Originally Posted by Nedkelly2

Lomas 2,
Had the unfortunate opportunity of reading your post before it was edited by JDR. It was because of negative, malicious minority like you that I stopped visiting this site for a period.
I know the people you were talking about and they are very hard working individuals. In particular the President who in my mind only has the interests of the community at heart and a times carries out a thankless task when confronted by comments such as yours.
Get a life.
Ned

Originally Posted by AliceB

The owner of the property is a good friend of ours. Having visited the house in question just after it was vacated we saw evidence of chewed up woodwork; doors required repair and replacement. Plus the house required a complete internal repaint. Also, other points which have been deleted are in fact truthful and not rumours at all.
Call it hearsay if you want, because unless the property owner posts, it will only be hearsay, wont it. And even if the owner did make a posting, those in opposition would say it is “malicious rumours” because they want to defend their friends.

So, to set the scales of balance, is your opposing view of the situation a rumour and is it hearsay. Did you view the property post rental? Did you correspond with the carpenter and painter who worked on the house? Why did the property owners employ these people if the house was not damaged?

Because for you to post that the points made by Lomas2 are “malicious rumours” is in fact a malicious rumour in itself because it is the opposite to the truth.
If you are a friend of the dog owner and choose to defend the issue on their part, so be it. Nonetheless, to castigate another with derogatory remarks only undermines your own character.

These are not “nasty rumours by sad people who have nothing better to do with their lives”; they are fact based comments by a concerned property owner warning others about potential rental horrors and they have been deleted.
If you watch Rogue Traders and the like you know their purpose is to warn.
Why then is Lomas2 not given the same right to view their opinion of fact based issues which are not rumours but fact.

Originally Posted by AliceB

“negative malicious minority like you” what gives you the right to throw remarks like that at someone who simply states their comments. What makes you think you are you permitted to use negative and malicious words against another who chooses to post their opinion?
You are allowed to voice your comments, so why not someone else.
In YOUR opinion and in YOUR “mind” 'the President' “only has the interests of the community at heart”. Well, that is YOUR opinion and is NOT the opinion of many others. So, if YOU are allowed to state your comments, equally the opinions and views of OTHERS are as valid.
And furthermore, there are many neighbours as well as other presidents who are carrying out thankless tasks and are being confronted by a lot more than “comments” such as seen on here.
Al

Originally Posted by Bennie

I went in that house during and after the rental and I am sorry but it was left they way it was when they got it!

My wife also rented a house to this family for the full month in August after they moved out of that house due to it being sold (funny how they sold a shit tip chewed up house isnt it?) and when they left the house was absolutely spotless and not a chewed up door in sight. In fact you wouldn't not have known they had been there.

While I am here I have read about emails going round. As a resident on Lomas I would advise the only emails you take any notice of are the ones from the inter community president who has been to all these meetings and they are sent via Ada and not any other emails!

Originally Posted by John & Kath

Sorry Bennie but plot owners are not yet in any community and do not get emails from anybody so we are left in the dark. The council did send out the invatation but it is not dated and did not arrive until Tuesday this week. Unless people share what info they do get we will not know what is going on. I am afraid I have heard very mixed views of ADA so I would always double check any info from them with non ADA sources.

Originally Posted by John & Kath

I am sure that the Law provides for everyone to be invited to community meetings and be given adequate notice. That clearly has not happened. I agree that Fadesa nor ADA should decide our future but I am afraid that the Town Hall has to be involved and we can influence that by registering on the Padron and voting in local elections even dare I suggest electing a candidate from Esuri.

Originally Posted by jdr

You should still be under the main urbi president and he should inform you.
The only people with legal clout are the Presidents and they are the only ones that should get the information on what is happening, if they are not keeping you clued up, ( do they know who and where you are ? ) take proceedings against them as you are entitled to as they are not fulfilling their role as president to look after the community.

Originally Posted by jdr

You have summed it up perfectly, the onus is on the owner to find out what is happening.
I am sorry to say they need to attend the meetings if they want to do something about it, it is so difficult to change things later.

Originally Posted by John & Kath

To convene a meeting for the 31st December where most of the owners are overseas Brits smacks to my mind of sharp practise. To send invitations to UK via snail mail over Christmas smacks of sharp practise. It may comply with the letter of the requirements but it does not allay my fears that both the council and Fadesa are arranging things to their best advantage and the detriment of the actual owners on Esuri.

Originally Posted by John & Kath

To convene a meeting for the 31st December where most of the owners are overseas Brits smacks to my mind of sharp practise. To send invitations to UK via snail mail over Christmas smacks of sharp practise. It may comply with the letter of the requirements but it does not allay my fears that both the council and Fadesa are arranging things to their best advantage and the detriment of the actual owners on Esuri.

Originally Posted by John & Kath

To convene a meeting for the 31st December where most of the owners are overseas Brits smacks to my mind of sharp practise. To send invitations to UK via snail mail over Christmas smacks of sharp practise. It may comply with the letter of the requirements but it does not allay my fears that both the council and Fadesa are arranging things to their best advantage and the detriment of the actual owners on Esuri.

Originally Posted by Luz

The fact that a meeting was taking place on the 31st. of December was reported in the "Huelva Informacion" (one of the Huelva newspapers) on the 19th. of December. It was also on the website of the newspaper so was available to everyone with access to internet. The same story was repeated on the ayamonte.org website on the 22nd. December.
All presidents, community administrators and plot owners could have attended or could have given a proxy vote for someone to attend on their behalf, as indeed some did. They simply had to bring along proof of who they were and they were admitted to the meeting.
If we, or our representatives, are unable to read the Spanish press then do we make others responsible for the fact that we knew nothing about the meeting?

Originally Posted by Luz

The fact that a meeting was taking place on the 31st. of December was reported in the "Huelva Informacion" (one of the Huelva newspapers) on the 19th. of December. It was also on the website of the newspaper so was available to everyone with access to internet. The same story was repeated on the ayamonte.org website on the 22nd. December.
All presidents, community administrators and plot owners could have attended or could have given a proxy vote for someone to attend on their behalf, as indeed some did. They simply had to bring along proof of who they were and they were admitted to the meeting.
If we, or our representatives, are unable to read the Spanish press then do we make others responsible for the fact that we knew nothing about the meeting?

Originally Posted by John & Kath

Why then was a community President refused admission to the room? Why were only those people designated by Fadesa and invited by ADA allowed in and why was a solicitor from the town who does not have a house on Esuri present?