View Full Version : The Tenerife illegal lettings thread
We have loads of Nelson's !!!
We had a couple of them but I returned them their keys and cancelled the registrations, now they have very few rentals and I notified the tourist board the reason for the cancellation. Guess they may receive a letter in the near future or just appear on the official boletin.
Red Devil
29-03-2013, 12:35
We had a couple of them but I returned them their keys and cancelled the registrations, now they have very few rentals and I notified the tourist board the reason for the cancellation. Guess they may receive a letter in the near future or just appear on the official boletin.
Thought you and Loaded were the good guys of sole agents.eek2:
Thought you and Loaded were the good guys of sole agents.eek2:
We try to be fair but sometimes owners just take the ****. Remember we face a greater penalty than the owner and when they blatantly abuse the system we will not put our neck on the line for them.
Red Devil
29-03-2013, 13:35
We try to be fair but sometimes owners just take the ****. Remember we face a greater penalty than the owner and when they blatantly abuse the system we will not put our neck on the line for them.
You mean then if they let illegally without involving you you would still get fined even if its without your knowledge? Seems a bit harsh.
You mean then if they let illegally without involving you you would still get fined even if its without your knowledge? Seems a bit harsh.
If the apartment is registered under our name - yes.
Not just all one sided against the owners!!!
Angusjim
29-03-2013, 13:55
We try to be fair but sometimes owners just take the ****. Remember we face a greater penalty than the owner and when they blatantly abuse the system we will not put our neck on the line for them.
Thats good that you can sort out bad owners quite easily but it seems a lot more difficult to sort out bad sole agents who overcharge & bully owners as seems to happen with a certain sole agent named in numerous posts
seanocelt
29-03-2013, 14:00
This forum got slated by a solicitor, yet having read the Tenerife Weekly interpretation by JA , quite a few of us have drawn the same conclusions, we are not as bad as some make out and have the balls to voice opinion, even though we are not as qualified. The internet has allowed the man in the street to question en masse, legal issues , no secrets to be paid throught the nose for now, no wonder legal eagles get their knickers in a twist.
Angusjim
29-03-2013, 14:07
This forum got slated by a solicitor, yet having read the Tenerife Weekly interpretation by JA , quite a few of us have drawn the same conclusions, we are not as bad as some make out and have the balls to voice opinion, even though we are not as qualified. The internet has allowed the man in the street to question en masse, legal issues , no secrets to be paid throught the nose for now, no wonder legal eagles get their knickers in a twist.
Well said brother Sheridan :lol:
seanocelt
29-03-2013, 14:18
Well said brother Sheridan :lol:
You after an invite to my swingers parties? Oh, awrite then.
Janets article echoes everything I and others have been saying on here and makes a lot more sense than the alternative which basically says; One EU law removed every aspect an entire industries regulations.
I've been in enough pubs to pass a bar exam!
I though JAs detailed article was excellent and written clearly enough to get the key points over for the likes of me, no legal eagle, to understand what the current law is.
Angusjim
29-03-2013, 14:32
I ask this again on the basis its all black & white about the rights and wrongs about this why are they not pushing on with the court cases & issuing the fines or does their legal team have reservations about winning in court. Its one thing speaking about how right you are the real test is in court.
welshman
29-03-2013, 14:43
JA statement is nothing new the saga continues. It will all come out on court when the first illegal renter is tried and hung, or may be shot at dawn. Its just becoming a ping pong game.
Any way HAPPY EASTER TO ALL it is GOOD FRIDAY good will to all men Nelson and Loaded
The bigger guns have fired hey Nellie...
tenerifelegal
29-03-2013, 16:06
When the law first came out I with several agents, cleaning companies and owners went to various lawyers, at least 6. Every single one of them had a different view and "legal" opinion on this law.
I think we will have to wait until the court cases to decide who is right or wrong....then again the law could change again before that!
Janets article echoes everything I and others have been saying on here and makes a lot more sense than the alternative which basically says; One EU law removed every aspect an entire industries regulations.
Link to the current issue of Tenerife Weekly to see Janet's article
http://issuu.com/tenerife-weekly/docs/issue-75
message from Janet to me:
Janet : "Hi John, just seen a question from Angus Jim (I think) on TF asking why the government isn't pushing ahead if they're so sure of themselves. Well the answer is simple: they are ... indeed they have pushed ahead and have confirmed the initial fines imposed, and rejected almost every single appeal made. They are now pushing ahead with embargoing bank accounts and putting charges on properties, which is why people need to lodge the fine money with the Court (even then it might still not be in time to stop the embargoes being placed).
So, the Government has confirmed the fines and rejected the appeals, and for those who haven't paid, is proceeding to collect their money. Meanwhile, they are still inspecting.
There's no ground, therefore, for anyone to say that they aren't pushing ahead. For them, it's business as absolutely normal.
Don't mind whether you post it or not, and you're perfectly welcome just to cut and paste and post as your own, but it's something that the questioner is clearly unaware of, and others might also be equally unaware. J"
Me: "Wow! Source? Jose Escobedo?"
Janet: "yes, that is virtually word for word what he said to me, which is why I can be so sure. Despite what JH says, José's not urging people to cave in and pay, just lodge the money to stop the government from putting embargoes on their accounts and, in due course, charges on their properties. It was only José's clients who got the permission from the court for the escrow account solution ...if they can't lodge the money, all they can do is hope the appeal goes their way. Josè's not hope that it will be thrown out, because the way civil law works they've been accused of something true (no complaints book, etc), but given the circumstances around the fine, he's hoping for clemency and to be able to argue the fine down to the minimum 1,500.
The real problem is that if this does indeed end up being what happens, they will have lost their appeal - technically the government will have won even though the fines will have been vastly reduced. As such, they will have to pay for any embargoes and charges to be lifted, have court costs ...
This is why encouragement for people to ignore the law and steam ahead is so infuriating."
Altamira
29-03-2013, 16:39
When the law first came out I with several agents, cleaning companies and owners went to various lawyers, at least 6. Every single one of them had a different view and "legal" opinion on this law.
I think we will have to wait until the court cases to decide who is right or wrong....then again the law could change again before that!
Legal Opinions Hello TenerifeLegal, like you I listened to several differing legal opinions, however I think the JA article reflects what most people currently think. I do hope others take note of the JA article and take heed of the warnings of substantial fines. Time will Tell I would not like to say when this situation is likely to be settled, as we may have court cases, then appeals and then onto higher appeals. Additional Problems Yes, it may involve some law changes, these can trigger a whole new set of problems for tourist apartment owners. What is needed is for some sensible politician to cut through the red tape and sort this mess out ASAP.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
message from Janet to me:
Janet : "Hi John, just seen a question from Angus Jim (I think) on TF asking why the government isn't pushing ahead if they're so sure of themselves. Well the answer is simple: they are ... indeed they have pushed ahead and have confirmed the initial fines imposed, and rejected almost every single appeal made. They are now pushing ahead with embargoing bank accounts and putting charges on properties, which is why people need to lodge the fine money with the Court (even then it might still not be in time to stop the embargoes being placed).
So, the Government has confirmed the fines and rejected the appeals, and for those who haven't paid, is proceeding to collect their money. Meanwhile, they are still inspecting.
There's no ground, therefore, for anyone to say that they aren't pushing ahead. For them, it's business as absolutely normal.
Don't mind whether you post it or not, and you're perfectly welcome just to cut and paste and post as your own, but it's something that the questioner is clearly unaware of, and others might also be equally unaware. J"
Me: "Wow! Source? Jose Escobedo?"
Janet: "yes, that is virtually word for word what he said to me, which is why I can be so sure. Despite what JH says, José's not urging people to cave in and pay, just lodge the money to stop the government from putting embargoes on their accounts and, in due course, charges on their properties. It was only José's clients who got the permission from the court for the escrow account solution ...if they can't lodge the money, all they can do is hope the appeal goes their way. Josè's not hope that it will be thrown out, because the way civil law works they've been accused of something true (no complaints book, etc), but given the circumstances around the fine, he's hoping for clemency and to be able to argue the fine down to the minimum 1,500.
The real problem is that if this does indeed end up being what happens, they will have lost their appeal - technically the government will have won even though the fines will have been vastly reduced. As such, they will have to pay for any embargoes and charges to be lifted, have court costs ...
This is why encouragement for people to ignore the law and steam ahead is so infuriating."
Judgement Day Wel that's the cat amongst pigeons, I suspect there will be a few ruffled feathers within our blog members.
for me thats unfortunately game set and match for those owners by the looks of it. Looks like none of the owners are going to get away without some sort of hit.
For purposes of Nelson; its Elbe Day
I would guess that the longer this drags on, and let's face it, it will, the people who originally panicked and pulled their apartments from rental will slowly drift back into letting again.
We all know it's against the law but it's been the norm for so long that it's hard to see why they should stop.
Originally the fines put them off but it's taking so long to actually do anything about it the fear factor is dwindling.
I returned from Los Cris this week with family & friends. I was legal, they were not.
My sister & bro in law were in an apartment they've used in the past. On the inside of the front door was a message from the owner with his name and a few details which people were supposed to read and remember if anyone knocked on the door asking who they were.
Now that really is a pitiful attempt to fool the inspectors but it just shows that many owners think it's all that's required these days. I can understand why they think that way to be honest.
If people hear things like "reduced to 1500", even though it's just another line of thought, they will see that as a risk well worth taking. Who wouldn't?
did you not read my post? #6520
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
message from Janet to me:
Janet : "Hi John, just seen a question from Angus Jim (I think) on TF asking why the government isn't pushing ahead if they're so sure of themselves. Well the answer is simple: they are ... indeed they have pushed ahead and have confirmed the initial fines imposed, and rejected almost every single appeal made. They are now pushing ahead with embargoing bank accounts and putting charges on properties, which is why people need to lodge the fine money with the Court (even then it might still not be in time to stop the embargoes being placed).
So, the Government has confirmed the fines and rejected the appeals, and for those who haven't paid, is proceeding to collect their money. Meanwhile, they are still inspecting.
There's no ground, therefore, for anyone to say that they aren't pushing ahead. For them, it's business as absolutely normal.
Don't mind whether you post it or not, and you're perfectly welcome just to cut and paste and post as your own, but it's something that the questioner is clearly unaware of, and others might also be equally unaware. J"
Me: "Wow! Source? Jose Escobedo?"
Janet: "yes, that is virtually word for word what he said to me, which is why I can be so sure. Despite what JH says, José's not urging people to cave in and pay, just lodge the money to stop the government from putting embargoes on their accounts and, in due course, charges on their properties. It was only José's clients who got the permission from the court for the escrow account solution ...if they can't lodge the money, all they can do is hope the appeal goes their way. Josè's not hope that it will be thrown out, because the way civil law works they've been accused of something true (no complaints book, etc), but given the circumstances around the fine, he's hoping for clemency and to be able to argue the fine down to the minimum 1,500.
The real problem is that if this does indeed end up being what happens, they will have lost their appeal - technically the government will have won even though the fines will have been vastly reduced. As such, they will have to pay for any embargoes and charges to be lifted, have court costs ...
This is why encouragement for people to ignore the law and steam ahead is so infuriating."
Can someone show me where in the 1995 law the word "Monopoly" appears?
Nelson seems a bit quiet!:ashamed:
again from janet - source Jose Escobedo:
"just one final comment ... promise ...
it shouldn't reassure anyone to hear that fines might end up at 1,500 because the government has said it intends, as a priority, to check on those who have been fined once to see if they are continuing to act illegally. If they are, the second fine will be 30,000 or so ... and there will be no chance of the courts being sympathetic for a repeat offender ..."
I would guess that the longer this drags on, and let's face it, it will, the people who originally panicked and pulled their apartments from rental will slowly drift back into letting again.
We all know it's against the law but it's been the norm for so long that it's hard to see why they should stop.
Originally the fines put them off but it's taking so long to actually do anything about it the fear factor is dwindling.
I returned from Los Cris this week with family & friends. I was legal, they were not.
My sister & bro in law were in an apartment they've used in the past. On the inside of the front door was a message from the owner with his name and a few details which people were supposed to read and remember if anyone knocked on the door asking who they were.
Now that really is a pitiful attempt to fool the inspectors but it just shows that many owners think it's all that's required these days. I can understand why they think that way to be honest.
If people hear things like "reduced to 1500", even though it's just another line of thought, they will see that as a risk well worth taking. Who wouldn't?
And the second offence fine will be between €30`000.00 & €60'000.00, not a risk I would like to take. :run:
Would you agents please calm down..lol
I'm only saying how it IS..not how it should be.
junglejim
29-03-2013, 17:32
They may not use the word monopoly but article 38.2 clearly refers to " una única empresa de la actividad de explotación"-one sole agent to administer the complex - controlled by one sole Turismo - sounds monopolistic to me!
They may not use the word monopoly but article 38.2 clearly refers to " una única empresa de la actividad de explotación"-one sole agent to administer the complex - controlled by one sole Turismo - sounds monopolistic to me!
How many tourist boards do you think there should be?
They may not use the word monopoly but article 38.2 clearly refers to " una única empresa de la actividad de explotación"-one sole agent to administer the complex - controlled by one sole Turismo - sounds monopolistic to me!
I want to be the hat! :tiphat::tiphat::tiphat:
How many tourist boards do you think there should be?
Don't say that - Nelson will be using Bolkenstein to set up his own Turismo in direct competition with the real one.
boredinscotland
29-03-2013, 18:57
So basically if the fine is not lodged, they are putting an Embargo on the property, I received an official letter that was to be picked up at post office, can't remember if it was from Hacienda or not, I then sold up, search came up clear of debt,what happens now?
Where is TF Solicitors now?
So basically if the fine is not lodged, they are putting an Embargo on the property, I received an official letter that was to be picked up at post office, can't remember if it was from Hacienda or not, I then sold up, search came up clear of debt,what happens now?
Looks like the debt wasn't lodged when you sold .....
One of two things will happen:
1. Nothing
2. The new owner will be laden with your debt ad the property will be embargoed
delderek
29-03-2013, 19:37
How many of you remember when Janet was a founder member on here and a moderator, and now, as then, her postings were reasoned and factual. It's nice to know that her judgements are widely respected, sought, and reproduced. A voice of reason, not too often seen in Tenerife. Well done Janet.:respect:
How many of you remember when Janet was a founder member on here and a moderator, and now, as then, her postings were reasoned and factual. It's nice to know that her judgements are widely respected, sought, and reproduced. A voice of reason, not too often seen in Tenerife. Well done Janet.:respect:
If only the admin of this forum thought as highly of her....
carolethatch
29-03-2013, 20:10
I remember her from the forum before this one, and have met her a few times, a very lovely lady
Altamira
29-03-2013, 20:22
again from janet - source Jose Escobedo:
"just one final comment ... promise ...
it shouldn't reassure anyone to hear that fines might end up at 1,500 because the government has said it intends, as a priority, to check on those who have been fined once to see if they are continuing to act illegally. If they are, the second fine will be 30,000 or so ... and there will be no chance of the courts being sympathetic for a repeat offender ..."
Stone & Hard Place If the lawyers are successful in pleading for clemency, then I suppose a 1500 euros fine may be seen as a reasonable warning amount, unfortunately threats of future fines of 30,000 - 60,000 may be absolutely devastating, especially for some cash strapped owners who have been mis-sold apartments with the promise of being able to privately rent them out. This may be a very black day for them and I hope the new proposed laws can in some way accommodate their difficulties. It appears that sole agents and administrators may be legally bound to hand over information on illegal rentals, to the tourist inspectors. We could also find that neighbours may denounce other owners to the tourist inspectors. I think for the time being the message is clear no one should operate illegal rentals.
No need to panic about extra massive second fines. The cases will be won and the govt defeated first time round. Ja is right to tell people to continue their cases, it's the same in uk , you can loose by default, but the canary courts will respect the eu law
From janet "john sorry about this, but someone has asked on TF about what happens if someone is fined but sells before it is registered against the property. I posted the following as a comment on the link below some time ago. Please feel free to post it as an answer ... it's from José, of course, so is properly legal advice.
"Fines are levied on the owner, not the property. If the fine is unpaid, it will be registered against the property. If the property has changed hands, however, then the fine will remain as levied against the person, and cannot be registered against the property. This means that if you agree a sale but the fine is then registered against the property before you notarize it, this will become clear at the point of signing, at the very latest: I would think it unlikely that any buyer would proceed before the charge were lifted, which would involve payment of fine plus interest plus legal admin/registry costs.
If, however, the fine is still ongoing and has NOT been registered against the property at the point of notarizing the sale, then it stays lodged against the person and never becomes charged against the property. The Government says that it intends to use existing reciprocal arrangements with the British Inland Revenue to pursue cases against individuals in this situation. Spain has reciprocal arrangements with the tax authorities in a long list of countries."
No need to panic about extra massive second fines. The cases will be won and the govt defeated first time round. Ja is right to tell people to continue their cases, it's the same in uk , you can loose by default, but the canary courts will respect the eu law
Where's that dark room ???
No need to panic about extra massive second fines. The cases will be won and the govt defeated first time round. Ja is right to tell people to continue their cases, it's the same in uk , you can loose by default, but the canary courts will respect the eu law
Not even your pal TF Solicitors said that in public without a disclaimer...
You must know more than a Lawyer
Did i mention that on "your" complex there's no Yorkshire woman that owns 2 apartments?
Commonsense will win here, it's no use you hoping the Alice in wonderland laws will endure, human activities evolve for the better.
Holiday home renting is normal and uncontroversial the world over, the canary high court judges recognise that , what more reassurance now do any of us need.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Not even your pal TF Solicitors said that in public without a disclaimer...
You must know more than a Lawyer
Did i mention that on "your" complex there's no Yorkshire woman that owns 2 apartments?
You could have fooled me, I have been married to one for 21 years, she is a proper Yorkshire lass, and she certainly does own 2 apartments on here, no doubt
It's just nobody knew of you when I'd asked on Thursday.
Not even your pal TF Solicitors said that in public without a disclaimer...
You must know more than a Lawyer
Did i mention that on "your" complex there's no Yorkshire woman that owns 2 apartments?
but you know nothing you thought you knew about me but you know sweet fanny adams
What's that about your fanny apples ?
but you know nothing you thought you knew about me but you know sweet fanny adams
Shut up and stop stalking me.............
seanocelt
30-03-2013, 02:02
Commonsense will win here, it's no use you hoping the Alice in wonderland laws will endure, human activities evolve for the better.
Holiday home renting is normal and uncontroversial the world over, the canary high court judges recognise that , what more reassurance now do any of us need.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
You could have fooled me, I have been married to one for 21 years, she is a proper Yorkshire lass, and she certainly does own 2 apartments on here, no doubt
Cracks me up; i rented 1 of YOUR gaffs 4 years ago, deffo a man i dealt with! Hey, what's in a name/inheritance clause! Still hope you get your money back, just hope when you do that you dont try to tell governments how to regulate their tourism. Just a hope that's all! By the way, reet good value for t' money t'was, straight up t' tash.
From janet "john sorry about this, but someone has asked on TF about what happens if someone is fined but sells before it is registered against the property. I posted the following as a comment on the link below some time ago. Please feel free to post it as an answer ... it's from José, of course, so is properly legal advice.
"Fines are levied on the owner, not the property. If the fine is unpaid, it will be registered against the property. If the property has changed hands, however, then the fine will remain as levied against the person, and cannot be registered against the property. This means that if you agree a sale but the fine is then registered against the property before you notarize it, this will become clear at the point of signing, at the very latest: I would think it unlikely that any buyer would proceed before the charge were lifted, which would involve payment of fine plus interest plus legal admin/registry costs.
If, however, the fine is still ongoing and has NOT been registered against the property at the point of notarizing the sale, then it stays lodged against the person and never becomes charged against the property. The Government says that it intends to use existing reciprocal arrangements with the British Inland Revenue to pursue cases against individuals in this situation. Spain has reciprocal arrangements with the tax authorities in a long list of countries."
Well Jim you now know the next time you set foot in Tenerife you be arrested on sight made spend a lot off jail time to you cough up just when you thought you had escaped ! or you could just give them one off these:raspberry:
No need to panic about extra massive second fines. The cases will be won and the govt defeated first time round. Ja is right to tell people to continue their cases, it's the same in uk , you can loose by default, but the canary courts will respect the eu law
Somehow I don't think many will share your enthusiasm!
junglejim
30-03-2013, 11:18
Loaded, I was answering Oasis's question on Monopopolistic - clearly the '95 law intends for a unique agent per complex as you have described many times previously , there is one tourism board and many interested cabals that are chasing their own agenda( such as Ashotel ) - there are several other Tourist Type organisations and Ayuntamientos also doing their own! Promos .
The principle of sole agent I don't have an issue with as long as they keep to those that want to rent and pay their way - but don't be a parasite on my back for your gain and abuse my rights !
Bored in Scotland gave em the slip before they got to the embargo stage, so his searches were clear . The new buyers cannot now be embargoed for his fine.he may not have been fined anyway, it would have been on the bolutin, so easy to check now, could be that if there is a fine tourismo may try to recover it in uk, but given their weakening position with this I would not loose any sleep
boredinscotland
30-03-2013, 11:34
Well Jim you now know the next time you set foot in Tenerife you be arrested on sight made spend a lot off jail time to you cough up just when you thought you had escaped ! or you could just give them one off these:raspberry:
Haha, back out 2 weeks, I got letter in and sold within 2 months. I will just tell them Nelson said its OK
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Bored in Scotland gave em the slip before they got to the embargo stage, so his searches were clear . The new buyers cannot now be embargoed for his fine.he may not have been fined anyway, it would have been on the bolutin, so easy to check now, could be that if there is a fine tourismo may try to recover it in uk, but given their weakening position with this I would not loose any sleep
I'm not loosing sleep either, just don't think it's fair if new owner gets hit with it, I still own a car in Tenerife in my name though, not sure if it goes on that. I thought this would be maybe a year long pursuit of renters, it is not going away Nelson and I'm glad I got out
Cracks me up; i rented 1 of YOUR gaffs 4 years ago, deffo a man i dealt with! Hey, what's in a name/inheritance clause! Still hope you get your money back, just hope when you do that you dont try to tell governments how to regulate their tourism. Just a hope that's all! By the way, reet good value for t' money t'was, straight up t' tash.
Glad you had a pleasant stay. Yes we are both defiantly Yorkshire, we both went to the comprehensive school in the film kes, filmed there and around our town. Mrs nelson was brought up in a council house you can see across the valley in the background , during the Brian glover football match scene. Her mum still lives in the house, she has bought it now,
Maybe people on our complex don't realise we own 2, we don't go around bragging off and ours are not the most posh ones, but they are our paradise , and we have worked hard to get them
But you don't rent out JJ
Somehow I don't think many will share your enthusiasm!
Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
Winston Churchill
Glad you had a pleasant stay. Yes we are both defiantly Yorkshire, we both went to the comprehensive school in the film kes, f
Yeah right we know so well, I am definitely sure about that one
But you don't rent out JJ
It's not illegal to rent out touristic,
junglejim
30-03-2013, 12:00
But you don't rent out JJ
I don't rent 9+ but I may shortly be expected to pay for Touristic requirements on our complex so that those who do, comply with Licence - eg 24 hr reception, Pool attendant , Leisure facilities, WiFi, extra garden,extra maintenance people, running repairs on overused facilities - we are about to pay €60k towards upgrading our electrical rooms which I suspect is a result of our Licence application , some other expensive upgrades have taken place under the same auspices but trying to get the truth from those that wish to run the Sole Agency is impossible .
If I was like Oasis , I could denounce everyone on our complex from President down for illegal letting but I wouldn't - but I don't wan't to be paying to fill their pockets at my expense !
The license won't have anything to do with the electrical upgrades.
Sometimes it doesn't seem fair, but thats community living.
The 24hr reception would be paid via the sole agent yeah so doesn't have to anything to do with your pocket?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
The license won't have anything to do with the electrical upgrades.
The town hall could provoke that.
Altamira
30-03-2013, 12:27
Sometimes it doesn't seem fair, but thats community living.
The 24hr reception would be paid via the sole agent yeah so doesn't have to anything to do with your pocket?
24hr Reception Costs Altamira Apartments, all the owners make a contribution via the community charges, towards the sole agent for running the 24hr reception, it is viewed as having a benefit for all regardless of rental or residential use. I suppose owners may in the future be unwilling to contribute towards the sole agent costs, especially if they start to vigorously impose their sole agent monopoly rights.
When our sole agent was the community president , it was always thought we were paying for much for his nearby apartments, security men we never saw etc.
It's a silly part of sole agent law in touristics, residents feeling done down at the expense of the touristic renters.
The canary judges are sorting these things out, much more sensible to rent individually and hassle no one else with the costs, especially the hotel style unnecessary costs
24hr Reception Costs Altamira Apartments, all the owners make a contribution via the community charges, towards the sole agent for running the 24hr reception, it is viewed as having a benefit for all regardless of rental or residential use. I suppose owners may in the future be unwilling to contribute towards the sole agent costs, especially if they start to vigorously impose their sole agent monopoly rights.
I know of 2 complexes where the sole agents reception is total paid for by them so doesn't incur costs to others who aren't on that list.
junglejim
30-03-2013, 13:36
Sometimes it doesn't seem fair, but thats community living.
The 24hr reception would be paid via the sole agent yeah so doesn't have to anything to do with your pocket?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
The town hall could provoke that.
The "upgrade" happened to co-incide with a Turismo inspection -I understand the need for the safety aspect (inert system etc.) but remain unconvinced in the absence of seeing documentation that it is not related .
The whole community is paying for 24 hr reception to suit the President illegally acting as an agent renting out apartments -the main residents do not use the reception - we have a key entry system - we do not object to paying for a night guard - when Konrad was the agent he paid for his reception staff .
With no reception , as Loaded has alluded to- no licence can be given !
Commonsense will win here, it's no use you hoping the Alice in wonderland laws will endure, human activities evolve for the better.
Holiday home renting is normal and uncontroversial the world over, the canary high court judges recognise that , what more reassurance now do any of us need.
The canary judges are sorting these things out, much more sensible to rent individually and hassle no one else with the costs, especially the hotel style unnecessary costs
I'm sorry nelson, but having had a quick look at three of the four cases mentioned (the fourth is in regard to Tour Guides) there appears to be no reference whatsover to the individual owner/renter ... all of the cases seem to be related to enterprises involved in running or advertising complexes who were fined PRE the introduction of the 2009 Tourism act which indeed did take on board the Bolkestein directive and the question to be answered was could this 2009 act be retrospective and thus annul the infringements they were fined for.
In the original Tenerife Solicitors article, he said
In the meantime, property owners will also be relieved to learn that the first three court cases brought against owners by the tourist board that have reached the TSJC (High Court of the Canary Islands) have been thrown out by the Judges on the basis that the Canarian rental law (7/1995) is in breach of European Law, specifically something called the ‘Bolkestein Directive’
.... but the cases are in no way related to the inspections and fines that started in late 2010 - at the rate that the Court system progresses in the Canaries, it is unlikely that the 'High Court" here will be adjudicating on any these fines before 2014.
I'm sorry nelson, but having had a quick look at three of the four cases mentioned (the fourth is in regard to Tour Guides) there appears to be no reference whatsover to the individual owner/renter ... all of the cases seem to be related to enterprises involved in running or advertising complexes who were fined PRE the introduction of the 2009 Tourism act which indeed did take on board the Bolkestein directive and the question to be answered was could this 2009 act be retrospective and thus annul the infringements they were fined for.
In the original Tenerife Solicitors article, he said
.... but the cases are in no way related to the inspections and fines that started in late 2010 - at the rate that the Court system progresses in the Canaries, it is unlikely that the 'High Court" here will be adjudicating on any these fines before 2014.
What you're saying is that the article was incorrect ?
Article said first 3 cases were against owners but then in the post on here he said they were a guide and two businesses .....
What you're saying is that the article was incorrect ?
Who me - tell a lawyer he is wrong :) Let's just say that there seems to have been a hasty conclusion drawn ....
What is perhaps doubtful in the article is the following :
Further good news for owners is that it has apparently been several months since the inspectors have initiated any new visits or penalty notices in respect of tourist complex accommodation in Tenerife. The initiative against tourist rentals appears to have been quietly dropped, or at least scaled back significantly
.... as evidenced by a recent posting here by Rene (sorry, I have not ploughed through all the posts to find a link, but basically, he told us Inspectors had entered his office in the last 10 days or so demanding details of 20 owners who were renting illegally)
That's weird, I usually believe everything unread in the press but now I'm not so sure......
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.
pfft .................pfft
Who me - tell a lawyer he is wrong :) Let's just say that there seems to have been a hasty conclusion drawn ....
What is perhaps doubtful in the article is the following :
.... as evidenced by a recent posting here by Rene (sorry, I have not ploughed through all the posts to find a link, but basically, he told us Inspectors had entered his office in the last 10 days or so demanding details of 20 owners who were renting illegally)
The inspectors were in Terrazas Del Duque two weeks ago .That's a residential complex which has coaches arriving at the door and more short stay tourists than some hotels!! The expresident has more than one apartment which he rents out as do other members of the commitee.Any owner trying to live quietly on the complex is treated as a trouble maker and their letters from the administrator, regarding community meetings disappear and all their requests to the commitee are refused on sight.However their day will come and one of the residents, having tried every other route,has denounced several of the owners who are renting illegally. Hence the inspectors paying them a visit.
It does not matter in law that the first cases defeated at the. Canary high court were by companies. Individuals have the same legal rights under eu law, my own little holiday letting business is no different to the largest 5 star hotel in the eyes of eu law.
The legal principal is the same , freedom to operate on an equal basis with the rest of Europe. The judges spoke in general terms about the interventionist nature of the 1995 law.
I feel confident that they will rule likewise in the coming individual cases.
Remember nobody is asking for the world here, private individual renting of holiday homes is absolutely normal and uncontroversial the world over.
It does not matter in law that the first cases defeated at the. Canary high court were by companies. Individuals have the same legal rights under eu law, my own little holiday letting business is no different to the largest 5 star hotel in the eyes of eu law.
The legal principal is the same , freedom to operate on an equal basis with the rest of Europe. The judges spoke in general terms about the interventionist nature of the 1995 law.
I feel confident that they will rule likewise in the coming individual cases.
Remember nobody is asking for the world here, private individual renting of holiday homes is absolutely normal and uncontroversial the world over.
I think, in due course, that you will find it does matter, and matters a lot. As you well know the legal system here operates in a very different way to that in Yorkshire despite both the Canaries and Yorkshire both being members of the EU - mind you, if Yorkshire had extra-peripheral status (which wouldn't be surprising) then there could be some similarities.
We have nothing whatsoever to fear from ultra periferal Statius . The learned judges will be aware it's a special status which is meant to help the economy. It's not supposed to be used to enforce a completely unnecessary law like
1995, which actually harms tourist standards and is upsetting the many tourists who over the years far prefer to stay in a well fitted out private individual apartment.
Commonsense and wise judges are having their day, I have complete confidence in their views on sole agency v private apartment today in 2013.
Interesting to note in the last few days, some cases of Turismo fines in the Boletin
http://www.gobiernodecanarias.org/boc/
Two cases of tourist guides in Gran Canaria who do not have the correct qualifications, an Agent (Sole?) of 29 units, again in Gran Canaria, who did not have Complaints books
and this
http://www.gobiernodecanarias.org/boc/2013/058/011.html
HECHO:
No haber comunicado previamente a la Administración Turística competente, el inicio de la actividad de intermediación turística en la unidad alojativa nº 85 del establecimiento denominado Campo Golf.
FECHA DE INFRACCIÓN:
30 de abril de 2012.
NORMAS SUSTANTIVAS INFRINGIDAS:
Artículos 4 y 8 del Decreto 89/2010, de 22 de julio, por el que se regula la actividad de intermediación turística (BOC nº 149, de 30 de julio).
TIPIFICACIÓN DE LA INFRACCIÓN:
Artículo 75.2 de la Ley 14/2009, de 30 de diciembre, por la que se modifica la Ley 7/1995, de 6 de abril, de Ordenación del Turismo de Canarias (BOC nº 2, de 5 de enero de 2010), en relación con el artículo 76.18 del mismo cuerpo legal.
CALIFICACIÓN JURÍDICA DE LAS INFRACCIONES:
Grave.
SANCIÓN QUE PUDIERA CORRESPONDERLE:
9.000,00 euros.
.... a lack of communication between Courts ??
Looks like somebody is not keeping up to speed, could just be that the govt had previously scheduled the denouncias , so they have gone through .
Should be easy to win at first appeal stage due to the recent rulings
Remember nobody is asking for the world here, private individual renting of holiday homes is absolutely normal and uncontroversial the world over.
Hmmm ... why then, I wonder, have HomeAway, Tripadvisor, FlipKey and AirBnB got together to fund The Short Term Rental Advocacy Center (http://www.stradvocacy.org/about-us/) in the States ... surely these multi-million dollar organisations cannot think that their business model is threatened :)
Why was the Short Term Rental Advocacy Center created?
In communities all across the country, individual residents, property managers, travelers, and policymakers are asking questions about regulation of short-term rentals.
Actually, their Advocacy 101 does give a good blueprint for a campaign .....
http://www.stradvocacy.org/learn-more/
I think there might be a big difference between :
not having prior authorization to begin trading - bolkestein related.
And
Not having prior authorization to rent an apartment - this isn't to do with the business setting itself up, this is about not registering apartments and letting them.
For example, at paloma we have authorization to trade and have opening license , tourist license etc.... But we still have to register apartments that come onto the books before we can let them.
junglejim
30-03-2013, 19:06
Interesting comment Loaded - does the inspector have to inspect each apartment or are you "self regulated" ie authorised to say an apartment is up to scratch?
Interesting comment Loaded - does the inspector have to inspect each apartment or are you "self regulated" ie authorised to say an apartment is up to scratch?
They have to inspect every apartment before we can let it. However we know what the minimum standards are because they are outlined in the laws, so we have never had one refused.
the inspector dept will be keen to try and show results also, hoping someone pays part of a fine and they get some revenue through the dept.
jose escobedo is saying thats the best he can do, fine reduction, so they could feel fine to carry on imposing fines.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
[QUOTE=doreen;275043]Hmmm ... why then, I wonder, have HomeAway, Tripadvisor, FlipKey and AirBnB got together to fund The Short Term Rental Advocacy Center (http://www.stradvocacy.org/about-us/) in the States ... surely these multi-million dollar organisations cannot think that their business model is threatened :)
[I]Why was the Short Term Rental Advocacy Center created?
at the end of the day its good news if the likes of owners direct have woken up to help at last, lets face it, its a personal freedom and should not cause any issues, internet ads are a modern trend and personal holiday home ownership a further expanding area.
Basically the evolution will be towards individual renting subject to sensible regulation. A long way from law 1995 and monopoly sole agents
Strange that the draft law seems to say the opposite ....
Hmmm ... why then, I wonder, have HomeAway, Tripadvisor, FlipKey and AirBnB got together to fund The Short Term Rental Advocacy Center (http://www.stradvocacy.org/about-us/) in the States ... surely these multi-million dollar organisations cannot think that their business model is threatened :)
[I]Why was the Short Term Rental Advocacy Center created?
at the end of the day its good news if the likes of owners direct have woken up to help at last, lets face it, its a personal freedom and should not cause any issues, internet ads are a modern trend and personal holiday home ownership a further expanding area.
Basically the evolution will be towards individual renting subject to sensible regulation. A long way from law 1995 and monopoly sole agents
From the same page on the website
Our Principles
We believe people have a right to rent their property on a short-term basis.
We believe the short-term rental marketplace brings tangible benefits to homeowners, residents, travelers and local communities in cities around the world.
We believe local short-term rental regulations should be easy to locate, understand and comply with.
We believe existing “good neighbor” laws provide sufficient protection against any disruptive behavior on the part of long-term residents or their guests.
What about some of the laws that have already passed?
We support compliance with existing laws, whether that be collection of local taxes, registration requirements or other provisions.
However, we believe any regulations on short-term rentals should be easy to locate, understand and comply with, and existing regulations tend to provide ample tools for addressing the actions of a few bad apples, for example, noise ordinances, neighborhood parking regulations, trash guidelines.
You have to look at the whole picture, not just pick the bits that suit you !!
From the same page on the website
Our Principles
We believe people have a right to rent their property on a short-term basis.
We believe the short-term rental marketplace brings tangible benefits to homeowners, residents, travelers and local communities in cities around the world.
We believe local short-term rental regulations should be easy to locate, understand and comply with.
We believe existing “good neighbor” laws provide sufficient protection against any disruptive behavior on the part of long-term residents or their guests.
What about some of the laws that have already passed?
We support compliance with existing laws, whether that be collection of local taxes, registration requirements or other provisions.
However, we believe any regulations on short-term rentals should be easy to locate, understand and comply with, and existing regulations tend to provide ample tools for addressing the actions of a few bad apples, for example, noise ordinances, neighborhood parking regulations, trash guidelines.
You have to look at the whole picture, not just pick the bits that suit you !!
This totally ignores the impact that they'd have on all the existing forms or accommodation in their areas
The govt are still hell bent on daft laws, they are not themselves open to reason, it will be custers last stand for them, reason and sensible evolution won't come into it,
Hitler did not shoot himself until the red army were 50 metres from him, I not expecting a canary govt re think of their new law
Better to have one sole agent on a complex controlling the tourists interests that 300 different people controlling their own apartments
That's why........you know the rest
Angusjim
31-03-2013, 08:10
Better to have one sole agent on a complex controlling the tourists interests that 300 different people controlling their own apartments
That's why........you know the rest
But what are safe guards to protect owners and holidaymakers from the sole agents it will not be long if there money to be made that the sharks will start to circle. Before they push on any further I think a system similar to ABTA in the UK to insure holidaymakers & owners money is safe guarded must be brought in. The system they propose at the moment does not have sufficient safeguards in my opinion. Another fear may be a cartel system between agents in certain areas fixing prices at a certain level to holidaymakers and returns to owners. Maybe sole agents are part of the answer but a lot more thought is required about how to regulate the system.
For sure, i concur of course Jim but what do you suggest?
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.
I hope you reported her to the inspectors,because, as we have been told on countless occassions,you cannot let to friends or family:doh:
She was quite fit so i shot her on the spot
Fivepence
31-03-2013, 11:59
Over 6500 posts and I know I'm sad because I've read everyone. :ashamed:
This thread is like watching a game of ping pong.
Whether sole agents are the only way in law or not, I would not be happy being forced to use someone I could not choose myself.
I would want to control my own asset.
I do not own an apartment in the Canaries but if I did, I would sell before I would be forced to allow a sole agent that I did not choose, to control my bookings.
In my experience of life, there are 2 types of law.........good law and bad law and just because it is the law, it still seems to me that this is a bad law.
I'll get behind the sofa now before the shots start firing..............:hide:
Over 6500 posts and I know I'm sad because I've read everyone. :ashamed:
This thread is like watching a game of ping pong.
Whether sole agents are the only way in law or not, I would not be happy being forced to use someone I could not choose myself.
I would want to control my own asset.
I do not own an apartment in the Canaries but if I did, I would sell before I would be forced to allow a sole agent that I did not choose, to control my bookings.
In my experience of life, there are 2 types of law.........good law and bad law and just because it is the law, it still seems to me that this is a bad law.
I'll get behind the sofa now before the shots start firing..............:hide:
No need to hide !!
What you say is fair and understandable but .........
The real point is that if you had bought a "buy to let" apartment in the Canaries at any time in the past 17 years you would, or should as the result of your own research, have known about the 1995 law, its consequences and the reasons for it. You would have made an informed decision as to whether the returns you were being offered added up in your particular circumstances and whether you were happy to work with the letting agent and agree when you could or could not have access to it.
The unfair part of Canarian law here is less the 1995 rules, and far more the fact that there seems to be no requirement to register to operate as an Estate Agent, nor any requirement on those that do to explain the rules and laws. Because of this, as we all know, many hundreds or even thousands of owners were, arguably, mis-sold to and have found themselves on the wrong side of the law and have absolutely no means to seek retribution on those who lied to them about the "fabulous rental returns" they would achieve.
That said, there were many who were/are aware of the law, how it worked and the risks in breaking it, yet went on to buy more property and operate under the counter (no names mentioned of course!!), and who are now the most vocal, clutching at every straw in the belief a country in which they don't live, cannot vote in and which has been given EU permission to introduce legislation to protect its most important asset, is about to fall foul of the same organisation (EU).
You don't have to look far to see other examples of how little chance there is of the EU over-ruling Canarian law. What has happened in Cyprus for example. Who would have thought that the EU with it's blanket laws which are supposed to apply across all member states would consider sanctioning what is effectively theft of money from bank accounts. Anyone hoping for a change of heart which will likely benefit the ordinary individual in the Canaries had better consider the liklihood very carefully indeed - eh Nellie.
.
Angusjim
31-03-2013, 12:47
For sure, i concur of course Jim but what do you suggest?
Well for a start a government backed compensation scheme for owners & holidaymakers, clear guidlines as to what is expected of both owners & sole agents with a system of arbitration to settle disputes, in depth vetting of sole agents to ensure they are competant to carryout this type of business. All sole agents licence's should be on a fixed term after which time they would have to apply to renew these and at the same time owners should get the opertunity to allow others to bid for the licence on any complex.
a bad law has to be changed, the system needs normality, not overlord agents, there is no need for them. this silly law was ignored for years.
the campaign group doreen has posted about seems to be in the usa. you can see that the rentals appear to be causing issues with residents, but this campaign group seems to be putting forward a reasonable case for individual letting. the holiday home rental industry in the usa must be massive, so understandable that the likes of owners direct are fighting there to oppose restrictions.
in the canaries as regards touristic apartments, there is no hassle regarding residential problems, the apartments are meant for tourist use, the only problem is the silly law requiring the sole agent and a hotel style set up.
we are well on the way to seeing the end of that .
yes you're well on your way, remind us all again how the owners cases are doing in court?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
". indeed they have pushed ahead and have confirmed the initial fines imposed, and rejected almost every single appeal made. They are now pushing ahead with embargoing bank accounts and putting charges on properties, which is why people need to lodge the fine money with the Court (even then it might still not be in time to stop the embargoes being placed).
So, the Government has confirmed the fines and rejected the appeals, and for those who haven't paid, is proceeding to collect their money. Meanwhile, they are still inspecting."
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
"f they can't lodge the money, all they can do is hope the appeal goes their way. Josè's not hope that it will be thrown out, because the way civil law works they've been accused of something true (no complaints book, etc), but given the circumstances around the fine, he's hoping for clemency and to be able to argue the fine down to the minimum 1,500.
The real problem is that if this does indeed end up being what happens, they will have lost their appeal - technically the government will have won even though the fines will have been vastly reduced. As such, they will have to pay for any embargoes and charges to be lifted, have court costs ..."
Jose Escobedos explanation to Janet
The alotca team do paint a bleak picture, many of us don't share their viewpoint, commonsense and reality will win through, the euro law is with us
delderek
31-03-2013, 18:12
Just as a sideline, if you are lucky enough to sell your property, how long before Spain follows Cyprus and introduces Capital controls, meaning you can't get your money out for years. Not allowed under EU rules, but Cyprus did it. So, so much for EU rules.Get out now would be my advice.
Spain needs to get out of euro ASAP, that's their route back to prosperity and get people back on work , and the canary govt of my back
Spain needs to get out of euro ASAP, that's their route back to prosperity and get people back on work , and the canary govt of my back
The BD wouldn't help anyone then nelson
The BD wouldn't help anyone then nelson
I am saying out of euro currency but remain in eu, like the uk, Spain back to peseta and economic growth, of course I still need the eu laws to sort the letting mess
I am saying out of euro currency but remain in eu, like the uk, Spain back to peseta and economic growth, of course I still need the eu laws to sort the letting mess
Spain may be in the EU but the Canaries are outside Spain and self governing for many, many things, and are only a peripheral member of the EU - one day you will understand the implications of this - one day!
seanocelt
01-04-2013, 01:39
The shocking horrible reality. Funny nobody seems to have commented on it..........the legal "great hope" admits despair? What a star.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
yes you're well on your way, remind us all again how the owners cases are doing in court?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
". indeed they have pushed ahead and have confirmed the initial fines imposed, and rejected almost every single appeal made. They are now pushing ahead with embargoing bank accounts and putting charges on properties, which is why people need to lodge the fine money with the Court (even then it might still not be in time to stop the embargoes being placed).
So, the Government has confirmed the fines and rejected the appeals, and for those who haven't paid, is proceeding to collect their money. Meanwhile, they are still inspecting."
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
"f they can't lodge the money, all they can do is hope the appeal goes their way. Josè's not hope that it will be thrown out, because the way civil law works they've been accused of something true (no complaints book, etc), but given the circumstances around the fine, he's hoping for clemency and to be able to argue the fine down to the minimum 1,500.
The real problem is that if this does indeed end up being what happens, they will have lost their appeal - technically the government will have won even though the fines will have been vastly reduced. As such, they will have to pay for any embargoes and charges to be lifted, have court costs ..."
Jose Escobedos explanation to Janet
Not one comment? From anyone, hours after Loaded posted? If he is saying what i think he is saying, its 2 fingers to you all from the "ultra " arrogant Canarian "ultra special status" Gov........... Ouch. Thanks, Loaded, puzzled by the silence? I bloody am!
Happy birthday Nelson!
hahaha nice one!
Check out the BOC turismo have embargoed 72 bank accounts this morning
^ APRIL FOOL just in case anyone thought it to be true
carolethatch
01-04-2013, 09:53
I bet that's made your day.
Check out the BOC turismo have embargoed 72 bank accounts this morning
Spare a thought for the worried people who check this thread frequently for information - nothing in the Boletin, just the 1st of April, I believe.
No heart attacks hopefully
The giveaway was the part at the bottom that says you're a qualified electrician...:laugh:
tonto99............
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I bet that's made your day.
I wouldn't say made my day but I'll be more than happy when tourism finally do something about illegals and everyone knows their place.
I also back bigger fines for people that continue to break this Law.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
By John Hatrick - Update 1st of April 2013
www.islandconnections.eu (http://www.islandconnections.eu/1000003/1000027/0/39347/living-lifestyle-article.html)
canary boy
01-04-2013, 11:45
I was very naive when i bought my apartment five years ago , the estate agent said you could happily rent out and it would be a good income for my pension.
Sadly I have been fined and I have already paid the fine and am selling up.
To be honest i really couldn't walk past the valdes centre and look at the queue snaking around the corner for the job centre every time i was off to the beach.I was making money and there just fighting to get a meal.
I should of got a solicitor when i purchased the apartment, life sends you these curve balls, but life in the UK is a hell of alot better than in Spain , pay the fine and get out
Peterrayner
01-04-2013, 12:02
I hope you reported her to the inspectors,because, as we have been told on countless occassions,you cannot let to friends or family:doh:
let being the operate word...but private personal use is allowed apparently.
Altamira
01-04-2013, 12:03
Rental Loopholes & Future Challenges For the time being, it looks as though the Canary Government will be successful in its campaign for prosecutions against illegal rentals. Many of us are aware that the illegal rental industry appears to have greatly reduced, some moved to either long term (3 month) rentals or moving to the Friends & Family scenario, where it is supposedly rent free.
I suppose the authorities will be looking at closing any perceived loopholes, in particular the F&F, as they may view them as an attempt to defeat the course of justice. If the authorities were to pursue this, I think they would be able to come up with a number of methods to uncover suspected F&F abuse. For instance when an owner has more than one property or where it is known by the sole agent etc. that the apartment has many different tenants. It may be that if a tenant is questioned they may say that they are a friend of the owner. However some people find it impossible to lie to officials, they could add that they were told by the owner to say they were a friend and staying rent free, when in actual fact they were not a friend but were really renting it, so would this evidence lead to a successful illegal rental prosecution? and more importantly could this lead to an additional charge of attempting to defeat the course of justice?
Peterrayner
01-04-2013, 12:12
Rental Loopholes & Future Challenges For the time being, it looks as though the Canary Government will be successful in its campaign for prosecutions against illegal rentals. Many of us are aware that the illegal rental industry appears to have greatly reduced, some moved to either long term (3 month) rentals or moving to the Friends & Family scenario.
I suppose the authorities will be looking at closing any perceived loopholes, in particular the F&F, as they may view them as an attempt to defeat the course of justice. If the authorities were to pursue this, I think they would be able to come up with a number of methods to uncover suspected F&F abuse. For instance when an owner has more than one property or where it is known by the sole agent etc. that the apartment has many different tenants. It may be that if a tenant is questioned they may say that they are a friend of the owner. However some people find it impossible to lie to officials, they could add that they were told by the owner to say they were a friend when in actual fact they were renting it, so would this evidence lead to a successful illegal rental prosecution? and more importantly could this lead to an additional charge of attempting to defeat the course of justice?
no need for all that.
if you are letting ie charging a commercial rent, then its clearly illegal, no matter who the guests are.
Altamira
01-04-2013, 12:40
no need for all that.
if you are letting ie charging a commercial rent, then its clearly illegal, no matter who the guests are.
Friends & Family Rent Free ? Hello Peter Rayner, my comments relate to the scenario of someone saying they are friend or family and paying no rent, when in fact they are not a friend and are actually paying a rent. The question is what if the tenant was told by the owner or agent to say they were a friend and paying no rent and then the tenant informs the tourist inspectors of the true situation and then informs the inspectors of what they were told to say.
If you were using your apartment etc for true friends & family only, then would you be commercially advertising across various Internet holiday websites?.
"NO"
Altamira
01-04-2013, 12:59
If you were using your apartment etc for true friends & family only, then would you be commercially advertising across various Internet holiday websites?.
"NO"
Adverts I think most identifiable illegal rental apartment adverts have already been removed from the internet.
Fivepence
01-04-2013, 13:02
I was very naive when i bought my apartment five years ago , the estate agent said you could happily rent out and it would be a good income for my pension.
Sadly I have been fined and I have already paid the fine and am selling up.
To be honest i really couldn't walk past the valdes centre and look at the queue snaking around the corner for the job centre every time i was off to the beach.I was making money and there just fighting to get a meal.
I should of got a solicitor when i purchased the apartment, life sends you these curve balls, but life in the UK is a hell of alot better than in Spain , pay the fine and get out
I think this is one of the most realistic posts on this subject..................and you have stated the facts of your own position very honestly. :respect:
Happy birthday Nelson!
Fact, our lawyer did sign for our 1st apartment on this day 9 years ago , the signing had been delayed
seanocelt
01-04-2013, 14:21
The shocking horrible reality. Funny nobody seems to have commented on it..........the legal "great hope" admits despair? What a star.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
.
Not one comment? From anyone, hours after Loaded posted? If he is saying what i think he is saying, its 2 fingers to you all from the "ultra " arrogant Canarian "ultra special status" Gov........... Ouch. Thanks, Loaded, puzzled by the silence? I bloody am!
I would like to wish all concerned the best of luck getting fines reduced/quashed. I now know some affected by the above have matters in hand, others may not. As i do not have a property to let, i now feel bad about continuing to comment on lawyer performances, and the attitude of the governent. Time to leave it the stakeholders and watch it from the sidelines
junglejim
01-04-2013, 14:40
Adverts I think most identifiable illegal rental apartment adverts have already been removed from the internet.
Oh really ?. :tiphat:
You have to consider Jose Escobedo s track record and credibility , remember folks , he wrote his. Now famous article in December 2011, and spoke in favour of independent letting , he put forward the figure of 1200 euro per year as a possible permit fee. Then in January 2012, alotca began to propose keeping sole agency. That was some u turn. The original Escobedo article was on this forum and there were links to it .
I have mentioned this odd affair many times, and will of course. Continue to do so. We have no response from Escobedo or any of his friends on this thread regarding this matter.
The lawyer who has publicised the bd cares which were won ,says all his cases were dropped before the six month stage.
If you do get a fine now you may wish to chose the best lawyer for the job based on their performance to date.
This has been mentioned before and various reasons were given.
You have to consider Jose Escobedo s track record and credibility , remember folks , he wrote his. Now famous article in December 2011, and spoke in favour of independent letting , he put forward the figure of 1200 euro per year as a possible permit fee. Then in January 2012, alotca began to propose keeping sole agency. That was some u turn. The original Escobedo article was on this forum and there were links to it .
I have mentioned this odd affair many times, and will of course. Continue to do so. We have no response from Escobedo or any of his friends on this thread regarding this matter.
The lawyer who has publicised the bd cares which were won ,says all his cases were dropped before the six month stage.
If you do get a fine now you may wish to chose the best lawyer for the job based on their performance to date.
Tenerife Solicitors said in the article
Fortunately, most parties who received such visits or notifications were not intimidated and instead instructed solicitors to fight the notices. Of the numerous cases that Tenerife Solicitors took on last year, not a single client has paid a cent in fines to the tourist board. For each appeal that we filed, the tourist board has so far failed to respond with their intention to proceed within the requisite 6 month deadline. Hence all such cases to date that have reached the said 6 month deadline have been dropped by the tourist board.
I understand it is not just a case of a calendar 6 months passing ... hopefully, TFSolrs has formal notification from Turismo for his clients (are you perhaps one of them, nelson?)
EDIT - remembering Jose Escobedo told me that the original cases which were based on just "proof" of internet ads have indeed been dropped.
The lawyer who has publicised the bd cares which were won ,says all his cases were dropped before the six month stage.
He also said you could continue to advertise on the internet and let your apartment direct without using the bullying sole agent!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
If you do get a fine now you may wish to chose the best lawyer for the job based on their performance to date.
Are you on a commission?
Tfs are not currently my Tenerife solicitors. My own solicitor says the gran canary rulings are very good news , he is getting up to speed on them.
Given that and the rulings on the invalidity of the Internet ad evidence I remain very upbeat.
I can't remember señor Escobedo explaining his u turn on individual letting. I remember his article well, the 1200 euro annual permit, he spoke of individual letting being worth around 30 hotels in the canaries, he spoke about the negative effects on investment.
I was in full accord with all he said.
Today potential customers need to consider his odd u turn when seeking his counsel.
Silence is golden it seems on him explaining his December 2011 u turn. John hatrick was soon on here last week to clarify his position and face his accusors
Silence is golden it seems on him explaining his December 2011 u turn. John hatrick was soon on here last week to clarify his position and face his accusors
It was a floored one off opinion from Solicitor Hatrick.
It was a floored one off opinion from Solicitor Hatrick.
Your opinion of his opinion, but at least he must have considered what he wanted to say and has stuck with it, Escobedo wrote his December 2011 article, then went to bed , got up , and said the complete opposite.
People make up your own mind which lawyer you want to defend you
Shut up and stop stalking me.............
My my what a big man you think you are I think you're just a poor soul that should be getting some psychiatric help urgently maybe you've had too many electric shocks recently
Rental Loopholes & Future Challenges For the time being, it looks as though the Canary Government will be successful in its campaign for prosecutions against illegal rentals. Many of us are aware that the illegal rental industry appears to have greatly reduced, some moved to either long term (3 month) rentals or moving to the Friends & Family scenario, where it is supposedly rent free.
I suppose the authorities will be looking at closing any perceived loopholes, in particular the F&F, as they may view them as an attempt to defeat the course of justice. If the authorities were to pursue this, I think they would be able to come up with a number of methods to uncover suspected F&F abuse. For instance when an owner has more than one property or where it is known by the sole agent etc. that the apartment has many different tenants. It may be that if a tenant is questioned they may say that they are a friend of the owner. However some people find it impossible to lie to officials, they could add that they were told by the owner to say they were a friend and staying rent free, when in actual fact they were not a friend but were really renting it, so would this evidence lead to a successful illegal rental prosecution? and more importantly could this lead to an additional charge of attempting to defeat the course of justice?
I have been advised by my lawyer to provide a minimum of one year for a letting contract (with the option to cancel giving one month's notice after the initial 6 months)-. He said anything less could be deemed a holiday let in a court of law. (Not a problem for me as I am doing long term lets ... but interesting for those trying to get round the holiday letting laws.)
I have heard of inspectors knocking on doors with a list of questions. When a tenant claims to be staying in an apartment rent free because they are a family member or friend of the owner, the inspector then asks his questions. Anyone genuine (ie the daughter/son of an owner) would be able to answer the questions no problem .... but anyone struggling to answer basic questions about the owner obviously does not know them well enough for the generous owner to have offered them the use of their apartment free of charge!
Spain may be in the EU but the Canaries are outside Spain and self governing for many, many things, and are only a peripheral member of the EU - one day you will understand the implications of this - one day!
The canaries are only part of the eu as long as Spain is a member if Spain goes the canaries follow
The onus is on the owner to prove their innocence.
Think this Gestapo door stepping stuff is most probably a rumour. It's too silly to be believed, imagine the evidence in court , the people were actually tourists , inflatable shark photo exhibit a.
It sort of highlights how bizarre the. Whole thing is , trying to differentiate in law as to the type of occupant of a property.
Think this Gestapo door stepping stuff is most probably a rumour. It's too silly to be believed, imagine the evidence in court , the people were actually tourists , inflatable shark photo exhibit a.
It sort of highlights how bizarre the. Whole thing is , trying to differentiate in law as to the type of occupant of a property.
The fact of it happening is not a rumour .... but whether they use the evidence in court I can't contest to!
junglejim
01-04-2013, 19:26
The onus is on the owner to prove their innocence.
So what you´re saying is the inspector can issue a fine to anyone , legal or not and they have to prove their innocence ?- what kind of natural justice is that? A bit Kakfkaesque if you ask me !
( The Trial ,Franz Kafka )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trial
Advice- don´t try reading the book Nelson , please! I´m losing the will to live already!
My my what a big man you think you are I think you're just a poor soul that should be getting some psychiatric help urgently maybe you've had too many electric shocks recently
It wouldn't be so obvious if you actually posted something else on the forum, Stop stalking me Kathml I've had enough of your emails I'm a married man.
So what you´re saying is the inspector can issue a fine to anyone , legal or not and they have to prove their innocence ?- what kind of natural justice is that? A bit Kakfkaesque if you ask me !
( The Trial ,Franz Kafka )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trial
Advice- don´t try reading the book Nelson , please! I´m losing the will to live already!
What I'm saying is people are suggesting that they can hide behind the "friends and family" excuse ..... in reality if the inspector believes that you are commercially letting your property, the onus is on the owner to prove the friend or family member has not paid as opposed to the inspector having to prove they have. Most owners who genuinely never commercially let their property, may have a small number of close family/friends who they allow to use the place free of charge, on occasion. Anyone whose property is "used" the majority of the time (by others) would be deemed as "commercially" letting the place. In general, folk are not that generous!!!!!!!!!!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
So what you´re saying is the inspector can issue a fine to anyone , legal or not and they have to prove their innocence ?- what kind of natural justice is that? A bit Kakfkaesque if you ask me !
( The Trial ,Franz Kafka )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trial
Advice- don´t try reading the book Nelson , please! I´m losing the will to live already!
What I'm saying is people are suggesting that they can hide behind the "friends and family" excuse ..... in reality if the inspector believes that you are commercially letting your property, the onus is on the owner to prove the friend or family member has not paid as opposed to the inspector having to prove they have. Most owners who genuinely never commercially let their property, may have a small number of close family/friends who they allow to use the place free of charge, on occasion. Anyone whose property is "used" the majority of the time (by others) would be deemed as "commercially" letting the place. In general, folk are not that generous!!!!!!!!!!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Not sure why that came up twice!!!!!!!!
junglejim
01-04-2013, 19:50
No Foz -this is what you posted -
The onus is on the owner to prove their innocence
That´s what I contested - natural justice is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty , not the other way round .
Not the Fascist attitude of the bureaucrats in this country that can run roughshod over virtually every facet of life here because they have a little rubber stamp .
Fining people and making them pay before court appearances is disgusting and an abuse of powers IMO.
Fivepence
01-04-2013, 19:50
My my what a big man you think you are I think you're just a poor soul that should be getting some psychiatric help urgently maybe you've had too many electric shocks recently
What weight are you Mark?..................:laugh:
What weight are you Mark?..................:laugh:
Kathml heard about the 9PLUS and wants a bit, most of the forum ladies at least the fanclub ones are a little more discrete.
x
No Foz -this is what you posted -
The onus is on the owner to prove their innocence
That´s what I contested - natural justice is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty , not the other way round .
Not the Fascist attitude of the bureaucrats in this country that can run roughshod over virtually every facet of life here because they have a little rubber stamp .
Fining people and making them pay before court appearances is disgusting and an abuse of powers IMO.
My mistake I should have clarified my point at the time of posting. To clarify ..... I am not suggesting that inspectors are just issuing fines willy nilly without an inkling as to whether an owner may be guilty of illegally letting. BUT those owners who are letting their properties by word of mouth under the assumption that they will be able to hide behind the "family/friends" excuse will find that the onus is on them to prove their innocence. A lot of folk believe that if an inspector knocks on the door of their apartment and is met by a holiday maker who knows little of the owner's details but "claims" to be a friend who has paid nothing, then the inspector would not be able to "prove" otherwise. What I am saying is the inspector will work on the assumption that the owner "is not that generous" and would only "lend" their property to someone they know very well, who would be able to answer their questions. The inspector would not have to prove that money had changed hands ... the onus would be on the owner to prove that it had not.
Sorry for any confusion!
How can you prove that money hasn't changed hands?
Think this Gestapo door stepping stuff is most probably a rumour. It's too silly to be believed, imagine the evidence in court , the people were actually tourists , inflatable shark photo exhibit a.
I can assure you that it is not a rumour and that it happens a lot. The report from the inspector can of course be used as evidence in court.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
How can you prove that money hasn't changed hands? A declaration under oath ?
Lol most people don't even believe in god
If they give scouts honour ill take that as true
I can assure you that it is not a rumour and that it happens a lot. The report from the inspector can of course be used as evidence in court.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
A declaration under oath ?
I've heared it all now,Bible carrying inspectors on the prowl you couldn't make it up
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I can assure you that it is not a rumour and that it happens a lot. The report from the inspector can of course be used as evidence in court.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
A declaration under oath ?
I've heared it all now,Bible carrying inspectors on the prowl you couldn't make it up
What i meant to say is that someone who testifies in court needs to tell the thruth. Lying can have serious consequences. In dutch this is called (translated) declare under oath. Sorry for the confusion:stupid:
What i meant to say is that someone who testifies in court needs to tell the thruth. Lying can have serious consequences. In dutch this is called (translated) declare under oath. Sorry for the confusion:stupid:
So your on holiday,the inspector knocks,your asked a few questions,they don't believe you so your summoned to appear in court at a later date? Marvelous
Red Devil
01-04-2013, 22:44
How can you prove that money hasn't changed hands?
Exactly! So if they are family or friend and I havent got proof they didnt pay me I could be summonsed - how do I prove something didnt happen? this thread is getting sillier day by day.
The inspectors need to be multilingual to university standard with the amount of questions they are allegedly asking -there are many many nationalities on our complex.
Exactly! So if they are family or friend and I havent got proof they didnt pay me I could be summonsed - how do I prove something didnt happen? this thread is getting sillier day by day.
The inspectors need to be multilingual to university standard with the amount of questions they are allegedly asking -there are many many nationalities on our complex.
Zey have vays of making you Tok!
junglejim
02-04-2013, 00:06
Looking at some of the comments above after challenging Foz´s earlier comment (not having a go at you , Foz) shows how akward and incomplete this 1995 law has been in definition . It allows people to be fined before court processes and evidence led prosecutition (not assumptions that can be torn apart by a half decent lawyer) are held -almost Spanish Inquisition type behaviour with "Inspectors" lurking about under false pretenses - it gives theories like Nelson´s traction .
The Cabildo and Turismo have made an a,rse of the law by virtually ignoring it for 15 years , allowing some abuse by certain sole agents who are closely aligned with the cabal that is Ashotel and a sniff of corruption in how the "law" is enforced e.g. below the requisite 50%+1 by a fair margin but no sanction. operating unlicenced but not prosecuted ,inequality in size of fines .
They are in a mess and are struggling to find a way out that will not ruin a significant part of their tourist economy any time soon !
I think if someone says they haven't paid then that's the end of the argument- move on .
But it doesn't make it incomplete because there's no way to ever prove that someone hasn't paid.
The fact that illegal letters would need to get all customers to lie continually will have its natural affect on their bookings and do the inspectors Job for them.
I should imagine that if an owner's family are staying in an apartment and say they have not paid, they would be able to answer questions about the owner and the owner would be believed that no money had changed hands. If however holiday makers were to lie about their personal connection to the owner in the hope of keeping the owner out of court, then the inspectors would not believe the owner had generously allowed these strangers to stay free of charge. Simples xxx
junglejim
02-04-2013, 09:36
Tourist Body FEHT's spokesman Fernando Fraile predicting a drop of 50% in tourism in the Islands this summer - this past Easter break only improved slightly due to poor weather on mainland and Scandinavian countries .
Many factors including flight prices etc are coming together to cause concern -Nero Fiddles whilst Rome Burns again?
Turismo got their "proofs" very wrong first time around - But remember, they will still have these details on file, so all they need to do now is call to the property to do their "survey" ... if they get a Family & Friends answer, then they just call back a month later and so on, till someone says they paid which will more than likely happen.
As an aside, the first apartment I rented via the internet (2004, Parque Tropical), I was asked to "lie" and say I was a "friend" - in those days, it was the Committee, not Inspectors who were to be feared. Having been promised BBC etc., the sat. box didn't work and the owner's only solution was to ask me to bring it to El Camison to be fixed ! A few years later, talking to a swallow, I realised they were going to stay the following year in the very same apartment. The owner had asked them to pay their deposit that year into her local bank account and they were mugged just as they were withdrawing the cash from an ATM .... so yes, things can go wrong for holiday makers in illegal lets :(
golf birdie
02-04-2013, 09:55
Tourist Body FEHT's spokesman Fernando Fraile predicting a drop of 50% in tourism in the Islands this summer - this past Easter break only improved slightly due to poor weather on mainland and Scandinavian countries .
Many factors including flight prices etc are coming together to cause concern -Nero Fiddles whilst Rome Burns again?
Everyone I talk to is saying this year is down on last, with the past 3 weeks being a complete washout. Flight prices are not helping but there is a lot more to blame as well. Please don't tell me you can't move along the front of LC, there may be bodies but look at how many are bangled up, not spending a cent when out. I too fear for this summer unless the UK has another washout summer.
junglejim
02-04-2013, 10:12
Easter weekend in our local was a washout - poorest weekend in months , our complex is about 70% full but most of Swallows and winter residents have gone home - last batch out today -let´s see how it holds up !
Everyone I talk to is saying this year is down on last, with the past 3 weeks being a complete washout. Flight prices are not helping but there is a lot more to blame as well. Please don't tell me you can't move along the front of LC, there may be bodies but look at how many are bangled up, not spending a cent when out. I too fear for this summer unless the UK has another washout summer.
On the contrary we've had a great year, record figures again - march rammed and even half of April full.
I don't believe we're the only ones getting things right.
golf birdie
02-04-2013, 10:28
On the contrary we've had a great year, record figures again - march rammed and even half of April full.
I don't believe we're the only ones getting things right.
I know of a fair few hotels saying they are doing well but this is not transcending into punters spending cash on the streets which is worrying. It seems like they are spent out before they land at the airport.
I know of a fair few hotels saying they are doing well but this is not transcending into punters spending cash on the streets which is worrying. It seems like they are spent out before they land at the airport.
That's may he the case but that's more to with people's spending budget while on holidays than any other reason - people will try not to stop going on holiday but they will budget themselves when they get there.
I always say to the bars on paloma - my job is to get the people here - it's your job to get them into your business and spend money .
Tourist Body FEHT's spokesman Fernando Fraile predicting a drop of 50% in tourism in the Islands this summer - this past Easter break only improved slightly due to poor weather on mainland and Scandinavian countries .
Many factors including flight prices etc are coming together to cause concern -Nero Fiddles whilst Rome Burns again?
http://www.expansion.com/agencia/efe/2013/04/01/18216737.html
The headline is somewhat misleading ... when you read on, it says they expect occupation to be 50% until the middle of July whereas it was 85% this Easter.
A report on TVE1 showed how most regions in Spain had a much lower occupation over Easter, with Valencia being as low as 65%
(FEHT is the Ashotel equivalent for the Eastern Province of the Canaries)
golf birdie
02-04-2013, 10:45
That's may he the case but that's more to with people's spending budget while on holidays than any other reason - people will try not to stop going on holiday but they will budget themselves when they get there.
don't mind the budget part its the not having any budget that worries me.
Private letting is not all that. Matters regarding tourism in the canaries, all sectors matter, hotels , apartments. There are reasons for decline in hotel visitors, the crisis , flight subsidies etc, none euro zone competition.
But the private renters now removed from the Internet advertising sites was a senseless and destructive act by the canary govt. e commerce is the growing trend and people do want to take holidays in private holiday homes.
Summer 2013 is the real start of the Internet ad famine for the canaries, the policy had filled paloma beach to bursting, but can that create work for everyone in the islands?
welshman
02-04-2013, 12:02
On the contrary we've had a great year, record figures again - march rammed and even half of April full.
I don't believe we're the only ones getting things right.
I,m alright Jack sod the rest. !!!!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Please explain if all apartments are only to be let through sole agent on each complex. How are there Management / Cleaning companies advertising apartments for let on their books, are they all doing this illegal !!!. Private cleaning companies is there a real need for these companies if sole agents do their own cleaning on complex. Are these companies going out of business due to the clamp down. Is there a future for these business.
Altamira
02-04-2013, 12:22
Private letting is not all that. Matters regarding tourism in the canaries, all sectors matter, hotels , apartments. There are reasons for decline in hotel visitors, the crisis , flight subsidies etc, none euro zone competition.
But the private renters now removed from the Internet advertising sites was a senseless and destructive act by the canary govt. e commerce is the growing trend and people do want to take holidays in private holiday homes.
Summer 2013 is the real start of the Internet ad famine for the canaries, the policy had filled paloma beach to bursting, but can that create work for everyone in the islands?
Villains & Victims It appears that the whole fiasco is due to the mis-selling of apartments by the Estate Agents & Developers (Villains) they mis-sold the apartments to innocent buyers (victims) saying they could be privately rented to tourists. It is normal practice within the western world for governments to regulate where there is mis-selling, however the Canary Government appears to be persecuting the victims. Surely the authorities should have first of all ensured that no future mis-selling can take place rather than taking the poor victims to court.
I,m alright Jack sod the rest. !!!!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Please explain if all apartments are only to be let through sole agent on each complex. How are there Management / Cleaning companies advertising apartments for let on their books, are they all doing this illegal !!!. Private cleaning companies is there a real need for these companies if sole agents do their own cleaning on complex. Are these companies going out of business due to the clamp down. Is there a future for these business.
My Canarian cleaners were very quiet last summer, joked that they have never spent so much time at home. Their lack of work represents loss of footfall and vital spending for the canary economy
On the contrary we've had a great year, record figures again - march rammed and even half of April full.
I don't believe we're the only ones getting things right.
We're the same.
We're the same.
To be fair we all said you would get very busy, just we also remarked that because overall footfall would be greatly reduced , and so the net result an economic disaster for the canaries
Red Devil
02-04-2013, 12:48
Friends of mine stayed every year in a privately let one bed on Santa Maria and it was £250 per week.
Now the only way she can book is through an agent, she checked the price on Travel Republic and a one bed on there is now £425.
Trying to book direct through Hovima showed it as fully booked all the way through to next year so they have obviously sold the beds to agents only. As far as she can see the only one losing out is her, the tourist, paying out an extra £175 pw for same apartment.
One less set of visitors to Tenerife from now on.
Of course to be fair ass hotel/ tourismo did not intend for loaded/ oasis to be mega busy out of the crackdown, the aim was to increase hotel occupancy. The fact that there has been no increase in hotel occupancy was always predictable.
Ass hotel would have been happy to get more punters in the hotels despite an overall decline in punters.
As I have said before, the canary govt have acted like a Robert Mugabe govt, happy to see a few cronies in wealth , and unconcerned if the majority starve.
The canary judges are fighting back against this terrible injustice on behalf of the Canarian people.
It's unacceptable to have 27 per cent unemployment and to take holiday home rentals off the Internet this summer
junglejim
02-04-2013, 13:31
Complexes such as Loaded's that are of good standard , well run are always going to do well in the present circumstances due to the adverse publicity of illegal lets .
Our complex has been rammed up until this week but added factor is that some of owners are now not advertising or withdrawing their apartments from market - we have several Swallows who are disappointed this year that their future long term holiday over winter will not happen due to this .
They are having difficulty in finding similar bookings at reasonable prices in our area of San Eugenio , short term bookings are apparently ok late summer , but next few months are going to be quiet as always .
Mercadona & San Eugenio CC were very quiet today .
'Didn't see any evidence of underhand tactics by officials, but the situation being caused by the big hotels and declining private renters is obviously having a very negative effect on Los Gigantes. Very surprised after only three years to see so many more shops closed, so many properties for sale and restaurants empty - sadly it will only get worse if the authorities continue with their strategy. Back in the '90's it could be quite difficult to eat in your favourite restaurant without pre-booking...'
The above is a verbatim quote from a lady who has just returned from my 'illegal' apartment in Los Gigantes, from an email I received from her this morning. I had warned her about the underhand tactics being used by Tourismo to catch people like me! She hadn't been to Tenerife for three years and I find her comments depressing. She's asked to book again for next year though - thing is, will I still be in business!
I'm my saying "I'm alright sod the rest" - I'm saying i don't think we're the only ones doing well.
Not sure how you got your snide interpretation from???
golf birdie
02-04-2013, 14:23
I'm my saying "I'm alright sod the rest" - I'm saying i don't think we're the only ones doing well.
Not sure how you got your snide interpretation from???
there will always be winners and losers. As long as there are more winners than losers it will be OK. Will wait to see what the summer brings as last year I had a great summer. Strange but for me the past 2 years the winters have been down and the summers up.
carolethatch
02-04-2013, 15:30
Just wondered how the inspectors can ask personal questions about the owner without them know the owner too. They would not know the answers to the personal question either.
Altamira
02-04-2013, 15:44
Just wondered how the inspectors can ask personal questions about the owner without them know the owner too. They would not know the answers to the personal question either.
Tourist Inspectors I had previously heard that the inspectors make themselves known to the Sole Agent, Administrator or the President and that they accompany the inspector on the visit to the suspects apartment. I would think that the inspectors will have prior to the visit, done some reasonable research on the victimized owner.
canary boy
02-04-2013, 16:16
before the clampdown i had two local ladies and there husband take care of my apartment, when they started to clamp down i ditched the locals and only used two friends form the UK i could trust.I see those three people in the queue at the valdes centre, It wont be long before things start to turn nasty with disgruntled locals who are so desperate
Glad I'm out of it
What is stopping them from approaching a complex and taking on the cleaning for the whole lot?
Just wondered how the inspectors can ask personal questions about the owner without them know the owner too. They would not know the answers to the personal question either.
If the person staying in the apartment claims to have a close enough relationship with the owner that the owner feels generous enough to lend them their apartment at no cost, an inspector would expect them to be able to give details like the full name of the owner, where they live, roughly what age they are, what they do for a living etc etc .... Anyone who has to refer to a piece of paper to answer such simple questions you would imagine doesn't know the owner well enough to be staying in their apartment free of charge.
I can't imagine that the law allows for them to make you answer any questions. You aren't under arrest or making a statement.
What can they do if you just refuse on the grounds that you don't want to divulge personal family information?
Fivepence
02-04-2013, 17:08
The recent threads discussing the questioning of occupants has a ring of Germany in the 30's about it..................I find it a bit disturbing.:confused:
I can't imagine that the law allows for them to make you answer any questions. You aren't under arrest or making a statement.
What can they do if you just refuse on the grounds that you don't want to divulge personal family information?
They embargo your life, auction off your ****ty apartment and sell it to a Canarian for threepence apne
carolethatch
02-04-2013, 17:16
Yes, but HOW would the inspectors know what work the owner did in the U.k., how many children they have. None of those personal details are on your deeds. I know my son would tell anyone knocking on my door asking those questions to go forth and multiply.
Fivepence
02-04-2013, 17:23
They embargo your life, auction off your ****ty apartment and sell it to a Canarian for threepence apne
Blimey, it must be worth Fivepence at least. :laugh:
I can't imagine that the law allows for them to make you answer any questions. You aren't under arrest or making a statement.
What can they do if you just refuse on the grounds that you don't want to divulge personal family information?
Correct ... we are completely in the realms of speculation here ... we have no report of the Inspectors asking any personal questions of the holiday makers .... only, how did you book, how much did you pay, are you happy with the "tourism services" offered
Yes, but HOW would the inspectors know what work the owner did in the U.k., how many children they have. None of those personal details are on your deeds. I know my son would tell anyone knocking on my door asking those questions to go forth and multiply.
And quite right too! But the inspectors would just keep returning week after week (if they have the impression an owner is illegally renting that is). Maybe an owner's son would be staying on one visit ... but if subsequent visits showed the daughter, followed by the uncle, followed by the sister etc etc etc and all of these people either struggle to answer simple questions, or refuse to, then the inspector is going to feel they have "evidence". Anyone who truly does not rent out their property, but does allow selected people to use it for free, is unlikely to have a high occupancy.
On our complex, I have had many owners argue that if ever they had an inspection they would "just say the occupants were family/friends". I'm just showing that if the argument is true it is easy to prove ... however if it is untrue it is equally very easy to disprove.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Correct ... we are completely in the realms of speculation here ... we have no report of the Inspectors asking any personal questions of the holiday makers .... only, how did you book, how much did you pay, are you happy with the "tourism services" offered
I believe that these are the type of questions being asked recently ... but in the past i know of people who have been asked more personal details on a residential complex where I own and rent out on a long term let.
Albatros
02-04-2013, 19:06
This discussion about the tourism officials is a case of 'damned if they do', 'damned if they don't'.
In the UK the tabloids rant about benefit cheats and how the relevant government departments are not doing their job in uncovering them for what they are. When the government send out 'fraud' inspectors to check on 'suspects' the same tabloids rant on about the sneaky officials spying on the vulnerable.
Ho Hum!
Peterrayner
02-04-2013, 20:07
correct ... We are completely in the realms of speculation here ... We have no report of the inspectors asking any personal questions of the holiday makers .... Only, how did you book, how much did you pay, are you happy with the "tourism services" offered
and the answers would be
i didnt book i am a guest of the owner
nothing i am a guest of the owner
i am a guest of the owner.
but then I only have about 6 - 8 guests a year. If you are inviting 30 - 40 guests year someone might get a bit suspicious.
The recent threads discussing the questioning of occupants has a ring of Germany in the 30's about it..................I find it a bit disturbing.:confused:
Silence !!!!!!!! Or we gas you!
M - Buenas tardes señor
T - I'm a guest
M - OK muy bien
T - I didn't pay it's free
M - OK no entiendo lo que me dices guiri, soy el jefe de mantenimiento
T - i'm a guest
M - aqui for long?
T - i'm a guest
M - pfft
junglejim
02-04-2013, 21:00
what happened to ¡Que te Vayas !
Peterrayner
02-04-2013, 21:13
what happened to ¡Que te Vayas !
or even
toca te **** madre :nono:
The clampdown continues...
http://www. janet ******** .com/news/its-not-just-the-canaries.html
Copy/paste take out the spaces...
http://www.congreso.es/public_oficiales/L10/CONG/BOCG/A/BOCG-10-A-21-1.PDF
Spare a thought for Nellie, not only will he have to fight the Canarian Government in court, he will also have Spain to contend with, followed, I bet, by Portugal ..........
Where ever next??
But I thought the EU were sorting this all out????
me too, we were all told just how it was last week by a solicitor
I can see the banks getting even less for their properties all over Spain when this comes out . . . . followd by a new bankcrisis in a few years or sooner .
do you envisage a big housing value drop?
duncan-6
03-04-2013, 16:52
I would love to buy an apartment on Sur y Sol, where we are staying right now.
But , we dont know which way this whole scenario is going to end up, It is a dormant touristic complex, various owners have been fined,( including you know who), we genuinely do not want to rent out, but use as a holiday home 50% of the year.
I suppose residential makes more sense, especially if we had to contribute £££,s to bring the Sur y Sol complex up to tourist licence spec?
No problem duncan apparently its OK to rent out to tourists without a sole agent if the complex is classified as touristic Tony the solicitor said he was right and hed wrote an article for the British press and then voiced his opinion on his very forum without a disclaimer. So that must be legal advice.
No problem duncan apparently its OK to rent out to tourists without a sole agent if the complex is classified as touristic Tony the solicitor said he was right and hed wrote an article for the British press and then voiced his opinion on his very forum without a disclaimer. So that must be legal advice.
For anyone that hasn't been following this long running saga day by day, can I just point out that 9PLUS is (sarcastically, perhaps) quoting one interpretation by an English lawyer based here which however, is not the opinion of another well known Canarian lawyer :)
duncan-6
03-04-2013, 17:29
No problem duncan apparently its OK to rent out to tourists without a sole agent if the complex is classified as touristic Tony the solicitor said he was right and hed wrote an article for the British press and then voiced his opinion on his very forum without a disclaimer. So that must be legal advice.
Yes, it is touristic, but dormant touristic, and if it was ok to rent out, why have owners been fined,which they definately have, everything here seems to be "word of mouth" same regulars/same apartment, no advertising whatsoever.
Dont get me wrong, Im not complaining, each to their own, I would just like to know which way this place will end up?
No problem duncan apparently its OK to rent out to tourists without a sole agent if the complex is classified as touristic Tony the solicitor said he was right and hed wrote an article for the British press and then voiced his opinion on his very forum without a disclaimer. So that must be legal advice.
I'd be interested to hear said lawyer's take on this latest information from mainland Spain!
Nellie ...... where are you ??
I'd be interested to hear said lawyer's take on this latest information from mainland Spain!
I concur Fox me to
I concur Fox me to
I love that you call me Fox xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For anyone that hasn't been following this long running saga day by day, can I just point out that 9PLUS is (sarcastically, perhaps) quoting one interpretation by an English lawyer based here which however, is not the opinion of another well known Canarian lawyer :)
Lol I love how diplomatically you explained that!
I love that you call me Fox xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I've seen the videos
xxx
sur y sol is not dormant touristic. there is a current licence in force to a company which holds the same licence for two other nearby complex;s.
sur y sol is not dormant touristic. there is a current licence in force to a company which holds the same licence for two other nearby complex;s.
But without said license holder operating from sur y sol it's useless
The clampdown continues...
http://www. janet ******** .com/news/its-not-just-the-canaries.html
Copy/paste take out the spaces...
http://www.congreso.es/public_oficiales/L10/CONG/BOCG/A/BOCG-10-A-21-1.PDF
I've only skimmed through this document .... am I right in thinking it does not relate to holiday lets or exploitation licenses .... just residential lets?
I've only skimmed through this document .... am I right in thinking it does not relate to holiday lets or exploitation licenses .... just residential lets?
In the preamble of the Act it states
Por último, en los últimos años se viene produciendo un aumento cada vez más significativo del uso del alojamiento privado para el turismo, que podría estar dando cobertura a situaciones de intrusismo y competencia desleal, que van en contra de la calidad de los destinos turísticos; de ahí que la reforma de la Ley propuesta los excluya específicamente para que queden regulados por la normativa sectorial específica o, en su defecto, se les aplique el régimen de los arrendamientos de temporada, que no sufre modificación.
Finally, in recent years there has been an ever more significant increase in the use of private accommodation for tourism, which could give rise to situations of intrusion and unfair competition, which goes against the quality of tourist destinations; hence the law reform proposal specifically excludes them so they are (remain) covered by specific sectoral rules or, failing that, the rules on seasonal (short term) leases are applicable, which remain unchanged.
In the preamble of the Act it states
Por último, en los últimos años se viene produciendo un aumento cada vez más significativo del uso del alojamiento privado para el turismo, que podría estar dando cobertura a situaciones de intrusismo y competencia desleal, que van en contra de la calidad de los destinos turísticos; de ahí que la reforma de la Ley propuesta los excluya específicamente para que queden regulados por la normativa sectorial específica o, en su defecto, se les aplique el régimen de los arrendamientos de temporada, que no sufre modificación.
Finally, in recent years there has been an ever more significant increase in the use of private accommodation for tourism, which could give rise to situations of intrusion and unfair competition, which goes against the quality of tourist destinations; hence the law reform proposal specifically excludes them so they are (remain) covered by specific sectoral rules or, failing that, the rules on seasonal (short term) leases are applicable, which remain unchanged.
So what are the rules on short term leases in mainland Spain ... do they have the sole agent exploitation license thang too?
So what are the rules on short term leases in mainland Spain ... do they have the sole agent exploitation license thang too?
No .... but "specific sectoral rules" apply in the Canaries :)
junglejim
04-04-2013, 11:14
Quote
"los arrendamientos de temporada, que no sufre modificación."
We have an ex-President , retired Canarian lawyer , who uses these for his other properties in Tenerife but also does "Home swaps " with people from other countries and is confident he is legal .
Personally I think that private holiday letting should be regulated. I do feel the way they are doing it here reduces the number of owners who feel happy to comply with the rules.
bonitatime
04-04-2013, 13:27
Home swaps must be different as no money changes hands
Is Mareverde in Fañabe still touristic?
Personally I think that private holiday letting should be regulated. I do feel the way they are doing it here reduces the number of owners who feel happy to comply with the rules.
No doubt holiday home letting needs regulating, just the sole agent everyone under one overlord is barking mad Alice in wonderland absurd.
No need for it, no ryhme or reason for it.
What's needed is individual letting , a pay per year permit charge, and reasonable standards enforced.
The real world
But in the real world the trend appears to be growing, with Spain as a country looking into introducing legislation to control holiday lettings, rather than just regions like the Canaries.
Seems to me from what I read that the days of buying to let abroad and pocketing the proceeds are more likely to be numbered than becoming the norm??
As before, previous question still applies - which country will be next to see this as the way to go? (or to put it in your terms, where will the next Wonderland for Alice go to next be)
Altamira
04-04-2013, 20:46
No doubt holiday home letting needs regulating, just the sole agent everyone under one overlord is barking mad Alice in wonderland absurd.
No need for it, no ryhme or reason for it.
What's needed is individual letting , a pay per year permit charge, and reasonable standards enforced.
The real world Regulated Tourist Rentals Hello Nelson. I think many will agree with you, that what is needed is a regulated system that allows an independent individual to market and operate a boutique kind of service catering for the more desiring clients. It is commonly acknowledged that this is what many tourists are looking for on the global tourist market place. I believe that the present enforcement of the 1995 tourist law is primarily designed to help the Ashotel associated establishments such as the sole agents and not the hotels.
Regulated Tourist Rentals Hello Nelson. I think many will agree with you, that what is needed is a regulated system that allows an independent individual to market and operate a boutique kind of service catering for the more desiring clients. It is commonly acknowledged that this is what many tourists are looking for on the global tourist market place. I believe that the present enforcement of the 1995 tourist law is primarily designed to help the Ashotel associated establishments such as the sole agents and not the hotels.
yes you are quite correct, the recent attempt to enforce the law is at ass hotels request and was designed to try to increase hotel occupancy. The 1995 law in effect creates nearly hotels, large blocks of apartments . managed with hotel add ons , 24 hour reception etc. The whole thing designed to hold back actual self catering apartment competition , comfort protectionism for the hotel mafia.
muppet is wrong to think the sole agency thing is expanding, the moves in mainland spain are unwelcome, but its aimed at residential zoned property. the euro law bd directive wont allow sole agency in touristic accomodation, euro harmonisation and competition law could never allow such nonsense.
You cant hold back progress and change, the growing trend is holiday home ownership and rental, its normal and should be uncontroversial.
Altamira
04-04-2013, 21:14
The 1995 benefits Sole Agents Having studied the 1995 law, I have come to the conclusion it is primarily designed to only benefit the sole agent ( Many are associated members of Ashotel) their business association ASHOTEL has campaigned for enforcement of the 1995 laws. It appears to have been a ruse to consider that this issue is designed to increase hotel occupancy, it is simply formulated to increase the use of sole agents.
Nothing at all to do with meeting the needs of the consumer and providing free choice of holiday accommodation . A very odd and totally unnecessary way to organise privately owned holiday homes.
Nothing at all to do with meeting the needs of the consumer and providing free choice of holiday accommodation . A very odd and totally unnecessary way to organise privately owned holiday homes.
The law isn't organizing privately owned holiday homes it's organizing and regulating the commercial tourist accommodation sector.
Think bigger
The sole agent a one stop office for the tourists needs is the only best way for the future of tourism in the Canaries.
Loaded, can I ask, do you think your situation is a unique one,ie,you had the chance to become sole agent because of the amount of property you and the family owned,not many people, who might want to go down the legal letting route,have the Power to influence community meetings in order to try to obtain a say in the appointment of a sole agent. Does this position give you a slightly distorted view on this subject
Altamira
05-04-2013, 10:56
Nothing at all to do with meeting the needs of the consumer and providing free choice of holiday accommodation . A very odd and totally unnecessary way to organise privately owned holiday homes.
Apartment v Hotel Any idea that the enforcement of the 1995 tourist laws are going to benefit hotels is simply ridiculous. For example a tourist who rents an independent tourist apartment at Altamira may pay 400 euros for 1 week or he can pay 1800 euros at the hotel next door. It is most unlikely that these apartment tourists would be in a position to pay the more expensive costs, the apartment customer is a different but significant sector of the global tourist industry.
delderek
05-04-2013, 10:58
Loaded, can I ask, do you think your situation is a unique one,ie,you had the chance to become sole agent because of the amount of property you and the family owned,not many people, who might want to go down the legal letting route,have the Power to influence community meetings in order to try to obtain a say in the appointment of a sole agent. Does this position give you a slightly distorted view on this subject
May be wrong, but I believe this is nothing to do with the community, If the agent gets his 50% +1 signed up, he can then be the sole agent. The community have no say.
The sole agent a one stop office for the tourists needs is the only best way for the future of tourism in the Canaries.
It will also control absent owners and make sure all their dues are paid!!!!
Loaded, can I ask, do you think your situation is a unique one,ie,you had the chance to become sole agent because of the amount of property you and the family owned,not many people, who might want to go down the legal letting route,have the Power to influence community meetings in order to try to obtain a say in the appointment of a sole agent. Does this position give you a slightly distorted view on this subject
Perhaps but I don't think so, we became sole agent by default to be honest. Back in 1995 we didn't own as much as now (from memory it was about 15 apartments back then )...... There were 3 legally registered companies us, a lady called jean and Marcus management, neither were prepared to share running costs so jean upped sticks and left and MM deregistered himself.
I think we became the sole agent because we cared most for the complex and had a long term vision which would benefit us and all of the owners.
junglejim
05-04-2013, 11:34
It will also control absent owners and make sure all their dues are paid!!!!
I don't think sole agents have a responsibility for ensuring owners pay their community fees etc.- taxes yes but other liabilities, I'm not so sure .
meanwhile Mr Hatrick has published another follow up article in this week's issue of Island Connections including an opinion of the legal situation that it is OK for individual owners to rent an apartment without a licence or sole agent on a Touristic Complex . Other interesting comments also in article , which doesn't appear to be on line yet !
Whiff- waff or Ping Pong - this is as exciting as the Korean Peninsula stand-off , or is it !
Somebody is going to get shafted !
But as Del says the decision is not made by community meetings so from that aspect it's irrelevant
I don't think sole agents have a responsibility for ensuring owners pay their community fees etc.- taxes yes but other liabilities, I'm not so sure .
meanwhile Mr Hatrick has published another follow up article in this week's issue of Island Connections including an opinion of the legal situation that it is OK for individual owners to rent an apartment without a licence or sole agent on a Touristic Complex . Other interesting comments also in article , which doesn't appear to be on line yet !
Whiff- waff or Ping Pong - this is as exciting as the Korean Peninsula stand-off , or is it !
Somebody is going to get shafted !
Same as what he wrote on here a week ago -
welshman
05-04-2013, 11:46
Just a silly question to sales agents on the forum Is this clamp down affecting apartment sales I understand that there are many people trying to sell are the buyers holding off until things settle.
Not a problem if you just want for residential only clear cut residential complex.
Would you advise people that want to buy to live on a complex, off purchasing on touristic just incase the law changes for long lets on touristic complex,s !!!
How again would you advise someone that want to purchase for themselves and holiday rental lets.
It must be having a great effect on your business the property prices and the economics of the Islands.
It seams you always have one hand tied behind your back. Unless the apartment is on a touristic complex with a reasonable sole agent.
junglejim
05-04-2013, 11:55
Same as what he wrote on here a week ago -
The wording and advice is not exactly the same as original article .
But it's now published ! The previouis article was presented by 9+ was it not?
http://www.tenerifeforum.org/tenerife-forum/showthread.php?23-The-Tenerife-illegal-lettings-thread&p=274322#post274322
Red Devil
05-04-2013, 12:38
If even the legal profession cant agree the interpretation of the law amongst themselves it shows exactly why it has been such a ridiculous one all along and no wonder it wasnt administered correctly from 1995 onwards.
If goverment officials had interpreted and correctly applied the law from the start there would not now be thousands of very unhappy owners.
Shame on the Canarian goverment for allowing this situation to have even arisen.
It is their gross inefficiency and incompetence that has kept the legal profession and estate agents businesses booming in all these intervening years, they were profiteering whilst deliberately misinforming purchasers, probably due in part to lack of leadership and cohesion from the tourist officials.
Altamira
05-04-2013, 13:28
If even the legal profession cant agree the interpretation of the law amongst themselves it shows exactly why it has been such a ridiculous one all along and no wonder it wasnt administered correctly from 1995 onwards.
If goverment officials had interpreted and correctly applied the law from the start there would not now be thousands of very unhappy owners.
Shame on the Canarian goverment for allowing this situation to have even arisen.
It is their gross inefficiency and incompetence that has kept the legal profession and estate agents businesses booming in all these intervening years, they were profiteering whilst deliberately misinforming purchasers, probably due in part to lack of leadership and cohesion from the tourist officials.
Legal Opinions I am sure many of us would like John Hatrick to be proved correct, however others take a very different view. I note a response to the article within the JA website, she says that a response is being drafted that takes into consideration opinions from EU & Government Lawyers and other lawyers etc. I certainly hope it adequately clarifies the situation for all parties concerned.
I don't think sole agents have a responsibility for ensuring owners pay their community fees etc.- taxes yes but other liabilities, I'm not so sure .
meanwhile Mr Hatrick has published another follow up article in this week's issue of Island Connections including an opinion of the legal situation that it is OK for individual owners to rent an apartment without a licence or sole agent on a Touristic Complex . Other interesting comments also in article , which doesn't appear to be on line yet !
Whiff- waff or Ping Pong - this is as exciting as the Korean Peninsula stand-off , or is it !
Somebody is going to get shafted !
But it only his opinion!
The Bolkenstein (think this how it's spelt) directive 3 cases have been quashed for no prior authority to operate, therefore a private owner could operate without the prior authorisation however they would not be able to register their apartment with the tourist board without the assistance of the sole agent. Without the registration there is no complaints forms or inspection book and these 2 items are not available to an individual. So.. you cannot be prosecuted for the operation but, as you are aware, the current fines are for not having the complaints forms and the inspection book.
Can't see old Bolkie getting these quashed.
golf birdie
05-04-2013, 14:55
But it only his opinion!
The Bolkenstein (think this how it's spelt) directive 3 cases have been quashed for no prior authority to operate, therefore a private owner could operate without the prior authorisation however they would not be able to register their apartment with the tourist board without the assistance of the sole agent. Without the registration there is no complaints forms or inspection book and these 2 items are not available to an individual. So.. you cannot be prosecuted for the operation but, as you are aware, the current fines are for not having the complaints forms and the inspection book.
Can't see old Bolkie getting these quashed.
does every apartment under a sole agent have its own inspection book ?
I meant that this weeks article is the same as what TENERIFE soliciters posted on here in response to criticism f his first article.
does every apartment under a sole agent have its own inspection book ?
No
The inspection book has to be on display in the letting office and also the notice that the complaint forms are available to customers.
f his first article.
yeah and his second one.......................pal
x
junglejim
05-04-2013, 16:24
Quite agree Oasis !
But it only his opinion!
Same as Escobedo´s willbe an opinion too and same as any lawyer in any country - they don´t make the law , the Governments do that and the Judges interpret and administer it , surely !
But , who would your money be on in this Farrago ?
Loaded and his ilk are a legally formed entity operating within the legislation - like it or not - others are moths round a candle flame , IMO .
Perhaps but I don't think so, we became sole agent by default to be honest. Back in 1995 we didn't own as much as now (from memory it was about 15 apartments back then )...... There were 3 legally registered companies us, a lady called jean and Marcus management, neither were prepared to share running costs so jean upped sticks and left and MM deregistered himself.
I think we became the sole agent because we cared most for the complex and had a long term vision which would benefit us and all of the owners.
Thanks for that,my point would be,how hard would it be to dislodge an incumbent sole agent from a complex when faced with a similar situation,or,if you would answer one more question,how many individual owners on Paloma Beach would it take to replace you
Thanks for that,my point would be,how hard would it be to dislodge an incumbent sole agent from a complex when faced with a similar situation,or,if you would answer one more question,how many individual owners on Paloma Beach would it take to replace you
someone would need to persuade 50%+1 of the owners (118 owners) that they can do a better job.
onelegnofeet
05-04-2013, 17:05
Blimey is this thread still going ? ......ignore me ,carry on !!
Blimey is this thread still going ? ......ignore me ,carry on !!
^ Blimey who let the gimp out?
someone would need to persuade 50%+1 of the owners (118 owners) that they can do a better job.
Just seeking clarification on this one point, as there seems to be different opinions on how many votes are needed to become the sole exploitation company.
Other than maybe on a small complex, you will never get all owners to vote, no matter what the vote is for.
For example on our complex the voting co-efficient at a recent AGM was less than 50%, and that has been the norm for a number of years now.
If a new exploitation company were to come along wanting to "oust" the existing one for whatever reason (we are a Touristic complex by the way),
do they really need to obtain 50%+1 of ALL owners, or just more votes than the existing company could manage?
I have heard it said that just 50%+1 of all votes cast is needed, not 50%+1 of ALL owners. Which interpretation is correct?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.