hacienda marina by aifos

LoadingFavourite

This topic contains 14 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of katy katy 8 years ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #54438
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    any other poor suckers like me who are caught by aifos in the above development ?
    would appreciate any info whatsoever !
    we have initiated legal proceedings to recover our money but reckon we are wasting both our time and more money
    would love to hear any ” good news stories ” but would appreciate any info whatsoever

  • #87392
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    I’m afraid you’ve picked up an awful timing. Hacienda Marina has just obtained the LFO on Friday the 24th October. Litigating when a developer has already obtained the LFO from the Town Hall is seldom a good idea.

    Please read our article on the matter (point three): http://www.marbella-lawyers.com/articles/showArticle/10-reasons-case-against-spanish-developer-may-be-thrown-out

  • #87393
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    In other words 99% of the punters have no bloody chance of winning whatever the circumstances. Thanks for the honest article on your website though.

  • #87394
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    Surely Lawbird are referring to people who initiate proceedings after the LFO is issued. I would think that most of the people who started court action did so long before this.

  • #87395
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    hope so !!

  • #87396
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    I was referring to the website article not just the LFO

  • #87397
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @Suzanne wrote:

    Surely Lawbird are referring to people who initiate proceedings after the LFO is issued. I would think that most of the people who started court action did so long before this.

    We are indeed Suzanne referring to that case. The poster “Molinamod” writes he/she is initiating action against them, not the he/she has already filed a law suit gainst them.

    In any case what’s important really is to have terminated the Private Purchase Contract before it is granted which in turn is required prior to litigation.

    It’s not generally advisable to litigate once the LFO has been granted by the Town Hall which is one of the reasons why we wrote the said article.

  • #87398
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    Well I must have been reading another article on your site 🙄 ….although I did follow the link. What about all the stuff that you cannot necessarily sue if the developer is late completing and you cannot sue if there is no bank guarantee and the most important whatever you are suing for if the Judge views that you are an investor not just purchasing then they will rule against you. There is a whole list of stuff there nothing to do with the LFO

  • #87399
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @katy wrote:

    Well I must have been reading another article on your site 🙄 ….although I did follow the link. What about all the stuff that you cannot necessarily sue if the developer is late completing and you cannot sue if there is no bank guarantee and the most important whatever you are suing for if the Judge views that you are an investor not just purchasing then they will rule against you. There is a whole list of stuff there nothing to do with the LFO

    Your point being?

    In our first post addressed to Molinamod we pasted the link to the said article and mentioned to read specifically point three (LFO). It’s a general article on reasons not to litigate, it’s not specific to LFO, only point three mentions them.

    If you read carefully the article we at no time discourage litigation on late delivery. Point 1 refers to plaintiffs who sue, for example, 3 months after the stipulated delivery date of the property as per their PPC. At no time does it mention not to sue on grounds of late delivery, this is your interpretation Katy. We sue on grounds of late delivery in many cases. But in these cases the late delivery is regarded by the judge as substantial, at least one year if not more. One may even claim compensation. Being realistic, almost all developments are delivered late in Spain. If you sue exclusively on account of the developer delivering the property late only for a couple of months you are bound to lose. The breach must be regarded by the judge as substantial.

    Regarding suing on a lack of BG it is a bad idea in our opinion. Another matter being if you take the Consumer’s route and have the developer fined for lack of compliance. Thre are hefty administrative fines on developer’s that do not comply with their issuance. We have written a specific article covering the subject of bank guarantees if you are particularly interestsd on the matter.

    A judge will not view under the same light someone whose purchased one or two properties than someone else whose purchased three or four. No-one purchases 3 or 4 properties for personal use, it’s done as an investment and the judge will factor this in on making his decision.

    We take no personal stance on this or any other points in that article for the record, we are just stating known facts that people ought to be aware of prior to litigating, that’s all. Litigation is a serious affair and the more information made available to them to take an informed decision all the better.

  • #87401
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    My point being is what I posted below, not refering to the LFO being issued but the additional issues which you have now posted. I was in no way being critical of your statements, I did say they were honest which is more than some Lawyers are stating, prefering instead to take the 6000 euros or so for a hopeless case.

    @katy wrote:

    In other words 99% of the punters have no bloody chance of winning whatever the circumstances. Thanks for the honest article on your website though.

    I was merely making a statement on the whole corrupt Judicial system when Judges favour the Developer.

    Inquest over…

  • #87402
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    In view of your last post I believe an apology is due Katy, we are sorry. It is then us who had misinterpreted your post as a criticism.

    Regarding judge’s rulings and the Judicial system we will make no comments. We are all entitled to voice our own opinions and that’s what forums are for.

  • #87404
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    That’s fine 🙂 I ought to have done a bit of cut and paste to explain my statement instead of quickly rattling on the keyboard! I was actually complementing your company (in my way 😉 )

  • #88190
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    katy

    in my experience, Lawbird do as much as they can, within a system of law that in my opinion lets judges make decisions based on how they feel about a situation, rather than strictly right or wrong?

    I think this leaves to many cases open to interpretation by a judge’s personal view, (and open to outside influence!!) rather than what we would consider making a ‘common sense’ verdict.

    I don’t like it, and i don’t think it’s right, but it’s what we have to contend with in Spanish law it seems?

  • #88258
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    In all fairness to Lawbird,I have found them nothing but helpful to our cause,we went to court this month with Aifos we could see what was happening 2 years ago and we have been with Lawbird for the past 4 years,we too bought on HM and it was promised to be completed in time for our grandaughters 5th birthday,she turned 10 years old this October gone,so I think what is trying to be said is you should have gone in to sue well before you got this far with your home,we have had just cause because we went into sue months and months ago for non delivery,please email me if you wish to do so,good luck to you all

    Regards

    Lesley

    lesleyhedison@hotmail.com

  • #88262
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    I don’t think anyone has criticised Lawbird. The sound an excellent company 😀

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.