The Priors

LoadingFavourite

This topic contains 30 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Anonymous Anonymous 8 years, 5 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #54102
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    Saw this on another forum

    It’s coming up to six months since the Priors were woken up in their home in Vera (Almería) to the sound of bulldozers.
    Their house was knocked down and the rubble removed – but, as their garage was on a different licence, it was spared. They’ve lived in that garage ever since as they have no place else to go. Their money was in their house and they are now paying storage on their furniture.
    The garage has no water or electric.
    The lawyer wants to sue the town hall, the town hall wants to sue the Junta de Andalucia… and meanwhile… the Priors stay in their garage.
    Nearby, there’s a 22 storey hotel built on the beach and in a national park. It’s illegal, but the govt won’t knock it down. They will, however, talk about compensation and are currently offering 80 million euros to the owners.
    The Priors, in their garage, know that they will not get compensation in under about seven to ten years – if they (or their children) are lucky.

  • #84771
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    It´s against the law to live in a garage as it is not licensed for residential purposess, but soley for storage.

    As we all know here, if you were to buy a plot of rustic land with a building, you would be eveicted if you tried to make it a home!

    So why do the JDA allow the Priors to stay there?

    Do they want anymore adverse publicity?

  • #84653
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    It´s against the law to live in a garage as it is not licensed for residential purposess, but soley for storage.

    As we all know here, if you were to buy a plot of rustic land with a building, you would be eveicted if you tried to make it a home!

    So why do the JDA allow the Priors to stay there?

    Do they want anymore adverse publicity?

  • #84785
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    Peter

    whoever gave the ‘go ahead’ for the demolition should be locked up.

    This really has become an example of Spanish justice. hopeless regulation, corruption, scams, illegal builds, brown envelopes etc, and how many of the guilty parties are living in a garage??

    If Spain is ever to recover, they must start coming down hard on the guilty people, wealthy or not!! The message i read from this case, from those in a position to force change is that, if you are a decent person, following the rules, you are just a mug, waiting to be screwed. On the other hand, if you are a crook greasing the right palms, then good luck to you, you are part of the system!!

    what chance of recovery in that climate??

  • #84681
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    Peter

    whoever gave the ‘go ahead’ for the demolition should be locked up.

    This really has become an example of Spanish justice. hopeless regulation, corruption, scams, illegal builds, brown envelopes etc, and how many of the guilty parties are living in a garage??

    If Spain is ever to recover, they must start coming down hard on the guilty people, wealthy or not!! The message i read from this case, from those in a position to force change is that, if you are a decent person, following the rules, you are just a mug, waiting to be screwed. On the other hand, if you are a crook greasing the right palms, then good luck to you, you are part of the system!!

    what chance of recovery in that climate??

  • #84786
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    You missed my point goodstich.

    Why are the local town hall allowing the Priors to live in their garage when doing so clearly contravenes the rules just as much as their house did.

    It highlights the inconsistency yet again in Spain. As katy pointed out, there is a large illegal hotel nearby with no license which is still standing. The Priors house isn´t – even though the local town hall gave a building permit!

    So many of the illegal build problems in Spain could be dealt with swiftly and decisively but it just doesn´t happen.

    In order for any kind of confidence to be restored in the market, there needs to be consistency in the planning process and equally as much consistency in the demolishion process.

    The Priors present living conditions are currently at odds with that.

  • #84683
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    You missed my point goodstich.

    Why are the local town hall allowing the Priors to live in their garage when doing so clearly contravenes the rules just as much as their house did.

    It highlights the inconsistency yet again in Spain. As katy pointed out, there is a large illegal hotel nearby with no license which is still standing. The Priors house isn´t – even though the local town hall gave a building permit!

    So many of the illegal build problems in Spain could be dealt with swiftly and decisively but it just doesn´t happen.

    In order for any kind of confidence to be restored in the market, there needs to be consistency in the planning process and equally as much consistency in the demolishion process.

    The Priors present living conditions are currently at odds with that.

  • #84788
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    Peter

    i got your point, and fully agree. I understand the inconsistency, but surely the main point is the dreadful way the Priors have treated. I hope you are saying because of planning regs’ with regard to their garage, they should have been put up in a good hotel until their house is re-build, or provided with a similar building and a large compensation package for all they have been through.

    It’s one rule for one, one for another, and far to often justice is not happening. The fact the illegal hotel is still standing and the Priors isn’t speaks volumes about who is being looked after!

  • #84687
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    Peter

    i got your point, and fully agree. I understand the inconsistency, but surely the main point is the dreadful way the Priors have treated. I hope you are saying because of planning regs’ with regard to their garage, they should have been put up in a good hotel until their house is re-build, or provided with a similar building and a large compensation package for all they have been through.

    It’s one rule for one, one for another, and far to often justice is not happening. The fact the illegal hotel is still standing and the Priors isn’t speaks volumes about who is being looked after!

  • #84793
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    I am confused by Peter’s point 😕 Is he saying the Priors should be turned out of their garage too as its not legal to live in it?

  • #84697
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    I am confused by Peter’s point 😕 Is he saying the Priors should be turned out of their garage too as its not legal to live in it?

  • #84798
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    The story of the Priors may be one of bad luck and uncaring authorities, but their property was technically illegal as it contravened the JDA PGOU.

    The local town hall were at fault for issuing permission to build that was not allowed under the PGOU. The land was not classified for building by the JDA.

    The JDA were within their rights to demolish the property. The Vera town hall were in the wrong and as such are the people to blame. The Priors can sue the department who gave them permission to build, or misslead them into thinking they could build.

    I don´t know if they are sueing that department, or even if they can afford to.

    The JDA are at fault for not demolishing other properties in the same situation.

    The local town hall is at fault for allowing the Priors to live in a building not classified for dwelling.

    I am not saying they are wrong living there, they probably have no alternative, but the inconsistent town hall seem to allow this to go on.

    Yes I think the Vera town Hall should find the Priors alternative accomodation, they are the ones who caused all of this to happen in the first instance. But whilst the Priors are living in their garage illegally, it is cheaper for the town hall to turn a blind eye to it than to have to admit their guild by re-housing them at town hall expense.

    The situation stinks of spineless mayors and greedy lazy councillors.

  • #84707
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    The story of the Priors may be one of bad luck and uncaring authorities, but their property was technically illegal as it contravened the JDA PGOU.

    The local town hall were at fault for issuing permission to build that was not allowed under the PGOU. The land was not classified for building by the JDA.

    The JDA were within their rights to demolish the property. The Vera town hall were in the wrong and as such are the people to blame. The Priors can sue the department who gave them permission to build, or misslead them into thinking they could build.

    I don´t know if they are sueing that department, or even if they can afford to.

    The JDA are at fault for not demolishing other properties in the same situation.

    The local town hall is at fault for allowing the Priors to live in a building not classified for dwelling.

    I am not saying they are wrong living there, they probably have no alternative, but the inconsistent town hall seem to allow this to go on.

    Yes I think the Vera town Hall should find the Priors alternative accomodation, they are the ones who caused all of this to happen in the first instance. But whilst the Priors are living in their garage illegally, it is cheaper for the town hall to turn a blind eye to it than to have to admit their guild by re-housing them at town hall expense.

    The situation stinks of spineless mayors and greedy lazy councillors.

  • #84800
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @peter Good wrote:

    Yes I think the Vera town Hall should find the Priors alternative accomodation, they are the ones who caused all of this to happen in the first instance.

    I agree with your statement Peter.

    What, if anything, has happened to the Planning Officer who signed/issued the Prior’s building licence?

    Does anyone know if the hotel is finished/open for business, or is it just a structure that the 80 million euros would compensate for it to be pulled down?

  • #84711
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @peter Good wrote:

    Yes I think the Vera town Hall should find the Priors alternative accomodation, they are the ones who caused all of this to happen in the first instance.

    I agree with your statement Peter.

    What, if anything, has happened to the Planning Officer who signed/issued the Prior’s building licence?

    Does anyone know if the hotel is finished/open for business, or is it just a structure that the 80 million euros would compensate for it to be pulled down?

  • #84801
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    Peter

    it certainly does. So the Priors have not only lost their house through no fault of their own, they are now being forced to live in an illegal garage to avoid the council facing the truth and admitting guilt, which would mean the Priors being treated in a fair way.

    don’t you just despair?

  • #84713
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    Peter

    it certainly does. So the Priors have not only lost their house through no fault of their own, they are now being forced to live in an illegal garage to avoid the council facing the truth and admitting guilt, which would mean the Priors being treated in a fair way.

    don’t you just despair?

  • #84802
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    The Local Town Hall had a meeting last week and refused to give the priors compensation. They said they should sue the Junta. Could take a decade, possibly money they don’t have and not much chance of winning.

    Some of the posters who claim this site is negative ought to realise that this forum carries only a few stories of people with problems…lots of other forums out there with nightmare stories.

  • #84715
    Profile photo of katy
    katy
    Spectator

    The Local Town Hall had a meeting last week and refused to give the priors compensation. They said they should sue the Junta. Could take a decade, possibly money they don’t have and not much chance of winning.

    Some of the posters who claim this site is negative ought to realise that this forum carries only a few stories of people with problems…lots of other forums out there with nightmare stories.

  • #84803
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @charlie wrote:

    What, if anything, has happened to the Planning Officer who signed/issued the Prior’s building licence?

    That for me charlie is the only question that needs to be addressed in this case.

    It is common sense that the person responsible for the Priors predicament is in the approval department. This person may have the protection of the town hall when it comes to being sued but the town hall as a whole should be the ones in the dock.

    There is no mention of identifying the person or bringing a case against the town hall, why??

    Sometimes these cases frustrate me so much because no one is following the obvious path. 👿

  • #84717
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @charlie wrote:

    What, if anything, has happened to the Planning Officer who signed/issued the Prior’s building licence?

    That for me charlie is the only question that needs to be addressed in this case.

    It is common sense that the person responsible for the Priors predicament is in the approval department. This person may have the protection of the town hall when it comes to being sued but the town hall as a whole should be the ones in the dock.

    There is no mention of identifying the person or bringing a case against the town hall, why??

    Sometimes these cases frustrate me so much because no one is following the obvious path. 👿

  • #84804
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @katy wrote:

    The Local Town Hall had a meeting last week and refused to give the priors compensation. They said they should sue the Junta. Could take a decade, possibly money they don’t have and not much chance of winning.

    When the JDA formulate the PGOU, it is to restrict the amount of building in it´s province to the areas they deem as fit for building. It releases land to be built on in a measured and controlled manner. There is usually more than enough land in all areas for expansion and creation of public housing.

    If a local town hall is guilty of ignoring this plan and goes about creating urban zones willy-nilly, then the JDA should punish them for contravention of the plan.

    In the priors case, the JDA should firstly enforce the Vera town hall to compensate the Priors for their loss and then dicipline the people involved.

    For Vera town hall to suggest the Priors sue the JDA is farcical. The JDA create the the planning laws and Vera town hall have broken them.

  • #84719
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @katy wrote:

    The Local Town Hall had a meeting last week and refused to give the priors compensation. They said they should sue the Junta. Could take a decade, possibly money they don’t have and not much chance of winning.

    When the JDA formulate the PGOU, it is to restrict the amount of building in it´s province to the areas they deem as fit for building. It releases land to be built on in a measured and controlled manner. There is usually more than enough land in all areas for expansion and creation of public housing.

    If a local town hall is guilty of ignoring this plan and goes about creating urban zones willy-nilly, then the JDA should punish them for contravention of the plan.

    In the priors case, the JDA should firstly enforce the Vera town hall to compensate the Priors for their loss and then dicipline the people involved.

    For Vera town hall to suggest the Priors sue the JDA is farcical. The JDA create the the planning laws and Vera town hall have broken them.

  • #84810
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    The Priors are a symbol of what is going wrong. Not that their house was illegal – or even that it was knocked down – but that there is no interest or concern or reaction from the Spanish authorities. Everyone knows that they won’t get compensation, or any help from any Spanish agency whatsoever. The man who ordered the demolition, Luís Caparros from the Junta de Andalucía, was promoted after the spring elections.
    The message is not a very happy one.
    On the subject of the hotel – the El Algarrobico outside Carboneras – the owners are Spanish, the town is PSOE, and no one quite dares order the bulldozers in. It’s still touch-n-go as to what will happen. No one wants to be known as the one who either let it go forward or who knocked it down.
    Clearly – the Priors should have built a 22 storey home on their 10,000 metres.
    On another point – the Junta de Andalucia is at odds with Almería (we voted PP) – and they are doing everything in their power to screw the province. Almería should wake up and vote itself out of the autonomy.

  • #84731
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    The Priors are a symbol of what is going wrong. Not that their house was illegal – or even that it was knocked down – but that there is no interest or concern or reaction from the Spanish authorities. Everyone knows that they won’t get compensation, or any help from any Spanish agency whatsoever. The man who ordered the demolition, Luís Caparros from the Junta de Andalucía, was promoted after the spring elections.
    The message is not a very happy one.
    On the subject of the hotel – the El Algarrobico outside Carboneras – the owners are Spanish, the town is PSOE, and no one quite dares order the bulldozers in. It’s still touch-n-go as to what will happen. No one wants to be known as the one who either let it go forward or who knocked it down.
    Clearly – the Priors should have built a 22 storey home on their 10,000 metres.
    On another point – the Junta de Andalucia is at odds with Almería (we voted PP) – and they are doing everything in their power to screw the province. Almería should wake up and vote itself out of the autonomy.

  • #84811
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @katy wrote:

    The lawyer wants to sue the town hall, the town hall wants to sue the Junta de Andalucia.

    Sometimes wonder whether there’s more to this, that’s not been reported in the press.

    As has been said, if the town hall had issued a licence in contravention of the JDA PGOU, what is stopping the Prior’s lawyer from suing the town hall (as an institution, not the representative concerned) for losses incurred? They have official documental evidence.

    From the outside, seems a watertight case. The lawyers ‘want’ to do it, so say, what’s stopping them?

    Guess things are never as straightforward as they sometimes might appear. 😕

  • #84733
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    @katy wrote:

    The lawyer wants to sue the town hall, the town hall wants to sue the Junta de Andalucia.

    Sometimes wonder whether there’s more to this, that’s not been reported in the press.

    As has been said, if the town hall had issued a licence in contravention of the JDA PGOU, what is stopping the Prior’s lawyer from suing the town hall (as an institution, not the representative concerned) for losses incurred? They have official documental evidence.

    From the outside, seems a watertight case. The lawyers ‘want’ to do it, so say, what’s stopping them?

    Guess things are never as straightforward as they sometimes might appear. 😕

  • #84821
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    These cases are expensive and, above all, time-consuming (seven years is about right). If it’s a criminal case, it can be speeded up.

  • #84900
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    Just want to make the point that I don’t think the Priors are actually living in the garage, they have a caravan parked on their land and I believe (from a televised interview I saw) that they are living in that.

  • #84911
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    ………cor, must be like being on holiday!!!!!!!

    seriously though, i can’t believe with all the bad publicity, they have been forced to continue in this way. Just shows how hard it is to get justice in Spain, even with a black and white case such as theirs.

  • #84914
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Anonymous
    Participant

    I feel sorry for the Priors. They were I suggest like many people who worked most of their lives and looked forward to a pleasant retirment in the sun.

    While the debate on the forum has been about the route they have to take if they are to have any chance of compensation, they are being left in a caravan to get on with their lot.

    Not a happy situation.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.