View Full Version : The Tenerife illegal lettings thread
You'd be welcome to contact me but don't know how this forum works I'm afraid. Can you tell me how to give you my contact details?
Angusjim
23-03-2013, 22:56
Maybe the Russians will move their money over here from Cyprus - or have they already started?
Now that the levy has started , let´s watch the fun !
Heaven forbit black money in Tenerife surely not that will never happen :hi: 9 Plus and all his bunch of angels will never accept that. Or are they already part of the system ???
carpenter
23-03-2013, 23:09
You'd be welcome to contact me but don't know how this forum works I'm afraid. Can you tell me how to give you my contact details?
Think 9plus was being 9plus which you find the meaning of in the subcategory under sarcasm in the oxford dictionary.
I think he wanted to contact you the same as the authorities might want to contact you. Just a joke ;)
Thanks for the explanation Carpenter! Gullible or what!
Heaven forbit black money in Tenerife surely not that will never happen :hi: 9 Plus and all his bunch of angels will never accept that. Or are they already part of the system ???
The fight for a better Tenerife is what I'm spending a lot of my spare time doing.
Are you doing anything?
Angusjim
23-03-2013, 23:28
The fight for a better Tenerife is what I'm spending a lot of my spare time doing.
Are you doing anything?
A better Tenerife perhaps start with the currupt Tenerife poliicians that are doing more damage to Tenerife than illegal letting. What am I doing for Tenerife well I come to Tenerife 4-5 times a year and spend money is that OK or am I not welcome???
A better Tenerife perhaps start with the currupt Tenerife poliicians that are doing more damage to Tenerife than illegal letting. What am I doing for Tenerife well I come to Tenerife 4-5 times a year and spend money is that OK or am I not welcome???
I'd have to consult let me organize a survey
Angusjim
23-03-2013, 23:46
I'd have to consult let me organize a survey
Mark
Your a funny man that never actually answers a question, are you a politician :tiphat:
But you have to understand fonica if he is no longer getting holiday makers, viewing it from his armchair in Yorkshire he'll just automatically think its a disaster and there's nobody here.
having been there first half of march its a disaster so stop kidding yourselves
welshman
24-03-2013, 01:04
And there is stuff in the new drafts for modernization of existing unlicensed accommodation .
They don't want to build loads of new blocks because there's already loads of tourist sites out there - they just need regenerating.
The last tourist laws from 2010 replaced the the key system for apartments with a new star system beginning at 3 going up to 5..... What price that they start looking to force the old 1 and 2 key places to update to 3,4 or 5 star?
Let private people let to the public under liecence an all the accomidation will be up graded. If it an investment its in their own interest to upgrade and give the punter what he wants. But its not common sence to purchase upgrade and let another person profitier from you investment not a business model that I would advicate. These agent have been around long enough
time for change. This time last week they were worried about what was happening . They have got second wind but no body knows what will happen. We have so many paper book lawyers think they whats happening. In the EU this is just a blip the laws can change over night. I have a close friend who is a EU barrister and his views on the monopily if it did get to the european court would be thrown out. So thing again regulate and prosper not edvicating on residencial but on all touristic.
having been there first half of march its a disaster so stop kidding yourselves
I know one thing sole agents are here to stay whether you think its right or wrong.
I'm here everyday, you are here once in the blue moon
cheers
The merry go round thread....here,s what happens.... the anti letting brigade spout off for a few posts,then the pro letting lot have their say,then there,s a bit of a lull.then nelson will come back on with a silly comment which in fishing terms would be called "throwing a line" after which Loaded will reply with a sensible thought out comment,unfortunatly followed by the clingons (who know who they are) its like a football match with opposing fans singing insults at each other...............I half expect to hear them singing chants like "your not letting any more" .They sit there waiting for the opposition to turn up and get a bit upset when they haven,t replied in a while.Meanwhile the clampdown/climbdown??? continues
your not letting any more
But the sole agents are
tune
your not letting any more
But the sole agents are
tune
But Mark if only that where true,,,, tune,,,group STATUS QUO
seanocelt
24-03-2013, 02:31
Similiar to Beanie, my friend bought in Panorama , spent over 30K on refurbishing and furnishing he rented out through an agency with cleaners etc and had high occupancy with good high value clients - now thanks to Konrad's diktat and poor offer he has chosen only to use it for himself and family and no longer uses a cleaner, the facilities ,and around 35 weeks goes empty with no spend .
Quite a few on Panorama have gone the same way , others are taking the risk -the vast majority on our complex have upgraded to a high standard but would fail on not having a full length mirror although they have top of the range TV/ DVD and music systems and aircon !
I wonder what entertainment you get from a mirror unless it´s on the ceiling?
.
My info on Panarama is that the illegal letters will not budge and feel doing there own thing is safe, and tax avoidance savings is ample to cover fines!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
having been there first half of march its a disaster so stop kidding yourselves
Kathml................why a disaster? For whom? Just interested as people i know are happy with it this year.
March airport arrivals. Throughout canaries down 250,000, think that number is all arrivals , so legal and illegal.
A terrible downturn and the illegal crash in my opinion will bite from April, I would have expected march to hold up better being a winter month.
March airport arrivals. Throughout canaries down 250,000, think that number is all arrivals , so legal and illegal.
A terrible downturn and the illegal crash in my opinion will bite from April, I would have expected march to hold up better being a winter month.
Suspended flights due to the snow
Accommodation Upgrades
^^^^^learnt that intro from Altamira - love it!!!!!!!!!!
When we speak of "upgrades" we don't just mean the individual apartments, there will be few legal apartments that are better inside than illegal ones - thats pretty much a fact generally speaking although not true in absolutely every case.
However, the upgrades refer to the communal zones too, this is where the private owners will struggle to get anything done without someone pulling them all in the right direction.
For example: part of the upgrades in the latest laws for standards include; taxi and mini bus drop off point, disabled spaces, shaded parking, recreational areas (exercise or play parks)...... I really can't see individual owners whose apartments have 50 inch plasma TVs and surround sound standaing up at an AGM saying "We really need a few disabled spots and a play park so my apartment meets the tourist board standards"...
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
bottom line is it doesn't matter how good the individual parts are if they don't fit together to provide the overall standards that the tourist board are looking.
junglejim
24-03-2013, 13:08
Sean , if you read through the various articles in Diario de Avisos you will see the data showing downturn over year , months and their big push in attracting the virtually untapped Russian market .
They are making big attempts this week to stop the happy campers at El peurtito - low spenders - the Ashotel push on AI has helped to ruin some restaurants and bars as quite a few have gone to wall.
There was always going to be a cull as too many doing same thing and competition fierce and an equilibrium will be reached.
The Turismo want to upgrade to high worth clientele - I'm just not convinced that there is suffient to sustain the whole of tha Canarian economy , just Ashotel !
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Accommodation Upgrades
^^^^^learnt that intro from Altamira - love it!!!!!!!!!!
When we speak of "upgrades" we don't just mean the individual apartments, there will be few legal apartments that are better inside than illegal ones - thats pretty much a fact generally speaking although not true in absolutely every case.
However, the upgrades refer to the communal zones too, this is where the private owners will struggle to get anything done without someone pulling them all in the right direction.
For example: part of the upgrades in the latest laws for standards include; taxi and mini bus drop off point, disabled spaces, shaded parking, recreational areas (exercise or play parks)...... I really can't see individual owners whose apartments have 50 inch plasma TVs and surround sound standaing up at an AGM saying "We really need a few disabled spots and a play park so my apartment meets the tourist board standards"...
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
bottom line is it doesn't matter how good the individual parts are if they don't fit together to provide the overall standards that the tourist board are looking.
So who's responsible for meeting the Touristic Standard of the complex facilities and the cost of it - " Cui Bono?"
Angusjim
24-03-2013, 13:16
Perhaps Tourist board should try something radical like asking their customers what they want, a bit of market research may put over a different view point from the people who pay their hard earned money to come to Tenerife on holiday
seanocelt
24-03-2013, 14:00
JungleJim, lay off the Guinness, i never mentioned tourist numbers. Nelson did . (again)!! Good point though, who is responsible for making external upgrades/what if a deemed "legal" complex, say Paloma Beach( tee heelets get Loaded to answer)) was to be asked to add a play park and a drop off point instead of the gate for El Mar buses ? (sorry Loaded!) Bit rediculous to expect all that, its like the opening licences for bars, do one upgrade, they inspect you and think up a new one. As for enough 5 star seekeing punters, no , Dubai have even started to try to attract the 4 star or less market. Like all planners wet dreams, they will shoot for the stars, but likely settle for Teide's peak, whilst scaring the wits out of everyone with a stake.
However I assume on some larger tourist establishments the administrator would not be fully aware of exactly who was illegally letting their apartments. Would the administrator be expected to divulge those who are suspected of illegal letting but where there is no concrete evidence?
I would not advise a community to denounce someone without any evidence. As mentioned before, the community does not have the legal obligation to denounce owners renting out illegally.
I understand much of the suspected illegal letting has now gone underground and described as friends & family.
As mentioned on this forum before by Loaded and others, the law does not make an exception for “friends & family”.
Also if the tourist inspectors were to also ask the sole agent for details of suspected illegal lettings, are they also legally obliged to hand over the details of those suspected of committing the illegal letting offence?
Anybody, administration, sole agents, the president, who gets such a paper does have the obligation to provide the requested details.
So far on this thread we have only heard about two very good sole agents and one very bad one who seems to upset lots of people. Does anyone have any experiences / information to share with us about other sole agents and what complexes they are on.
I also do think that that this thread should go this direction. We can moan about market research, flights down, etc, but this will help nobody. Accept the current situation and adjust yourself to the reality.
If you have a sole agent which you all do not like, then try to find another one. Some posts ago I advised Altamira to speak with Wimpen (http://www.wimpen.com/en) or any other sole agent (I am sure Loaded knows some others). I don’t know a lot about this company except that we administer the community where they have their office and that I have not heard of any complaints.
I am sure that Wimpen and any other sole agent will be interested and that you can negotiate the return you get and all other conditions. Our company helped quite a few groups of owners who were unhappy with their administrator. Most of the time they said that it was “impossible” to remove them. Quite sure that this is the same with the sole agents.
March airport arrivals. Throughout canaries down 250,000, think that number is all arrivals , so legal and illegal.
A terrible downturn and the illegal crash in my opinion will bite from April, I would have expected march to hold up better being a winter month.
Which paper did you find that in?? As I said before the island has been buzzing all winter,I was in Los Cristianos last night and all the good restaurants were full.There is a world wide recession out there and Tenerife is holding its own.Don't you worry about us,we'll be just fine.
I saw the same article Fonica and have to agree with you that the island was positively buzzing when I was there a few weeks ago. I agree with Nelson however because in theory the numbers should be dropping if everyone had stopped advertising as I have and I guess he has - my bookings are way down and virtually nothing for this summer as expected. However, what I can't understand when I look at the websites, is that more people are advertising private rentals than ever before - 20 more in my area alone than when I cancelled my ad last year.
junglejim
24-03-2013, 16:51
Hi Sean ,no Guinness as yet ,although it´s my birthday - that´ll happen tonight - my point wasn´t specifically about numbers but Turismo´s and ASHOTEL´s drive for high-end Tourism as depicted in this week´s Adeje Tourist video which concentrated on Del Duque , Private Villas but nowhere near PDLA !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-fZtBNiZ5Lw
duncan-6
24-03-2013, 16:55
Tourism is holding up in Tenerife,....me and the mrs got a free drink off Rosa last night in Big Ben!....what a landlady!
Altamira
24-03-2013, 16:58
If you have a sole agent which you all do not like, then try to find another one. Some posts ago I advised Altamira to speak with Wimpen (http://www.wimpen.com/en) or any other sole agent (I am sure Loaded knows some others). I don’t know a lot about this company except that we administer the community where they have their office and that I have not heard of any complaints.
I am sure that Wimpen and any other sole agent will be interested and that you can negotiate the return you get and all other conditions. Our company helped quite a few groups of owners who were unhappy with their administrator. Most of the time they said that it was “impossible” to remove them. Quite sure that this is the same with the sole agents.
Sole Agent Thanks Rene, I think many Altamira owners want to wait for the outcome of the proposed new tourist laws before considering a change in our sole agent. I think the owners would then firstly try to come to a reasonable working relationship with the existing sole agent. If negotiations were to fail then some changes may be requested, these could be for a different agent or a apartment owners limited company SL (Sole Agent) to work on behalf of all the owners.
seanocelt
24-03-2013, 17:19
I saw the same article Fonica and have to agree with you that the island was positively buzzing when I was there a few weeks ago. I agree with Nelson however because in theory the numbers should be dropping if everyone had stopped advertising as I have and I guess he has - my bookings are way down and virtually nothing for this summer as expected. However, what I can't understand when I look at the websites, is that more people are advertising private rentals than ever before - 20 more in my area alone than when I cancelled my ad last year.
Its a fact, adverts have re-appeared, people seem to be taking a chance rather than no income, maybe hoping to stay lucky. On the evidence of fines issued/paid/reduced, its a calculated risk i would say.
Sean , if you read through the various articles in Diario de Avisos you will see the data showing downturn over year , months and their big push in attracting the virtually untapped Russian market .
They are making big attempts this week to stop the happy campers at El peurtito - low spenders - the Ashotel push on AI has helped to ruin some restaurants and bars as quite a few have gone to wall.
There was always going to be a cull as too many doing same thing and competition fierce and an equilibrium will be reached.
The Turismo want to upgrade to high worth clientele - I'm just not convinced that there is suffient to sustain the whole of tha Canarian economy , just Ashotel !
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
So who's responsible for meeting the Touristic Standard of the complex facilities and the cost of it - " Cui Bono?"
Who's responsible for metting the standards? The Sole Agent is responsible.
Who's responisible for the costs? The owners of the community.
It's the sole agents job to get the owners all singing from the same hymn sheet, I can tell you now it is a mamoth task getting the majority of owners to agree to anything even when it's something they actually need to rent their apartment.
junglejim
24-03-2013, 17:30
Loaded ,that´s my biggest concern with a mixed complex - for those that don´t rent , they are pressurised into contributing towards facilities that they don´t need or want to benefit other people´s earnings - Sole agents don´t make a contribution unless they own some of the community but they tend to control most of the votes via proxy to push decisions through -it´s happening on our complex already in our attempt to resurrect a dormant licence .
Its a fact, adverts have re-appeared, people seem to be taking a chance rather than no income, maybe hoping to stay lucky. On the evidence of fines issued/paid/reduced, its a calculated risk i would say.
adverts will be reappearing in some cases due to the harsh reality of this summers flat bookings meaning a repossed apartment in a few weeks , its do or dare time for some.
much of the islands tourism troubles is down to tourismo/govt meddling. they have imposed a moratorium to protect existing accomodation but the private sector provided beds for more punters anyway. clearly the economy benefited from that down the years. this talk of just 5 star punters is more central planning nonsense. No modern economy in a democracy allows the govt to presume to know best in economic matters. No planned economy in history has ever suceeded. Govt interventions inevitabley go wrong, real world dynamics cause constant changes. Dubai going downmarket is just one example of the unpredictable shifting sands of factors way outside tourismo's control.
not all the canary economys troubles are down to the letting crackdown, but a good part of it is. It is ceertainley a completelly self engineered problem that the govt have placed on their own economy, and in the future they need to get real and be part of internet holiday home renting, its not all the tourist market, but it is a very important sector and one that the canaries can not be left out off.
Angusjim
24-03-2013, 17:33
Who's responsible for metting the standards? The Sole Agent is responsible.
Who's responisible for the costs? The owners of the community.
It's the sole agents job to get the owners all singing from the same hymn sheet, I can tell you now it is a mamoth task getting the majority of owners to agree to anything even when it's something they actually need to rent their apartment.
How do owners make any decent profit there seems to be a never ending stream of expense with upgrades to meet requirements. Do people who do not rent out apartments have to a share ?
junglejim
24-03-2013, 17:43
How do owners make any decent profit there seems to be a never ending stream of expense with upgrades to meet requirements. Do people who do not rent out apartments have to a share ?
That´s the problem AJ - when you have a dishonest President and Administrator who will not discriminate improvements required for Licence Approval and general maintenance you have difficulty in apportioning the correct costs to Touristic needs !
We have nearly 85K of "improvements " this year which I am certain most are needed for Licence approval but the Administrator refuses to break out the detail, even to the auditors (who are appointed by the votes held by President) !
On a community all of the owners have to share the costs that are AGREED TO BE CARRIED OUT.
As JungleJim says this appears unfair to owners who don't let but ther reallyis no other way to pay for things, for example;
Lets say it is dcided that only owners who let should have to pay for a proposed improvement, that sounds fair on the face of it but try tying down the owners who don't officially let to pay. Also what happens if the owners who don't let sell their property or decide they want to let at a later date? Do they then have to contribute their share???? This creates a mess.
At the end of the day a complex with legal tourism on it will USUALLY mean the value of the property is worth more than those on a residential community so in the end it benefits all owners someday.
On Paloma Beach there is a guy who owns a 2 bed and a 1 bed and a garage and a local and he's smashed all 4 properties into one giant property ........ he was complaining how much community fees he has to pay and that putting a play park in to get 3 stars was going to cost him more money that he hasn't got now he's retired...... I pointed out that he has a huge property worth around 400,000 euros all together - if he is really struggling to pay community fees then why not sell all the properties and buy a townhouse on a residential complex? Or rent out the 1 bedroom side after all it's only him and his wife living there!
Angusjim
24-03-2013, 17:47
On a community all of the owners have to share the costs that are AGREED TO BE CARRIED OUT.
As JungleJim says this appears unfair to owners who don't let but ther reallyis no other way to pay for things, for example;
Lets say it is dcided that only owners who let should have to pay for a proposed improvement, that sounds fair on the face of it but try tying down the owners who don't officially let to pay. Also what happens if the owners who don't let sell their property or decide they want to let at a later date? Do they then have to contribute their share???? This creates a mess.
At the end of the day a complex with legal tourism on it will USUALLY mean the value of the property is worth more than those on a residential community so in the end it benefits all owners someday.
On Paloma Beach there is a guy who owns a 2 bed and a 1 bed and a garage and a local and he's smashed all 4 properties into one giant property ........ he was complaining how much community fees he has to pay and that putting a play park in to get 3 stars was going to cost him more money that he hasn't got now he's retired...... I pointed out that he has a huge property worth around 400,000 euros all together - if he is really struggling to pay community fees then why not sell all the properties and buy a townhouse on a residential complex? Or rent out the 1 bedroom side after all it's only him and his wife living there!
Do they pay based on Sq meterage of their apartment or just 1 bed or 2 bed etc ?
Do they pay based on Sq meterage of their apartment or just 1 bed or 2 bed etc ?
all properties have a coeficient of the community, 1 beds are usually 0.311% of the complex, 2 beds 0.42% , garages 0.24%, locals 0.24%..... these vary...... so if the budget for the year is 400000 euros for the year then an owner of a 1 bed pay 0.311% of that budget =1244 euros per year, paid quarterly = 311 euros per month.......
So the guy I'm talking about pays around 1200 euros per quarter in community fees = 400 per month!!!
I live on Los Girasoles and have 4 bedrooms, 2 bathroom, a massive patio, 2 balconies, a garden and a private pool and pay 50 euros per month.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
imagine we split the costs for tourist related things though, the residents wouldn't pay:
lifeguard
resurfacing of inner road + disabled spaces and taxi drop off.
play park
update to swimming pool...
the renters would pay double community fees almost.
Thanks seanocelt - I'm not imagining things then! They are taking a big risk, however calculated it is but makes me wonder if I'd be better off joining them rather than taking a dive in earnings. I guess people need the income but it's a shame, as I'm convinced there would be a huge drop in tourist numbers if everyone 'withdrew' from 'illegal' renting and maybe that might give the Government something to think about!
I know one thing sole agents are here to stay whether you think its right or wrong.
I'm here everyday, you are here once in the blue moon
cheers
That just shows that you dont know what you're talking about You are a stupid little man so far this year i've been here for 7+ weeks and will probably spend close on 6 months on the island this year!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fivepence
24-03-2013, 19:21
Hi Sean ,no Guinness as yet ,although it´s my birthday - that´ll happen tonight - my point wasn´t specifically about numbers but Turismo´s and ASHOTEL´s drive for high-end Tourism as depicted in this week´s Adeje Tourist video which concentrated on Del Duque , Private Villas but nowhere near PDLA !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-fZtBNiZ5Lw
Happy Birthday JJ, have a great night. :rave::trink: HH
Sorry all, I know that was off topic.:sorry:
That just shows that you dont know what you're talking about You are a stupid little man so far this year i've been here for 7+ weeks and will probably spend close on 6 months on the island this year!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But you're still not here everyday are you little Miss Ruffled feathers
Sounds like she doesn't know the half of it lol
Speak to the hand
Please
I can only imagine people getting ruffled when their beloved apartment with English TV they keep going back to is no longer available.
On a community all of the owners have to share the costs that are AGREED TO BE CARRIED OUT.
As JungleJim says this appears unfair to owners who don't let but ther reallyis no other way to pay for things, for example;
Lets say it is dcided that only owners who let should have to pay for a proposed improvement, that sounds fair on the face of it but try tying down the owners who don't officially let to pay. Also what happens if the owners who don't let sell their property or decide they want to let at a later date? Do they then have to contribute their share???? This creates a mess.
At the end of the day a complex with legal tourism on it will USUALLY mean the value of the property is worth more than those on a residential community so in the end it benefits all owners someday.
On Paloma Beach there is a guy who owns a 2 bed and a 1 bed and a garage and a local and he's smashed all 4 properties into one giant property ........ he was complaining how much community fees he has to pay and that putting a play park in to get 3 stars was going to cost him more money that he hasn't got now he's retired...... I pointed out that he has a huge property worth around 400,000 euros all together - if he is really struggling to pay community fees then why not sell all the properties and buy a townhouse on a residential complex? Or rent out the 1 bedroom side after all it's only him and his wife living there!
It may be for sale, I have seen advertised a 3 bed for sale but when you look at the info it is a 2 bed & 1 bed that can only be sold together.
No that's a different one - I know which one you mean.
This guy ain't for sale .
Yet
[QUOTE=Loaded;273307]all properties have a coeficient of the community, 1 beds are usually 0.311% of the complex, 2 beds 0.42% , garages 0.24%, locals 0.24%..... these vary......
You are quite correct - the co-efficient will vary from complex to complex. How it is calculated when a complex is first built I don't exactly know*, but on ours the co-efficents are Studio=.23, 1 bed (non-duplex)=.27, 1 bed duplex=.29, 2 bed (non-duplex)=.34, 2 bed duplex =.36, 3 bed=.40 etc. Not sure about locals though, have a feeling they are only .10.
*It is all based on square meterage as far as I can gather, and voting rights at AGMs and EGMs are determined by your co-efficient holding.
Thanks seanocelt - I'm not imagining things then! They are taking a big risk, however calculated it is but makes me wonder if I'd be better off joining them rather than taking a dive in earnings. I guess people need the income but it's a shame, as I'm convinced there would be a huge drop in tourist numbers if everyone 'withdrew' from 'illegal' renting and maybe that might give the Government something to think about!
Problem is if the govt/tourismo had acted in due diligence in the first place then they could never have considered their mad attack on holiday home renting.even now they are acting on ass hotel pressure, because ass hotel are hoping stopping private letting will result in a simple transfer of customers from apartments to hotels. It's that basic and simplistic idea that had driven this whole mess.
The govt/tourismo have acted against the constitution of tourismo, they are legally obliged to act in the interest of the entire canary population and economy.
Their policy could never rationally have got apartment customers to go to hotels, so their attack on private renters was pointless and very damaging to the canary economy.
You can not expect them to change their ways now, the courts will expose them all soon and they will all soon be answering for their corrupt decisions in the courts themselves.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Thanks seanocelt - I'm not imagining things then! They are taking a big risk, however calculated it is but makes me wonder if I'd be better off joining them rather than taking a dive in earnings. I guess people need the income but it's a shame, as I'm convinced there would be a huge drop in tourist numbers if everyone 'withdrew' from 'illegal' renting and maybe that might give the Government something to think about!
Problem is if the govt/tourismo had acted in due diligence in the first place then they could never have considered their mad attack on holiday home renting.even now they are acting on ass hotel pressure, because ass hotel are hoping stopping private letting will result in a simple transfer of customers from apartments to hotels. It's that basic and simplistic idea that had driven this whole mess.
The govt/tourismo have acted against the constitution of tourismo, they are legally obliged to act in the interest of the entire canary population and economy.
Their policy could never rationally have got apartment customers to go to hotels, so their attack on private renters was pointless and very damaging to the canary economy.
You can not expect them to change their ways now, the courts will expose them all soon and they will all soon be answering for their corrupt decisions in the courts themselves.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Thanks seanocelt - I'm not imagining things then! They are taking a big risk, however calculated it is but makes me wonder if I'd be better off joining them rather than taking a dive in earnings. I guess people need the income but it's a shame, as I'm convinced there would be a huge drop in tourist numbers if everyone 'withdrew' from 'illegal' renting and maybe that might give the Government something to think about!
Problem is if the govt/tourismo had acted in due diligence in the first place then they could never have considered their mad attack on holiday home renting.even now they are acting on ass hotel pressure, because ass hotel are hoping stopping private letting will result in a simple transfer of customers from apartments to hotels. It's that basic and simplistic idea that had driven this whole mess.
The govt/tourismo have acted against the constitution of tourismo, they are legally obliged to act in the interest of the entire canary population and economy.
Their policy could never rationally have got apartment customers to go to hotels, so their attack on private renters was pointless and very damaging to the canary economy.
You can not expect them to change their ways now, the courts will expose them all soon and they will all soon be answering for their corrupt decisions in the courts themselves.
But i though Tony the Lawyer said it was all a big mistake
I really want to know who is right.
The govt/tourismo have acted against the constitution of tourismo, they are legally obliged to act in the interest of the entire canary population and economy.
Their policy could never rationally have got apartment customers to go to hotels, so their attack on private renters was pointless and very damaging to the canary economy.
You can not expect them to change their ways now, the courts will expose them all soon and they will all soon be answering for their corrupt decisions in the courts themselves.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I certainly hope you're right Nelson! It's about time something changed. Judging by the number of apartments I saw for sale in my complex, which used to be like gold dust to get hold of, it's going to be too late for a lot of people though and all this will make people think twice about investing in Tenerife. Tourismo have a lot to answer for in my opinion.
seanocelt
25-03-2013, 03:21
Problem is if the govt/tourismo had acted in due diligence in the first place then they could never have considered their mad attack on holiday home renting.even now they are acting on ass hotel pressure, because ass hotel are hoping stopping private letting will result in a simple transfer of customers from apartments to hotels. It's that basic and simplistic idea that had driven this whole mess.
The govt/tourismo have acted against the constitution of tourismo, they are legally obliged to act in the interest of the entire canary population and economy.
Their policy could never rationally have got apartment customers to go to hotels, so their attack on private renters was pointless and very damaging to the canary economy.
You can not expect them to change their ways now, the courts will expose them all soon and they will all soon be answering for their corrupt decisions in the courts themselves.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Problem is if the govt/tourismo had acted in due diligence in the first place then they could never have considered their mad attack on holiday home renting.even now they are acting on ass hotel pressure, because ass hotel are hoping stopping private letting will result in a simple transfer of customers from apartments to hotels. It's that basic and simplistic idea that had driven this whole mess.
The govt/tourismo have acted against the constitution of tourismo, they are legally obliged to act in the interest of the entire canary population and economy.
Their policy could never rationally have got apartment customers to go to hotels, so their attack on private renters was pointless and very damaging to the canary economy.
You can not expect them to change their ways now, the courts will expose them all soon and they will all soon be answering for their corrupt decisions in the courts themselves.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Problem is if the govt/tourismo had acted in due diligence in the first place then they could never have considered their mad attack on holiday home renting.even now they are acting on ass hotel pressure, because ass hotel are hoping stopping private letting will result in a simple transfer of customers from apartments to hotels. It's that basic and simplistic idea that had driven this whole mess.
The govt/tourismo have acted against the constitution of tourismo, they are legally obliged to act in the interest of the entire canary population and economy.
Their policy could never rationally have got apartment customers to go to hotels, so their attack on private renters was pointless and very damaging to the canary economy.
You can not expect them to change their ways now, the courts will expose them all soon and they will all soon be answering for their corrupt decisions in the courts themselves.
Oh no, its groundhog day...again! "Just when i thought i was out."........etc
junglejim
25-03-2013, 09:40
Well Sean , The Godfather is on Film 4 this week again ! It´s Business- not Personal!
Maybe Nelson can find a Horse´s Head somewhere to persuade Turismo - or just an Iceland Value Burger !
The govt/tourismo have acted against the constitution of tourismo, they are legally obliged to act in the interest of the entire canary population and economy.
Their policy could never rationally have got apartment customers to go to hotels, so their attack on private renters was pointless and very damaging to the canary economy.
You can not expect them to change their ways now, the courts will expose them all soon and they will all soon be answering for their corrupt decisions in the courts themselves.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I certainly hope you're right Nelson! It's about time something changed. Judging by the number of apartments I saw for sale in my complex, which used to be like gold dust to get hold of, it's going to be too late for a lot of people though and all this will make people think twice about investing in Tenerife. Tourismo have a lot to answer for in my opinion.
on our place after a few years of holding out for a sale at the old high prices brits are selling up fast now, we are getting belgians and italians, the situation wont disappear depite brits selling of.
and yes 9 plus, I remain convinced the bd euro law reported by tony m has cracked the issue, at least on the touristics.
What on earth has due dilligence got to do with it? That is an entirely different concept usually applied to the purchase of a business.
You seem to forget Nelson that in politics there is an automatic system through which decisions of the Government are put to the people regularly for their opinions. Normally these would be known as elections. As has been discussed on so many occasions here and elsewhere, IF the Canarians did not believe their Government were acting in their best interests, the Government (and therefore the powers it bestows on those it empowered to oversee its tourism rules) would have been removed, especially given that there have been at least 3 general elections since the beginning of the initial discussions leading to the 1995 laws.
You can harp on about fairness and responsibility as much as you like, but you cannot ignore the FACTS that the EU has given the Canaries the right to make their own laws in respect of tourism, it has insisted on certain modifications to the laws it originally set in 1995 and that is the way it has been for 16 odd years.
Many would agree that perhaps the laws appear draconian on the surface, but they have received not only a mandate from the Canarians, but also from the EU. One might also agree that the 1995 laws did not exactly encorage foreign investment in the tourist industry here, but hey, that's the way they wanted it to be, and more importantly that's the way it still is. Remember the good old "wealth warnings" from radio and TV - the value of your investments may rise or fall and are not guaranteed??
But you're still not here everyday are you little Miss Ruffled feathers
no but I'm probably out and about more days in the year than you are
you display that arrogance that a lot of the residents on here have that tourists know absolutely nothing about the economics and politics concerning the island
no but I'm probably out and about more days in the year than you are
I neversaid you knew nothing about it, I just want to be straight with that, I'm out and about 365 days a year in all different walking of life, I've a lot of experience on the street, more than most.
on our place after a few years of holding out for a sale at the old high prices brits are selling up fast now, we are getting belgians and italians, the situation wont disappear depite brits selling of.
and yes 9 plus, I remain convinced the bd euro law reported by tony m has cracked the issue, at least on the touristics.
I've just spent some time looking at this and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to solve your problem.
The BD was only passed by the EU on 27.12.2006 - Link HERE (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:376:0036:0068:EN:PDF)
It actually applies to businesses, rather than private individuals, who are already trading in one EU state and wish to start operating in another EU state - to use it you would need to have an established Holiday Letting business in the UK.
It actually allows EU states to apply protection measures to services which they consider important to their economy.
You should read it.
I've just spent some time looking at this and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to solve your problem.
The BD didn't come was only passed by the EU on 27.12.2006 - Link HERE (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:376:0036:0068:EN:PDF)
It actually applies businesses who are already trading in one EU state and wish to start operating in another EU state - to use it you would need to have an established Holiday Letting business in the UK.
It actually allows EU states to apply protection measures to services which they consider important to their economy.
You should read it.
Like travel agents for instance.
Like travel agents for instance.
Providing they have done it according to the rules laid down in the EU Directive, just like you have to do your Holiday Letting in accordance with the Canarian Laws !!
Accommodation Upgrades
^^^^^learnt that intro from Altamira - love it!!!!!!!!!!
When we speak of "upgrades" we don't just mean the individual apartments, there will be few legal apartments that are better inside than illegal ones - thats pretty much a fact generally speaking although not true in absolutely every case.
However, the upgrades refer to the communal zones too, this is where the private owners will struggle to get anything done without someone pulling them all in the right direction.
For example: part of the upgrades in the latest laws for standards include; taxi and mini bus drop off point, disabled spaces, shaded parking, recreational areas (exercise or play parks)...... I really can't see individual owners whose apartments have 50 inch plasma TVs and surround sound standaing up at an AGM saying "We really need a few disabled spots and a play park so my apartment meets the tourist board standards"...
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
bottom line is it doesn't matter how good the individual parts are if they don't fit together to provide the overall standards that the tourist board are looking.
But isn't that a job the community administrator could take on? If a complex holds a touristic licence then the community administrator, president and committee should present all the owners with the list of upgrades necessary to comply with the law and then implement them. I don't see the need for a sole agent to do that.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
What on earth has due dilligence got to do with it? That is an entirely different concept usually applied to the purchase of a business.
You seem to forget Nelson that in politics there is an automatic system through which decisions of the Government are put to the people regularly for their opinions. Normally these would be known as elections. As has been discussed on so many occasions here and elsewhere, IF the Canarians did not believe their Government were acting in their best interests, the Government (and therefore the powers it bestows on those it empowered to oversee its tourism rules) would have been removed, especially given that there have been at least 3 general elections since the beginning of the initial discussions leading to the 1995 laws.
You can harp on about fairness and responsibility as much as you like, but you cannot ignore the FACTS that the EU has given the Canaries the right to make their own laws in respect of tourism, it has insisted on certain modifications to the laws it originally set in 1995 and that is the way it has been for 16 odd years.
Many would agree that perhaps the laws appear draconian on the surface, but they have received not only a mandate from the Canarians, but also from the EU. One might also agree that the 1995 laws did not exactly encorage foreign investment in the tourist industry here, but hey, that's the way they wanted it to be, and more importantly that's the way it still is. Remember the good old "wealth warnings" from radio and TV - the value of your investments may rise or fall and are not guaranteed??
Every Canarian I have spoken with has very little understanding of what is going on here regarding the illegal lettings. Most are shocked when they learn the truth! Once again the fact that is it not greatly publicised means that many people are extremely confused. If there were to be some discussion programmes on TV explaining both sides of the story we may find that very many Canarians would think he system as ludicrous as many of us do.
We're these Canarians owners on touristic complexes?
On a community all of the owners have to share the costs that are AGREED TO BE CARRIED OUT.
As JungleJim says this appears unfair to owners who don't let but ther reallyis no other way to pay for things, for example;
Lets say it is dcided that only owners who let should have to pay for a proposed improvement, that sounds fair on the face of it but try tying down the owners who don't officially let to pay. Also what happens if the owners who don't let sell their property or decide they want to let at a later date? Do they then have to contribute their share???? This creates a mess.
At the end of the day a complex with legal tourism on it will USUALLY mean the value of the property is worth more than those on a residential community so in the end it benefits all owners someday.
On Paloma Beach there is a guy who owns a 2 bed and a 1 bed and a garage and a local and he's smashed all 4 properties into one giant property ........ he was complaining how much community fees he has to pay and that putting a play park in to get 3 stars was going to cost him more money that he hasn't got now he's retired...... I pointed out that he has a huge property worth around 400,000 euros all together - if he is really struggling to pay community fees then why not sell all the properties and buy a townhouse on a residential complex? Or rent out the 1 bedroom side after all it's only him and his wife living there!
But if the idea is that in order to hold a tourist licence a complex must have a majority of owners who want to let .. then those that don't have to either sell up and move to a residential complex or accept there will be costs involved in maintaining the complex to tourist board standards. People might complain as you say ... but surely they don't have a leg to stand on if they are in the minority.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
We're these Canarians owners on touristic complexes?
No ... they are Canarians who earn their living as taxi drivers, waiters, restaurant owners, etc etc
But isn't that a job the community administrator could take on? If a complex holds a touristic licence then the community administrator, president and committee should present all the owners with the list of upgrades necessary to comply with the law and then implement them. I don't see the need for a sole agent to do that.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Every Canarian I have spoken with has very little understanding of what is going on here regarding the illegal lettings. Most are shocked when they learn the truth! Once again the fact that is it not greatly publicised means that many people are extremely confused. If there were to be some discussion programmes on TV explaining both sides of the story we may find that very many Canarians would think he system as ludicrous as many of us do.
An interesting point. As it happens TV Canarias is operated by the Government, so not convinced that would be an appropriate way to assist the population at large to make their choices. Press like El Dia is probably the most efficient way forward.
That said, if you think about the bottom line of the discussion though - one where the Canarian Government is trying to clamp down on "Foreigners" lining their pockets on the back of an industry which should be lining the pockets of the ordinary Canarian, you can see why the Canarians are probably supportive of the concept. Especially when the demand for property here from Johnny Foreigner has, (although less so today), pushed prices far beyond the reach of most ordinary locals.
I have a feeling, but it is only my feeling, that if faced with supporting their Government in its endeavors to gain control of its tourist industry through the existing and potential updates to the law for the benefit of the Islands and Islanders, or to allow an effective free for all to continue whereby Johnny Foreigner stands to gain the most, then most would be supportive of their elected representatives.
An interesting twist to the debate however !!
Altamira
25-03-2013, 16:22
Foreign Investment It is foreign investment that has bolstered and helped the Canary economy over the last few decades. The global economy is down at the moment and this has a detrimental affect everywhere including the Canaries. Therefore the Canary Government should do nothing that will make their economy worse, but for some illogical reason they are by imposing tourist restrictions via the 1995 tourist law.
The Canarians I speak to are extremely worried about just making ends meet. They are struggling to meet all of their financial commitments and can see no upturn in their circumstances for years to come. If the government were to bring in a system whereby owners on touristic complexes could register their property with the tourist board who would ensure standards were met, taxes were paid etc .... then this would encourage tourism to the island. I think most Islanders would have enough forethought to see that even if "Johnny Foreigner" were to gain then at least they would prosper a long side him.
An interesting point. As it happens TV Canarias is operated by the Government, so not convinced that would be an appropriate way to assist the population at large to make their choices. Press like El Dia is probably the most efficient way forward.
That said, if you think about the bottom line of the discussion though - one where the Canarian Government is trying to clamp down on "Foreigners" lining their pockets on the back of an industry which should be lining the pockets of the ordinary Canarian, you can see why the Canarians are probably supportive of the concept. Especially when the demand for property here from Johnny Foreigner has, (although less so today), pushed prices far beyond the reach of most ordinary locals.
I have a feeling, but it is only my feeling, that if faced with supporting their Government in its endeavors to gain control of its tourist industry through the existing and potential updates to the law for the benefit of the Islands and Islanders, or to allow an effective free for all to continue whereby Johnny Foreigner stands to gain the most, then most would be supportive of their elected representatives.
An interesting twist to the debate however !!
Always find the ja notion that individual letting is a free for all very odd. Like individual taxi owners each with a permit/licence is a free for all? Or a line of different restaurants amounts to a free for all , rather than just a line of seperate restaurants?
Do these people think that taxis and restaurants need to be managed 50 at a time by a sole agent overlord?
Euro harmonisation and plain common sense will soon show them the way. Just like the little boy who said the emporer actually had no clothes on
Always find the ja notion that individual letting is a free for all very odd. Like individual taxi owners each with a permit/licence is a free for all? Or a line of different restaurants amounts to a free for all , rather than just a line of seperate restaurants?
Do these people think that taxis and restaurants need to be managed 50 at a time by a sole agent overlord?
Euro harmonisation and plain common sense will soon show them the way. Just like the little boy who said the emporer actually had no clothes on
A lot of them are like that though - the actual cars are all owned by a company and the drivers are employed by the company company rather than being self-employed, exactly the same as the UK.
A lot of them are like that though - the actual cars are all owned by a company and the drivers are employed by the company company rather than being self-employed, exactly the same as the UK.
No bob mac , the drivers are independent but join together at times under a central control office. In the uk private hire cars are often pure stand alone independent .
But not to confuse , would a line of independent restaurants/ bars amount to a free for all? Would it be needed to join them together under a sole agent? Could the same be said of a row of shops, all at present independent , are they a free for all? Should they be grouped together under a monopoly sole agent?
It's these simple normal situations that sole agency for holiday homes is up against in Europe ,
junglejim
25-03-2013, 18:42
Don´t think your anology on Taxis stands up Nelson-but you won´t see it , the impression I have is most "private" taxi´s are connected to money laundering scams ,hackney cabs Associations tend to be more legit but gradually get"bought out".
Over here most cabs are owned by businesses and hire the drivers from what I make out .
boredinscotland
25-03-2013, 19:23
No bob mac , the drivers are independent but join together at times under a central control office. In the uk private hire cars are often pure stand alone independent .
But not to confuse , would a line of independent restaurants/ bars amount to a free for all? Would it be needed to join them together under a sole agent? Could the same be said of a row of shops, all at present independent , are they a free for all? Should they be grouped together under a monopoly sole agent?
It's these simple normal situations that sole agency for holiday homes is up against in Europe ,
I'm part owner of a Taxi company in UK,, Nelson you talk some crap, you are an expert at nowt and to be honest you are digging a hole for yourself every time you make daft comments, do yourself a favour and think before you speak
If I remember rightly ... it wasn't really taxis that we were discussing. (Apart from the fact that taxi drivers here are feeling the pinch due to the lack of independent holiday makers.) Ok .. so maybe Nelson's analogy wasn't the best ... but we get the point he/she was trying to make don't we?
The Taxis drivers will never be happy whilst there's other forms of public transport, it's just how it is.
If I remember rightly ... it wasn't really taxis that we were discussing. (Apart from the fact that taxi drivers here are feeling the pinch due to the lack of independent holiday makers.) Ok .. so maybe Nelson's analogy wasn't the best ... but we get the point he/she was trying to make don't we?
Yes we do. That being that I bought an investment property in Tenerife, and made so much money out of the first, I thought I'd buy a second, despite me knowing full well that I was breaking the law with both. Now I'm well naffed off that I've been fined for breaking the law. I've paid my tax on my earnings (OK in the UK when I should have paid it here, but hey) ...... etc (as I see it)
boredinscotland
25-03-2013, 20:19
The point I made was to show Nelson that he is going by hearsay,,,not Facts and someone may believe what he says is the Gospel truth
junglejim
25-03-2013, 20:37
The Taxis drivers will never be happy whilst there's other forms of public transport, it's just how it is.
They even wanted the 2- horse and cart sole monopoly stopped as well ,what´s next ?- the Wally Trolley ?
anyway sole agents are the way forward so who is selling up cheap ?
Yes we do. That being that I bought an investment property in Tenerife, and made so much money out of the first, I thought I'd buy a second, despite me knowing full well that I was breaking the law with both. Now I'm well naffed off that I've been fined for breaking the law. I've paid my tax on my earnings (OK in the UK when I should have paid it here, but hey) ...... etc (as I see it)
The point I was trying to make (badly ...obviously!!!) was that these islands have a fantastic opportunity to withstand the worst of the economic disaster being felt by other countries ... purely because of the weather and tourism. Surely it would be better for EVERYONE........the government, the locals, the overseas investors, the holiday makers ..... if the tourism industry here were to offer the most diverse types of holidays possible ... rather than just either hotels or hotel style self catering establishments. The opportunities to regulate and promote the types of accommodation on offer are plentiful. it is such a shame that rather than diversify, they have chosen to "standardise" what is on offer.
Update from janet a n s c o m b e :
"Update 25 March: As I posted on 14 March below, there are three recent judgments from the Canarian High Court where fines were overturned on the grounds of a successful appeal based on the EU’s Bolkenstein Directive. I apologise for the delay in coming back to this to get the information out but felt that it was too important to post something that was possibly incorrect: as I said then, it was too early to give firm legal opinion until the judgments were considered in detail.
I now have the judgments and legal opinion in my possession, and can confirm that they have nothing whatsoever to do with the inspections made and fines imposed on individual property owners for commercial letting. The judgments relate entirely to SL companies operating without the legal requirement of “Autorización Previa”. The Bolkenstein Directive means that it is no longer compulsory for businesses to get an administrative license before starting a holiday let business. Even more specifically, if there is no infraction or violation of the law, they cannot be fined, but if there is an infraction, with a commercial let that is otherwise illegal, they can be fined on the basis of that particular illegality.
To be explicit: the Bolkenstein Directives are concerned only with registered holiday companies, and then only with the issue of prior authorization to trade. The judgments have no relevance whatsoever to any illegal activities such businesses might be undertaking, and if found to be doing so, they can be fined for those activities. The judgments have absolutely no relevance to individual owners in any shape or form, for whom it can be considered as though the judgments did not exist."
Link to her website http://snipurl.com/26ouvh8
I think this categorically destroys the authenticity of the "facts" in articles that have appeared in the local press.
I think I should have been a lawyer - this new legal advice is what I said all along was happening - now which bar do i do my exam in????
It's such a shame that someone like J.A. doesn't have a column in one of the papers! The number of times I have been quoted that article as "proof" that all us worry warts should just calm down..................!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's surprising how "believable" something appears to become once it has been printed in the press!!
Exactly why the tenerife news and Islam connections need a slap for not checking what their advertisers submit as "articles".
http://www.janet ansco mbe.com/news/tourism-inspections.html
tonym and nelson maybe Tenerife Solicitors can make a little show and explain their view or at least give some legal advice.
You know euro law is catching up with the issue, ja and Escobedo are not the be all and end all, bd is reality , the canaries high judges have said so
karlburn
25-03-2013, 23:28
You know euro law is catching up with the issue, ja and Escobedo are not the be all and end all, bd is reality , the canaries high judges have said so
God loves a trier!!
Don´t think your anology on Taxis stands up Nelson-but you won´t see it , the impression I have is most "private" taxi´s are connected to money laundering scams ,hackney cabs Associations tend to be more legit but gradually get"bought out".
Over here most cabs are owned by businesses and hire the drivers from what I make out .
Then foreigners, without licenses or insurance, come along and take the work from them by undercutting their prices. Most of these foreign "taxi drivers" are used by the same people who rent out their apartments illegally and recommend cheap "taxis" to their clients.
With Nelson becoming a mega Tenerifian :spin: 9 plus asked if he had paid his fine,which got me thinking,how many people have paid their fines and how much has this raised?,it is well over two years since this started so do any of you well informed people,lawyers or not know the answer .
http://www.janet ansco mbe.com/news/tourism-inspections.html
tonym and nelson maybe Tenerife Solicitors can make a little show and explain their view or at least give some legal advice.
JH would want to be paid before he did that.I'd use Loaded as a lawyer before JH any day of the week.
JH would want to be paid before he did that.I'd use Loaded as a lawyer before JH any day of the week.
Is it John Hatrick or Tony Hatrick ?
Not if their laws are illegal! Goodnight!
seanocelt
26-03-2013, 04:30
I think this categorically destroys the authenticity of the "facts" in articles that have appeared in the local press.
Thankfully most of us never believed them in the first place. Apart from the odd straw clutcher. But then i remember the banner headlines in early 96 when the law was hot goss for Tenerife's Britpress then, scaring everyone but then completely ignoring people's letters( no internet then ) on any further updates they could provide. The Paper, Island Connections, Tenerife Weekly, all full of the new law and its explosive impact, lots of money for the lawyers then sod all for years after it. Total tripe, nothing more than gossipmongers.
boredinscotland
26-03-2013, 09:19
The REAL FACTS are this is NOT going away, no matter how many times the same 'drivel' is claimed to be 'fact' some people talk some piish but we are not believing it
Is it John Hatrick or Tony Hatrick ?
In the Island Connections,which is hardly likely to make a mistake, the article was written by; Jhon Hatricks So I believe that to be his name unless you can prove me wrong in which case I will lose all faith in anything written by said newspaper.
Altamira
26-03-2013, 10:28
Misleading - Legally Drafted Article The Tenerife legal profession should give the lawyer a severe reprimand, for adding confusion to the illegal letting problems (perhaps politely ask him to go back to England). The newspapers concerned should now retract the articles and apologize to anyone who may have now committed an offence because of the misleading legally drafted article.
junglejim
26-03-2013, 10:39
"Caveat Emptor"! they used to say (Buyer Beware!) but what chance have you got here when a prominent solicitor distorts the facts to suit his own gain in newspaper articles
When someone like Escobedo is peddling Arrendamientos Temporadas as a way round short term letting on touristic complexes but his colleagues are denying their legality ? He is making a small fortune out of representing many who have been fined - how many of these sales did he preside over?
Estate agents sell properties with "Great Rental Potential" but fail to point out the pitfalls, legalities and monopolistic sole agent rules .
Who do you trust in this quagmire - solicitors, Estate Agents,Politicians, Newspapers,Bloggers ,Administrators,Presidents....?
Misleading - Legally Drafted Article The Tenerife legal profession should give the lawyer a severe reprimand, for adding confusion to the illegal letting problems (perhaps politely ask him to go back to England). The newspapers concerned should now retract the articles and apologize to anyone who may have now committed an offence because of the misleading legally drafted article.
Quite agree
Will it happen
Nah ....
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
"Caveat Emptor"! they used to say (Buyer Beware!) but what chance have you got here when a prominent solicitor distorts the facts to suit his own gain in newspaper articles
When someone like Escobedo is peddling Arrendamientos Temporadas as a way round short term letting on touristic complexes but his colleagues are denying their legality ? He is making a small fortune out of representing many who have been fined - how many of these sales did he preside over?
Estate agents sell properties with "Great Rental Potential" but fail to point out the pitfalls, legalities and monopolistic sole agent rules .
Who do you trust in this quagmire - solicitors, Estate Agents,Politicians, Newspapers,Bloggers ,Administrators,Presidents....?
... Nelson?? .......
seanocelt
26-03-2013, 13:51
"Caveat Emptor"! they used to say (Buyer Beware!) but what chance have you got here when a prominent solicitor distorts the facts to suit his own gain in newspaper articles
When someone like Escobedo is peddling Arrendamientos Temporadas as a way round short term letting on touristic complexes but his colleagues are denying their legality ? He is making a small fortune out of representing many who have been fined - how many of these sales did he preside over?
Estate agents sell properties with "Great Rental Potential" but fail to point out the pitfalls, legalities and monopolistic sole agent rules .
Who do you trust in this quagmire - solicitors, Estate Agents,Politicians, Newspapers,Bloggers ,Administrators,Presidents....?
Spot on JJ, even the "top" guys giving out illegal documents to pocket a few quid, knew about it, didnt know if you did, accurate post.
I believe you own a couple of apartments on a complex with a community, Sur-y-Sol, and therefore have a set of definitions, statutes, community rules, a president and a committee. Community rules, of which you have to abide or action is taken against you, are there for the benefit of the owners. Balconies have to be of the same tile, exterior blinds the same colour, behavior around the pool areas etc. etc. etc..
As a multiple owner on your complex do you abide by the community rules or take the attitude that these are my apartments and I will paint them any colour I choose, put up any blind I like and skinny dip in the pool at midnight because no one is going to tell me what to do with my property?
Guess not. So you abide by a set of rules set by a community but refuse to abide by the rules set by the government of the country you own property in, rules probably in place before you made a purchase and to your own admission rules that you were aware of!
Maybe i am stupid,(which i am not) but if you live in a "FORIEGN" country surely you should
abide by there laws????
Not if their laws are illegal! Goodnight!
Whether you agree with/like it or not, if the Canarian Government pass a law, it is a LEGALLY binding law in the Canaries.
It might a total and complete ass of a law but if it's been passed by the Canarian Government then it is on the legal statute book until such time as they change it or repeal it.
junglejim
26-03-2013, 16:37
Quote"It might a total and complete ass of a law but if it's been passed by the Canarian Government then it is on the legal statute book until such time as they change it or repeal it. "
Or until it is challenged in European Courts and deemed illegal Bob !
They still have to obey certain fundamental principles of European Law .
Quote"It might a total and complete ass of a law but if it's been passed by the Canarian Government then it is on the legal statute book until such time as they change it or repeal it. "
Or until it is challenged in European Courts and deemed illegal Bob !
They still have to obey certain fundamental principles of European Law .
Until that happens it's still the law and legal in the Canaries.
Quote"It might a total and complete ass of a law but if it's been passed by the Canarian Government then it is on the legal statute book until such time as they change it or repeal it. "
Or until it is challenged in European Courts and deemed illegal Bob !
They still have to obey certain fundamental principles of European Law .
It's been there already, challenged and lost. This was soon after the law was implemented in 1995!
junglejim
26-03-2013, 17:34
It's been there already, challenged and lost. This was soon after the law was implemented in 1995!
Wasn´t specifically talking about 95 law - i should have quoted his whole post about any Law passed - any law can be challenged in European Courts !
Misleading - Legally Drafted Article The Tenerife legal profession should give the lawyer a severe reprimand, for adding confusion to the illegal letting problems (perhaps politely ask him to go back to England). The newspapers concerned should now retract the articles and apologize to anyone who may have now committed an offence because of the misleading legally drafted article.
If this article was written by the lawyer Nelson named, you should have a look at these links
1) His website (http://www.tenerifesolicitors.com/index.php)
All his qualifications are English, he's registered in Spain as a Foreign lawyer, so I don't think he's best qualified to pass any opinion on Canarian law.
2) Previous Thread (http://www.tenerifeforum.org/tenerife-forum/showthread.php?10912-Are-Tenerife-Solicitors-still-trading)
His Website goes on about their quality of service - See the link.
Wasn´t specifically talking about 95 law - i should have quoted his whole post about any Law passed - any law can be challenged in European Courts !
What has "ANY" law got to do with this discussion??
The law in question here is the 1995 letting law. It has not been repealled or declared illegal by any court despite what some would like to believe. In fact as in the previous post, It has already been challenged at the European courts, shortly after it was first implimented and was amended by the Canarian Government as required.
It has stood ever since and discussions are currently underway for revisions to it.
End of - Full Stop ....
next?
junglejim
26-03-2013, 17:53
Read the posts Muppet! BobMac´s comment was :-
"Whether you agree with/like it or not, if the Canarian Government pass a law, it is a LEGALLY binding law in the Canaries.
It might a total and complete ass of a law but if it's been passed by the Canarian Government then it is on the legal statute book until such time as they change it or repeal it. "
So even if they pass a new law it can be challenged !
My reply to him was in the context of his comment - now wind your neck in - you are not the person who decides what is posted on here! That´s Nelson´s job ! End of... FACT!
Quite right - I wouldn't want to stand in the way, or question any of the facts Nelson has posted here.
In particular the fact(s) that the Legal Firm mentioned here had anything to do with the recent case
or
The fact that it's OK to go on letting because or the 2-year "grace period"
etc etc etc
junglejim
26-03-2013, 18:14
If and when the new law comes out , everyone including Nelson will have the absolute right to challenge it all the way into European Courts , if he can afford it , or ,he can as has been done before write to his MEP who can raise it in the appropriate manner !
We await with baited breath ....
Still awaiting any English media coming out with translation of the proposed laws and the progress so far , all these Ex -Pats that hang on to every word should be harrassing the Media to act on their behalf .....
Quite right - I wouldn't want to stand in the way, or question any of the facts Nelson has posted here.
In particular the fact(s) that the Legal Firm mentioned here had anything to do with the recent case
or
The fact that it's OK to go on letting because or the 2-year "grace period"
etc etc etc
I also wouldn't rely on the Bolkenstein Directive for individual property letting protection - it is purely for Businesses who wish to operate across EU state borders, be they large corporations or small one-man and his dog style. It also didn't come into force until 27 December 2006 which was after this problem first surfaced.
To be sure of being covered by it, you would need to have a Holiday Letting business operating in the UK and then apply to open up an office in the Canaries. You also need to operate within the law of the country you want to operate in. The BD does not override any local laws and it actually allows the local government to apply their own laws to protect any service area which the regard as being vital to their economy and also states a whole load of requirements for Consumer Protection such as Public Liability Insurance Etc., so to comply with it will be expensive.
The full English copy of the directive can be found HERE (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:376:0036:0068:EN:PDF)
boredinscotland
26-03-2013, 18:17
Tenerife Solicitors were the Lawyers that dealt for my buyer when I sold, within 5 minuites of speaking to a Skandi woman that works there and her telling me how the sale would go, I told her to jog on, she wanted me to sign at Notary saying I was paid then I would be paid later,,,dinny think so doll, if this is how they do business, they will never beat Canarian Law of 18 years, I would not let them do a Will never mind anything else
What has "ANY" law got to do with this discussion??
The law in question here is the 1995 letting law. It has not been repealled or declared illegal by any court despite what some would like to believe. In fact as in the previous post, It has already been challenged at the European courts, shortly after it was first implimented and was amended by the Canarian Government as required.
It has stood ever since and discussions are currently underway for revisions to it.
End of - Full Stop ....
next?. Next would be to fine those that have been illegally letting,so I ask again how many people have paid their fines and how much has this raised
Answer is that no one knows how many have paid.
What we do know is that a great amount were appealed by lawyers so this process is currently going on now.
Some Of the owners affected have had to lodge the money theyve been fined with the government while their case is answered .
Time will tell.
o dear bob macs back on the, its a law so no one can challenge it or campaign for it to be changed /reformed argument.
well the bobmac award 2013 for people campaigning against unjust laws was won in my opinion by that brave schoolgirl from pakistan. Remember , the one who disagreed with the talibans law about girls not going to school, she organised a campaign against that viewpoint. The taliban are in the bobmac camp on the issue of challenging laws, they sent a gunman who shot her point blank in the head on the schoolbus.
Thank god she survived and thank god there are people on this planet brave enough to campaign against unhust laws.
we all have that right bobmac, without it we have no freedom,
Tell us again how your campaign for change is going with this law Nelson?
Things I've learned today:
Bobmac = Taliban
seanocelt
26-03-2013, 20:25
Im getting scared.
o dear bob macs back on the, its a law so no one can challenge it or campaign for it to be changed /reformed argument.
well the bobmac award 2013 for people campaigning against unjust laws was won in my opinion by that brave schoolgirl from pakistan. Remember , the one who disagreed with the talibans law about girls not going to school, she organised a campaign against that viewpoint. The taliban are in the bobmac camp on the issue of challenging laws, they sent a gunman who shot her point blank in the head on the schoolbus.
Thank god she survived and thank god there are people on this planet brave enough to campaign against unhust laws.
we all have that right bobmac, without it we have no freedom,
I'm beginning to wonder under what bloody stone a prat like you crawled out from.
Whether you like it or not this law is the law of the Canaries. I happen to agree with you that it is wrong but until such time as the new law comes in, it is the law and nothing you say is going to change that; I have never at any time said anything other than that.
It's you who seems to have the problem handling the fact that there is this law which stops you from doing what you want to do and which by your own admission, you were totally aware off.
If you want to bring campaigning into this discussion, I suggest that you get off your a r s e and start campaigning rather than sitting there pontificating on why everyone else on this thread is wrong if their views can't be twisted to suit your own self-centred twisted view of what you think should be happening.
junglejim
26-03-2013, 20:50
You can't talk to a Mega Tenerifian like tha Bob ! ..... can you?......
You can't talk to a Mega Tenerifian like tha Bob ! ..... can you?......
He started the personal slant, not me.
nelson hasn't even got any apartments there's no Yorkshire woman with 2 apartments on that complex.
I've checked it out
She's just a forum troll.
You would think the British would have learnt not to go over to foreign soil and start pontificating on the rights and wrongs of the laws of the land.
You would think the British would have learnt not to go over to foreign soil and start pontificating on the rights and wrongs of the laws of the land.
Totally agree with you.
Then they latch on to an article on the subject written by an English lawyer who works on Tenerife and try to make out that it is correct and backs up their argument !!!
Someone ban this terrorist lol
Totally agree with you.
Then they latch on to an article on the subject written by an English lawyer who works on Tenerife and try to make out that it is correct and backs up their argument !!!
Nothing new I'm afraid - I lived there for a long time and the sense of entitlement from a lot of ex-pats was embarrassing. You get the feeling that a few still believe that the british commonwealth = world.
Nothing new I'm afraid - I lived there for a long time and the sense of entitlement from a lot of ex-pats was embarrassing. You get the feeling that a few still believe that the british commonwealth = world.
The real joke is that the most of the people shouting loudest about how unfair this law is by their own admission were aware of the law when they bought.
I do have a degree of sympathy for people who have been caught out because they were misled by the agents when they bought.
The real joke is that the most of the people shouting loudest about how unfair this law is by their own admission were aware of the law when they bought.
I do have a degree of sympathy for people who have been caught out because they were misled by the agents when they bought.
And that still continues I'm afraid. I have just sold an apartment to an Italian couple. I had never met them as the agent had keys to the place so showed them round in my absence. It was only after the notary appointment that I overheard the agent discussing the number of holiday rentals she had already arranged for the new owners!!!!!!!!!!! No doubt they are blissfully unaware of the fact that what they will be doing is illegal!
no need to take my line of argument as some sort of deeply personal insult. surely you can see the point, its a very simple one. you are saying bobmac, that i have no right to challenge the canary law 1995, or question that it is corect or not. To me that is the same as the brave young girl in pakistan, she thinks that the taliban law which says girls can not have a school education is wrong. She will not accept the talibans law and she has organised a campaign to fight it.
I say she has the right to campaign to change that law. I support her in her actions and admire her.
I think from what you have said about me opposing the 1995 letting law that you believe I have no right to object to these laws because they are laws.
Explain what your position is then, is the pakistani schoolgirl in order to campaign against the taliban law or not?
or are you just having a hissy fit because my debating point has knocked you for six, and you know that yourself, but dont like what I have pointed out to you ?
What he's saying is you will not do anything about it, just moan on a internet forum.
no need to take my line of argument as some sort of deeply personal insult. surely you can see the point, its a very simple one. you are saying bobmac, that i have no right to challenge the canary law 1995, or question that it is corect or not. To me that is the same as the brave young girl in pakistan, she thinks that the taliban law which says girls can not have a school education is wrong. She will not accept the talibans law and she has organised a campaign to fight it.
I say she has the right to campaign to change that law. I support her in her actions and admire her.
I think from what you have said about me opposing the 1995 letting law that you believe I have no right to object to these laws because they are laws.
Explain what your position is then, is the pakistani schoolgirl in order to campaign against the taliban law or not?
or are you just having a hissy fit because my debating point has knocked you for six, and you know that yourself, but dont like what I have pointed out to you ?
Last time I checked tenerife wasn't overrun with terrorists (timeshare doesn't count) and your post, like many of your others is a straw man at best and unsubstantiated hyperbole at worse.
The fact that you compare the rights and wrongs of a tourism law to one which resulted in a schoolgirl being shot in the head makes you sound a little out of touch with reality...
I agree with Nelson, he is like a little schoolgirl.
Altamira
27-03-2013, 11:05
And that still continues I'm afraid. I have just sold an apartment to an Italian couple. I had never met them as the agent had keys to the place so showed them round in my absence. It was only after the notary appointment that I overheard the agent discussing the number of holiday rentals she had already arranged for the new owners!!!!!!!!!!! No doubt they are blissfully unaware of the fact that what they will be doing is illegal! Apartment Sales & Rentals According to the John Hatrick article headed "Property Law" it appears to say owners can advertise on the internet and independently rent them out. I assume many owners and estate agents believe what they are reading and simply carry on accordingly, therefore the "Property Law" article on private rentals now appears to be used as guidance by owners, sellers and agents.
Not the most accurate or responsible thing for a legal person to "publish", unless of course you are looking to secure a significant number of future clients.
Oh, sorry, forgot that Nellie told us it was this legal practice who single-handedly had the entire 1995 act declared null and void in the highest court in the land only a week or so ago.
Erm - take any notice of this at your peril
The thing is though, if the agents have won their case , they can set up now legally anywhere in Europe. However to hear doubters on here , what are they going to be agents to rent out?
I think you will soon see that these basic normal practises, renting out holiday homes, will prove to be legal throughout Europe , on the same basis.
That's how things have to be in the eu
boredinscotland
27-03-2013, 13:09
The thing is though, if the agents have won their case , they can set up now legally anywhere in Europe. However to hear doubters on here , what are they going to be agents to rent out?
I think you will soon see that these basic normal practises, renting out holiday homes, will prove to be legal throughout Europe , on the same basis.
That's how things have to be in the eu
Say it enough times and people will believe you........zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zz
Angusjim
27-03-2013, 13:16
Nelson you seem to be attracting more and more fans by the day:laugh: keep the faith
The thing is though, if the agents have won their case , they can set up now legally anywhere in Europe. However to hear doubters on here , what are they going to be agents to rent out?
I think you will soon see that these basic normal practises, renting out holiday homes, will prove to be legal throughout Europe , on the same basis.
That's how things have to be in the eu
Unless of course you are effectively outside the EU when it comes to being permitted to create specific legislation to safeguard aspects of your important infra-structure,
Altamira
27-03-2013, 14:18
Apartment Sales & Rentals According to the John Hatrick article headed "Property Law" it appears to say owners can advertise on the internet and independently rent them out. I assume many owners and estate agents believe what they are reading and simply carry on accordingly, therefore the "Property Law" article on private rentals now appears to be used as guidance by owners, sellers and agents.
Villa Rentals - Bolkestein Directive I have just noticed on the JA blog a comment from "Interested Party" it refers to the Bolkestein Directive and an independent individual winning a court case relating to a Lanzarote Villa Rental. I am sure Nelson and others will find it encouraging.
However the above needs to be verified as
some doubts have been cast on its reporting.
junglejim
27-03-2013, 14:22
Lifted from another site/topic - maybe applies to some on here?
"reminds me of famous exchange in the courts when a judge said to F E Smith a very famous barrister
"I've listened to you for an hour Mr Smith and I'm none the wiser"
"indeed M'lud" came the reply " but you're now much better informed" "
Villa Rentals - Bolkestein Directive I have just noticed on the JA blog a comment from "Interested Party" it refers to the Bolkestein Directive and an independent individual winning a court case relating to a Lanzarote Villa Rental. I am sure Nelson and others will find it encouraging.
However the above needs to be verified as
some doubts have been cast on its reporting.
That does not surprise me at all and of course encouraging .
Euro law applies eu wide, and extra periferal is supposed to help the far away economy,not to be be used as a mechanism for economic protectionism.
This whole mess is getting sorted
^^^^ thanks to your campaign Nelson
^^^^ thanks to your campaign Nelson
No , some good lawyers are striking the right and obvious target, eu law . The canary judges are acting on the law properly, it seems we all won't have to live in a Robert Mugabe style country at all.
Commonsense is taking over . What we need now ASAP is a system to tax the renters annually, a permit fee, the canaries needs the money, then we want Internet ads back online, a booming summer 2013 , and lifeguards paid ,
Doesn't look as thought there's anything in the BD to help you so why no use the Stampbugs club membership form in Europe
You may have better luck.
THIS should be interesting i see a brighter future and some fun & games. TF Solicitors
The thing is though, if the agents have won their case , they can set up now legally anywhere in Europe. However to hear doubters on here , what are they going to be agents to rent out?
I think you will soon see that these basic normal practises, renting out holiday homes, will prove to be legal throughout Europe , on the same basis.
That's how things have to be in the eu
You seem to be missing the point though - they are BUSINESSES - Bolkenstein only applies to businesses, not private individuals. To operate as you want using BD as cover, you would need to have an operational Holiday Letting Business in an EU member state which could then use as the basis for setting up an Holiday Letting Business in the Canaries; it would still have to operate fully within the existing legal framework of the Canaries and offer full Consume Protection to the recipient of the service you offer such as Full Public Liability Insurance, etc.
BD also allows a member state to pass local laws which protect any service area which they see as being vital to their economy which would mean that the Canarian law you detest would still be legal.
I know that's not what you want to hear but that's the situation unfortunately.
As I've said before, I agree that the current law is downright bloody crazy and needs to be rethought, so we need to wait and see what the new law finally looks like when they finally release it. Only then can things move on.
Until that happens, we're stuck with the heap of crock which the current law has caused.
I bloody hope you aren't reading all this thread John i've got to go out again
pfft
I knew they'd be reprisals from this Taliban terrorist lol
no need to take my line of argument as some sort of deeply personal insult. surely you can see the point, its a very simple one. you are saying bobmac, that i have no right to challenge the canary law 1995, or question that it is corect or not. To me that is the same as the brave young girl in pakistan, she thinks that the taliban law which says girls can not have a school education is wrong. She will not accept the talibans law and she has organised a campaign to fight it.
I say she has the right to campaign to change that law. I support her in her actions and admire her.
I think from what you have said about me opposing the 1995 letting law that you believe I have no right to object to these laws because they are laws.
Explain what your position is then, is the pakistani schoolgirl in order to campaign against the taliban law or not?
or are you just having a hissy fit because my debating point has knocked you for six, and you know that yourself, but dont like what I have pointed out to you ?
Excuse me !!
I have never disputed your right to challenge or question this law.
I do however have an issue with your pathetic attempt to use the situation of one of the bravest kids in the world to try and back up your warped views on this law; she's got more balls than you or I will ever have.
If you have reached the point in this debate where you need to use her as an example I feel truly sorry for you because you must be totally desperate to try and defend your viewpoint.
All it does is show you up to be a totally pathetic little **** who has completely lost the plot.
On the subject of challenging this law, have you actually done anything to instigate your challenge, or like everything else are you sitting around pontificating on the subject while you wait for someone else to do it so you cling onto their coattails and claim the credit for the idea ??
bonitatime
27-03-2013, 17:00
Can i confirm.
The three cases we are talking about were found not guilty because they didnt have the right Papers but couldn't be guilty as the BD allowed them to start a business in another member state without completing the right start up paper work?
This is a technicality? No?
That they got off just means the local Gov needs to adjust what they are denouncing?
Well that's a no post from Tenerife Solicitors
Thought they would of taken the opportunity and cleared the skies.
Maybe they've read the last couple of pages of this thread, got educated and gone off to do another news article.?
TF Solicitors
27-03-2013, 17:15
UPDATE ON TOURIST RENTAL LAWS - THE FACTS!
Given the vitriol, bile and self-serving rubbish spouted by a regrettable minority of members on this forum, I do not propose to enter into ongoing correspondence or debate on this issue via the forum. However, if anyone wishes to discuss the following issues in a civilized manner, they are welcome to contact me via email or our website.
Janet ********'s website (plus a handful of 'bar room experts' on this forum) have boldly announced that the article I wrote in the local press was incorrect or an 'advertorial'. Please now allow me (a qualified lawyer regulated in both Spain and England with 3 million Euros professional indemnity insurance) to set the facts straight.
I have now obtained copies of the Judgments from the TSJC (High Court of the Canary Islands), which is the highest court in the archipelago, whose decisions affect Tenerife. Those Judgments are:
1. 23rd December 2011 - Appeal by ‘Teide 10 S.L.’ (223/2010)
2. 22nd December 2011 Appeal by ‘The Assoc of Tenerife Professional Tourist Guides of Tenerife’ & others (ref: 363/2010),
3. 8th May 2012, Appeal by Surfing Club Aguila Playa S.L. (91/2011).
Copies of the Judgments are available from our office on request by email (free of charge).
CONTINUED IN SEPARATE POST BELOW DUE TO SIZE OF ARTICLE.................
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
CONTINUED FROM ABOVE..........
In the 1st and 3rd case, the parties were appealing against fines issued to them by the tourist board for allegedly failing to comply with the licence requirements under the Law of 7/1995. In the 2nd case, the parties were challenging provisions of a new decree introduced in 2010 which specifically affected their industry (tour guides). That decree operated in conjunction with the controversial tourism exploitation law 7/1995.
In cases 1 and 3, the Judge expressly criticised the requirements to obtain a rental licence as set out in the 7/1995 law, describing those requirements as both disproportionate and in breach of the Bolkestein Directive under European Law.
In case 2, the key provisions of the said decree were ruled to be illegal, whilst in cases 1 and 3, the Judge threw out the denuncias and cancelled the associated fines issued by the tourist board.
In case 2, the Judge helpfully defined the scope of the 2006 Bolkestein Directive (Directive 2006/123/EC), namely that it applies to all tourist services in the Canary Islands, including tourist accommodation, travel agents, tour guides and recreational services. He commented that the Directive required all European member states to revise and modify their existing laws so as to simplify the administrative process and assist in the creation of new businesses and employment. Unsurprisingly, the Canarian Government thumbed their nose at this directive when the 7/1995 law was updated by the law of 14/2009.
The Judge went on to expressly state that the existing tourism laws (namely Law 7/1995 which was amended by Law 14/2009) regulating administrative licences to trade were incompatible with the Bolkestein Directive, whilst expressly criticising the 7/1995 law as being disproportionate. The Judge also highlighted the rather obvious fact that obtaining a licence in advance of trading provides no reassurance as to ongoing standards and that ongoing monitoring and supervision of rental establishments is the only effective solution.
For clarification, the licences referred to are those required specifically to rent properties to tourists. There is NO reference in the Judgment to any other type of upfront licence to trade that a business might require (e.g. Town Hall Opening Licences)
The said Judgments also make it clear that the rulings do not only affect tour guides or holiday companies, as suggested by some parties, but in fact affect all parties involved in tourist activities. Indeed, let's consider a fairly obvious point. The 7/1995 law (as amended by 14/2009) applies to all parties wishing to rent to tourists in the Canaries. Bolkestein is obviously intended to regulate that exact type of law. So how on earth could Bolkestein be interpreted to cover only certain categories of renter when the Canarian law covers all parties?? How on earth could anybody explain or justify that level of 'cherry-picking'?
Plus, even if mine and the Judges' analyses were somehow wrong and Bolkestein does only apply to businesses, then owners can obviously now go ahead and rent their properties through one of the dozens of independent rental agents in Tenerife (who are BUSINESSES), even if such owners don't have the confidence to put their own private adverts and websites back up just yet.
For anyone who still isn't quite ready to take my word for it, the subject has also been widely published in the Canarian press, which not a single person on this forum appears to have picked upon, despite Google bringing up both of the follow articles when the relevant keywords are entered:
From La Opinion (8th February 2013):
http://www.laopinion.es/canarias/2013/02/08/canarias-nueva-turistica-legalizara-150000-camas/458671.html
From La Provincia (9th February 2013):
http://www.laprovincia.es/canarias/2013/02/09/tribunales-tumban-autorizacion-previa-alojamientos-turisticos/513421.html
It should also be noted that the newly proposed law entitled “Ley de Renovación y Modernización Turística de Canarias” has been formulated in direct response to the above court rulings, a conclusion which is also reached by the writer of the article in La Opinion above. Indeed, if all the Judges are wrong and the 7/1995 law is somehow unaffected by Bolkestein, why is the Canarian Government now rushing to change it? They have buried their heads in the sand and ignored the overwhelming criticism of the 7/1995 Law for almost 16 years. It seems that High Court rulings have a wonderful way of focusing the government’s attention.
Further clarification is being sought on the rather vague information available as to how the proposed new law will work or when it will be introduced. The timetable for implementation of the new law can be found here:
http://www.parcan.es/iniciativa.py?numero=8L/PL-0006
However, we anticipate that further clarification will be published in April, following which we will write a further article with more information.
Meanwhile, until such new law is introduced, the obvious analysis of the legal situation is that any owner or agent wishing to rent their property on a tourist complex is not legally obliged to use the sole exploitation agent nor to obtain any specific tourist rental licence in advance and may now proceed to rent their property privately or through an independent agent. However, if owners wish to play it safe, they should stick to renting through a 'business', namely any independent rental agent'.
For further clarification, a complex is designated as ‘touristic’ if it is specified as such in the complex’s own community rules/statutes. Whether the complex has obtained a ‘licence’ to rent to tourists is irrelevant to its legal status as being either ‘touristic’ or ‘residential’.
In the meantime, anyone who receives an inspection demand or a denuncia fine should send the inspectors packing and immediately instruct a firm of solicitors (not necessarily mine) who will represent them for no more than €2.500 - €3.000 euros (a fair fee for the work involved) and who actually fights for their clients and does not simply advise them to pay up or haggle the fine.
I trust that this clears up the confusion over the issue. Meanwhile, I shall make no comment as to the apparent errors and inconsistencies in the 'legal opinion' apparently tendered by others. Suffice it to say, if any other 'lawyer' wishes to comment further, I'm sure they can come on the forum and give up their 'free time' to set out their response, just as I have done.
Conclusion: Let's put this ridiculous 'sole agency' law to bed once and for all, so that agents and property owners can live their lives and operate their businesses without fear and help to make Tenerife the booming success that we all know it can be!
Taliban, brave little girl in Pakistan,Robert Mugabe......Come back Portugal all is forgiven. AG (Alias Nelson) will sell his apartments as soon as he can and dissapear over the horizon having first paid his fine. Now that is true never mind the other drivel that comes from him!!!!
PS; 9 plus In the end was it John, Jonh or Tony Hatrick or Hatricks?????????? I think hatricks would suit cos he's heading for several own goals.
Altamira
27-03-2013, 17:18
Can i confirm.
The three cases we are talking about were found not guilty because they didnt have the right Papers but couldn't be guilty as the BD allowed them to start a business in another member state without completing the right start up paper work?
This is a technicality? No?
That they got off just means the local Gov needs to adjust what they are denouncing?
Legally Drafted Newspaper Article There are differing opinions on this issue, perhaps if you read the John Hatrick legally drafted article, you would then come to the conclusion that the 3 cases were about something else!!!!!! its all a bit confusing for many observers, but the well informed will have a good grasp of the reality of the situation.
TF Solicitors
27-03-2013, 17:24
I have just posted a long response on the forum (in two parts due to the size), which is apparently awaiting 'approval'.
Taliban, brave little girl in Pakistan,Robert Mugabe......Come back Portugal all is forgiven. AG (Alias Nelson) will sell his apartments as soon as he can and dissapear over the horizon having first paid his fine. Now that is true never mind the other drivel that comes from him!!!!
PS; 9 plus In the end was it John, Jonh or Tony Hatrick or Hatricks?????????? I think hatricks would suit cos he's heading for several own goals.
I'm not too sure but i was expecting a "professional discussion" from a Lawyer really, to see if he is raising the bar or just at the bar.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I have just posted a long response on the forum (in two parts due to the size), which is apparently awaiting 'approval'.
Great stuff
slodgedad get your finger out and get those posts approved what do you think we pay you for?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
inflatable crocodiles
View Tag Cloud
RADness x
The big guns are starting up soon
junglejim
27-03-2013, 18:28
The Guns of Neverwon ? Starring Gregory Picky - It´s all Greek to me !
The Guns of Neverwon ? Starring Gregory Picky - It´s all Greek to me !
No need to be confused, reality is catching up with events, it was never that complicated, just a silly law out of step with the real world,
In the end a load of fuss over something perfectly normal and uncontroversial, renting out holiday homes
where is it then?
Perhaps the Moderators have decided to turn this thread into a cliffhanger serial - episode 6411 tomorrow!?
Could be the awaited post is so big it has broken the Forum Website - it says at the bottom there is another page (642), but if you click on it, it goes back to page 640!!!!
dunnaworry Tdm as soon as sloggy gets out the pub he'll pull his finger out
seanocelt
27-03-2013, 18:57
Perhaps the Moderators have decided to turn this thread into a cliffhanger serial - episode 6411 tomorrow!?
Could be the awaited post is so big it has broken the Forum Website - it says at the bottom there is another page (642), but if you click on it, it goes back to page 640!!!!
Dunno about cliffhanger- there's a few ready to jump off a cliff the way its heading.
ffs sloggy..........
Perhaps he's seeking Legal Advice before authorising the post - do you think he will have gone to Tenerife Solicitors for that !? :spin:
does one need legal advice to answer you?
does one need legal advice to answer you?
I myself give advice more freely the more you ply me with drinks, and I won't get upset by your answers, unless they are stupid uninformed ones!.
I myself give advice more freely the more you ply me with drinks, and I won't get upset by your answers, unless they are stupid uninformed ones!.
haaaahahaha man where did you come from ?
haaaahahaha man where did you come from ?
Do you need a lesson on the birds and the bees if you don't know where people come from? (only joking)
This particular thread is of interest and of relevance as I live on a Touristic Complex that has both
a Sole Lettings Exploitation Company, as well as a number of Private Letters.
I have been following this thread with interest since it first appeared, but I only make posts on this Forum
if I think they may be interest to others, or I can answer somebody's question in an informed manner.
I too can't wait to see what TF Solicitors have to say in answer to everything that has been said of them on here, and would like to think we might receive some more "genuine" factual information about the whole situation..
boredinscotland
27-03-2013, 19:59
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, right,,,where's the 'Facts?'
I rented illegally on residential complex for 5 years or so, as I did not get much of a return plus this letting law sold up and spent my money better elsewhere,,,,,you ever thought about doing that Nelson? you will never win this one
slodgedad
27-03-2013, 20:09
I'm not too sure but i was expecting a "professional discussion" from a Lawyer really, to see if he is raising the bar or just at the bar.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Great stuff
slodgedad get your finger out and get those posts approved what do you think we pay you for?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
inflatable crocodiles
View Tag Cloud
RADness x
Thorry thir. Just logged on...
9PLUS/Slodge - any chance of seeing Part One from TFSolrs :)
UPDATE ON TOURIST RENTAL LAWS - THE FACTS!
Given the vitriol, bile and self-serving rubbish spouted by a regrettable minority of members on this forum, I do not propose to enter into ongoing correspondence or debate on this issue via the forum. However, if anyone wishes to discuss the following issues in a civilized manner, they are welcome to contact me via email or our website.
Janet ********'s website (plus a handful of 'bar room experts' on this forum) have boldly announced that the article I wrote in the local press was incorrect or an 'advertorial'. Please now allow me (a qualified lawyer regulated in both Spain and England with 3 million Euros professional indemnity insurance) to set the facts straight.
I have now obtained copies of the Judgments from the TSJC (High Court of the Canary Islands), which is the highest court in the archipelago, whose decisions affect Tenerife. Those Judgments are:
1. 23rd December 2011 - Appeal by ‘Teide 10 S.L.’ (223/2010)
2. 22nd December 2011 Appeal by ‘The Assoc of Tenerife Professional Tourist Guides of Tenerife’ & others (ref: 363/2010),
3. 8th May 2012, Appeal by Surfing Club Aguila Playa S.L. (91/2011).
Copies of the Judgments are available from our office on request by email (free of charge).
CONTINUED IN SEPARATE POST BELOW DUE TO SIZE OF ARTICLE.................
Altamira
27-03-2013, 21:53
Tenerife Solicitors With reference to your legally drafted newspaper article, many thanks for taking the time to respond to the counter arguments. I am sure many of us appreciate to have read your side of the argument and we hope you are correct. The problem arose because of other notable comments from others offering a different legal opinion, I am therefore delighted to read your vigorous response, I only wish you had responded earlier.
CONTINUED FROM ABOVE..........
In the 1st and 3rd case, the parties were appealing against fines issued to them by the tourist board for allegedly failing to comply with the licence requirements under the Law of 7/1995. In the 2nd case, the parties were challenging provisions of a new decree introduced in 2010 which specifically affected their industry (tour guides). That decree operated in conjunction with the controversial tourism exploitation law 7/1995.
In cases 1 and 3, the Judge expressly criticised the requirements to obtain a rental licence as set out in the 7/1995 law, describing those requirements as both disproportionate and in breach of the Bolkestein Directive under European Law.
In case 2, the key provisions of the said decree were ruled to be illegal, whilst in cases 1 and 3, the Judge threw out the denuncias and cancelled the associated fines issued by the tourist board.
In case 2, the Judge helpfully defined the scope of the 2006 Bolkestein Directive (Directive 2006/123/EC), namely that it applies to all tourist services in the Canary Islands, including tourist accommodation, travel agents, tour guides and recreational services. He commented that the Directive required all European member states to revise and modify their existing laws so as to simplify the administrative process and assist in the creation of new businesses and employment. Unsurprisingly, the Canarian Government thumbed their nose at this directive when the 7/1995 law was updated by the law of 14/2009.
The Judge went on to expressly state that the existing tourism laws (namely Law 7/1995 which was amended by Law 14/2009) regulating administrative licences to trade were incompatible with the Bolkestein Directive, whilst expressly criticising the 7/1995 law as being disproportionate. The Judge also highlighted the rather obvious fact that obtaining a licence in advance of trading provides no reassurance as to ongoing standards and that ongoing monitoring and supervision of rental establishments is the only effective solution.
For clarification, the licences referred to are those required specifically to rent properties to tourists. There is NO reference in the Judgment to any other type of upfront licence to trade that a business might require (e.g. Town Hall Opening Licences)
The said Judgments also make it clear that the rulings do not only affect tour guides or holiday companies, as suggested by some parties, but in fact affect all parties involved in tourist activities. Indeed, let's consider a fairly obvious point. The 7/1995 law (as amended by 14/2009) applies to all parties wishing to rent to tourists in the Canaries. Bolkestein is obviously intended to regulate that exact type of law. So how on earth could Bolkestein be interpreted to cover only certain categories of renter when the Canarian law covers all parties?? How on earth could anybody explain or justify that level of 'cherry-picking'?
Plus, even if mine and the Judges' analyses were somehow wrong and Bolkestein does only apply to businesses, then owners can obviously now go ahead and rent their properties through one of the dozens of independent rental agents in Tenerife (who are BUSINESSES), even if such owners don't have the confidence to put their own private adverts and websites back up just yet.
For anyone who still isn't quite ready to take my word for it, the subject has also been widely published in the Canarian press, which not a single person on this forum appears to have picked upon, despite Google bringing up both of the follow articles when the relevant keywords are entered:
From La Opinion (8th February 2013):
http://www.laopinion.es/canarias/2013/02/08/canarias-nueva-turistica-legalizara-150000-camas/458671.html
From La Provincia (9th February 2013):
http://www.laprovincia.es/canarias/2013/02/09/tribunales-tumban-autorizacion-previa-alojamientos-turisticos/513421.html
It should also be noted that the newly proposed law entitled “Ley de Renovación y Modernización Turística de Canarias” has been formulated in direct response to the above court rulings, a conclusion which is also reached by the writer of the article in La Opinion above. Indeed, if all the Judges are wrong and the 7/1995 law is somehow unaffected by Bolkestein, why is the Canarian Government now rushing to change it? They have buried their heads in the sand and ignored the overwhelming criticism of the 7/1995 Law for almost 16 years. It seems that High Court rulings have a wonderful way of focusing the government’s attention.
Further clarification is being sought on the rather vague information available as to how the proposed new law will work or when it will be introduced. The timetable for implementation of the new law can be found here:
http://www.parcan.es/iniciativa.py?numero=8L/PL-0006
However, we anticipate that further clarification will be published in April, following which we will write a further article with more information.
Meanwhile, until such new law is introduced, the obvious analysis of the legal situation is that any owner or agent wishing to rent their property on a tourist complex is not legally obliged to use the sole exploitation agent nor to obtain any specific tourist rental licence in advance and may now proceed to rent their property privately or through an independent agent. However, if owners wish to play it safe, they should stick to renting through a 'business', namely any independent rental agent'.
For further clarification, a complex is designated as ‘touristic’ if it is specified as such in the complex’s own community rules/statutes. Whether the complex has obtained a ‘licence’ to rent to tourists is irrelevant to its legal status as being either ‘touristic’ or ‘residential’.
In the meantime, anyone who receives an inspection demand or a denuncia fine should send the inspectors packing and immediately instruct a firm of solicitors (not necessarily mine) who will represent them for no more than €2.500 - €3.000 euros (a fair fee for the work involved) and who actually fights for their clients and does not simply advise them to pay up or haggle the fine.
I trust that this clears up the confusion over the issue. Meanwhile, I shall make no comment as to the apparent errors and inconsistencies in the 'legal opinion' apparently tendered by others. Suffice it to say, if any other 'lawyer' wishes to comment further, I'm sure they can come on the forum and give up their 'free time' to set out their response, just as I have done.
Conclusion: Let's put this ridiculous 'sole agency' law to bed once and for all, so that agents and property owners can live their lives and operate their businesses without fear and help to make Tenerife the booming success that we all know it can be!
copies of the Judgments from the TSJC (High Court of the Canary Islands) .... in Spanish
1. 23rd December 2011 - Appeal by ‘Teide 10 S.L.’ (223/2010)
http://www.poderjudicial.es/search/doAction?action=contentpdf&databasematch=AN&reference=6396525&links=ley%20turismo%20previa&optimize=20120606&publicinterface=true
2. 22nd December 2011 Appeal by ‘The Assoc of Tenerife Professional Tourist Guides of Tenerife’ & others (ref: 363/2010),
http://www.poderjudicial.es/search/doAction?action=contentpdf&databasematch=AN&reference=6396511&links=turismo&optimize=20120606&publicinterface=true
3. 8th May 2012, Appeal by Surfing Club Aguila Playa S.L. (91/2011).
http://www.poderjudicial.es/search/doAction?action=contentpdf&databasematch=AN&reference=6491374&links=Surfing%20Club%20Aguila&optimize=20120911&publicinterface=true
I too would like to say thank you to Tenerife Solicitors for taking the time to respond on this Forum and clarify quite a number of points that had become clouded and caused confusion amongst most of the people who own property in the Canarias.
I quite understand that you needed time to study copies of the judgements before making your detailed reply.
I just hope that the new law takes account of the High Court rulings, is clearly and fully explained, and doesn't move the goalposts again, as seems to be the way in Tenerife.
I await with interest the next article you say you will publish when the new law has been published (in April?)
Reading through Tenerifelegal's posts it all seems very reasonable and positive for the future. Can I just ask .... there has been talk on here of the Canary Islands having some "special dispensation" from the EU allowing them to not have to comply with EU laws concerning the sole agencies on touristic complexes. Is there any truth to that "rumour/piffle"?
junglejim
27-03-2013, 22:28
Has Nelson´s left arm just been sewed back on by TFS´s retort ?- are we going to have another Trafalgar ?-Willthe Spanish Armada regroup?
Kiss me Hardy !
:twak::thanx::read::poke::popcorn:
It should also be noted that the newly proposed law entitled “Ley de Renovación y Modernización Turística de Canarias” has been formulated in direct response to the above court rulings, a conclusion which is also reached by the writer of the article in La Opinion above. Indeed, if all the Judges are wrong and the 7/1995 law is somehow unaffected by Bolkestein, why is the Canarian Government now rushing to change it? They have buried their heads in the sand and ignored the overwhelming criticism of the 7/1995 Law for almost 16 years. It seems that High Court rulings have a wonderful way of focusing the government’s attention.
I believe the new law is mainly concerned with offering incentives to enterprises to modernise their tourism stock. Transitional provisions give two years grace for complexes (not individual owners) to bring their units up to standard.
welshman
27-03-2013, 22:39
I got to take my hat off to you Nelson you stuck to your guns.
Things may be going the right way, people have slagged you off and laught for so long.
Sole agents are not laughing now.
Hope they are big enough to accept what has been written.
Good on You:jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping:
Got a 24 hr reception nelson ?
I got to take my hat off to you Nelson you stuck to your guns.
Things may be going the right way, people have slagged you off and laught for so long.
Sole agents are not laughing now.
Hope they are big enough to accept what has been written.
Good on You:jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping:
We are still back to a matter of interpretation between two lawyers - these cases quoted above refer to businesses (and the fourth, the one considered by Alcota lawyers, was to do with this company http://www.sbhfue.com)
Other thing is why "on earth" did you not include this is not legal advice on the forum post yet you made sure it was included in the news paper article?
I honestly don't see what this response actually tells us that we didn't already know and accept - no one on here has said that bolkestein does not remove the need to get prior authorization to begin trading....... We all agree it removes that necessity and it's done so to make trade easier to begin.
All of the cases have been thrown out because the BD trumps the requirement to have prior authorization - which is what they were penalized for.
So yes , any company can begin trading without asking for permission first. This doesn't mean they don't have to follow the rest of the laws in their industry.
To begin practicing law I'm sure there are exams you need to pass and rules you have to follow (maybe like having 3 million indemnity....?)..... Otherwise I can start practicing as a lawyer or a doctor in the morning .....
Yes we agree you don't have to ask to start trading because of bolkestein but there are other things in the tourist laws that any business have to follow , for example:
Unity of exploitation - only one company per complex allowed to rent the units .
Company must have 50%+1.
Owners must sign document expressly authorizing company to let their apartment.
Company Must have a reception
Company must have sufficient staff to deal with customers requirements....
Blah blah blah.....
Just because a company doesn't have to ask before trading try still have to follow laws!!!!!!
The articles you have linked to we're mentioned by me on this forum within the last couple of weeks, one of those articles says what Doreen just posted and not what you posted in your article.
Until a high court judge expressly says "the whole of the tourist laws are now scrapped" then they are all legal APART form the requirement for prior authorization which we all agree the BD trumps.....
It occurs to me that these cases help our member sunspot and another prominent agent who was fined for running a business advertising/managing several holiday rentals .... however they would not help the individuals whose properties they advertised.
It occurs to me that these cases help our member sunspot and another prominent agent who was fined for running a business advertising/managing several holiday rentals .... however they would not help the individuals whose properties they advertised.
It's only going to help them of they were penalized for not having "authorizacion previa".... If their crime was "letting without abiding by the principle of unity of exploitation " / "not having inspection books" how will bolkestein help then?
The fines were issued for not having and therefore not displaying "el libro de reclamaciones" which applies to any business in Spain.The early fines for renting through the internet were dropped in many cases although the second charge of not having the "libro" could still apply.Strikes me that Mr.Hatrick hasn't come up with a solution to this because you can only get this official,numbered reclamation book by being a registered business.Mr.Hatricks response appears to be typical of a lawyer, rant a bit and then blind them with a bit of legal jargon.First he tells people who read his article that they can rent out their aparments without using the sole agent and now he tells them that maybe, to cover themselve,s they should us the sole agent so he isn't helping the situation.If there is legislation due to appear in April then why isn't he waiting to see what it says?
According to this logic;
Bolkestein says no need for prior authorization.
Which means anyone can be active in any field and doesn't have to follow laws of their industry at all.
So I can be a lawyer and I don't have to follow any lawyers legal requirements.
I can be a doctor and don't need to have training or follow any laws relating to this practice.
I can open a restaurant and not bother following hygiene laws.
I can start any business and not give anyone a contract of employment .....
The fines were issued for not having and therefore not displaying "el libro de reclamaciones" which applies to any business in Spain.The early fines for renting through the internet were dropped in many cases although the second charge of not having the "libro" could still apply.Strikes me that Mr.Hatrick hasn't come up with a solution to this because you can only get this official,numbered reclamation book by being a registered business.Mr.Hatricks response appears to be typical of a lawyer, rant a bit and then blind them with a bit of legal jargon.First he tells people who read his article that they can rent out their aparments without using the sole agent and now he tells them that maybe, to cover themselve,s they should us the sole agent so he isn't helping the situation.If there is legislation due to appear in April then why isn't he waiting to see what it says?
In fairness, fonica, his quote was not advising the use of Sole Agents :)
Plus, even if mine and the Judges' analyses were somehow wrong and Bolkestein does only apply to businesses, then owners can obviously now go ahead and rent their properties through one of the dozens of independent rental agents in Tenerife (who are BUSINESSES), even if such owners don't have the confidence to put their own private adverts and websites back up just yet.
... and going back to a point of 9PLUS's, perhaps he should have added "not legal advice etc" or perhaps one could go after that 3 million indemnity :)
The fines were issued for not having and therefore not displaying "el libro de reclamaciones" which applies to any business in Spain.The early fines for renting through the internet were dropped in many cases although the second charge of not having the "libro" could still apply.Strikes me that Mr.Hatrick hasn't come up with a solution to this because you can only get this official,numbered reclamation book by being a registered business.Mr.Hatricks response appears to be typical of a lawyer, rant a bit and then blind them with a bit of legal jargon.First he tells people who read his article that they can rent out their aparments without using the sole agent and now he tells them that maybe, to cover themselve,s they should us the sole agent so he isn't helping the situation.If there is legislation due to appear in April then why isn't he waiting to see what it says?
re-read what he said I think you've misunderstood what he said.
Old TF Solicitors wannabeback he's just a one hit wonder, wants the money at his office.
I have the right to change my mind whenever i like just like any other woman.
re-read what he said I think you've misunderstood what he said.
I'll give him another go in the morning when hopefully it will make more sense!!!!!
seanocelt
28-03-2013, 02:58
Me too, as he seems to say exactly this- anyone can rent out as long the complex was originally designated touristic, forget licences, and if you are nervous use an agency (not a sole agent). Presume now agents are not nervous and will happily take on apartments to rent now then? Think i will become one then. (and i have the right!)
Exactly he's saying because businesses don't need prior authorization to trade any business can operate in any complex and rent apartments out for the owners.
What hasn't been addresses is why suddenly every law and regulation in the tourist industry is then allowed to beignored just because a business doesn't need prior authorization to trade .
This logic is :
Businesses don't need prior authorization to trade - therefore once trading has begun they can ignore all other regulations in their industry.
Altamira
28-03-2013, 10:42
Legal Advice To date I have listened to four separate lawyers, regarding the existing and proposed new tourist laws and I am non the wiser, but I am better informed. I think we shall all need to wait for the outcome of the individual existing court cases and the proposed new laws. Only time will tell what the future holds for tourist apartment owners, but will this be settled soon? or will it last for several more years? Does anyone know when the new laws will be announced?
If these three cases had been for businesses who weren't related to the tourist industry ie:
One was a hairdresser.
One was an electrician.
One was a decorator.
And they'd all been fined for working with any prior authorization to begin to trading ......
...... Would the same conclusion be drawn about sole agents?
Me too, as he seems to say exactly this- anyone can rent out as long the complex was originally designated touristic, forget licences, and if you are nervous use an agency (not a sole agent). Presume now agents are not nervous and will happily take on apartments to rent now then? Think i will become one then. (and i have the right!)
You are welcome to rent apartments on this complex as long as the booking comes via my office. Should you chose to take the payment or have the payment made direct to the owner I think you may find both yourself and the property owner liable to prosecution!
essexeddie
28-03-2013, 11:36
By the looks of whats been happening in Cyprus people will be taking their money out of Tenerife. Or think twice about investing there.
the vast majority of people will sell essexeddie?
seanocelt
28-03-2013, 12:09
You are welcome to rent apartments on this complex as long as the booking comes via my office. Should you chose to take the payment or have the payment made direct to the owner I think you may find both yourself and the property owner liable to prosecution!
What if my pals had apartments on Sur y Sol, and other single units elsewhere? If they are too scared to risk (another!) fine, i could "become" their agent? And other people's on other non sole agent complexes? My interpretation of the latest solicitor update, just playing devil's advocate, as usual.
Thanks Doreen,as usual you are right! (It was late when I read it). Lovey to see you back on forum with your cool view on the subject.
Medanoman
28-03-2013, 12:15
By the looks of whats been happening in Cyprus people will be taking their money out of Tenerife. Or think twice about investing there.
I was not at all worried about that happening...Tenerife is Spain my friend and while Spain is in the doldrums its debts in comparison to Ireland or Portugal are a small fraction of GDP.
The biggest problem for any investor regardless of where they are is the current currency devaluation war that is going on.
Mind you tho , Its when that Liar Rajy comes on the tele saying that will never happen in Spain I get the collywobbles. :shy:
More worrying is the amount of euros that were taken out of Spain in the early years of the downturn.I suspect that Spanish politicos have long since removed their savings from the Spanish bank coffers and will therefore be less worried about what happens to our deposits. It will be interesting to see ,one day in the future,just how many politicians in Cyprus had removed their money from the banks before they closed 10 days ago.
The big guns made a quite a noise , I could not count them , but the deafening noise made me feel sure that there was at least 1000 all firing off at the same time out of the silence of the desert night, just as general Montgomery had said they would, El Alamein 1942.
There really is no need for confusion. The day of freedom has dawned, and as I did say just a couple of weeks ago , much sooner than people could imagine.
Individuals in regards to the law are no different to limited companies, it's just a type of legal entity. You don't have different laws for individuals and companies , that would be, well, Alice in wonderland.
I was a business age 14 when I took a bus to Manchester to buy watches to sell , I am also a business today with a couple of holiday homes to rent out. Alan sugar is also a business.
The judges have spelt it out plain, we have to obey euro law. Also from what they have said they don't like the 1995 law, they seem to see it as unnecessary and protectionist.
I bet they soon start an investigation into tourismo/ ass hotel, to find out why they are fighting for such a damaging law, a responsible democratic govt would not normally do that.
Could be this now opens up a can of worms, and the judges are on the trail.
What is urgently needed , lets not forget, is a permit system and a fiscal contribution from the private renters, we need all the ads back online , punters on the islands, but a tax contribution.
That's now up to the govt, but our golden day of victory is here
I'm a Lawyer now
I don,t believe you !! mind you I never believed you were an electrician either:laugh:
I believe you're a bulldog
junglejim
28-03-2013, 12:56
The big guns made a quite a noise , I could not count them , but the deafening noise made me feel sure that there was at least 1000 all firing off at the same time out of the silence of the desert night, just as general Montgomery had said they would, El Alamein 1942.
Tanks for the memories Nelson.. you´ll be quoting Churchill next!!
Winston Churchill said of this victory: "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end, but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
The big guns made a quite a noise , I could not count them , but the deafening noise made me feel sure that there was at least 1000 all firing off at the same time out of the silence of the desert night, just as general Montgomery had said they would, El Alamein 1942.
Tanks for the memories Nelson.. you´ll be quoting Churchill next!!
Winston Churchill said of this victory: "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end, but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
yes he did say that, and so many other wonderful things. He is my hero number one, been down to his grave near blenheim, and I read his books and books about him. I chose el alemein as my analogy for where we are now based on churchills speech you have quoted. There is still some way to go on this matter, but we all must now understand that the end is certain.
a free letting market for holiday homes, like everywhere else in europe , and a museum for the sole agents.
And to the ja/alotca camp, that is not a free for all. just reality and commonsense.
they rang out the church bells all over the country after the victory at el alamein in 1942, first time since the war began, up to then to do so would have meant german invasion in progress. our bells are all ringing today in celebration
I believe you're a bulldog
you,re 100% right I am a bulldog ,now post us your license number issued from industria
you,re 100% right I am a bulldog ,now post us your license number issued from industria
You don't need that anymore remember! There are now no regulations in any industry!
Fivepence
28-03-2013, 14:01
It may soon be the end of this thread because if the airlines keep increasing their prices, they will effectively end all tourist letting in Tenerife!
So it won't matter whether you are a sole agent or owner.
http://www.tenerifeforum.org/tenerife-forum/showthread.php?706-When-do-Easyjet-announce-their-flight-schedule&p=274460#post274460
You don't need that anymore remember! There are now no regulations in any industry!
Nobody is saying that, but regs have to be same Europe wide, and you could never compel a complex of individual owners to have to rent out through a single monopoly agent. That would be illegal and Alice in wonderland.
junglejim
28-03-2013, 14:07
Not so Nelson -e.g.- Big stores in Scotland can trade every Sunday - not so in Englandshire , many other regulations differ too - Scots Law v English Law is full of differences!
Canarias are different. Sole agents are here to stay.
With the EU backing.
Not so Nelson -e.g.- Big stores in Scotland can trade every Sunday - not so in Englandshire , many other regulations differ too - Scots Law v English Law is full of differences!
Could be that's illegal too, most commercial things hav to be in harmony, our farmers often comply with welfare issues . Europe ingnores them.
The canarys were getting away with sole agency, now their crackdown has brought it crashing down on them in the courts, bit like the japs after pearl harbour, like I posted a million posts back
Nobody is saying that, but regs have to be same Europe wide, and you could never compel a complex of individual owners to have to rent out through a single monopoly agent. That would be illegal and Alice in wonderland.
the only thing the EU law has done is made it ok to start an activity without prior permission - therefore ALL OTHER PARTS OF ALL TOURIST LAWS STILL APPLY.
Could be that's illegal too, most commercial things hav to be in harmony, our farmers often comply with welfare issues . Europe ingnores them.
The canarys were getting away with sole agency, now their crackdown has brought it crashing down on them in the courts, bit like the japs after pearl harbour, like I posted a million posts back
So how does the effect you nelson?
Angusjim
28-03-2013, 14:30
the only thing the EU law has done is made it ok to start an activity without prior permission - therefore ALL OTHER PARTS OF ALL TOURIST LAWS STILL APPLY.
I have almost lost the will to live with this but if its so black & white about the law why are they not just pushing on with the court cases and collecting in the fines ???
As the solicitor has posted, you can't cherry pick the bits of the bd you want, it's about freedom for us all to operate not just start up.
Read the solicitors post , it's all there for you and very clear.
You may be in shock just now, maybe best to lie down in a dark room for a few hours first and then try
Show us where it is if it's so clear
Show us where it is if it's so clear
Post number 6402 on this thread
Where is the Law to back up his opinion, the exact paragraph/s for everything he has said ?
Reading through Tenerifelegal's posts it all seems very reasonable and positive for the future. Can I just ask .... there has been talk on here of the Canary Islands having some "special dispensation" from the EU allowing them to not have to comply with EU laws concerning the sole agencies on touristic complexes. Is there any truth to that "rumour/piffle"?
They have extra periferal status, they enjoy special exemption from some aspects of euro law because they are so far from Europe .
This is nothing to fear , the exemption meant to help the islands economy, not to help something damaging and unnecessary like the 1995 law and monopoly sole agency.
The judges are onto this issue, the govt has to argue why on earth it wants the 1995 laws, there has to be good and sensible reasons to invoke the periferal argument. Turismo/ ass hotel are going to feel very uneasy as the spotlight falls on them, questions are going to start to be asked.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Got a 24 hr reception nelson ?
Won't need one, I am renting 2 self catering holiday apartments, not a hotel. We are talking reality and commonsense now, you don't need 24 hour reception in cottages in Ireland,gites in Brittany or a cottage in Wensleydale .
When you get confused between a hotel and a small self catering apartment that's when you end up messing the law.
Thankfully the days of such confusion in the canaries are over.
As the solicitor has posted, you can't cherry pick the bits of the bd you want, it's about freedom for us all to operate not just start up.
Read the solicitors post , it's all there for you and very clear.
You may be in shock just now, maybe best to lie down in a dark room for a few hours first and then try
Why can't we do that ??
You've been doing it for months with all the posts on this thread.
Why can't we do that ??
You've been doing it for months with all the posts on this thread.
Sorry I thought I had been consistently and clearly arguing the same position all these months.
In summary,
The 1995 law is wrong and will be beaten by euro law.
Sole agency is completely unnecessary and unknown anywhere else on the globe.
1995 law requirements for apartments are unnecessary hotel style add ons.
The govt is harming its own economy with the crackdown, and should permit charge the renters.
Not sure what part of you and your friends debate I have chosen to cherry pick? I won't even mention your one about not opposing laws ,
Sorry I thought I had been consistently and clearly arguing the same position all these months.
In summary,
The 1995 law is wrong and will be beaten by euro law.
Sole agency is completely unnecessary and unknown anywhere else on the globe.
1995 law requirements for apartments are unnecessary hotel style add ons.
The govt is harming its own economy with the crackdown, and should permit charge the renters.
Not sure what part of you and your friends debate I have chosen to cherry pick? I won't even mention your one about not opposing laws ,
I have never argued that you can't oppose laws, what I've argued is that until such time as they change the law, the law stands as it has been passed by a democratically elected government.
You keep banging on about damage to the economy - where's your evidence ??
Tourist numbers being down doesn't mean that the loss of illegal lettings is the sole cause. Will you be organising opposition to the airlines bumping up the price of the flights to Tenerife ?? That will have more impact on the tourist numbers than any clampdown on illegal letting.
When I can get a week's B&B in a 4* hotel on the Algarve with flights for less than the cost of the flights only to Tenerife, I'm going to the Algarve - much as I love Tenerife.
As the solicitor has posted, you can't cherry pick the bits of the bd you want, it's about freedom for us all to operate not just start up.
Read the solicitors post , it's all there for you and very clear.
You may be in shock just now, maybe best to lie down in a dark room for a few hours first and then try
The only thing I'm in shock about is the stupidity of your posts.
The BD has only been applied to how those 3 court cases were penalized , and if it hasn't then the alternative reality is that every business no longer has to worry about it's regulations.
Which reality do you want to pretend we're in and we can go forward accordingly.
If the later, I'd like to be a fully qualified astronaut this week please.
seanocelt
28-03-2013, 18:08
Sorry I thought I had been consistently and clearly arguing the same position all these months.
In summary,
The 1995 law is wrong and will be beaten by euro law.
Sole agency is completely unnecessary and unknown anywhere else on the globe.
1995 law requirements for apartments are unnecessary hotel style add ons.
The govt is harming its own economy with the crackdown, and should permit charge the renters.
Not sure what part of you and your friends debate I have chosen to cherry pick? I won't even mention your one about not opposing laws ,
First 3 points are hard to argue with but they are what we are still stuck with, 4th a nice idea of your, who is listening?
I still think you are unlikely to see these wishes change to reality anytime soon. Latest Tenerife Solicitor's post, to me, makes it no more likely for now. Are YOU going to start re-advertising on the strength of his comments ?(serious question).
The only thing I'm in shock about is the stupidity of your posts.
The BD has only been applied to how those 3 court cases were penalized , and if it hasn't then the alternative reality is that every business no longer has to worry about it's regulations.
Which reality do you want to pretend we're in and we can go forward accordingly.
If the later, I'd like to be a fully qualified astronaut this week please.
Back in the dark room for a bit longer for you , it could end up being like a bunker under the richstag
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
First 3 points are hard to argue with but they are what we are still stuck with, 4th a nice idea of yourso is listening?
I still think you are unlikely to see these wishes change to reality anytime soon. Latest Tenerife Solicitor's post, to me, makes it no more likely for now. Are YOU going to start re-advertising on the strength of his comments ?(serious question).
I will stick with family and friends for now, when my case is won then I can advertise, the cases just like mine will be in appeal court soon
I'm sure it was "Reichstag".........
Altamira
28-03-2013, 18:30
Legal Advice To date I have listened to four separate lawyers, regarding the existing and proposed new tourist laws and I am non the wiser, but I am better informed. I think we shall all need to wait for the outcome of the individual existing court cases and the proposed new laws. Only time will tell what the future holds for tourist apartment owners, but will this be settled soon? or will it last for several more years? Does anyone know when the new laws will be announced?
Ping Pong With regards to recent posts, I now appear to be watching an endurance ping pong match that shows no sign of ending until the outcome of a legal judgment concerning an independent apartment owner. I do hope we get a decision soon otherwise I will get dizzy.
Ping Pong With regards to recent posts, I now appear to be watching an endurance ping pong match that shows no sign of ending until the outcome of a legal judgment concerning an independent apartment owner. I do hope we get a decision soon otherwise I will get dizzy.
Its similar to the epic battle between the RAF and the Luftwaffe over the British skies in the summer and autumn of 1940, despite the bomber attacks by the nazi airforce, the RAF fought on and eventually won this particular war of atrition........ Due to te Luftwaffes inability to defeat the RAF Hitlers plans for an amphibious invasion of Britain could not be carried out - many saw this as a turning point in the war.........
Sole agents = RAF
Fivepence
28-03-2013, 19:20
Its similar to the epic battle between the RAF and the Luftwaffe over the British skies in the summer and autumn of 1940, despite the bomber attacks by the nazi airforce, the RAF fought on and eventually won this particular war of atrition........ Due to te Luftwaffes inability to defeat the RAF Hitlers plans for an amphibious invasion of Britain could not be carried out - many saw this as a turning point in the war.........
Sole agents = RAF
RAF = Rental Apartment Fee......................:whistle:
Ecky Thump
28-03-2013, 19:33
Sole agents = RAF
RAF= Sole Agents = Redundancies :p
I am now seriously concerned that I may not live to see the end of this saga.So in the process of trying to get access to the forum in my next life so I can be assured of seeing the final episode!
seanocelt
28-03-2013, 20:01
"I will stick with family and friends for now, when my case is won then I can advertise, the cases just like mine will be in appeal court soon"[/QUOTE]from NELSON;
Ah....................so your NOT taking it as gospel? And it MAY NOT be correct? I concur!
I am now seriously concerned that I may not live to see the end of this saga.So in the process of trying to get access to the forum in my next life so I can be assured of seeing the final episode!
Illegal renters are paying the price for crimes committed in a past life.
boredinscotland
28-03-2013, 22:41
Friends and Family.............when was this Legal Nelson? it IS COMMERCIAL LETTING, i.e for money, doesn't matter if uncle sam is in your apartment or aunty betty,,it is about MONEY. When are you taking the Canarian Government to court or are you gonna talkthem into changing the Law?. You could employ TS and see how they get on for you
Illegal renters are paying the price for crimes committed in a past life.
If a sole agent ends up with Nelson as a client it will be the poor sole agent paying the price for something! Can you imagine a complex where Nelson has to use a SA ? The stresssssssssssss!
There are filters that you can attach to your camera lens to improve a picture,
and there are filters you put on your PC to get rid of Spam and Malware etc.
Wouldn't it be nice if a filter could be put on this thread to get rid of all the rubbish, back biting, and pure speculation that is posted; and just let the facts and informed and honest opinion through.
I think we need to see what form the new Law takes, and what the results are of any new court cases (if there are any) that might have a bearing on the subject.
*****
It wouldn't be the Tenerifeforum we know and love then Tdm
It wouldn't be the Tenerifeforum we know and love then Tdm
The Battle of Britain had nothing to do with monopoly exploitation and protectionism on the raf side, it was an epic struggle of good v evil . There is absolutely nothing good about 1995 letting law and sole agent monopoly exploitation , nothing for advocates of that tyranny to try to equate to.
The issue of this crackdown has been won in the canarians own courts , we should all respect their decision , Spain is moving from dictatorship to democracy , and it's judges are not today part of the irrational govt crackdown .
A change has come
lay off the drink........................pal
cheers
x
boredinscotland
29-03-2013, 01:13
:wall::wall: good luck Nelson v Canarian Government, your gonna need it
junglejim
29-03-2013, 09:04
I see JA has published an article in today´s issue of Tenerife Weekly on "The Facts" on the Letting Laws - should make interesting reading for another 20 or so pages on this thread !
It´s better than the Sun v Mirror wars!
If a sole agent ends up with Nelson as a client it will be the poor sole agent paying the price for something! Can you imagine a complex where Nelson has to use a SA ? The stresssssssssssss!
We have loads of Nelson's !!!
welshman
29-03-2013, 11:07
Why there are so many Nelson they are fed up being ripped off by the sole agents dictating to owners when an if they can use their own apartment. When they have invested many many thousands of euros in for someone to make a killing on their investment. The Law must Change and do away with the Sole agents or Tenerife will continue to fail. No one is going to invest going forward.
If it stays the same and the sole agent continue and its enforced. who in their right mind going to invest in apartments that they can use a few weeks a year and get very low return. No control over their investment. If you don,t want control stick your money in the bank or shares. No money to be made in investing in property in Canaries.
Become sole complex agent Loaded !!
Why there are so many Nelson they are fed up being ripped off by the sole agents dictating to owners when an if they can use their own apartment. When they have invested many many thousands of euros in for someone to make a killing on their investment. The Law must Change and do away with the Sole agents or Tenerife will continue to fail. No one is going to invest going forward.
If it stays the same and the sole agent continue and its enforced. who in their right mind going to invest in apartments that they can use a few weeks a year and get very low return. No control over their investment. If you don,t want control stick your money in the bank or shares. No money to be made in investing in property in Canaries.
Become sole complex agent Loaded !!
How can Nelson be fed up with sole agents when his complex has never had one?
welshman
29-03-2013, 11:49
We have loads of Nelson's !!!
You said you have loads of Nelson,s
Met this lady yesterday she has an apartment on a legal touristic complex, When she purchased she wanted to stay there for 6 months a year and loan it out after to her daughter for 20 weeks, in the following 6 weeks that remained of the year all she wanted was for her apartment to bring her in €10000 and pay for everything.
She is a lovely lady quite a character really.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.