering apartments and eating out where they want. loaded can not commercially accomodate swallows as cheaply as the private rented apartments. He has the canary sole agent nearly hotel overheads so quite naturally he needs to rent at higher rates per week. Private renters only trying to cover costs are happy to get swallows in for 1/2/3 months for even £ 200 per week.
This was the reality of canary tourism up until the crackdown, a diverse offering to several markets, all contributing to the economic welfare of the islands, and all very necesary. For the canary government to contemplate taking all the private renters of the market was insanity. If they could have got all the apartment clients into hotels, well that would be different, but since that was never going to happen we are left with a self inficted damaged canary economy. The damage we are seeing today is only in respect of lost internet ads and summer bookings, if the apartment renters had all completely stopped renting completly the canary economy would have completley colasped.
I agree and think this still could be on the cards as people are going else where, we spend a lot of money when we come over for the winter but couldn't believe how easy and cheaper going else where was.and we could get more from our money and go to other places with the money saved,and it never got cold at night so my condition much better.
To be fair, the guys with the agencies are being shown in a good light here given that they could easily get an extra £50 per week per apartment and still be cheaper than the hotel websites.
They are, and always have been good value for money. Just lately the flights have become a bigger problem.
And Nelson, you're back to the big long posts again.......we talked about this didn't we......:laugh:
I agree and think this still could be on the cards as people are going else where, we spend a lot of money when we come over for the winter but couldn't believe how easy and cheaper going else where was.and we could get more from our money and go to other places with the money saved,and it never got cold at night so my condition much better.
the devastating economic impact of the crackdown will be seen with the sort of reduced tourist footfall we are seeing at the moment. It does not have to be a total shut down of the illegal renters to end up with a nightmare ecomomic scenario. When you start to get unemployment on the scale it is in the canaries and youth unemployment being so great, then social unrest and a very damaged society begin to be visible. I only remark about what would occur if all the illegal renters actually ceased renting to further show how barking mad the canary government have been, the consequences of that scenario would have been unimaginably in economic and social/political terms.
This is what is so unacceptable in all of this crackdown. An independant economic review of the consequences of the crackdown should have been undertaken by the canary government before they began this policy. A legitamate democratric government, unbiased and trying to run the economy in the interests of the whole canary population should have done that. You would have expected in normal democratic politics , some canary politicians to have demanded such an investigation if they had doubts about the wisdom of the proposed attack. Now, with the policy in force and the damage being done, it is surely time for such an apprasial of the situation?
maybe the madrid government will demand an investigation as the canary government demands more funds for welfare?
Of I were an unemployed Canarian I'd be pointing the finger at the unlicensed illegal renters who in so many ways prevent legal employment.
And I don't just mean because these apartments are cleaned by random friends and cleaners in Tenerife.... but on a bigger scale such as Sur y sol where apparently there are more
Than 50% renting ..... Complexes like these have made little effort to work within the laws and create jobs.
Instead they've just been bitching about the law for how long now and got no where?
Of I were an unemployed Canarian I'd be pointing the finger at the unlicensed illegal renters who in so many ways prevent legal employment.
And I don't just mean because these apartments are cleaned by random friends and cleaners in Tenerife.... but on a bigger scale such as Sur y sol where apparently there are more
Than 50% renting ..... Complexes like these have made little effort to work within the laws and create jobs.
Instead they've just been bitching about the law for how long now and got no where?
you are just ranting now. Too many doradas and a hasty post I think. sur y sol is touristic , so any renting there is just doing what the economy needs and bringing customers to the islands and work and jobs. If they dont have a sole agent then as far as the economy is concerned thats just a technicality, we can all rest asured that they are renting to tourists in the right type of complex.
The canary unemployed need all the renters, all the internet ads from all the many complex's. Its a fact, nothing but a full renting sector as was the case pre crackdown, is going to help the canary economy. The construction sector in particular needs apartment sales and refurbs. Madrid needs to start asking questions about the canary economy because madrid is paying the welfare bills.
seanocelt
08-09-2012, 14:48
Sur y Sol is touristic? Never knew that, i know a few people who stopped renting in there, scared of fines.
Sur y Sol is touristic? Never knew that, i know a few people who stopped renting in there, scared of fines.
But no licence holder reception ect so not legal.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Just as a matter of interest, I've been looking at squeezing an extra trip in next year but couldn't get an apartment in January. As an alternative I checked all the hotel sites including LateRooms and Trivago etc. who are all showing vacancies but have certainly gone up in price since I last looked a couple of months ago.
As an example; 7 nights (Jan 15-23) in Tenerife/Christian Sur would cost nearly £500 for a couple. Same in March.
It's no wonder the private apartments are busy.
Yes we charge £260 per week for our Cristian Sur apartment booked for next 2 years Christmas till April suprised there was any free apartments even reception ones. David
you are just ranting now. Too many doradas and a hasty post I think. sur y sol is touristic , so any renting there is just doing what the economy needs and bringing customers to the islands and work and jobs. If they dont have a sole agent then as far as the economy is concerned thats just a technicality, we can all rest asured that they are renting to tourists in the right type of complex.
The canary unemployed need all the renters, all the internet ads from all the many complex's. Its a fact, nothing but a full renting sector as was the case pre crackdown, is going to help the canary economy. The construction sector in particular needs apartment sales and refurbs. Madrid needs to start asking questions about the canary economy because madrid is paying the welfare bills.
Ha ha! What a ridiculous post!
You have no sole agent , no existing license holder and I would assume by now not even a license (the inspectors were going around "closing" establishments without the sole agent earlier this year.
Having none of the above is a pretty big technicality !
If its all so legal and above board why have you been fined, why have you stopped advertising and why are you constantly saying the law should be changed? After all it's only a technicality.
I'll take my dorada over your crack any day!
i think every one is missing the point that footfall is down and due to the fact they is no apartments to rent and the ones that are over priced,and its now cheaper to go else where for they 2 weeks holidays.(which i do my home work on this ) and if this keeps going the way it is most agents will have no foot fall at all and be on crack and drinking dorada from a brown paper bags and throwing your selves of the nearest cliff.i think it should be a free for all if you have a apartment to rent you should be able to rent it out and yes that might upset the agents but it will bring the much need foot fall up which will benefit everyone in the long run from taxis to bars and restaurants.minimising the choice to the tourist is worse thing you can do as they just go else where and once they go they might never come back.
tfs_longlets
08-09-2012, 20:39
Sorry, way off topic mods but.......Like Thailand maybe?
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1587551_manchester-ex-pat-gunned-down-as-he-rides-home-on-his-motorbike-in-thailand
This one won't come back for sure
you are quite correct doingok, this is a serious problem, but many of us are not missing your point.
The official tourist figures for the canaries are well down this summer. People like me can confirm as would be expected , that private renters of apartments are well down in bookings due to the removal of internet advertising. So the canaries is now experiencing a decline in tourist footfall , the legal accomodation is down due to the economic crissis whilst the private rented apartment sector is down due to the canary government crackdown.
Given the levels of unemployment in the canaries, the canary government needs to re consider its crazy policy. The canary people should not have to suffer due to their governments misguided actions. Hopefully some politicians in the canaries and other interest groups will challenge what is happening. The canary economy needs those internet ads back online and it needs all those private apartment renting and bringing tourists to the islands.
If the governments original misguided plan was to divert apartment customers to hotels, well this has not worked. It is time now to return to sanity and get the maximum footfall back in the marketplace.
Not accurate figures but : Let's simplify this and say there are 10,000 legal beds in Los Cristianos, of those 10,000 beds lets say half are hotel and half are legal apartments - 5000 each.
When they are full there is foot fall and all those hotels and apartments make
Money and employ staff, pay staff, etc etc....
Now when there are some rival extra beds (lets say 5000) that are not following the same rules and regs as the legal hotels and apartments they have the following effect :
The footfall remains the same, say 10,000 but instead of meaning there are 15000 beds occupied , what happens is the legal apartments and hotels lose occupancy to the unlicensed beds and therefore do not, and cannot operate the way they were because occupancy is down as the customers who were in the legally licensed accommodation that was intended for tourist use, begin to spread across the black market.
What happens? The hotels and apartments make cuts and people lose their jobs and these businesses lose income.
@ tfs_longlets this one will not be staying that's for sure touche. this happens all over the world fact. so grow up
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386762/British-woman-beheaded-Tenerife-machete.html SORRY BOUT THIS JUST MAKING POINT SORRY IF THIS HAS UPSET ANYONE.
@ loaded this has not happened though foot fall is down people are going else where, i did last year and only back cause of having to be going for treatment in the uk so the flights are closer high cost is driving people away fact.there might be a argument for both.here
prices for renting are to high in my book and people are going else where which is a fact to.
cainaries
08-09-2012, 21:49
Does anyone think there is a difference between the two provinces (Tenerife and Gran Canaria) in the way they are addressing the problem? Posts on here tend to differentiate between the interpretation of the rules in Tenerife whilst others mention all the Canary Islands. Just wondered if the crackdown is more severe in Tenerife Province than in Gran Canaria.
@ tfs_longlets this one will not be staying that's for sure touche. this happens all over the world fact. so grow up
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386762/British-woman-beheaded-Tenerife-machete.html SORRY BOUT THIS JUST MAKING POINT SORRY IF THIS HAS UPSET ANYONE.
@ loaded this has not happened though foot fall is down people are going else where, i did last year and only back cause of having to be going for treatment in the uk so the flights are closer high cost is driving people away fact.there might be a argument for both.here
prices for renting are to high in my book and people are going else where which is a fact to.
How can you say with any certainty that footfall is down?
The official figures have never included the illegal apartments so all you can rely on is local business owners telling you how they're doing - this gives a very mixed and inaccurate result based on the canaries as a whole.
And with all due respect just because you didn't come back it doesn't mean everyone else stopped coming.
Also regarding high cost.... One of the problem we personally face is the low cost of the unlicensed aparments who although some do pay income tax none will pay igic (7%) and none have to pay commissions from 10-25% to tour operators (who are needed of you're in charge of filling a whole complex)....
Meanwhile the owners constantly want more money but the price to public cant be much higher than the illegal apartments because they're much the same product - this leaves is in a catch 22 where we need to put the price up to the client so we can pay owners more but we can't put the price up too high all the while there are illegal lets going on who
Don't have the same overheads
Some people on here just will not believe what is actually happening and choose to believe their own ''figures''.
Me and my family did not come to Tenerife this year (I have taken the liberty of reprinting the reasons from an earlier post below)
Two other families we meet here DIDN'T come and spend their usual £3000 on the island this year.
'Doingok' and myself are telling our actual factual experiences, not what we think is happening or what we would like to think is happening!
I don't know if you can actually multiply our families by x amount to get a figure in lower football, but it is Definitely happening - real life
It seems everything conspired together against Tenerife this year - maybe as part of the crackdown. From early in the year, Flights were considerably dearer than previous years (we have been coming for 15 years on and off and for the last 8 years without fail).
Nice apartments in Legal complexes went very early this year, leaving ones either older (shabbier) / without views / without sun on the balconies etc.
Then of course there was the lack of 'illegals' available, were yes I ADMIT I would probably have found something, with the lack of availability in the legals (naughty boy that I am )
So, in the end, the flights ended up at over £500, apartments were expensive and less desirable, so we went to Lanzarote for our two weeks!
The flights and accommodation cost less than the flights to Tenerife would have cost, we still spent the same while we were there as we would in Los Cristianos, it's just that Lanzarote Bars and Restaurants got our money this year instead of Tenerife's!
Why the prices were so much dearer in Tenerife than Lanzarote I don't know, but as per Nelson's post I think I can have a b****y good guess and whatever the reasons they didn't help the Taxi Drivers, Bars , Restaurants, Boat trip companies that didn't get our cash this year!
loaded, just skip back a few posts, there is a link to a canary news site, the legal tourist numbers are down.
seancelt also posted that it has been a quiet summer, though he thinks that it has been also in other countries, so I think he is in the denial camp as far as the government crackdown has made things worse than they needed to be.
At the end of the day either the crackdown has reduced footfall for the canaries or it has not. My own knowledge from friends in tenerife suggests that it has reduced footfall for apartments this summer. If the legal numbers shown from the link on this thread are down this summer and illegal renters are doing worse because they have stopped or dare not advrtise then footfall will be down, and that is a very bad thing for the canary economy and people.
Why do you think that canary unemployment is 34% the highest in spain and worse than south america? What was the unemployment level before the crackdown?
The canary government have got into a hole with this, it is time they stopped digging.
carpenter
08-09-2012, 23:30
So basically the 5 star hotels refused to invest in Tenerife unless the authorities did something about all the easy to book illegal holiday apartments, and people that have been lucky enough to be part of a family business in the licensed holiday apartments business are rubbing there hands with glee.
Meanwhile all the businesses that pay IGIC and other taxes are losing money hand over fist because of these selfish high and mighty people.
My business has been cut down to less than 10% of what is was two years ago due to many of my clients being forced to sell their properties that I did regular maintenance on.
Opinions don't really count when it's a law you're fighting but it is probably the worst time to try and implement such a ridiculous thing.
I can't blame anyone going elsewhere, I would.
Spanish law and Expats are driving me off this island and once I've gone I will never be back.
Not when I can go to Thailand or Goa for 6 months for the same price as a two week stay here!
Allow me to use an analogy.....
I want to go for a beer, I have three choices:
1. Have beer in my house (don't go on holiday)
2. Buy one from a shop and drink it on the park bench (apartments)
3. Drink it in a pub. (hotel)
Then Someone comes along and invents an alternative , she invites people into her house for a beer for a small fee somewhere around what the supermarkets sell beer for.
She starts advertising her "beer house" and before long lots of people start going round Her house for beer because its more comfortable than the pub, it's more homely than the supermarket and the park bench, and it's better than not going out at all.
The beer house doesn't need many staff, intact they get their mums to get the beers from a guy who does odd jobs and errands since he retired.....
What happened next?
The local pubs and supermarkets noticed a marked downturn in their income but didn't say anything and tried to compete anyway.
Over the years, takings dropped and people who had jobs in the once busy pub were let go, same thing happened at the supermarket.
Then came the global crisis and things got worse for the pubs and supermarkets .... Luckily pressure was brought on the government to do something about the "beer house".
The beer houses were fined for not having a license to sell alcohol - there was uproar! The people who had got used to going to the beer houses didn't see why they should have to stop and go back to drinking in the pubs or buying from supermarkets... They threatened to go elsewhere where beer houses were legalized ....
The owners of the beer houses complained that people wanted an alternative and they were providing it, they'd paid tax and assumed everything was ok even though they knew they didn't have a license to sell alcohol.
Soon everyone forgot about the beer houses and bought alcohol from pubs and supermarkets again. Jobs re appeared in the pubs and the supermarkets and everyone lived in a wonderful world of chocolate rivers and raindrop smiles....
The end
Allow me to use an analogy.....
I want to go for a beer, I have three choices:
1. Have beer in my house (don't go on holiday)
2. Buy one from a shop and drink it on the park bench (apartments)
3. Drink it in a pub. (hotel)
Then Someone comes along and invents an alternative , she invites people into her house for a beer for a small fee somewhere around what the supermarkets sell beer for.
She starts advertising her "beer house" and before long lots of people start going round Her house for beer because its more comfortable than the pub, it's more homely than the supermarket and the park bench, and it's better than not going out at all.
The beer house doesn't need many staff, intact they get their mums to get the beers from a guy who does odd jobs and errands since he retired.....
What happened next?
The local pubs and supermarkets noticed a marked downturn in their income but didn't say anything and tried to compete anyway.
Over the years, takings dropped and people who had jobs in the once busy pub were let go, same thing happened at the supermarket.
Then came the global crisis and things got worse for the pubs and supermarkets .... Luckily pressure was brought on the government to do something about the "beer house".
The beer houses were fined for not having a license to sell alcohol - there was uproar! The people who had got used to going to the beer houses didn't see why they should have to stop and go back to drinking in the pubs or buying from supermarkets... They threatened to go elsewhere where beer houses were legalized ....
The owners of the beer houses complained that people wanted an alternative and they were providing it, they'd paid tax and assumed everything was ok even though they knew they didn't have a license to sell alcohol.
Soon everyone forgot about the beer houses and bought alcohol from pubs and supermarkets again. Jobs re appeared in the pubs and the supermarkets and everyone lived in a wonderful world of chocolate rivers and raindrop smiles....
The end
Oh my goodness.
You're analogy seems to actually reveal what you really believe in real life. That being, you can FORCE people to not only obey the laws, but that they will be happy about it.
What your analogy patently ignores, as it appears you also ignore, is the fact that there are alternatives. That your secret drinkers will not just go back to the pubs and supermarkets they used to use and be happy about it - no they will look at the next town or village, maybe over some water.
As I did this year
If I could have found appropriate accommodation at the right price , with the right flights I would have holidayed in Tenerife as normal. But I couldn't , so excercised my right to holiday elsewhere - as would your fictional drinkers.
But you probably don't believe that.
mmmm
Footfall may be down, but if you research the matter fully, rather than just using the bits that suit, you will see that actual spending is up, even though there are fewer people here than last year - which, incidentally was an exceptional year because of unrest in other parts of the world.
The most significant factor to determine how many visitors come to the Canaries is, and always will be, the price of flights. The Canaries like other areas of Spain, had the landing fees subsidy removed by Madrid earlier in the year, and price rises are now filtering through - as are increased prices of fuel (unless you are Ryan Air of course!). Aviation fuel will never get cheaper in relative terms, and continue to rise as oil beomes more scare over the coming years
There are two sides to this issue - that is clear and obvious, but don't kid yourselves that the Canarian Government will change their minds anytime soon. What they are looking to do is control their, almost only, single asset - tourism for the long-term future of the islands. There will be areas where some pain will be felt - the restaurant industry perhaps the worst affected, but there are far too many here already.
Yes unemployment is high, bad news wherever you live, however it has not risen to such heights solely because of the letting issue - in fact, for the past two months it has actually fallen. It would be interesting to hear from the pro "illegal" letting lobby how they explain this??
seanocelt
09-09-2012, 02:48
loaded, just skip back a few posts, there is a link to a canary news site, the legal tourist numbers are down.
seancelt also posted that it has been a quiet summer, though he thinks that it has been also in other countries, so I think he is in the denial camp as far as the government crackdown has made things worse than they needed to be.
At the end of the day either the crackdown has reduced footfall for the canaries or it has not. My own knowledge from friends in tenerife suggests that it has reduced footfall for apartments this summer. If the legal numbers shown from the link on this thread are down this summer and illegal renters are doing worse because they have stopped or dare not advrtise then footfall will be down, and that is a very bad thing for the canary economy and people.
Why do you think that canary unemployment is 34% the highest in spain and worse than south america? What was the unemployment level before the crackdown?
The canary government have got into a hole with this, it is time they stopped digging.
No, YOU are in denial. Im in Tenerife. I am staying. I accept that i cannot change the law whatever i think of it (and its not the interpretation you have of my opinion.). I await still Hughysby's link, thats what kicked off the thread again (no sign of it though). I await the outcome of the review. No denial here from me.
willowlily
09-09-2012, 06:23
Sorry, way off topic mods but.......Like Thailand maybe?
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1587551_manchester-ex-pat-gunned-down-as-he-rides-home-on-his-motorbike-in-thailand
This one won't come back for sure
i rather be shot dead than have my head hacked off in a shop full of people
maybe he married a young local girl then as happened hundreds of times in thailand her brothers or other members of her family kill the stupid old man and automatically in thailand the wife gets everything, so by all means enjoy your retirement/holiday but dont marry the locals and dont do business with them if you weant to stay healthy wealthy and alive, i dont speak from personal experience but from other peoples mistakes
Like i said in my other post i met lots of people that used to go to tenerife but it just got to expensive and went else where,and people spending more thats cause of the prices up.look i have nothing to lose as i have no business on the island thank god or i have to rely on renting an apartment,but from a tourist point of view greed as been said the owner WANT MORE MONEY and the agents wanting there cut, the boom has gone and been gone a long time.and the footfall with fall even more all because of greed,even buying a car on the island is mad and well over priced and even cheaper to go to the mainland to buy one that is enough proof is needed
Angusjim
09-09-2012, 07:37
To be honest I don't think its all about the cost on the island there are other factors mainly cost of flights which seem to be a lot more expensive this year & people having less disposable income. But in saying that Easyjet recently opened flights up to June and you can get flights with luggage etc for around £114.00 per flight in April / May / June and say a lovely 2 bedroom apartments for prices ranging from £250.00 to £350.00.
No way Mrs B would go to Thailand you don't get Eastenders & Corrie on the telly ;)
loadeds illegal beer analgy is write to the point. The problem is he is not realising that the brewery is providing the jobs regardless of where the beer is drunk. closing the one outlet would not matter as long as all the customers continued to drink beer in the other outlet.
we know in the canaries that stopping tourists in 30 hotels worth of illegal apartments would mean that these customers would not all migrate to the legal accomodation. Hence the problem footfall is going to be down so the economy overall suffers.
As I have said many times, private renters price to cover costs, thats all, so they provide cheaper accomodation for tourists who want that type of holiday accomodation. The added costs of agents profits and hotel style extra overheads are a fact of life for sole agent complex's. If the customer is told he must pay that rate or he can not come to the canaries, then it is the customers free choice as to what happens next.
You can not buck the market and after many years of tolerating private renting the canary government picked a crazy time to decide to stop it. What is needed is legalising the private renters, charge an annual fee, like portugal.
No one can expect customers to pay for a higher cost system, some may, but if footfall falls overall then its a disaster for the canary economy and people.
carpenter
09-09-2012, 12:21
Allow me to use an analogy.....
I want to go for a beer, I have three choices:
1. Have beer in my house (don't go on holiday)
2. Buy one from a shop and drink it on the park bench (apartments)
3. Drink it in a pub. (hotel)
Then Someone comes along and invents an alternative , she invites people into her house for a beer for a small fee somewhere around what the supermarkets sell beer for.
She starts advertising her "beer house" and before long lots of people start going round Her house for beer because its more comfortable than the pub, it's more homely than the supermarket and the park bench, and it's better than not going out at all.
The beer house doesn't need many staff, intact they get their mums to get the beers from a guy who does odd jobs and errands since he retired.....
What happened next?
The local pubs and supermarkets noticed a marked downturn in their income but didn't say anything and tried to compete anyway.
Over the years, takings dropped and people who had jobs in the once busy pub were let go, same thing happened at the supermarket.
Then came the global crisis and things got worse for the pubs and supermarkets .... Luckily pressure was brought on the government to do something about the "beer house".
The beer houses were fined for not having a license to sell alcohol - there was uproar! The people who had got used to going to the beer houses didn't see why they should have to stop and go back to drinking in the pubs or buying from supermarkets... They threatened to go elsewhere where beer houses were legalized ....
The owners of the beer houses complained that people wanted an alternative and they were providing it, they'd paid tax and assumed everything was ok even though they knew they didn't have a license to sell alcohol.
Soon everyone forgot about the beer houses and bought alcohol from pubs and supermarkets again. Jobs re appeared in the pubs and the supermarkets and everyone lived in a wonderful world of chocolate rivers and raindrop smiles....
The end
I have never read such utter codswallop
Angusjim
09-09-2012, 12:23
loadeds illegal beer analgy is write to the point. The problem is he is not realising that the brewery is providing the jobs regardless of where the beer is drunk. closing the one outlet would not matter as long as all the customers continued to drink beer in the other outlet.
we know in the canaries that stopping tourists in 30 hotels worth of illegal apartments would mean that these customers would not all migrate to the legal accomodation. Hence the problem footfall is going to be down so the economy overall suffers.
As I have said many times, private renters price to cover costs, thats all, so they provide cheaper accomodation for tourists who want that type of holiday accomodation. The added costs of agents profits and hotel style extra overheads are a fact of life for sole agent complex's. If the customer is told he must pay that rate or he can not come to the canaries, then it is the customers free choice as to what happens next.
You can not buck the market and after many years of tolerating private renting the canary government picked a crazy time to decide to stop it. What is needed is legalising the private renters, charge an annual fee, like portugal.
No one can expect customers to pay for a higher cost system, some may, but if footfall falls overall then its a disaster for the canary economy and people.
I know nothing about the tourist industry in Portugal are they reaping the benefits at the moment because of their letting laws I thought everwhere was suffering???
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I have never read such utter codswallop
Obviously you have not read thru all the posts on this thread :lol::lol::crazy:
carpenter
09-09-2012, 12:30
Surely if the beer house require less staff then it is better managed! It still has the same amount of customers!
What about all the shops and eateries that are around the beer house that also provide jobs? Legal Jobs!
I tell you what, pull your head out of the clouds and just see what a devastating impact this has had on the island, and when there's no money in the pot to pay paro and people are returning to their home countries left right and centre.
The only bars that aren't complaining are the ones that are next to legal complexes, it's no fault of the others that they are now suddenly in bad locations.
Thanks for agreeing with the analagy, I think it was a good one and your point about the brewery is a good one too, the brewery could be the airline industry....
While it's very nice of the private renters to help out and give everyone who wants somewhere to stay a cheap option that doesn't make the owner any profit - surely you can see that this has a massive negative effect on the accommodation industry? It might be that more people come if everything cheaper (thus helping bars and restaurants) but if they're staying in private accommodation a vital part of the canaries economy is missed out. While it may help the bars that everyone gets digs for nothing it doesn't help the hotels or apartments, if they don't get custom they close and A LOT of jobs go with them.
Paloma Beach is only a complex with 150 units being let out, for those 150 units we have 5 reception and admin staff, 1 full time maintenance guy, 1 head of housekeeping and about 10 cleaning staff. This is without counting the comunal staff that amount to 3..... so 20 people.
Hotels and high rated apartments, or apartment complexes with more units will have even more staff than that.
So although private accommodation keeps the airlines happy and the bars and restaurants happy, its completely cutting out the accommodation industry and that is an important part of the canary islands.
I have to ask the question: if someone doesn't make any profit out of providing a service; 1. Why do the work for nothing? 2. What gives you the right to take business away from other accommodation options at their expense?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I have to ask the question: if someone doesn't make any profit out of providing a service; 1. Why do the work for nothing? 2. What gives you the right to take business away from other accommodation options at their expense?
Can I stand out Taylors Lounge trying to sell beers to the people on their terrace just because I think they'll eat more in the restaurant next door if they pay me supermarket prices for beer?
carpenter
09-09-2012, 12:43
I have to ask the question: if someone doesn't make any profit out of providing a service; 1. Why do the work for nothing? 2. What gives you the right to take business away from other accommodation options at their expense?
I personally think that a profit is being made. These apartments have been bought as an investment either with retirement cash, inheritance cash, mortgage etc.
These apartments are now being sold at an alarming rate because people can no longer afford the mortgage repayments which in turn has had a negative effect on the value of housing. especially 1 and 2 bed in the los cris area
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
The apartments owners that have bought outright are perhaps now just waiting for the value to go back up. But they will be waiting a very long time 10-20 years??
I many ways this is a little like the "botellón" - this is the Canarian term for parking outside a nightclub and drinking pre bought booze because you don't want to pay wht the clubs charge, you get ****** outside and then go into the club and enjoy it's facilities (DJ's, toilets, atmosphere, oposite sex)..... sure, it looks busy in that club but they aren't making any money.
What happened? The government made it illegal to consume alcohol in the street - did it cut down the Botellon? A little but many carried on. So what did theclubs do? Well depends where you go out to, some clubs charge an entrance fee which includes your first drink (usually 10€)...... other don't but have hiked up their prices to make up for those who don't buy anything...... others (in starco and veronicas) actually charge entry fees ONLY TO SPANISH PEOPLE (because the brits on holiday don't think to do a botellón).
So basically, yes you can do what you want up to a point - that point is where it starts to be detrimental to a business sector, then the government or the businesses that are affected do something about it themselves.
You can call it protectionism if you like - I think we'd all be complaining if Hotels, tourist complexes, bars and nightclubs all closed because of private rentals and botellóns.........
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I personally think that a profit is being made. These apartments have been bought as an investment either with retirement cash, inheritance cash, mortgage etc.
These apartments are now being sold at an alarming rate because people can no longer afford the mortgage repayments which in turn has had a negative effect on the value of housing. especially 1 and 2 bed in the los cris area
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
The apartments owners that have bought outright are perhaps now just waiting for the value to go back up. But they will be waiting a very long time 10-20 years??
Carpenter (or should I call you Quagmire? Giggity goo!);
You are 100% correct, profit is being made by the private owners - yes many of them only cover costs, but one of those costs is a MORTGAGE - the more they pay their mortgage, the more of the property they own and when they come to sell the property (2 years, 5 years, 10 years, 15 years - 40 years) they will then own more of it (equity) and hopefully make a profit on the sale (or not; but thats property investment for you).
Therefore it's simply not fair to say they "aren't making a profit so it's ok" - there are people who buy property on tourist complexes on a mortgage and the income they received from the sole agent helps them pay for their mortgage - why should their legal buy to let investment be adversely affected by someone elses illegal one? Why have they got to suffer because someone couldn't afford a holiday home outright and is renting it illegally to fund their holiday home?
If these private owners on residential complexes couldn't afford the property without letting it illegally, they really shouldn't have bought it at all.
carpenter
09-09-2012, 13:33
I fear by saying this it has already been said numerous times b4.
Many of them (the owners) didn't know, they were not told, the unregulated estate agent said something like "you're not supposed to but everyone does it" or touristic complexes simply did not apply for or renew their license and over time became residential.
Now in any of those situations I feel for the owner. If they were categorically told no you can't or if the information signs that you see everywhere now, existed back then, it would be I different stance I would take.
Look where I live on the Golf this is hysterical The Irish government said that they would give tax benefits to the Irish if they invested in property! What they forgot to say was that the property was meant to be purchased in Ireland.
With this Tax break the Golf was built and now sits fairly empty because of illegal lettings and the Irish Government sitting very red faced.
I fear by saying this it has already been said numerous times b4.
Many of them (the owners) didn't know, they were not told, the unregulated estate agent said something like "you're not supposed to but everyone does it" or touristic complexes simply did not apply for or renew their license and over time became residential.
Now in any of those situations I feel for the owner. If they were categorically told no you can't or if the information signs that you see everywhere now, existed back then, it would be I different stance I would take.
Look where I live on the Golf this is hysterical The Irish government said that they would give tax benefits to the Irish if they invested in property! What they forgot to say was that the property was meant to be purchased in Ireland.
With this Tax break the Golf was built and now sits fairly empty because of illegal lettings and the Irish Government sitting very red faced.
I agree thats a crying shame for those owners who were not aware of the laws - I am not one of those who throws the "ignorance is no excuse" argument - but there are many who were aware and just did it anyway, then bought another property too even though they knew it was illegal (Cough cough Nelson)....
Either way, as soon as they've found out they have 3 options:
1. carry on regardless and risk a fine.
2. stop letting.
3. Sell the property.
Simple as that.
carpenter
09-09-2012, 15:44
I agree thats a crying shame for those owners who were not aware of the laws - I am not one of those who throws the "ignorance is no excuse" argument - but there are many who were aware and just did it anyway, then bought another property too even though they knew it was illegal (Cough cough Nelson)....
Either way, as soon as they've found out they have 3 options:
1. carry on regardless and risk a fine.
2. stop letting.
3. Sell the property.
Simple as that.
Indeed, those that carry on are doing so but with greater care. My own family are staying on the same complex as us next month. The performance they went through booking it was very complex web of emails and disclaimers but I'm happy that they are close and they are happy they have a 5 bed villa for a week for €400.
Stop letting? again is ok if you have no mortgage and those selling their property is what has cost me my livelihood. What am I supposed to do?
Oh yeah leave this rock! The words "rats" and "sinking ship" spring to mind.
It's a shame because this island is my wife's adopted home but I can no longer support my family since my clients have decided to sell.
Those simple 3 options are "The butterfly effect, chaos theory" any one of these actions have disastrous direct consequences on the simple man in Tenerife and his ability to provide.
You don't strike me as a simple man, I'm guessing by your username you're a carpenter - either that or one part of an american vocal / instrumental duo..... surely private owners will want carpentry done wether they let or not? People will always need doors, kitchens etc.... or why not diversify and go into aluminium doors and windows? create bespoke furniture, beds and outdoor tables etc?
The only good thing about an economic crisis is it gets you thinking.
carpenter
09-09-2012, 17:04
You don't strike me as a simple man, I'm guessing by your username you're a carpenter - either that or one part of an american vocal / instrumental duo..... surely private owners will want carpentry done wether they let or not? People will always need doors, kitchens etc.... or why not diversify and go into aluminium doors and windows? create bespoke furniture, beds and outdoor tables etc?
The only good thing about an economic crisis is it gets you thinking.
Are there we are, that's where the illegal letting subject really gets to me. Where are the people policing the black workers?
How many basura posters, lamppost posters, business cards left on notice boards have you seen and how many are overlooked or rather checked for legality or social payments by the authorities. So why is it people that live in Tenerife have the choice of saving a few quid with non legal workers but the visitors to Tenerife don't have that choice with where they stay?
Surely that's then just one rule for them. This is why it all strikes me as really unfair. I shouldn't have to drop my prices and I do diversify but to no avail. Maybe one day the authorities will get it right but not in my time on this island.
I'm sorry I don't understand what you're saying - if you want to live in a place with no rules then you need to head a little further east....2000 km should do it - but buy a gun.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Sorry to sound brash with that last post but we know Tenerife is far from perfect but surely the government taing steps to sort out one part of the economy is better than ignoring everything and allowing a free for all which is obiously going to damage the islands main source of revenue.
Of course you are right that all of these fliers and notices everywhere should be stamped out too, I'm sure the barbers and hair salons are furious with all the mobile people and this follows suit right the way accross, they are hard to catch but there are still laws against running a business (no matter what type) without the correct paper work.
carpenter
09-09-2012, 17:47
No one said about living anywhere with no rules that's why women were invented oh no that's living without fun!
It's the unprofessional way that the rules have been implemented.
By Clamping down in this way, they are effectively squeezing a sponge with increased pressure being put on the infrastructure.
As far as I can see the only people benefiting from all this are people like yourselves. (not angry BTW)
The government sorting the economy? That's a good one.
It's all being done ar=e about face, either it all gets done at once or it gets done stage by stage and quickly. Look at the smoking ban in the UK. Each month a separate province was put under the no smoking laws and no one got ar*ey
This whole argument reminds me of when there's a change on Facebook, every says "I hate the new Facebook, I'm not going to use it anymore" fast forward some time and everyone's got over it and still using Facebook .
This whole argument reminds me of when there's a change on Facebook, every says "I hate the new Facebook, I'm not going to use it anymore" fast forward some time and everyone's got over it and still using Facebook .
face book is free this is costing them money so i think the only thing that will be going away is the tourists.
well said about loadeds post cartpenter, codswollap. He does not seem to get the picture that a decline in so called illegal apartment customers without an equal increase in customers staying in legal accomodation is bad for the canary economy and people. The footfall issue is critical to the canary economy.
Its no good if a few places see a gain from this is a far larger number suffer a huge downturn. That way we are looking at a disaster as many on here have predicted.
I acknowledge , and have before on here, that private renters are involved in a buy to let investment, so yes the profit is the paid of apartment at the end of the mortgage. These investors also help the economy by refurbing, having upgrades and buying furniture. When the private renters let out at less than a sole agent rate they do so because thay are not trying to earn a week by week profit to live on. At the end of the day the customer is king, so for years these renters have brought customers to the canaries. This is how free markets evolve and this massive tourist sector has helped the canary economy over many years.
If footfall is going down this sector needs legalising and quickly.
Interesting that I'm Talking codswallop yet you agreed with me a few posts back.....
seanocelt
09-09-2012, 20:31
well said about loadeds post cartpenter, codswollap. He does not seem to get the picture that a decline in so called illegal apartment customers without an equal increase in customers staying in legal accomodation is bad for the canary economy and people. The footfall issue is critical to the canary economy.
Its no good if a few places see a gain from this is a far larger number suffer a huge downturn. That way we are looking at a disaster as many on here have predicted.
I acknowledge , and have before on here, that private renters are involved in a buy to let investment, so yes the profit is the paid of apartment at the end of the mortgage. These investors also help the economy by refurbing, having upgrades and buying furniture. When the private renters let out at less than a sole agent rate they do so because thay are not trying to earn a week by week profit to live on. At the end of the day the customer is king, so for years these renters have brought customers to the canaries. This is how free markets evolve and this massive tourist sector has helped the canary economy over many years.
If footfall is going down this sector needs legalising and quickly.
Alll you do is trot out the same "if this happens then the consequences will be " line, over and over again. Does it make you feel like you are some font of knowledge on what the Canarian Gov is doing, or that they care about what you keep repeating? You spouted that i was in a certain camp, is that just because i will not say you are right? Us residents are getting on with it, not repeating the predictions of doom you bleat out. We know we are powerless immigrants. I hope the law is ammended, common sense applied. Not holding my breath. Please, no more lessons on "footfall" "free market" and consequences, we are not stupid.
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/12/09/10/4ahaqazu.jpg
Low occupancy levels in the Canaries during August 2012
Posted by Canaries News on September 3rd, 2012
The average occupancy levels in the Canaries during the month of August this year (2012) was 70%, during the last week of the month, it dropped to 60%. This is a significant drop when compared to the same month last year (August 2011) when occupancy levels reached 85% in the Canary Islands. Fernando Fraile, president of the Federation of Hospitality and Tourism (FEHT), said that the month previous month of July (2012) saw an acceptable level of occupancy in the islands, at around 75%, but August has been particularly bad, especially the last week of the month where the percentage of occupancy was reduced to 60%, a level not seen for more than ten years. According to Mr. Fraile, the low level of occupancy during August, one of the best months for National and local tourism, is due to a drop of over 12,000 domestic visitors (compared to 2011). Similar bad results are expected during September.
http://www.canariesnews.com/
I'm sorry I don't understand what you're saying - if you want to live in a place with no rules then you need to head a little further east....2000 km should do it - but buy a gun.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Sorry to sound brash with that last post but we know Tenerife is far from perfect but surely the government taing steps to sort out one part of the economy is better than ignoring everything and allowing a free for all which is obiously going to damage the islands main source of revenue.
Of course you are right that all of these fliers and notices everywhere should be stamped out too, I'm sure the barbers and hair salons are furious with all the mobile people and this follows suit right the way accross, they are hard to catch but there are still laws against running a business (no matter what type) without the correct paper work.
Not that hard to catch,many of them "advertise"on the forum!!!
Low occupancy levels in the Canaries during August 2012
Posted by Canaries News on September 3rd, 2012
The average occupancy levels in the Canaries during the month of August this year (2012) was 70%, during the last week of the month, it dropped to 60%. This is a significant drop when compared to the same month last year (August 2011) when occupancy levels reached 85% in the Canary Islands. Fernando Fraile, president of the Federation of Hospitality and Tourism (FEHT), said that the month previous month of July (2012) saw an acceptable level of occupancy in the islands, at around 75%, but August has been particularly bad, especially the last week of the month where the percentage of occupancy was reduced to 60%, a level not seen for more than ten years. According to Mr. Fraile, the low level of occupancy during August, one of the best months for National and local tourism, is due to a drop of over 12,000 domestic visitors (compared to 2011). Similar bad results are expected during September.
http://www.canariesnews.com/
And herin is EXACTLY the point - domestic visitors - i.e mainland Spanish. What you have forgotten to add to your point is that foreign visitor numbers are up on the previous year by almost 4% - in particular British and Germans - and the "tourist" spend whilst here has increased, despite fewer visitors overall.
Since this discussion began, Nelson and others have done nothing but lecture about the devistation to the Canarian economy we are not only facing, but are already in the midst of right now - unemployment rising, local businesses closing and so on because of the letting laws.
The facts though suggest differently - unemployment has actually fallen for two months in a row, not by much thats true, but actually fallen in the Canaries (with it's draconian letting laws devestating the economy) whilst in many parts of the mainland (where such draconian letting laws do not exist) it has risen - risen means gone up !!
Nobody is arguing that there are parts of the letting laws - specifically the bits relating to villas and sole agencies that need attention, but the doom and gloom predictions of the effects of the law to the economy here have simply not happened. The local econpmy is stuffed, that is true, but not as a result of the letting law, more as the result of an economy which used to thrive on black money which is becoming harder to do because of antiquated employment laws imposed by Madrid. Moreover, if anybody believes the letting laws will be changed for the benefit of those who have been breaking the law for years, should have a long hard think - it won't happen !
sorry!
seanocelt
10-09-2012, 01:22
Was about to say similar; domestic down due to an economic depression in Spain. But there are some who just want to lecture on their perceived impact (on our lives). With no proof.
Hughysyb STILL aint gave us any proof of his latest preceived change to the laws, meanwhile a good mate of mine is scared to rent out his (45% negative equity!!) villa to tourists in Lanzarote for fear of being fined, and has heard nowt to make him feel any more optimistic.
slodgedad
10-09-2012, 01:49
Low occupancy levels in the Canaries during August 2012
Posted by Canaries News on September 3rd, 2012
The average occupancy levels in the Canaries during the month of August this year (2012) was 70%, during the last week of the month, it dropped to 60%. This is a significant drop when compared to the same month last year (August 2011) when occupancy levels reached 85% in the Canary Islands. Fernando Fraile, president of the Federation of Hospitality and Tourism (FEHT), said that the month previous month of July (2012) saw an acceptable level of occupancy in the islands, at around 75%, but August has been particularly bad, especially the last week of the month where the percentage of occupancy was reduced to 60%, a level not seen for more than ten years. According to Mr. Fraile, the low level of occupancy during August, one of the best months for National and local tourism, is due to a drop of over 12,000 domestic visitors (compared to 2011). Similar bad results are expected during September.
http://www.canariesnews.com/
These figures have absolutely nothing to do with the thrust of this thread as the figures do not include illegal lettings.
If anything they could prove that illegal lettings are on the increase, therefore shooting the whole argument in the foot.
Off Topic sorry to every one that has emailed me about Thailand i will get back to you all asp or go to http://www.thaivisa.com/ s my PM is full.
Well if this is something to go by then the island is not looking good what so ever and i hope what ever is making people going else where i hope its sorted soon,and even having people staying on the island looking to leave after being there years is a shame.every where has to be competitive to get people to come and at the moment Tenerife is no where near the mark. i hope this gets sort as this will be my home soon enough and i do feel for the people who have to make a living here,or have to rent out for an income of some sort i can see both points of view but loss of tourists is all ways bad for everyone one on the island.slodgedad i just read that and i thought i would post it good or bad if its true or not,and i guess you have a business in GDS nice little place be there in 3 week.
These figures have absolutely nothing to do with the thrust of this thread as the figures do not include illegal lettings.
If anything they could prove that illegal lettings are on the increase, therefore shooting the whole argument in the foot.
that is the heart of the issue. I would say that it is clear illegal lets will have been down this summer as well as the legal official numbers. rthis was predicted, the removal of internet ads last winter would leave many private renters unable to get summer bookings. Those that are trying to carry on quietly renting may have somme regulars for the winter, but most will not have been able to get summer bookings.
Carpenter seems to be telling it from local experience, his own work is down due to the crackdown and he says only bars near legal complex's are doing ok.
It seems on here the more right you are about an issue the greater others try to shout you down. Given that there are said to be 900,000 illegal or illicit tourist beds in the canaries , clearly attacking them would cause a major problem unless those previous apartment customers all decided to migrate to the legal accomodation.
If all these thousands of so called illegal beds were not a major economic factor in the first place, why launch an attack on them at all?
that is the heart of the issue. I would say that it is clear illegal lets will have been down this summer as well as the legal official numbers. rthis was predicted, the removal of internet ads last winter would leave many private renters unable to get summer bookings. Those that are trying to carry on quietly renting may have somme regulars for the winter, but most will not have been able to get summer bookings.
Carpenter seems to be telling it from local experience, his own work is down due to the crackdown and he says only bars near legal complex's are doing ok.
It seems on here the more right you are about an issue the greater others try to shout you down. Given that there are said to be 900,000 illegal or illicit tourist beds in the canaries , clearly attacking them would cause a major problem unless those previous apartment customers all decided to migrate to the legal accomodation.
If all these thousands of so called illegal beds were not a major economic factor in the first place, why launch an attack on them at all?
How can it possibly be "clear" that that "illegal" lets will have been down this summer?? If you read Hugh wotsits post of a few days ago, according to him there are more "illegal" lets than ever available on the internet.
Yes Carpenter's work has dropped off, but this is not necessarily indicitive of every person who works in his trade - there are many builders - including chippies, in my neck of the woods here who have never been busier.
As in my previous post, the principle cause of changes to holiday patterns is the price of flights themselves now the Spanish subsidies at the airports have been removed and the higher cost of fuel and operating planes generally. Even today new airline routes from Norway to the Canaries have been announced, so tourism generally to the Canaries must still be on the UP, or at least there is still such a demand that new routes are being added.
Things change and things evolve - that is life. The primary reason for the clampdown on illegal lets was and is a desire by the Government here to regain control of the tourism market so as to be able to control overall standards of the industry and pressure providers to improve the touristic offer. There are also side issues like, for example, providing an unapproved service from your property will invalidate most insurance policies - so if you have no permission to let your guests could find themselves in difficulty. Another example being that of swimming pool accidents, thefts and robberies where the holiday maker has nobody on-hand to help.
Whether private letting, or the licensing of such that meets the required minimum standard will ever be brought within the law remains to be seen. It is possible some aspects will - i.e. stand-alone villas, but when tourism is your one and only industry it is very unlikely there will ever be a change to the basic principal - residential is where people live (and have a right to do so away from the tourist industry), and touristic where standards are checked and maintained, basic services have to be provided (reception, security and pool attendant(s)) and facilities are aimed at and for tourists.
It is a fact of life here that there are far too many bars and restaurants to go around - perhaps there are too many builders and carpenters as well?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Just briefly adding to the above.....
You bought an apartment some years ago if I understand correctly, and advertised it and let it, as many others did, and in knowledge it was against the 1995 law.
Then, presumably because your unregulated venture was lucrative enough, you buy a second apartment and continued to operate outside the law. Now you have been caught up by the law you chose to ignore and have been fined for doing so.
The explanation and excuses you are giving to explain your decisions are that if you had not been breaking the law the local economy would collapse and now claim it has collapsed because you and others have been forced to stop doing something illegal (if you have in fact actually stopped).
Do enjoy explaining and more importantly providing proof to the courts when your case comes up.
How can it possibly be "clear" that that "illegal" lets will have been down this summer?? If you read Hugh wotsits post of a few days ago, according to him there are more "illegal" lets than ever available on the internet.
Yes Carpenter's work has dropped off, but this is not necessarily indicitive of every person who works in his trade - there are many builders - including chippies, in my neck of the woods here who have never been busier.
As in my previous post, the principle cause of changes to holiday patterns is the price of flights themselves now the Spanish subsidies at the airports have been removed and the higher cost of fuel and operating planes generally. Even today new airline routes from Norway to the Canaries have been announced, so tourism generally to the Canaries must still be on the UP, or at least there is still such a demand that new routes are being added.
Things change and things evolve - that is life. The primary reason for the clampdown on illegal lets was and is a desire by the Government here to regain control of the tourism market so as to be able to control overall standards of the industry and pressure providers to improve the touristic offer. There are also side issues like, for example, providing an unapproved service from your property will invalidate most insurance policies - so if you have no permission to let your guests could find themselves in difficulty. Another example being that of swimming pool accidents, thefts and robberies where the holiday maker has nobody on-hand to help.
Whether private letting, or the licensing of such that meets the required minimum standard will ever be brought within the law remains to be seen. It is possible some aspects will - i.e. stand-alone villas, but when tourism is your one and only industry it is very unlikely there will ever be a change to the basic principal - residential is where people live (and have a right to do so away from the tourist industry), and touristic where standards are checked and maintained, basic services have to be provided (reception, security and pool attendant(s)) and facilities are aimed at and for tourists.
It is a fact of life here that there are far too many bars and restaurants to go around - perhaps there are too many builders and carpenters as well?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Just briefly adding to the above.....
You bought an apartment some years ago if I understand correctly, and advertised it and let it, as many others did, and in knowledge it was against the 1995 law.
Then, presumably because your unregulated venture was lucrative enough, you buy a second apartment and continued to operate outside the law. Now you have been caught up by the law you chose to ignore and have been fined for doing so.
The explanation and excuses you are giving to explain your decisions are that if you had not been breaking the law the local economy would collapse and now claim it has collapsed because you and others have been forced to stop doing something illegal (if you have in fact actually stopped).
Do enjoy explaining and more importantly providing proof to the courts when your case comes up.
I personally think hughsy may be wrong when he says there are more internet ads than before the crackdown. I remember when we started on the internet , we were late comers realyy on there, and you could see in drop boxes how many 1 bedders in the canaries , then each island and right down to resort. Even allowing for the ones trying to hide/quiet let on there now they seem to be much less to me. Most on there now appear to be legal complex's.
I have only my contacts in the canaries and people like carpentor on here to give me the knowledge that footfall is down this summer and we see from the stats that legal lets /hotels are down also.
Just saying this over the past few days seems to have enraged the pro crackdown camp. I accept if I am misguided then , keep your heads in the clouds, there is no problem from the crackdown. If I am correct to think that footfall is down, then the canary economy is heading for terrible times.
One opinion is corect on this , the other is incorrect. We will have to continue to monitor the numbers in the weeks ahead, I hope some canary politicians are likewise concerned and may be taking some notice of the situation also.
I personally think hughsy may be wrong when he says there are more internet ads than before the crackdown. I remember when we started on the internet , we were late comers realyy on there, and you could see in drop boxes how many 1 bedders in the canaries , then each island and right down to resort. Even allowing for the ones trying to hide/quiet let on there now they seem to be much less to me. Most on there now appear to be legal complex's.
I have only my contacts in the canaries and people like carpentor on here to give me the knowledge that footfall is down this summer and we see from the stats that legal lets /hotels are down also.
Just saying this over the past few days seems to have enraged the pro crackdown camp. I accept if I am misguided then , keep your heads in the clouds, there is no problem from the crackdown. If I am correct to think that footfall is down, then the canary economy is heading for terrible times.
One opinion is corect on this , the other is incorrect. We will have to continue to monitor the numbers in the weeks ahead, I hope some canary politicians are likewise concerned and may be taking some notice of the situation also.
Can somebody tell her about the economic crisis in europe.There would have been a lowering of expected visitors to the island whatever happened to these illegal apartments.I suspect that at the end of the day this matter of illegal versus legal apartments will only matter to the owners who have been fined.It certainly doesn't matter to the rest of us.The island is looking good and tourists will come and go and Tenerife will survive.
I personally think hughsy may be wrong when he says there are more internet ads than before the crackdown. I remember when we started on the internet , we were late comers realyy on there, and you could see in drop boxes how many 1 bedders in the canaries , then each island and right down to resort. Even allowing for the ones trying to hide/quiet let on there now they seem to be much less to me. Most on there now appear to be legal complex's.
I have only my contacts in the canaries and people like carpentor on here to give me the knowledge that footfall is down this summer and we see from the stats that legal lets /hotels are down also.
Just saying this over the past few days seems to have enraged the pro crackdown camp. I accept if I am misguided then , keep your heads in the clouds, there is no problem from the crackdown. If I am correct to think that footfall is down, then the canary economy is heading for terrible times.
One opinion is corect on this , the other is incorrect. We will have to continue to monitor the numbers in the weeks ahead, I hope some canary politicians are likewise concerned and may be taking some notice of the situation also.
The problem though Nelson is that you have been telling us that the effects on the Canarian economy are happening and happening now in front of our very eyes with restaurants closing, taxi drivers losing their jobs and so on, and that footfall to the Canaries has and will continue to drop through the floor ...
But, whilst the Spanish tourist numbers have clearly fallen through the floor this year, not surprisingly, "foreign" numbers remain pretty constant and if anything are going up slightly. Canarian unemployment is falling, OK slowly and OK year on year the numbers are painfully higher, but nevertheless the statistics so far are not backing up your theory of the bottom falling out of Canarian tourism.
The reality is, as in the previous post, the "clampdown" is only of real concern to those, like yourself, who have been knowingly breaking the law in favour of your own personal pocket(s), and you have had to restrict or abandoned your "illegal" business and your pocket(s) are suffering. Sadly, not much sympathy from me on that score.
My sympathies lie with the many who have bought to let under badly given advice from the other group of (sharks) people who have been making a living here under false pretences and unregulated - these being Estate Agents.
loadeds illegal beer analgy is write to the point. The problem is he is not realising that the brewery is providing the jobs regardless of where the beer is drunk. closing the one outlet would not matter as long as all the customers continued to drink beer in the other outlet.
we know in the canaries that stopping tourists in 30 hotels worth of illegal apartments would mean that these customers would not all migrate to the legal accomodation. Hence the problem footfall is going to be down so the economy overall suffers.
As I have said many times, private renters price to cover costs, thats all, so they provide cheaper accomodation for tourists who want that type of holiday accomodation. The added costs of agents profits and hotel style extra overheads are a fact of life for sole agent complex's. If the customer is told he must pay that rate or he can not come to the canaries, then it is the customers free choice as to what happens next.
You can not buck the market and after many years of tolerating private renting the canary government picked a crazy time to decide to stop it. What is needed is legalising the private renters, charge an annual fee, like portugal.
No one can expect customers to pay for a higher cost system, some may, but if footfall falls overall then its a disaster for the canary economy and people.
More like to own a property from illegal gains.
All you do is create unfair competition to the likes of us that have the massive overheads required to rent apartments legally.
Another point you mention is the downfall in local businesses, strange that the local bars I have spoken to on El Mirador strip are all claiming they have had the best summer ever!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Low occupancy levels in the Canaries during August 2012
Posted by Canaries News on September 3rd, 2012
The average occupancy levels in the Canaries during the month of August this year (2012) was 70%, during the last week of the month, it dropped to 60%. This is a significant drop when compared to the same month last year (August 2011) when occupancy levels reached 85% in the Canary Islands. Fernando Fraile, president of the Federation of Hospitality and Tourism (FEHT), said that the month previous month of July (2012) saw an acceptable level of occupancy in the islands, at around 75%, but August has been particularly bad, especially the last week of the month where the percentage of occupancy was reduced to 60%, a level not seen for more than ten years. According to Mr. Fraile, the low level of occupancy during August, one of the best months for National and local tourism, is due to a drop of over 12,000 domestic visitors (compared to 2011). Similar bad results are expected during September.
http://www.canariesnews.com/
A little confused how they quote the August figures when they are not due to be presented till 21st of this month!
We have to do our occupancy figures (like all other legal complexes) by the 21st of the following month i.e. August figures are presented on or before the 21st September.
More like to own a property from illegal gains.
All you do is create unfair competition to the likes of us that have the massive overheads required to rent apartments legally.
Another point you mention is the downfall in local businesses, strange that the local bars I have spoken to on El Mirador strip are all claiming they have had the best summer ever!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
A little confused how they quote the August figures when they are not due to be presented till 21st of this month!
We have to do our occupancy figures (like all other legal complexes) by the 21st of the following month i.e. August figures are presented on or before the 21st September.
its early days in the crackdown. If legal let footfall is down, then its reasonable to assume that former illegal let customers are not migrating to the legal accomodation. As regards illegal let footfall , my own contacts tell me it has been a very quiet summer. Seancelt on here said likewise and just this weekend carpenter posted that things were bad for bars near illegal complex's.
It has to said though, that the full impact of the crackdown is not being felt at thye moment due to the large numbers who are carrying on renting. They may have removed their internet ad , but even if they did that around december last year they would have had some summer bookings. The problem may be worse next year when these renters have very few bookings for summer 2013 due to no internet adverts.
The other thing to remember is that if all the illegal renters actually obeyed the law and stopped renting immediatley then the canary economy would have completly collasped.
Sorry for the delay Seano - been away.
Here's the link.......
http://thegazettelive.com/flip/sep12/sep12flip.html
Page 15.
Originally Posted by Hughsyb
So just so I understand, in your opinion, villas currently in residential community developments will not be allowed to holiday rent at all?
That's my theory, I may turn out to be wrong. It's possible they will separate the apartments from villas/townhouses etc and open the door for them but I doubt it.
We'll soon see though, changes coming January 1st
So when Rita Hernandez, the Director of Tourist Regulation and Promotion in the Canaries, states that the legislation of tourist villas that fulfill certain requirements is included in the White Paper of the forthcoming Law of Tourist Renovation and Qualification, and that those requirements will include the location of the villas, their fitness for use, and whether legalising them is likely to improve competitiveness., you don't believe her?
I personally think hughsy may be wrong when he says there are more internet ads than before the crackdown.
So why don't you check it for yourself? The figures are there for all to see. Or do you believe Owners Direct etc can't count the number of villas on their own website?
Originally Posted by Hughsyb
So just so I understand, in your opinion, villas currently in residential community developments will not be allowed to holiday rent at all?
So when Rita Hernandez, the Director of Tourist Regulation and Promotion in the Canaries, states that the legislation of tourist villas that fulfill certain requirements is included in the White Paper of the forthcoming Law of Tourist Renovation and Qualification, and that those requirements will include the location of the villas, their fitness for use, and whether legalising them is likely to improve competitiveness., you don't believe her?
It is a very brave man or woman, (or should that be naive) who would believe anything a Canarian politician has to say quite frankly. They might have an opinion perhaps, whether their superiors take any notice whatsoever remains to be seen.
seanocelt
11-09-2012, 13:55
Credibility restored for Hughsyb, he took the time to scan in a huge mag(never seen it before). Now; did Rita not pretty much say what some of us have been saying, for 2 years , along the lines of "its our law, we will do what we see fit and we are not interested in your opinion/position"?? That was my take on it anyway.
Sorry for the delay Seano - been away.
Here's the link.......
http://thegazettelive.com/flip/sep12/sep12flip.html
Page 15.
Originally Posted by Hughsyb
So just so I understand, in your opinion, villas currently in residential community developments will not be allowed to holiday rent at all?
So when Rita Hernandez, the Director of Tourist Regulation and Promotion in the Canaries, states that the legislation of tourist villas that fulfill certain requirements is included in the White Paper of the forthcoming Law of Tourist Renovation and Qualification, and that those requirements will include the location of the villas, their fitness for use, and whether legalising them is likely to improve competitiveness., you don't believe her?
So why don't you check it for yourself? The figures are there for all to see. Or do you believe Owners Direct etc can't count the number of villas on their own website?
sorry hughsy, I think I mixed myself up because you are talking about villas. I suppose you can see the correct number of villas throughout the islands in the drop down boxes, and this shows an increase. I was thinking about the apartments , which from memory , appear to me to have thinned out quite a bit from what they were a few years back.
Sorry, I'm not talking about villas. That should have read properties.
Credibility restored for Hughsyb, he took the time to scan in a huge mag(never seen it before). Now; did Rita not pretty much say what some of us have been saying, for 2 years , along the lines of "its our law, we will do what we see fit and we are not interested in your opinion/position"?? That was my take on it anyway.
no , that would not be a fair appraisal of what rita hernadez said. She has stuck by the daft letting laws as regards apartments, but she has also stated that some villas look like being made legal in the up coming new law.
This info was already in the press some weeks ago including changes to letting for touristic complex's both active and dormant. We are all waiting to see exactly what that is going to mean.
It is a very brave man or woman, (or should that be naive) who would believe anything a Canarian politician has to say quite frankly. They might have an opinion perhaps, whether their superiors take any notice whatsoever remains to be seen.
Oh right. I must remember the next time that any Canarian politician announces anything in the press or media, to dimiss it all as a load of twaddle. For example stopping all illegal holiday letting in the Canaries, taking on 17 new inspectors etc.
Sorry, I'm not talking about villas. That should have read properties.
fair enough, must be because I look at los cristo/pdla that I seem to think adverts on the internet have reduced. From memory there used to be pages and pages of 1 bedders to look through. Today you seem to have fewer , mostly legal complex's with those new secret ads with just internal photos and no names no calendar showing.
Maybe thats just a los cristo/pdla factor where there have been more fines, other islands may not be as badly affected and so that explains why the canary economy is coping with the crackdown despite the government attack.
Having read the article which Hughsyb has posted, my impression is that the only villas which are likely to be legalised are the villas on touristic sites - she quite clearly says TOURISTIC VILLAS in her answer which I would take to mean that Residential Villas are not likely to be legalised any time soon.
Sorry for the delay Seano - been away.
Here's the link.......
http://thegazettelive.com/flip/sep12/sep12flip.html
Page 15.
Originally Posted by Hughsyb
So just so I understand, in your opinion, villas currently in residential community developments will not be allowed to holiday rent at all?
So when Rita Hernandez, the Director of Tourist Regulation and Promotion in the Canaries, states that the legislation of tourist villas that fulfill certain requirements is included in the White Paper of the forthcoming Law of Tourist Renovation and Qualification, and that those requirements will include the location of the villas, their fitness for use, and whether legalising them is likely to improve competitiveness., you don't believe her?
So why don't you check it for yourself? The figures are there for all to see. Or do you believe Owners Direct etc can't count the number of villas on their own website?
Perhaps you need to read all of what I wrote:
There will probably be some changes to the villa aspect, this has always been a logical argument and to be honest all that has stopped villas from being legal is the moratorium not the letting law.
I can see (stand alone) villas (not part of communities) being allowed to register from January 1st.
Can't see a change in residential complexes but can see the possibility of residential complexes becoming "touristic" without 100%, they will likely need 75% to change but still need to apply to "unity of exploitation".
I would take to mean that Residential Villas are not likely to be legalised any time soon.
Unless they are redesignated, which is what is going to happen.
That's funny, I posted a link to a statement from the Tourist Authorities 19 months ago which said they were looking at doing that, but because it was a Lanzarote website, it was ridiculed at the time on here.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Can't see a change in residential complexes but can see the possibility of residential complexes becoming "touristic" without 100%, they will likely need 75% to change but still need to apply to "unity of exploitation".
But you and I know villa developments will never achieve 75% approval from owners, so that's not going to happen.
All the tourist board need to do to incorporate villas (that aren't part of a community) is relax the moratorium for them and hey presto.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
somehow you've misquoted and misunderstood me, here is what i am saying:
In the new year I predict the moratorium will lifted to allow villas to register themselves with the tourist board. This will be for villas on their on plot ONLY.
The law will also allow the registration of other complexes (former tourist blocks that have lost license or residential blocks) to re-register with 75%.
The 75% will also apply to a community of villas, for example if there is a community of 8 villas and 6 of them want to register with a sole agent they will be able to do so (6 out of 8 = 75%).
All the tourist board need to do to incorporate villas (that aren't part of a community) is relax the moratorium for them and hey presto.
But villas in the Canaries which aren't part of a community are just a small minority. Most are on community developments in residential areas.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
All the tourist board need to do to incorporate villas (that aren't part of a community) is relax the moratorium for them and hey presto.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
somehow you've misquoted and misunderstood me, here is what i am saying:
In the new year I predict the moratorium will lifted to allow villas to register themselves with the tourist board. This will be for villas on their on plot ONLY.
The law will also allow the registration of other complexes (former tourist blocks that have lost license or residential blocks) to re-register with 75%.
The 75% will also apply to a community of villas, for example if there is a community of 8 villas and 6 of them want to register with a sole agent they will be able to do so (6 out of 8 = 75%).
That may be your prediction but it's certainly not mine. There will be no question of 75%s and sole agents for villa communities.
But villas in the Canaries which aren't part of a community are just a small minority. Most are on community developments in residential areas.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
That may be your prediction but it's certainly not mine. There will be no question of 75%s and sole agents for villa communities.
Time will tell if I am right or am I wrong , life is very short and there's no time for fussing and fighting my friend, so I will ask you once again........
seanocelt
11-09-2012, 18:09
There's still a few of you hanging your hat on her, and other Canarian politicos change- making to favour the outcome you want. I wish you well,honest i do; but i do not think things are much further forward at all. Limbo in fact. There is stuff i know about fines/complexes i cannot divulge but any notion that "help" is going to be given to legalise illegal lets is not in harmony with activity at present. Jan 2013 is not far away, i hope the Canary Islands benefit from any ammendments.
Oh right. I must remember the next time that any Canarian politician announces anything in the press or media, to dimiss it all as a load of twaddle. For example stopping all illegal holiday letting in the Canaries, taking on 17 new inspectors etc.
Let's take the licensing of radio as an example then. After years of pressure and speculation the Canarian Government finally "advertised" about 150 frequencies for grabs. In the blurb they quite clearly stated that no single entity could own and operate more than 5, existing local Canarian services which had grown over the years would be looked at favouribly and that foreign language stations would be sanctioned (i.e. German Russian and English) in areas of the islands where it was appropriate.
The outcome? As the applications were being asessed a number of applicantions by a group with whom the Government have real issues (operated by a well known Tenerife newspaper) were seen to be scoring rather well, so the points system was changed mid-way - finally then 2 companies were awarded nearly 70 percent of the frequencies - one of which was a station which would be networked from the mainland, and not a single foreign language licence was awarded.
The inspectors are real, the desire to gain full control over the islands touristic offer is also very real (and understandable!) and for that matter the fact that the Supreme court has demanded the politicians involved in the radio debarcle appear before them to explain themselves is also very real
Trust Canarian politicians? Believe anything they say? I really don't think so........
(sorry slightly off topic)
Let's take the licensing of radio as an example then. After years of pressure and speculation the Canarian Government finally "advertised" about 150 frequencies for grabs. In the blurb they quite clearly stated that no single entity could own and operate more than 5, existing local Canarian services which had grown over the years would be looked at favouribly and that foreign language stations would be sanctioned (i.e. German Russian and English) in areas of the islands where it was appropriate.
The outcome? As the applications were being asessed a number of applicantions by a group with whom the Government have real issues (operated by a well known Tenerife newspaper) were seen to be scoring rather well, so the points system was changed mid-way - finally then 2 companies were awarded nearly 70 percent of the frequencies - one of which was a station which would be networked from the mainland, and not a single foreign language licence was awarded.
The inspectors are real, the desire to gain full control over the islands touristic offer is also very real (and understandable!) and for that matter the fact that the Supreme court has demanded the politicians involved in the radio debarcle appear before them to explain themselves is also very real
Trust Canarian politicians? Believe anything they say? I really don't think so........
(sorry slightly off topic)
one thing that puzzles me about the whole illegal renting crackdown is that no canary politicians of any party have said anything about the issue. There has been nothing said for or against the crackdown by any of them. There has been talk of the southern mayors attending the alotca public meeting , but nothing said since pubicley.
Just leaving aside our differences over the issue, whether we support the crackdown or are against it, surely we could expect some debate between the various political parties right and left, over this issue ?
These spanish/ canary politicians are a strange bunch.
one thing that puzzles me about the whole illegal renting crackdown is that no canary politicians of any party have said anything about the issue. There has been nothing said for or against the crackdown by any of them. There has been talk of the southern mayors attending the alotca public meeting , but nothing said since pubicley.
Just leaving aside our differences over the issue, whether we support the crackdown or are against it, surely we could expect some debate between the various political parties right and left, over this issue ?
These spanish/ canary politicians are a strange bunch.
If you examine the way politics is funded and influenced here I think you would find it much less strange - too many decision makers are in the hands (or more precisly, pockets) of others. Individuals like yourself, - and especially foreign individuals, simply do not count.
The tourism industry is no exception, and whilst one or two politicians may make positive noises (from your perspective) the reality is that they will do what suits them and their benefactors best. I will retract every word of this on learning that the tourism industry in the Canaries is to be modified in such a way as to even partially benefit your (and others) position(s).
However, I don't expect to be writing a retraction anytime soon despite the noises in that article - or any others either.
seanocelt
13-09-2012, 14:01
He is right. Its not racism or predjudice against us. They just see us as irrelevant.
He is right. Its not racism or predjudice against us. They just see us as irrelevant.
I dont think muppet is saying that exactly. I think he is saying that all the ploiticos here of whatever political party are first and foremost loyal to what pays them personally.
I would agree this is not a racial issue or anti foreigner. I have alaways said , and still believe, that the crackdown is a protectionist measure to try to increase hotel occupancy. My view is that the government is unduly in the pocket of the hotels as regards this issue. I just think it odd that no canary politicians are speaking against the crackdown policy. Could be that too many of them have reasons not to want to make a stir.
one thing that puzzles me about the whole illegal renting crackdown is that no canary politicians of any party have said anything about the issue. There has been nothing said for or against the crackdown by any of them. There has been talk of the southern mayors attending the alotca public meeting , but nothing said since pubicley.
Just leaving aside our differences over the issue, whether we support the crackdown or are against it, surely we could expect some debate between the various political parties right and left, over this issue ?
These spanish/ canary politicians are a strange bunch.
Why would they ??
As far as they are concerned, the authorities are enforcing an existing law - the fact that they haven't enforced it before is totally irrelevant to them, they have decided that it should now be enforced.
Why would they ??
As far as they are concerned, the authorities are enforcing an existing law - the fact that they haven't enforced it before is totally irrelevant to them, they have decided that it should now be enforced.
come on bobmac, I know that you have that opinion/position on this issue that because it is currently the law no one should even try to oppose it, but at the end of the day any issue can be debated , and in a democracy politicians debate issues, and the majority decide what is the law and what law might need to be changed/ repealed/ammended. That is the democratic process and laws are not set in stone , or subject to some kind of no opposition or discussion allowed type fatwa.
You are confusing democratic ploitics/ societies with dictatorships.
come on bobmac, I know that you have that opinion/position on this issue that because it is currently the law no one should even try to oppose it, but at the end of the day any issue can be debated , and in a democracy politicians debate issues, and the majority decide what is the law and what law might need to be changed/ repealed/ammended. That is the democratic process and laws are not set in stone , or subject to some kind of no opposition or discussion allowed type fatwa.
You are confusing democratic ploitics/ societies with dictatorships.
NO
I have never at any time said that I think this law shouldn't be changed - I think it's a total ass and needs to be redrafted. Where we differ is I don't see the Canarian government making the changes you want; the changes that have been floated on this forum, if they are accurate, would appear to indicate that Touristic properties are all going to be brought into line and Residential properties will stay as they are - RESIDENTIAL.
I also stand by my comment - why would the politicians feel the need to make any comment on this debate when as far as they are concerned, the Canarian government is only enforcing a law which was passed in 1995, even if it has been ignored until now.
Even if it was never enforced until now, it was still a valid law which could have been enforced at any time since it was first passed
one thing that puzzles me about the whole illegal renting crackdown is that no canary politicians of any party have said anything about the issue. There has been nothing said for or against the crackdown by any of them. There has been talk of the southern mayors attending the alotca public meeting , but nothing said since pubicley.
Just leaving aside our differences over the issue, whether we support the crackdown or are against it, surely we could expect some debate between the various political parties right and left, over this issue ?
These spanish/ canary politicians are a strange bunch.
You over estimate the importance of the subject.Canarians and local politicians thought that the law was already being enforced from when the it was passed some years ago.They just think that anyone who bought an apartment in a residential complex with the intention to let to tourists must be somewhat silly!!
You over estimate the importance of the subject.Canarians and local politicians thought that the law was already being enforced from when the it was passed some years ago.They just think that anyone who bought an apartment in a residential complex with the intention to let to tourists must be somewhat silly!!
I accept that the canarian general perception is that this is not a significant issue. It seems fairley invisible in the canarian press, and the locals I spoke to last in april thought it was a tax evasion crackdown. For what its worth none of them had any idae about sole agency or prohibition of letting to tourists on residential complex's.
You can not dismiss the matter as not seen as important by the majority of canary politicians , as of course they have started the crackdown against the letting. We know from their own press realise that they consider that there was arond 900,000 illegal/illicit tourist beds in the canaries. So these canary politicians having arrived at this figure for a large number of illegal beds , then decided to commence the crackdown.
To my mind that shows that some canary politicians were very interested in this issue. What still remains a mystery to me is, why no canary politicians of any grouping spoke against these measures or raised concerns about possible impact on the canary economy by taking these tourist beds off the market.
maybe the politicians see it as a necessary move to protect one of the most important industries in Tenerife ? - The hotel and apartment industry.......
maybe the politicians see it as a necessary move to protect one of the most important industries in Tenerife ? - The hotel and apartment industry.......
the point I am making is that politicians of different political parties normally have different opinions on issues. This letting crackdown is a very important issue for the canaries. The descision to attack all these private renters had the potential to damage the canary economy. The issue was never in the first place , an uncontraversal measure.
The whole thing from the beggining could have been argued both ways for and against. We are now at a stage where it appears the legal accomodations have suffered a decline in footfall this past summer , and we know that illegal renting is reduced due to the crackdown.
Given this situation , it seems odd to me that no canary politicians of any party are expressing concerns about the wisdom of the crackdown.
delderek
15-09-2012, 19:01
the point I am making is that politicians of different political parties normally have different opinions on issues. This letting crackdown is a very important issue for the canaries. The descision to attack all these private renters had the potential to damage the canary economy. The issue was never in the first place , an uncontraversal measure.
The whole thing from the beggining could have been argued both ways for and against. We are now at a stage where it appears the legal accomodations have suffered a decline in footfall this past summer , and we know that illegal renting is reduced due to the crackdown.
Given this situation , it seems odd to me that no canary politicians of any party are expressing concerns about the wisdom of the crackdown.
Does any politician in any country express concerns about a wrong decision they have made?
slodgedad
16-09-2012, 02:53
Does any politician in any country express concerns about a wrong decision they have made?
Spot on, del.
When they get it right they crow on ad nauseum but, get it wrong and politic speak (change the subject) kicks in..
the point I am making is that politicians of different political parties normally have different opinions on issues. This letting crackdown is a very important issue for the canaries. The descision to attack all these private renters had the potential to damage the canary economy. The issue was never in the first place , an uncontraversal measure.
The whole thing from the beggining could have been argued both ways for and against. We are now at a stage where it appears the legal accomodations have suffered a decline in footfall this past summer , and we know that illegal renting is reduced due to the crackdown.
Given this situation , it seems odd to me that no canary politicians of any party are expressing concerns about the wisdom of the crackdown.
I wasn't on the island(s) in 1994/5 when the law must have been discussed by the Canarian Parliament, but the assumption has to be that when the legislation was initially proposed there would have been a normal parliamentary style debate during which all the then politicians would have discussed the pros and cons of the issue.
The fact that the legislation was passed, presumably with some form of majority, and that following the additional changes to the original law which were imposed by the EU, the fact that the 1995 law, and it's later amendments, have not been the focus of much political campaigning in subsequent elections suggests that the then, current and presumably future members of Parliament do not consider the law to be particularly controversial, or to not be in the best interests of their islands.
Logically it can be assumed that this will be why the Press are relatively uninterested. When they come to report on political issues, they report on what the politicians are currently saying about today's situation(s), and it is a fairly safe bet that very few, if any, are campaigning for a significant change, and therefore a fairly safe bet that most see the law as sensible in terms of what it is trying to achieve. The provision, by law, to have control over their single most important asset - that of the attraction of the weather and the industries which have grown out of it.
As has been debated here time after time, the Canarian people, and therefore their politicians, see no benefit in foreigners buying property and letting it out to tourists directly, lining their pockets and operating their private little businesses with precious few rules or controls over the services being provided. They clearly do see benefit in their Tourist offices being able to insist that minimum standards for tourists are not only introduced, but maintained and improved, and so therefore having control of the country's single most important industry.
True, many foreigners chose to flout the laws, and were allowed to do so for some time. Not just those who bought to let, but those who marketed and sold property to "foreigners" under false pretences and made a lot - infact an obscene, amount of money in the process. The Canarian Government were pretty naive during this period and it does seem to have come as quite a surprise to them when they eventually realised just how large the black-market letting industry had become right under their very noses, and the decision to impliment their laws in recent times would seem to have general approval in the Canarian Parliament - acting now rather than letting the black-market develop and grow any further.
Whether the estimates of illegal beds is accurate is not important, it might be 30 hotels worth, it is likely a lot less, but the bottom line of the discussion remains that it is their country, they can legislate to protect their primary industry in any way they wish, provided such legislation is legal under the EU, which has not only sanctioned the letting laws passed by the Canarian Parliament, but allowed the Canaries to introduce other laws, some of which discriminate in favour of Canarians being given priority over "foreigners" in employment and other similar areas.
Yes there are a few tweaks due later this year. Bringing (some) villas inside the law would seem to be one area of attention, as would bringing back into the touristic offer some of the complexes which have lapsed out of it. But again, whether or not you approve, or are disapointed that your little black-market letting business seems set to remain outside the law, is pretty irrelevant to the Canarians themselves and their representatives in Government.
You also continue to bring us tidings of woe from both sides of the tourist industry (legal and illegal), but very little seems to be the case. Footfall is down a little this year compared to last - hardly surprising given the state of the world, but actual spending by tourists was slightly up on the year before. You assume that because legal footall is down, illegal footfall must also be down - fair enough, you might be right, but if legal tourist spend is up why should not illegal tourist spend also not be up?
Both Thomas Cook and Tui are reporting potentially excellent "legal" numbers for the winter season, as are those on here who deal in legal lets. If your bookings are down for your illegal business because you have had to restrict/abandon your advertising and legal bookings are looking very healthy - even improved, then it does seem that the Government is, albeit slowly, achieving what it wants - including putting you out of business.
I dont like commenting on this thread as I think there is far too much schadenfreude, bitterness and negativity from the regular posters who see current/former residential owners who have let their properties in order to pay for them as worse than Hitler (completely ridiculous by the way.) I will post this but I will not be drawn into silly to and fro arguments where people are ridiculed for stating the law is an ass. I work in the industry, I see it from both sides and it is very clear the impact it is having now and will have in the long term. I beleive in regulating the tourism industry i order to maintain standards and ensure tax is paid etc - my post has nothing to do with either of these points but these two points seem to be what those rooting for this law incorrectly hang all of their reasoning on.
When a property is sold by a non resident they pay a 3% retention tax and Plus Valia tax. The buyer then pays a 6.5% purchase tax (and the rest...) The total amount paid is well in excess of 10% of the price. (The agency also pays 7% IGIC and 21% tax on their "excessive" commission of 5%...)
Since the "crackdown" people have stopped buying here - its that simple.
A whole load of people who want to buy - will not.
A whole load of people who were going to buy have changed their mind.
A big bunch of potential buyers will not ever buy because I and many other agents go through the finer details of this law.
And once they realise that they cannot derive a half decent income (be it touristic or residential) they decide there is simply no point in owning here.
150,000€ property with a 105,000€ mortgage costing 585€ a month (7,000€ per year.) You use it for 6 weeks a year and the rest of the time it sits empty. It now makes very little sense for people to buy here if they need a mortgage and aren't going to be living here.
Even buying on touristic, unless you choose very carefully, the returns are atrocious - disgusting in fact. Most people will not be able to find the complexes they need to where they can legally do what they like with the full consent of the license holder. They are few and far between anyways. The rest of the license holders are in it for themselves and will continue to take advantage of their unfair positions to fleece these owners of as much as they can.
Whilst the huge drop off in property sales can to a large extent be attribute to the crisis, a very big chunk of this fall is solely down to this law and the ignorance of those in power to do anything about it.
I keep reading posts here about the Spanish this and the Spanish that, as though they have always known and haven't fallen into this cynical trap, 16 years in the making. The Spanish / Canarian owners are, for the most part, completely oblivious to what is going on - they know nothing about it! When you explain it to them or speak to those who do know, their attitude is much the same as the British owners who are opposed to this law - it is stupid, poorly implemented, confusing and over the long term will have a devastating impact on the market here.
Try this one next time you want to defend this law - For the past 17 years there have been ZERO legal holiday villas in Tenerife. Thats correct, according to this law, Tenerife should have no villas for renting out to tourists. If you want to rent a villa for your holidays in Tenerife - sorry, that option does not exist. And then tell me this law is right and proper - the Canary Islands and their Government are a laughing stock. Whilst many have gone out of their way to defend and justify this law, it simply cannot be done in a credible manner - it is a complete joke, people cannot even beleive the law is real, it is so unbelievable!
It is ridiculous on every level, a massive amount of people are suffering because of it and a small amount of people are getting rich because of it. Overall the economy is suffering, the property market is suffering and the image of the island is that is run by a tin pot Government that has no idea what it is doing.
It needs changed - very quickly!
Jackalina
16-09-2012, 12:17
What's more I am having real difficulty getting an apartment for December
seanocelt
16-09-2012, 14:12
Andy i have'nt seen many on here agreeing with it or supporting it,most agree its stupid and damaging, but there aint a lot we can do about it. (on here anyway)
Lets be clear about something; The reason independant villas cannot currently register are not because of the 95 letting law........
Villas cannot register because there is a moratorium in place, this is a completely separate reason.
I dont like commenting on this thread as I think there is far too much schadenfreude, bitterness and negativity from the regular posters who see current/former residential owners who have let their properties in order to pay for them as worse than Hitler (completely ridiculous by the way.) I will post this but I will not be drawn into silly to and fro arguments where people are ridiculed for stating the law is an ass. I work in the industry, I see it from both sides and it is very clear the impact it is having now and will have in the long term. I beleive in regulating the tourism industry i order to maintain standards and ensure tax is paid etc - my post has nothing to do with either of these points but these two points seem to be what those rooting for this law incorrectly hang all of their reasoning on.
When a property is sold by a non resident they pay a 3% retention tax and Plus Valia tax. The buyer then pays a 6.5% purchase tax (and the rest...) The total amount paid is well in excess of 10% of the price. (The agency also pays 7% IGIC and 21% tax on their "excessive" commission of 5%...)
Since the "crackdown" people have stopped buying here - its that simple.
A whole load of people who want to buy - will not.
A whole load of people who were going to buy have changed their mind.
A big bunch of potential buyers will not ever buy because I and many other agents go through the finer details of this law.
And once they realise that they cannot derive a half decent income (be it touristic or residential) they decide there is simply no point in owning here.
150,000€ property with a 105,000€ mortgage costing 585€ a month (7,000€ per year.) You use it for 6 weeks a year and the rest of the time it sits empty. It now makes very little sense for people to buy here if they need a mortgage and aren't going to be living here.
Even buying on touristic, unless you choose very carefully, the returns are atrocious - disgusting in fact. Most people will not be able to find the complexes they need to where they can legally do what they like with the full consent of the license holder. They are few and far between anyways. The rest of the license holders are in it for themselves and will continue to take advantage of their unfair positions to fleece these owners of as much as they can.
Whilst the huge drop off in property sales can to a large extent be attribute to the crisis, a very big chunk of this fall is solely down to this law and the ignorance of those in power to do anything about it.
I keep reading posts here about the Spanish this and the Spanish that, as though they have always known and haven't fallen into this cynical trap, 16 years in the making. The Spanish / Canarian owners are, for the most part, completely oblivious to what is going on - they know nothing about it! When you explain it to them or speak to those who do know, their attitude is much the same as the British owners who are opposed to this law - it is stupid, poorly implemented, confusing and over the long term will have a devastating impact on the market here.
Try this one next time you want to defend this law - For the past 17 years there have been ZERO legal holiday villas in Tenerife. Thats correct, according to this law, Tenerife should have no villas for renting out to tourists. If you want to rent a villa for your holidays in Tenerife - sorry, that option does not exist. And then tell me this law is right and proper - the Canary Islands and their Government are a laughing stock. Whilst many have gone out of their way to defend and justify this law, it simply cannot be done in a credible manner - it is a complete joke, people cannot even beleive the law is real, it is so unbelievable!
It is ridiculous on every level, a massive amount of people are suffering because of it and a small amount of people are getting rich because of it. Overall the economy is suffering, the property market is suffering and the image of the island is that is run by a tin pot Government that has no idea what it is doing.
It needs changed - very quickly!
Interesting post and assuming sales have dropped in the last 18 months or so (and it would be ridiculous to think they haven't) the government must be losing more in tax than they are gaining in fines (working on the basis that a lot of fines have been challenged and remain uncollected).
We live on a large residential community on the Golf, twenty plus owners continue to holiday let illegally. Our neighbours next door let illegally.
Last night we had to put up with the guests next door having a drunken argument for over a hour with doors being banged and hammered sounded like one of them had locked themselves in the bedroom.
We have complained in the past to the owner, who took the attitude, “they are on holiday what do you expect”
What can we do?
It makes you feel like reporting them to the inspectors, but if we do this, it would have a knock on effect on the community with many owners having bought solely to let perhaps they could not carry on making their payments if they where stopped.
All letting on any communities needs to go through a sole agent this way you have the infrastructure in place to take care of any eventuality.
seanocelt
16-09-2012, 19:41
I live on a very residential complex. My next door neighbours (Italian/Spanish) have owned for 12 years i think they said. They are happy we are next door as the owner used to holiday let our apartment and it made their lives a misery. Still a few taking the chance on our complex despite several owners being fined, and residents who bought are mighty sick of the noise and attitude of the tourists.
I live on a very residential complex. My next door neighbours (Italian/Spanish) have owned for 12 years i think they said. They are happy we are next door as the owner used to holiday let our apartment and it made their lives a misery. Still a few taking the chance on our complex despite several owners being fined, and residents who bought are mighty sick of the noise and attitude of the tourists.
that is one of the important points that has been discussed many times on this thread. We bought touristic , we are illegal in the sense of no sole agent. Our complex has around 80 apartments, approx 5 residents proper, around 10 swallows who never rent and the rest all renting and holidaying themselves. Without repeating myself too much on here , I have been responsible for a few disturbances with nutty beer monster clients over the years. However many of our original clients from pre internet days, ie from our town, have been poached from us and stay in other apartments now. Without renting clearly our complex would be in deep trouble as regards community fees, the 15 residents /swallows would have a large shortfall to find.
That is the factor all complex's need to consider if they want to have renting stopped. They have to consider if the complex can manage given the effect on owners of not being able to rent. If there are a small number of renters then maybe stopping them is no big deal, if you have a lot of renting owners then you need to do the maths first.
Its the same sort of consideration the canary government should have done before starting the crackdown in the first place.
junglejim
17-09-2012, 19:42
Nice to see one of the biggest culprits in abusing the sole agent role in his complexes ,Roberto Konrad, is also the Vice President of Ashotel -very cosy !
http://www.diariodeavisos.com/2012/09/16/actualidad/roberto-konrad-tenerife-tiene-futuro-pero-hay-mimarla-continuamente/
seanocelt
17-09-2012, 20:11
that is one of the important points that has been discussed many times on this thread. We bought touristic , we are illegal in the sense of no sole agent. Our complex has around 80 apartments, approx 5 residents proper, around 10 swallows who never rent and the rest all renting and holidaying themselves. Without repeating myself too much on here , I have been responsible for a few disturbances with nutty beer monster clients over the years. However many of our original clients from pre internet days, ie from our town, have been poached from us and stay in other apartments now. Without renting clearly our complex would be in deep trouble as regards community fees, the 15 residents /swallows would have a large shortfall to find.
That is the factor all complex's need to consider if they want to have renting stopped. They have to consider if the complex can manage given the effect on owners of not being able to rent. If there are a small number of renters then maybe stopping them is no big deal, if you have a lot of renting owners then you need to do the maths first.
Its the same sort of consideration the canary government should have done before starting the crackdown in the first place.
That would be saying people bought to rent illegally knowing they cannot afford their community fees otherwise? Poor decision making.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Nice to see one of the biggest culprits in abusing the sole agent role in his complexes ,Roberto Konrad, is also the Vice President of Ashotel -very cosy !
http://www.diariodeavisos.com/2012/09/16/actualidad/roberto-konrad-tenerife-tiene-futuro-pero-hay-mimarla-continuamente/
One of the people fined heavily was telling me that JJ. Amazing the relationships on this island at high levels.
Nice to see one of the biggest culprits in abusing the sole agent role in his complexes ,Roberto Konrad, is also the Vice President of Ashotel -very cosy !
http://www.diariodeavisos.com/2012/09/16/actualidad/roberto-konrad-tenerife-tiene-futuro-pero-hay-mimarla-continuamente/
I might be wrong , but I think its his son , Kurt who may be the vice president of ashotel, el Hijo. all very cosy. Heard from another forum that Konrad was a developer on some residential complex;s, sold them with potential to tourist let, then denounced the renters.
It's definitely not kurt Konrad anyway
- he struggles to do anything these days on account of being dead
I might be wrong , but I think its his son , Kurt who may be the vice president of ashotel, el Hijo. all very cosy. Heard from another forum that Konrad was a developer on some residential complex;s, sold them with potential to tourist let, then denounced the renters.
Be careful how you explain things, i think you'll discover kurt Konrad y CIA built complexes as tourist builds and sold some or all of the properties to private owners on the basis that they could let them via the sole agent (who was themselves).... They will only have denounced those who rented without being part of their management structure - and fair
Enough too
junglejim
18-09-2012, 09:45
Kurt Konrad built complexes such as Panorama,Atlantis , Santa Maria, Los Geranios before 1995 law and sold them to people to rent any way they wished -there are still original owners here on our complex.
He leased back some of of these on a minimal rental contract along with a "partner" called Keil so that they held the majority on complex and ran the Hovima side of Hotel.
Now deceased ,his son Roberto carries on the Business in the same manner, bullying and threatening people in Panorama & Atlantis (and others).Almost impossible to get your miniscule rent from him through various excuses and scams.
He is a prime example of all that is wrong with 1995 law , our dealings with him area a nightmare - not paying community fees , causing problems with paying staff - attempts at bullying us - as Vice President ,he epitomises what the Ashhotel clique is all about ,self-interest and real exploitation of people who invested hundreds of millions buying property here only to be scammed by an unfair and biased law invented by Ashotel and their political friends ( how many are in jail now?)
Loaded , he has threatened to denounce anyone whether in his complexor not - I just hope he has a majority in Atlantis!
Loaded , he has threatened to denounce anyone whether in his complexor not - I just hope he has a majority in Atlantis!
why wouldn't he? if he runs a legal complex and the apartment block next door is letting illegally to the detriment of his business and the owners he's trying to get a ROI for, surely that's fair enough?
junglejim
18-09-2012, 11:27
No,no,no Loaded his Roi is pitiful, he only allows you minimal use of your property, you must remove your fittings , he charges you for maintenance caused by his lettings to avoid paying you the pitiful rent , he sends out illegal threatening letters - he is a parasite living off other peoples' hard earned money .
I have friends who have been fckd over by him , he nearly destroyed our community and is still causing problems - he is corrupt and abuses his position - the sooner his empire folds , the better .
might take a while Jim.....
junglejim
18-09-2012, 15:38
Not as long as you think or I hope - don't think his T3 is doing so well , serious money invested!
junglejim
18-09-2012, 19:37
Is t3 his?
Yes he´s heavily invested in it !
from the previously posted article
"Roberto Konrad acude cada mañana a su despacho para dirigir el centro de alto rendimiento deportivo Tenerife Top Training T3. En una pared figuran las fotografías de deportistas sonrientes que han pasado por esas modernas instalaciones."
Angusjim
20-09-2012, 09:33
Just back from Costa Blanca and it appears that "illegal letting" is coming on the mainland as well, read story page 2 " Rent Your Home to Tourists at Your Peril " http://www.thecourier.es/latest-issue/
Just back from Costa Blanca and it appears that "illegal letting" is coming on the mainland as well, read story page 2 " Rent Your Home to Tourists at Your Peril " http://www.thecourier.es/latest-issue/
good news for the canary renters, the more affected the better. Clearly it is protectionism for the hotels, but as in the canaries if the punters dont go to the hotels as required, then the plan fails and the economy suffers. Also on the mainland its the same as here with restuarants and bars , shops and taxis all losing to the crackdown. If there is no gain to hotels, then change may come on the mainland. In addition the low cost carrierers. ryan air etc, should be hurt in the mainland crackdown, so they should object to a damaging protectionist agenda.
Lets hope its big fines all round, a big outcry, and a quicker reform and return to sanity.
good news for the canary renters, the more affected the better. Clearly it is protectionism for the hotels, but as in the canaries if the punters dont go to the hotels as required, then the plan fails and the economy suffers. Also on the mainland its the same as here with restuarants and bars , shops and taxis all losing to the crackdown. If there is no gain to hotels, then change may come on the mainland. In addition the low cost carrierers. ryan air etc, should be hurt in the mainland crackdown, so they should object to a damaging protectionist agenda.
Lets hope its big fines all round, a big outcry, and a quicker reform and return to sanity.
Wishful thinking I think....
For a start, IF (big if) the mainland were to adopt similar rules as here, it would set the precident for Spain as a country and it's regions which have already imposed similar laws would be vindicated even more for their actions and any reform even less likely.
When you think about it though, it is nothing more outrageous than the nationalisation of an industry, in the case of the UK think rail, steel, car making and so on. All big industries which at one time or another provided employment and needed investment - ok no longer, but in the past certainly.
All the Canaries, and perhaps Spain soon, are doing is effectively moving toward nationalising their single biggest industry - tourism.
If the mainland do go this way, I'd say those affected and campaigning in the Canaries and elsewhere will have their arguments swept away from under their feet.
I'm not saying the law is right or wrong, just an opinion of the outcome......
Wishful thinking I think....
For a start, IF (big if) the mainland were to adopt similar rules as here, it would set the precident for Spain as a country and it's regions which have already imposed similar laws would be vindicated even more for their actions and any reform even less likely.
When you think about it though, it is nothing more outrageous than the nationalisation of an industry, in the case of the UK think rail, steel, car making and so on. All big industries which at one time or another provided employment and needed investment - ok no longer, but in the past certainly.
All the Canaries, and perhaps Spain soon, are doing is effectively moving toward nationalising their single biggest industry - tourism.
If the mainland do go this way, I'd say those affected and campaigning in the Canaries and elsewhere will have their arguments swept away from under their feet.
I'm not saying the law is right or wrong, just an opinion of the outcome......
I think you are overthinking the issue. All that is happening is that quite naturally because they are suffering declining occupancy the hotels are demanding a crackdown on private renters. We can all understand their point of view, there exists laws to prevent the private renting, so we can all see why these hotels if they are suffering, would demand action. Then the problem will be as here in the canaries, if the customers do not actually migrate from apartments to hotels, then the economy will suffer greatly with no actual benefit to the hotels.
Its curious that on the mainland they are able to quote figures showing that just this year there is an increase in apartment customers in the face of the decline in hotel occupany.
In the canaries as well as on the mainland its a simple protectionist crackdown in favour of the hotels. Before the crissis everyone got on fine and all the customers hotel and apartment were valuble footfall for the economy. Of course on the mainland we are not hearing about monopoly sole agents , these strange overlords are only a canary factor. On the mainland it appears to be just a straightforward plea by the hotels to try to get more customers.
As in the canaries the issue will be decided by reference to competition law and mainly by economic reality, if protectionism as normal, does not help the economy , then protectionism will have to go. The more people affected the better, for a resolution, and the battle moving to the mainland will greatly help.
anyone else not abel to see that article in the latest edition???????
anyone else not abel to see that article in the latest edition???????
the link is going to latest issue ,which was correct yesday. latest today is a new paper 21st september. To read the article now go to link and select back issues, you need issue 82, article is on second page.
I think you are overthinking the issue. All that is happening is that quite naturally because they are suffering declining occupancy the hotels are demanding a crackdown on private renters. We can all understand their point of view, there exists laws to prevent the private renting, so we can all see why these hotels if they are suffering, would demand action. Then the problem will be as here in the canaries, if the customers do not actually migrate from apartments to hotels, then the economy will suffer greatly with no actual benefit to the hotels.
Its curious that on the mainland they are able to quote figures showing that just this year there is an increase in apartment customers in the face of the decline in hotel occupany.
In the canaries as well as on the mainland its a simple protectionist crackdown in favour of the hotels. Before the crissis everyone got on fine and all the customers hotel and apartment were valuble footfall for the economy. Of course on the mainland we are not hearing about monopoly sole agents , these strange overlords are only a canary factor. On the mainland it appears to be just a straightforward plea by the hotels to try to get more customers.
As in the canaries the issue will be decided by reference to competition law and mainly by economic reality, if protectionism as normal, does not help the economy , then protectionism will have to go. The more people affected the better, for a resolution, and the battle moving to the mainland will greatly help.
Sorry, only just got around to reading your post carefully.
If I understand the issue correctly, there are currently no laws as such on the mainland which prohibit letting of residential property to tourists - other than perhaps local legislation.
The article you posted appears to imply that the mainland are now looking to introduce similar legislation to that which has existed here for some years.
Where I think you are wishfully thinking is that, if the mainland puts such a law as has been in existence here for some years, it would set a precident for the country of Spain, rather then what has effectively been a local law to the Canaries and the Balaerics.
This will be an entirely different ball-game ......
Of course, we only have a little, local newspaper's report to go on and in fairness it doesn't make much clear. Is it referring to the region in which it reports, or Spain as a whole. If it is the region then clearly they feel introducing similar laws to other regions to be the way to go..... If this matter is being considered centrally then as above - different ball-game. Not sure how other areas, or the country as a whole bringing in such law(s), helps your case - I'd think it scuppers any chance whatsoever of the Canaries being seen to be in isolation on this matter .......
Sorry, only just got around to reading your post carefully.
If I understand the issue correctly, there are currently no laws as such on the mainland which prohibit letting of residential property to tourists - other than perhaps local legislation.
The article you posted appears to imply that the mainland are now looking to introduce similar legislation to that which has existed here for some years.
Where I think you are wishfully thinking is that, if the mainland puts such a law as has been in existence here for some years, it would set a precident for the country of Spain, rather then what has effectively been a local law to the Canaries and the Balaerics.
This will be an entirely different ball-game ......
Of course, we only have a little, local newspaper's report to go on and in fairness it doesn't make much clear. Is it referring to the region in which it reports, or Spain as a whole. If it is the region then clearly they feel introducing similar laws to other regions to be the way to go..... If this matter is being considered centrally then as above - different ball-game. Not sure how other areas, or the country as a whole bringing in such law(s), helps your case - I'd think it scuppers any chance whatsoever of the Canaries being seen to be in isolation on this matter .......
the issue will come down to if the law on the mainland goes that way. The same demand in portugal resulted in free private renting subject to a permit. In the canaries the laws came in many years ago due to the small town protectionist mentality, even today we are seeing the closeness of the hotels to government. The laws were never enforced as they would have held back economic growth, its only the crisis that has got the hotels demanding action now in the canaries. Over on the mainland I feel it is unlikely that the pp government will fall in line with the protectionist agenda of the hotels over there. The insanity of government trying to plan the economy in artifical favour of the hotels industry should be seen as just that. The mainland construction industry needs helping on the mainland , attacking tourist renters , just like in the canaries , would be an incredibley damaging act to the economy and the welfare of the spanish people overall. The government on the mainland will have the latest canary footfall figures to work with in considering such protectionist laws, here we have a a major crackdown on independant renting, internet ads removed and footfall down , yet hotel occupancy is also down.
Protectionism does not work, and the last thing mainland spain needs is less footfall in its tourist industry.
the issue will come down to if the law on the mainland goes that way. The same demand in portugal resulted in free private renting subject to a permit. In the canaries the laws came in many years ago due to the small town protectionist mentality, even today we are seeing the closeness of the hotels to government. The laws were never enforced as they would have held back economic growth, its only the crisis that has got the hotels demanding action now in the canaries. Over on the mainland I feel it is unlikely that the pp government will fall in line with the protectionist agenda of the hotels over there. The insanity of government trying to plan the economy in artifical favour of the hotels industry should be seen as just that. The mainland construction industry needs helping on the mainland , attacking tourist renters , just like in the canaries , would be an incredibley damaging act to the economy and the welfare of the spanish people overall. The government on the mainland will have the latest canary footfall figures to work with in considering such protectionist laws, here we have a a major crackdown on independant renting, internet ads removed and footfall down , yet hotel occupancy is also down.
Protectionism does not work, and the last thing mainland spain needs is less footfall in its tourist industry.
But you are forgetting that the new draft amendments to the law here appears to allow the Tourist Office to demand improvements are done to older complexes and surrounding areas. This ought to create employment and work for the construction and associated industies - what is happening then, in essence, is the introduction of control and subsequent requirements for improvements to be enforced as part of the same rules.
Protectionism perhaps, but protection of the primary asset of this country (and similarly on the mainland) that of tourism, which you cannot deny is not as daft as it sounds (unless you are out of pocket having broken the law).
The principle argument here though is, you say, the introduction of similar laws in other parts of Spain will see the entire concept of letting laws such as those on the Canaries being abandoned in favour of private enterprise (and pocket lining) - from what I understand of the new draft, it looks like everything is heading in the opposite direction.
Can't see things going your way !!
MallorcaResiden
24-09-2012, 15:39
This also effects Mallorca. The sooner they get it right and stop the "Mafia" hotel corporations and the government bribes, the better.
good news for the canary renters, the more affected the better. Clearly it is protectionism for the hotels, but as in the canaries if the punters dont go to the hotels as required, then the plan fails and the economy suffers. Also on the mainland its the same as here with restuarants and bars , shops and taxis all losing to the crackdown. If there is no gain to hotels, then change may come on the mainland. In addition the low cost carrierers. ryan air etc, should be hurt in the mainland crackdown, so they should object to a damaging protectionist agenda.
Lets hope its big fines all round, a big outcry, and a quicker reform and return to sanity.
But you are forgetting that the new draft amendments to the law here appears to allow the Tourist Office to demand improvements are done to older complexes and surrounding areas. This ought to create employment and work for the construction and associated industies - what is happening then, in essence, is the introduction of control and subsequent requirements for improvements to be enforced as part of the same rules.
Protectionism perhaps, but protection of the primary asset of this country (and similarly on the mainland) that of tourism, which you cannot deny is not as daft as it sounds (unless you are out of pocket having broken the law).
The principle argument here though is, you say, the introduction of similar laws in other parts of Spain will see the entire concept of letting laws such as those on the Canaries being abandoned in favour of private enterprise (and pocket lining) - from what I understand of the new draft, it looks like everything is heading in the opposite direction.
Can't see things going your way !!
we will have to see muppet. What the canary government are actually proposing most people would not believe, ie , the mandatory upgrading of existing touristic sites and the de residentialising of other complex's. Coming on the back of the crackdown on renting, which we have seen has reduced private rent footfall but not increased hotel occupancy, its all more or less beyond rational comment.
The test of all this madness is if any of it actually results in a benefit to the canary economy. If at any time in the future the governments plan brings a rise in employment, tourist footfall and spending, then everyone like me who thinksthey are deranged selfish nut cases, well we will have to eat our hats and accept that they were right all along. Our personal dreams and investments will have to be sidelined, if the canary government were right and they knew how to bring greater prosperity to the canaries.
For us all its eyes down looking, we have to watch the tourist footfall and keep an eye on business's in resort and canary unemployment. My opinion is that they are dragging the economy down quite needlessly. They are trying to fly in the face of a modern trend by attacking the internet advertisers that many modern day customers want to use. They are acting in a dictatorial manner, as I have said you would expect all this from a Robert Mugabwe. The problem they have is that Mugabwe gets away with it by violence, we now have free speech, what we write on here goes all around the world. This whole thing is just too absurd to be carried through, the suffering canary people will not stand for it in the long run.
The majority of residents on residential sites, do not wish them to be re-classified,we do not want to have to put up the noise illegal renters. The only people who gain from this are the owners who still carry on with the illegal letting and in many cases contribute nothing in tax to the economy.
Altamira
24-09-2012, 17:54
we will have to see muppet. What the canary government are actually proposing most people would not believe, ie , the mandatory upgrading of existing touristic sites and the de residentialising of other complex's. Coming on the back of the crackdown on renting, which we have seen has reduced private rent footfall but not increased hotel occupancy, its all more or less beyond rational comment.
The test of all this madness is if any of it actually results in a benefit to the canary economy. If at any time in the future the governments plan brings a rise in employment, tourist footfall and spending, then everyone like me who thinksthey are deranged selfish nut cases, well we will have to eat our hats and accept that they were right all along. Our personal dreams and investments will have to be sidelined, if the canary government were right and they knew how to bring greater prosperity to the canaries.
For us all its eyes down looking, we have to watch the tourist footfall and keep an eye on business's in resort and canary unemployment. My opinion is that they are dragging the economy down quite needlessly. They are trying to fly in the face of a modern trend by attacking the internet advertisers that many modern day customers want to use. They are acting in a dictatorial manner, as I have said you would expect all this from a Robert Mugabwe. The problem they have is that Mugabwe gets away with it by violence, we now have free speech, what we write on here goes all around the world. This whole thing is just too absurd to be carried through, the suffering canary people will not stand for it in the long run.
Ref. The Canary Government draft consultation for a new tourist law. I am beginning to think that illegal rentals may pale into insignificance, when one considers what they may mean in relation to the "to avoid and if appropriate, redirect the residentialisation of touristic areas". Do they intend to force apartment owners in tourist areas to rent them out?and therefore the owner would be unable to use their own apartment for residential use?
junglejim
24-09-2012, 18:10
The majority of residents on residential sites, do not wish them to be re-classified,we do not want to have to put up the noise illegal renters. The only people who gain from this are the owners who still carry on with the illegal letting and in many cases contribute nothing in tax to the economy.
And you have absolute proof of this or are you just talking pash ?
Bring forward some evidence instead of sweeping statements!: -
purchasing a property , you pay tax
You pay community fees which are taxed
You employ community workers
You pay council tax
Your guests pay airport tax
pay tax on their spending whilst here
The people employed in the above activities pay tax on their earnings
If you are suggesting they do not pay tax on their income , bring forward some evidence
to support your allegations -how many local politicians on this Island have been charged with corruption ?
we will have to see muppet. What the canary government are actually proposing most people would not believe, ie , the mandatory upgrading of existing touristic sites and the de residentialising of other complex's. Coming on the back of the crackdown on renting, which we have seen has reduced private rent footfall but not increased hotel occupancy, its all more or less beyond rational comment.
The test of all this madness is if any of it actually results in a benefit to the canary economy. If at any time in the future the governments plan brings a rise in employment, tourist footfall and spending, then everyone like me who thinksthey are deranged selfish nut cases, well we will have to eat our hats and accept that they were right all along. Our personal dreams and investments will have to be sidelined, if the canary government were right and they knew how to bring greater prosperity to the canaries.
For us all its eyes down looking, we have to watch the tourist footfall and keep an eye on business's in resort and canary unemployment. My opinion is that they are dragging the economy down quite needlessly. They are trying to fly in the face of a modern trend by attacking the internet advertisers that many modern day customers want to use. They are acting in a dictatorial manner, as I have said you would expect all this from a Robert Mugabwe. The problem they have is that Mugabwe gets away with it by violence, we now have free speech, what we write on here goes all around the world. This whole thing is just too absurd to be carried through, the suffering canary people will not stand for it in the long run.
Official tourist numbers - hotels, legal apartments and so on (and obviously not including any illegal numbers whatsoever) hit an all time high last month and were record breaking - still not actually going as you wish!
Against such a back-drop of rising official numbers do you really think the Canarian (not Canary) Government are going to change their laws just to suit you and your mates?
source:- http://newsinthesun.com/bumper-summer-for-spanish-tourism/
in any event, Mugabwe is a bit busy tonight
source:- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19704766
[QUOTE=martinc;216988]We live on a large residential community on the Golf, twenty plus owners continue to holiday let illegally. Our neighbours next door let illegally.
Last night we had to put up with the guests next door having a drunken argument for over a hour with doors being banged and hammered sounded like one of them had locked themselves in the bedroom.
We have complained in the past to the owner, who took the attitude, “they are on holiday what do you expect”
For many years I lived on a residential complex in an apartment that I had bought on a mortgage. My next door neighbours regularly had drunken arguments in the wee small hours of the morning to which the police were regularly called. They too were the owners of their property. Given the economic climate it took us years to sell
and move away from these awful neighbours. Take some comfort in the fact that your poorly behaved holiday makers will be going home soon and may be replaced with a lovely quiet couple
junglejim
24-09-2012, 20:25
Foz most of our issues are with long term rentals!
Foz most of our issues are with long term rentals!
Exactly x inconsiderate neighbours exist, unfortunately. The bonus with inconsiderate holiday maker neighbours is that they go home soon!!!
And you have absolute proof of this or are you just talking pash ?
Bring forward some evidence instead of sweeping statements!: -
purchasing a property , you pay tax
You pay community fees which are taxed
You employ community workers
You pay council tax
Your guests pay airport tax
pay tax on their spending whilst here
The people employed in the above activities pay tax on their earnings
If you are suggesting they do not pay tax on their income , bring forward some evidence
to support your allegations -how many local politicians on this Island have been charged with corruption ?
I think it's common knowledge and fair enough to say that a lot of these owners don't pay tax - impossible to prove as none of us have access to everyone's tax declarations......
Ecky Thump
24-09-2012, 21:20
I shall promise to be very quiet for the next three weeks in the lovely apartment that my friends let me have the use of and spend my money in the local shops, bars, airport,restaurants, taxis, theme parks, buses and even give the odd beggar a few cents......I hope I will have helped the residents and workers of Tenerife to prosper.:)
junglejim
24-09-2012, 22:29
Loaded,all the people I know renting in my complex pay their local taxes and on their rentals via their gestor ,just by definition of 1995 law they are illegal but Hacienda is happy to take their money .
100 odd apartments at around 250 euros a week - that's a lot of tax being taken even at70% occupancy !
Even the secondary effect of what they contribute means they do add to economy unlike what poster alleged !
Hi Jim,
Of course some do pay taxes but others do not - you might by chance only know ones who do.....
Hacienda takes tax from "rental of the property".... They do not ask anyone to specify what type of rental has been in the apartment.
I don't think anyone is saying that illegal rentals do not contribute to the economy - its clear they do.... But they are also contributing to a massive black economy .
For every owner who does declare their illegal rentals there will be Many more who don't.
And even if these owners do pay their income tax they won't be adding 7% IGIC into the rental prices, will they?
The tax aspect is only a small part of the whole argument however.
I don't think anyone is saying that illegal rentals do not contribute to the economy - its clear they do.... But they are also contributing to a massive black economy .
For every owner who does declare their illegal rentals there will be Many more who don't.
And even if these owners do pay their income tax they won't be adding 7% IGIC into the rental prices, will they?
The tax aspect is only a small part of the whole argument however.
the tax aspect as you say is just a part of the whole argument. Most of the illegal renters do not pay the IGIC tax . They pay many other taxes and as you accept their customers bring valuble footfall and spending to the islands economy.
The rational thing to do would be to legalise the renters as they have chosen to do in Portugal, and have them pay an annual permit. In portugal this is currently 400 euro per year, in the canaries the rate could be double that and maybe a bit more, as here we have a 52 week renting season.
Many of the renters only exist in black economy because the letting laws put them outside the law. Leaving the issue of residential complex renting aside for just a moment, there are many owners like me in dormant touristic sites whose only crime is to not have the fuedal overlord sole agent in charge of our renting. Our beds have been used for tourists as intended, yet we are in the firing like of the government equally.
What you also need to do is to get your head around how the tax system works.
Revenues collected by the Hacienda and Social Security do not stay in the islands. The are collected centrally by Madrid and pooled. From these Madrid make annual payments back to all the regions depending on their needs from which things like unemployment benefit are paid. This year for example the amount given back to the Canaries was actually cut by around 16% and this is where IGIC comes in - this IS a local tax, based on the value of transactions.
If "illegal" renters are not declaring their earnings and therefore not paying the 7% IGIC on the value of their lettings, the Canarian economy gets very little out of the illegal tourist industry, other than the IGIC they would collect from restaurants and other services that a tourist might use whilst they are here and would have also used had they been here legally ..... these numbers are still going up!
This is one of the (many) reasons the Governent here are trying to restrict the black market letting - in an effort to ensure the tax which goes directly to the Canarian economy - IGIC is collected.
I
tenerifelegal
25-09-2012, 10:00
I think it's common knowledge and fair enough to say that a lot of these owners don't pay tax - impossible to prove as none of us have access to everyone's tax declarations......
So what proof have we that "legal" apartments pay tax? Do the sole agents deduct tax and igic and pay on their behalf?
Angusjim
25-09-2012, 11:08
So what proof have we that "legal" apartments pay tax? Do the sole agents deduct tax and igic and pay on their behalf?
How very dare you question the integrity of sole agents they are ALL beyond reproach they have never done anything wrong, not one of them has ever paid cash for any work done and they ALL declare all their rentals & earning in full.:bowdown:
junglejim
25-09-2012, 13:12
The whole island ,and possibly country, runs with a black economy- commercial and private renters who only take cash .
Commissions paid for contracts in cash, Inspectors given a cash sum for turning a blind eye, policemen jailed for taking bribes etc.
That's why Spain is in same mess as Greece and will not change!
I'm looking forward to these proposals crystallising out to see what deal Ashotel has done to stitch up the letting brigade !
The whole island ,and possibly country, runs with a black economy- commercial and private renters who only take cash .
Commissions paid for contracts in cash, Inspectors given a cash sum for turning a blind eye, policemen jailed for taking bribes etc.
That's why Spain is in same mess as Greece and will not change!
I'm looking forward to these proposals crystallising out to see what deal Ashotel has done to stitch up the letting brigade !
aggreed all that does happen. Government tax raising is just one part of the equation, the islands economy needs the spending power of the tourists in illegal apartments regardless of the government getting the tax.
My opinion is still the same, the rational way forward is to legalise the private renters by a system like they have introduced in portugal , subject to an annual permit fee. This would be better than ignc, all would have to pay annually and regardless of occupancy. Direct taxes work better in countries where there is a culture of tax evasion. Just like IGNC this tax imposed by the canarian government would remain in the canaries.
The canarian economy does need all these private renters, it needs them fully renting with internet ads online summer and winter. The matter has to be resolved in a rational manner, but the renters themselves need to accpt a few extra overheads in the future, my suggested permit fee being one, proper insurances would be another.
How very dare you question the integrity of sole agents they are ALL beyond reproach they have never done anything wrong, not one of them has ever paid cash for any work done and they ALL declare all their rentals & earning in full.:bowdown:
Now now let's not get silly - I don't think there's a business in the world that would claim they haven't paid something in cash at some stage ....
But yes we pay IGIC and it's included in the price to customers, most hotels and apartments dot even get the chance to fiddle it if they wanted to , the travel agents include it in the booking fee so by the time you receive an invoice or send one it's already accounted for in black and white so there's no running away from it unfortunately.
tenerifelegal
25-09-2012, 19:16
Now now let's not get silly - I don't think there's a business in the world that would claim they haven't paid something in cash at some stage ....
But yes we pay IGIC and it's included in the price to customers, most hotels and apartments dot even get the chance to fiddle it if they wanted to , the travel agents include it in the booking fee so by the time you receive an invoice or send one it's already accounted for in black and white so there's no running away from it unfortunately.
Do you also deduct the tax before paying owners or are they left to declare this themselves?
Do you also deduct the tax before paying owners or are they left to declare this themselves?
21.00% for residents and 24.75% for non. At the end of the year owners should do a annual tax return and get a rebate.
Hi Jim,
Of course some do pay taxes but others do not - you might by chance only know ones who do.....
Hacienda takes tax from "rental of the property".... They do not ask anyone to specify what type of rental has been in the apartment.
In my experience the Hacienda are fully aware of the type of rental being taxed. In an apartment owners annual tax return the question is specifically asked. If the tax is for holiday rentals the specific number of days the apartment has been rented out for needs to be submitted as you can only claim your expenses for those days ..... for example mortgage interest, services etc can be put against income but if you rented your apartment out for 200 days, your annual bills would be divided by 365 then multiplied by 200 and this is the amount you could claim. Also, you get a tax concession for long lets that is not available on holiday lets.
I have been paying tax on holiday rentals for years without knowing that I should have been going through the sole agent. Neither the tax offfice, nor my Gestor, nor the community president/administrator, nor the sole agent (who I know quite well) ever mentioned that what I was doing was against the law or even incorrect!!!!!!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I don't think anyone is saying that illegal rentals do not contribute to the economy - its clear they do.... But they are also contributing to a massive black economy .
For every owner who does declare their illegal rentals there will be Many more who don't.
And even if these owners do pay their income tax they won't be adding 7% IGIC into the rental prices, will they?
The tax aspect is only a small part of the whole argument however.
IGIC has to be charged when earnings reach a certain level .... if you are declaring income tax you have no choice as to whether you charge IGIC or not ...
Angusjim
26-09-2012, 10:04
Now now let's not get silly - I don't think there's a business in the world that would claim they haven't paid something in cash at some stage ....
But yes we pay IGIC and it's included in the price to customers, most hotels and apartments dot even get the chance to fiddle it if they wanted to , the travel agents include it in the booking fee so by the time you receive an invoice or send one it's already accounted for in black and white so there's no running away from it unfortunately.
No ones getting silly just it seems to be the thought that everyone who is renting " illegally" must be cheating the tax system and everyone who is "legal" are paying every cent they are due. You mention travel agents take fee etc etc but there must be a bit of slack when you are a sole agents that also has apartments to rent these could be occasionally used for " family and friends":wink::whistle:
been off a few days cos my iphone app wouldn't let me go to the thread the forum insisting on directing me to before viewing or seeing a post, thought I'd give you a classic:
On Tuesday night at 9pm I receive a phone call from night staff; "theres a woman - must be 70 odd - screaming around the pool area, p*ssed out of her mind shouting and swearing at the top of her voice that she doesn't know which apartment she's in..... she says her name is "flynn" and arrived last night but I can't find her on last nights arrival sheet."
Me "ok I'lll check from this end...........(I look on my computer).... found it, FLYNN, but arrived on 25/9..... she's saying she arrived last night?"
Night staff; "yes can't be that one if she arrived last night, she keeps swearing at me - she claims to be in 132, 162 and 136, I've been to all those apartments and the people in them say she's not with them."
Me "ok try number 82 thats where Flynn who arrived 25/9 is staying"
Night staff: "the police have just turned up! Ok I'll check 82 with the police"
I keep calling back for updates........
After an hour it turns out she's staying in 161 - an apartment that "doesn't let", she had disturbed the ENTIRE COMPLEX, all the night staff, me and my family and even 2 members of the police force.
Eventually they get into her apartment and wake up her friend who is the same age and just as p*ssed.
The point to this story is that when people do their own letting that isn't part of a management set up (sole agent), when things like this happen (and they do) it is impossible for the Reception staff to know which apartment they are staying in - this could have gone on all night and ended up with the police taking a 70+ year old woman to the cells to sober up (but more likely just leaving her to swear at everyone).
It also means that our staff end up dealing with ( / suffering?) the person who is causing hell, yet do not receive any financial contribution from the owner who "doesn't let"......
Painful
junglejim
04-10-2012, 12:02
A genuine question Loaded, does the Apartment 161 ( I´m sure the Inspector will be happy you´ve identified it !) not contribute anything through their community charge towards the reception or pool attendant ?
Does the president not take any interest in disturbances on the complex ?
The reason I´m asking is that on our complex, everyone contributes letting or not
We´ve had similiar problems bot with tourist , owner and long lets but President has always come and had an input .
A genuine question Loaded, does the Apartment 161 ( I´m sure the Inspector will be happy you´ve identified it !) not contribute anything through their community charge towards the reception or pool attendant ?
Does the president not take any interest in disturbances on the complex ?
The reason I´m asking is that on our complex, everyone contributes letting or not
We´ve had similiar problems bot with tourist , owner and long lets but President has always come and had an input .
They do contribute to the community and receive the benefits of what they pay for just like all of the other owners (which actually does include the lifeguard), this does not cover any of the Reception costs which are paid for by the bookings that are generated by our business (the lettings and owners who let) which seems to be the fairest way.
The president does take interest in the disturbances and was present along with the security guard (paid for by the community) but no one had any way of knowing which apartment this woman was in, so no one was in a possition where they could accurately guess which apartment she was staying in, it was only when she muttered the owners name that we figured out which apartment she was staying in.
Meanwhile the whole complex, residents and holidaymakers alike, were disturbed and were all probably wondering why no one could help her find where she was staying.
All this while she's drunk as hell and verbally abusing all present.
Remember that a president does not receive any money for their role (unless they're crooked!), so to imply that the owner has paid their community fees so that should cover services that everyone else pays extra for is simply unfair, why should other owners who help to pay for the reception by allowing the letting agent to use their apartment subsidise someone who is blatently lying about their own activity?
junglejim
04-10-2012, 14:00
I understand your points - the President is the only legal entity on the complex so he has to protect the community´s interests , say if the person fell into pool and died !
At our complex everyone at present - letting or not pays for everything -reception that is only used for letting and the associated staff and all the other "Touristic Costs" - even the electricity used to charge for the disabled scooters that the President rents out -without permission !
I understand your points - the President is the only legal entity on the complex so he has to protect the community´s interests , say if the person fell into pool and died !
At our complex everyone at present - letting or not pays for everything -reception that is only used for letting and the associated staff and all the other "Touristic Costs" - even the electricity used to charge for the disabled scooters that the President rents out -without permission !
Thats where i guess this is different, if all the owners had to foot the bill for the reception etc then you could understand the argument of "why should the guy pretending not to let just let anyway since he's paying anyway" - but the way we do it we don't force residents to pay for Reception costs that are genuinely the "letting brigades" bill.
So clearly this guy is taking advantage of the situation and using the "letting brigades" service at the expense of the owners who are honest and on board with everything.
junglejim
04-10-2012, 14:49
Yes we still have to go over that argument if/when he resurrects the licence ! Should be interesting!
its a great story loaded, but really, you are not actually trying to justify sole agency overloadship based on this one poor drunken lady and her drunken friend are you? Think if you are you are scraping the bottom of the, we actaully do need sole agents argument.
The reality is millions of travellors manage to go to self catering accomodation all around the world all on their own with no mishaps. Its a humourous story but shows more how we dont need sole agents , the extreme incident you describe is a very rare and as such you are not actually demonstating a valid need for sole agents, but rather the opposite.
its a great story loaded, but really, you are not actually trying to justify sole agency overloadship based on this one poor drunken lady and her drunken friend are you? Think if you are you are scraping the bottom of the, we actaully do need sole agents argument.
The reality is millions of travellors manage to go to self catering accomodation all around the world all on their own with no mishaps. Its a humourous story but shows more how we dont need sole agents , the extreme incident you describe is a very rare and as such you are not actually demonstating a valid need for sole agents, but rather the opposite.
I don't think it's demonstrating the opposite at all, while this was one incident that backs up the argument there are many other people who do similar things to this lady (not quite as extreme) and need to know they're apartment number or need keys etc.... the rest of the people who do similar have the back up and support of a system that can quickly find out where they are staying and who they are - this incident was much harder to figure out than it needed to be - luckily there are only about 10-15 owners on the complex who still do this - if every apartment "did their own" thing imagine how many clients would not have a clue who to go to for help - and if they did find someone who could help them, then the person they find won't be able to help them becasue of a lack of information.
Yes, the vast majority of holiday makers manage to get by on holiday without incident, but there should always be a plan for the ones who for some reason, can't quite get through their stay without mishap.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
why should all the paying customers and residents have to put up with an idiot screaming just because an owner decided he'd rather give his clients a lesser service?
come on loaded , stop digging. The lady was screaming and drunk because she has mental health issues , to put it diplomatically. If she was our customer we would have sent her with keys, address and apartment number, plus our local management contact details. All sane adults manage with that and find their apartment ok.
Its the same in hotels when reception give you your key on first night and point to the stairway you need.
The screaming lady was a rare on off, the renter would have given her proper details, but as we know from your post, this lady would be a bit difficult in any circumstances.
I think you're missing something here, she had already arrived the day before and was just too drunk to remember her apartment number
Nelson climb back on top of your column and give us all a rest from your arguments, just operate within the law.
Yes, the vast majority of holiday makers manage to get by on holiday without incident, but there should always be a plan for the ones who for some reason, can't quite get through their stay without mishap.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
why should all the paying customers and residents have to put up with an idiot screaming just because an owner decided he'd rather give his clients a lesser service?
A couple of points if I may.
1. Not sure you have to have a plan for Every holidaymaker who might have a mishap - accidents / incidents happen and you can't legislate for them all.
2. Maybe I have missed this point but do you actually know this was a ''Client '' as opposed to an Auntie or a Mother-In-Law who are using a family apartment? Families can get drunk you know, not just illegal lets!
A couple of points if I may.
1. Not sure you have to have a plan for Every holidaymaker who might have a mishap - accidents / incidents happen and you can't legislate for them all.
2. Maybe I have missed this point but do you actually know this was a ''Client '' as opposed to an Auntie or a Mother-In-Law who are using a family apartment? Families can get drunk you know, not just illegal lets!
Yes it was a paying customer not a relative.
I think you're missing something here, she had already arrived the day before and was just too drunk to remember her apartment number
point taken, in my view that makes even less of an argument for sole agent existance. She was too drunk to know her apartment number, seems her age and possibly age related confusion was a part in this. Her reaction to scream hysterically also seems to point to underlying medical reasons for her extreme actions. A normal lost person in such circumstances would soon be assisted by other people on most complex's without agents. It would be unusual for such a lost person to scream hysterically in any case even if they were lost and unable to find their room.
You have to remember when you are trying to justify sole agency with all the canary hotel add ons, that this is not the norm everywhere else arond the world. There are many self catering rented holiday stays that dont involve sole agents control or hotel receptions. There are static caravan parks, holiday flats, country cottages, etc. The communal ones normally offer a little help from other residents. On the uk East coast people can be forgiven for struggling to locate their actual caravan park , let alone finding the correct actual caravan. Are we in golden sands 1 or golden sands 4 ? They all look the same acres and acres of them.
This is probabley the wrong thread for arguments about sole agency. Having touristic complex's is one thing as opposed to residential ones, but really its another argument altogether as to needing a sole agent overlord in charge of them all. From what I have seen, in the canaries and around the world, holiday letting of properties works just fine without them.
Nelson I really think you've missed something here matey.
The point being made was not to justify the sole agent.
It was to explain that when people decide they can do it without contributing to the cost of a sole agent, they can, and do sometimes end up with a situation where the agent has to put themselves out, free of charge merely because the owner isn't interested in the welfare of their client. That is not good business practice is it?
Especially as the owner is operating illegally and in direct opposition to the agent.
Why should they have to put up with it?
I realise that you and many like you, do care about your clients but that's not the case everywhere.
Plus if the owner was doing things properly we would have had her name in our system and we could have easily seen which apartment she was in and she would have been helped to her apartment straight away.
Nelson I really think you've missed something here matey.
The point being made was not to justify the sole agent.
It was to explain that when people decide they can do it without contributing to the cost of a sole agent, they can, and do sometimes end up with a situation where the agent has to put themselves out, free of charge merely because the owner isn't interested in the welfare of their client. That is not good business practice is it?
Especially as the owner is operating illegally and in direct opposition to the agent.
Why should they have to put up with it?
I realise that you and many like you, do care about your clients but that's not the case everywhere.
well I still think loaded was telling us the story as a this is why we all need sole agent overlords example. but I accept that things, are a bit different on loadeds complex. from what I read he is an example of a decent sole agent overlord, offering reasonable returns to his renters and not demanding set weeks from them. They seem free to use what weeks they want and to send their own guests. Having these private renters on there, though, shows some still want to go their own way for reasons we are not party to. Its understandable that loaded resents this, but in this extreme example those at hand had to sort it , it was not really a cause for loaded putting his agents hat on to do this.
well I still think loaded was telling us the story as a this is why we all need sole agent overlords example. but I accept that things, are a bit different on loadeds complex. from what I read he is an example of a decent sole agent overlord, offering reasonable returns to his renters and not demanding set weeks from them. They seem free to use what weeks they want and to send their own guests. Having these private renters on there, though, shows some still want to go their own way for reasons we are not party to. Its understandable that loaded resents this, but in this extreme example those at hand had to sort it , it was not really a cause for loaded putting his agents hat on to do this.
His agent's hat was on because he'd received a call from site at 9pm for something that really wasn't his concern. I can see the unfairness of that can't you?
"she would have been helped to her apartment straight away."
Oh Yeah! I have stayed in "sole agency" apartments and in my experience it is difficult enough to get the agent to help people who have booked through them let alone those who haven't. You must be the exception.
Additionally every time I have rented an apartment the owner has given me contacts who I could go to for assistance and in all the years I have done so I have never ever had a situation where I was unable to get assistance.
windowcleaningm
05-10-2012, 10:57
hi Maurenn looked all over this site and can,t find town hall pest services could you give me the name and phone number for the town hall pest control ,,,sorry to bother you thanks wcm
MallorcaResiden
05-10-2012, 11:12
I think this lady might have been a problem wherever she stayed, considering the comment "Eventually they get into her apartment and wake up her friend who is the same age and just as p*ssed."
I wonder why?
I would also guess, that anyone who is making money out of these "laws and regulations" would be supporting them!
"she would have been helped to her apartment straight away."
Oh Yeah! I have stayed in "sole agency" apartments and in my experience it is difficult enough to get the agent to help people who have booked through them let alone those who haven't. You must be the exception.
Additionally every time I have rented an apartment the owner has given me contacts who I could go to for assistance and in all the years I have done so I have never ever had a situation where I was unable to get assistance.
Again, she was too drunk to know who she'd rented it from or which apartment she was in, I she'd had any contacts to call she was also too drunk to remember them too.
Again, she was too drunk to know who she'd rented it from or which apartment she was in, I she'd had any contacts to call she was also too drunk to remember them too.
yes she was in a right state, but that brings me back to what I said at first, this is such an extreme example ,surely this does not rationally mean you have proven that all self catering accomodation all around the world msut have on site 24 hour reception ?
Its right what TOJO is saying, its difficult on your complex as you have sole agent customers and independant customers, so you have had to get involved with someone elses difficult customer. But at the end of the day, this sad drunken old lady and her friend are the rare exception not the rule, in my view the story shows how the world does not need 24 hour reception with holiday rented accomodation . The more detail you give us about the old ladys condition, totally out of it, the more I reason she was a very rare case and a danger to herself in all circumstances without close supervision. I hope she does not burn the apartment down.
Is she a smoker?
seanocelt
05-10-2012, 13:18
"she would have been helped to her apartment straight away."
Oh Yeah! I have stayed in "sole agency" apartments and in my experience it is difficult enough to get the agent to help people who have booked through them let alone those who haven't. You must be the exception.
Additionally every time I have rented an apartment the owner has given me contacts who I could go to for assistance and in all the years I have done so I have never ever had a situation where I was unable to get assistance.
I have. At 3am. Owners "contacts" didnt want to know. An agents people maybe be annoyed/offhand, but at least available.
yes she was in a right state, but that brings me back to what I said at first, this is such an extreme example ,surely this does not rationally mean you have proven that all self catering accomodation all around the world msut have on site 24 hour reception ?
Its right what TOJO is saying, its difficult on your complex as you have sole agent customers and independant customers, so you have had to get involved with someone elses difficult customer. But at the end of the day, this sad drunken old lady and her friend are the rare exception not the rule, in my view the story shows how the world does not need 24 hour reception with holiday rented accomodation . The more detail you give us about the old ladys condition, totally out of it, the more I reason she was a very rare case and a danger to herself in all circumstances without close supervision. I hope she does not burn the apartment down.
Is she a smoker?
How do you always seem to totally miss the point, Nelson.
Are you seriously suggesting that it would have been better for this lady to be locked up for the night, because that's what would have happened if there hadn't been a 24 hour reception.
Yet again, you're trying to bend what is being said to enable you to use it to back up your totally unrealistic view of what should be happenin regarding the enforcement of the Letting laws.
How do you always seem to totally miss the point, Nelson.
Are you seriously suggesting that it would have been better for this lady to be locked up for the night, because that's what would have happened if there hadn't been a 24 hour reception.
Yet again, you're trying to bend what is being said to enable you to use it to back up your totally unrealistic view of what should be happenin regarding the enforcement of the Letting laws.
she deserved being locked up if only for having us debate her antics for the past 24 hours.
she deserved being locked up if only for having us debate her antics for the past 24 hours.
Why am I not surprised by your answer??
You do realise that if you get your way and they do remove the sole agent requirements, incidents like this, rather than being isolated incidents, will actually become commonplace.
How do you think your fellow owners on your complex would react if this starts to happen on a regular basis in your apartment ??
I doubt if they will be very happy with you.
Why am I not surprised by your answer??
You do realise that if you get your way and they do remove the sole agent requirements, incidents like this, rather than being isolated incidents, will actually become commonplace.
How do you think your fellow owners on your complex would react if this starts to happen on a regular basis in your apartment ??
I doubt if they will be very happy with you.
ha ha , I admit that you have all taken me in with this one, I was taking it all seriously when you were arguing as if this rare isolated incident did justify sole agency.
Your post Bobmac shows me that you are all just winding me up with this one, and silly me took the bait.
our complex has no sole agent so clearly that is not an option. clearly something as rare as this could never actually happen on a regular basis by its very definition.
Well done you did have me fooled.
ha ha , I admit that you have all taken me in with this one, I was taking it all seriously when you were arguing as if this rare isolated incident did justify sole agency.
Your post Bobmac shows me that you are all just winding me up with this one, and silly me took the bait.
our complex has no sole agent so clearly that is not an option. clearly something as rare as this could never actually happen on a regular basis by its very definition.
Well done you did have me fooled.
Who's winding you up ?? I'm certainly not and it isn't the first of April.
Sorry though, I had forgotten that your complex had no agent so none of you are letting illegally anyway.
Are you seriously asking us to believe that you would be quite happy to see someone who has rented your apartment carted off to the nick for the night because they can't remember which apartment they have rented and nobody else knows who they are ??
Who's winding you up ?? I'm certainly not and it isn't the first of April.
Sorry though, I had forgotten that your complex had no agent so none of you are letting illegally anyway.
Are you seriously asking us to believe that you would be quite happy to see someone who has rented your apartment carted off to the nick for the night because they can't remember which apartment they have rented and nobody else knows who they are ??
well I was joking in actual fact, but to be honest if I was unlucky enough to have the said ladies staying with me , well given all the circumstances it may be the safest thing for everyone if they were safely locked up.
has loaded confirmed if they are smokers yet? I am beginning to suspect helpful loaded had a hidden agenda when he so chivarously found the ladies digs and got her safely in the illegal let apartment . The owner will have to thank loaded , and probabley redecorate for the next guests.
well I was joking in actual fact, but to be honest if I was unlucky enough to have the said ladies staying with me , well given all the circumstances it may be the safest thing for everyone if they were safely locked up.
has loaded confirmed if they are smokers yet? I am beginning to suspect helpful loaded had a hidden agenda when he so chivarously found the ladies digs and got her safely in the illegal let apartment . The owner will have to thank loaded , and probabley redecorate for the next guests.
On a more serious note, what's happening about your fine these days ??
junglejim
05-10-2012, 17:32
Are you seriously asking us to believe that you would be quite happy to see someone who has rented your apartment carted off to the nick for the night because they can't remember which apartment they have rented and nobody else knows who they are ??
Bob incidents like this are more likely to happen , IMO, with complexes with sole agents who are only interested in occupancy rates and know little of the people they are letting to.
In my experience on our complex, private rentals tend to be repeated over the years from known clients - the majority of our issues from holidaymakers come from 1 individual who advertises on internet and takes in all sorts - other issues have been from long term lets who are soon expelled .
Whether private or sole agent , neither can surely be expected to be responsible for other adults´behaviour - you can only point out the regulations and retrospectively excludethem .
It is within the President´s remit to have people removed from the complex if they do not comply with community rules , especially on safety issues .
On a more serious note, what's happening about your fine these days ??
we have exhausted appeals procedure and now move to actual court. thr final resolution could be 14 months in the future. So far no cases have been heard in court so no one knows how the courts will rule. Most fines were reduced to 15000 euros on first appeal, none have been reduced further on second appeal. I have heard that the fines on some islands are far lower than tenerife, so that may come into things too. Its basically a waiting game.
I didn't reply about them being smokers because I don't know and to be honest I can't see the relevance?
And rest assured when I see the owner I will be having a stern word with him.
has loaded confirmed if they are smokers yet? I am beginning to suspect helpful loaded had a hidden agenda when he so chivarously found the ladies digs and got her safely in the illegal let apartment . The owner will have to thank loaded , and probabley redecorate for the next guests.
Sorry you'll have to explain that one, what possible agenda could I have had apart from getting back to my evening at home with my family???
Red Devil
06-10-2012, 07:22
Why am I not surprised by your answer??
You do realise that if you get your way and they do remove the sole agent requirements, incidents like this, rather than being isolated incidents, will actually become commonplace.
How do you think your fellow owners on your complex would react if this starts to happen on a regular basis in your apartment ??
I doubt if they will be very happy with you.
Where on earth have you got that fact from? Every complex has a President who can take action and most have a night security guard. To suggest only a sole agent can deal with incidents is simply not correct. Its odd that the comments frequently made from people living in
Tenerife is that it is usually long term renters who cause the most trouble but that fact is simply overlooked because it doesn't suit your arguments. Sole agents dont care who goes in your apartment as long as its a booking - private owners are far more selective, usually, in 99% of cases.
Listen to Jungle Jim - he is stating a fact, not an assumption
I didn't reply about them being smokers because I don't know and to be honest I can't see the relevance?
And rest assured when I see the owner I will be having a stern word with him.
its commonsense really , and with all your experience in hotel management I would have thought you might have thought about it. The ladies sound very irrational and incapable in their drunken state. If they are smokers there is a real risk of fire due to carelessness , eg smoking in bed or on sofa and nodding off. Also many serious house fires result from late night drunken chip pan incidents, with drunks getting the chips started and then nodding off while the fat ignites.
As myself and others have posted, this incident and these ladies do not make an argument for sole agency. Agreed you got roped in as you are sole agent overlord on your place , so most guests will treat you as a sort of head honcho/president figure, even the ones who are in private rents. You resent that personally, thats understandable as the private renter is not using your agency, but thats the situation on your complex with the two types of renter, your agency ones and the independant ones.
As jungle jim has posted, on any complex an incident of that nature is a matter for the president to sort out on behalf of the community of owners. Nothing to do with sole agency or independant renting.
Nelson, you really need to ease off a bit.
It doesn't matter if these women were retired pyromaniacs, they were not there via Loaded so why should he have to consider anything about them? Why do you not see that they were absolutely nothing to do with him.
I whole heartedly agree with you that not every complex requires it at the same level but unfortunately the law doesn't agree. I'm not saying you shouldn't campaign against it but you are wasting your time repeating it on here. We know how you feel.
Worst of all, the point of this last few posts was only about people doing their own letting in a place where they shouldn't. You can't twist that to mean anything other than illegal competition.
From memory, you are in the transport business? If so, would you let your nearest competitor take his broken down vehicle to be fixed and then send you the bill because he doesn't fancy paying for it himself? That's what the story amounts to. It's business. No hidden agenda.
This non stop agent bashing isn't getting anyone anywhere. I can see your point, I really can and I agree with some of it. I don't need to read it in every other post though!
And another thing...you've got me writing long ranting posts now....:lol:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.