- April 19, 2007 at 6:18 am #52813
- April 19, 2007 at 7:51 am #70978
Now that is interesting ❗
Any more info on this would be welcome.
- April 19, 2007 at 8:08 am #70981
Good Call. It needs more action like this to bring Spain to order. I’m sorry for the poor people in the properties but if all these illegal builds are allowed to stand , everything will continue as before!! JMHO.
- April 19, 2007 at 10:57 am #70989
The strange part of this story is that, in the same area, there are at least two urbanisations being built in blatant infringement of the local regulations (the buildings should be no more than 2 storey, the urbanisation in question are 5 storey)… the construction is continuing unabated.
I visited the area of Marina del Este about 10 year ago.
The place was beautiful then.
Now the hill side has been almost totally covered by concrete and I think it has lost a lot of its original charm.
Good thing that someone is starting to take actions
- April 19, 2007 at 11:23 am #70991
What I find personally upsetting is that people have settled in and are living there. Cannot imagine how they are feeling.
Just goes to show that when it comes to demolition decisions – it seems it is now irrelevant whether people are living there or not. It is not a consideration.
This contradicts the school of thought of some developers that if theirs is an illegal build – get people to complete, get people to occupy the place, get the utilities connected etc. and they wouldn’t dare demolish because of the bad publicity and all the upheaval it would involve.
My heart goes out to these innocent people. Personally, I would be fit to kill! 👿
Full compensation should be obtained from the seized assets of those responsible (developer and officials alike).
Unfortunately stress can make you make you ill, or can even kill – and nothing can compensate for that.
- April 19, 2007 at 12:02 pm #70995
Charlie, what do you mean by full compensation?
The present market value?
The value inscribed in the deeds?
If b money was involved in the transaction things could go sour!
- April 19, 2007 at 12:09 pm #70996
“Full compensation should be obtained from the seized assets of those responsible (developer and officials alike). “
But if the developer is a bit iffy, or like most companies, safeguard themselves, surely the parent company would have developed via a subsidiary company, therefore, possibly no assets?
- April 20, 2007 at 10:47 am #71050
Would the occupation licence have been given for this particular urbanisation? If so, surely that means that all should be OK?
There was a block of flats in Frigiliana built a couple of years ago which had an extra storey built on it. The town hall insisted that the top floor was removed. This has been done, but no-one had moved in at the time.
- April 20, 2007 at 11:49 am #71053
I was introduced to a couple who had bought one of these apartments. We were comparing our woes. 🙁 (we hadn’t had our money back then) I came away thinking we had had bad luck..until I heard their story!!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.