Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
Nov 25th 2009 | 6:44 am
#227
Just Joined
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 22
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
As a home owner on Esuri who will be contributing to the EUC then I think that it is highly likely they have contact details, especially as I have a bill sat there waiting for me.
The point that I am making is that there is very little information sent out and if you look back on all the posts covering this subject there is a lot of confusion and frustration.
The point that I am making is that there is very little information sent out and if you look back on all the posts covering this subject there is a lot of confusion and frustration.
Nov 25th 2009 | 10:31 am
#228
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,675
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
As a home owner on Esuri who will be contributing to the EUC then I think that it is highly likely they have contact details, especially as I have a bill sat there waiting for me.
The point that I am making is that there is very little information sent out and if you look back on all the posts covering this subject there is a lot of confusion and frustration.
The point that I am making is that there is very little information sent out and if you look back on all the posts covering this subject there is a lot of confusion and frustration.
Nov 25th 2009 | 6:41 pm
#229
RETIRED ;-))
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 20,156
From: Benalmadena Pueblo,Spain
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
Unless you have sent your contact details to the EUC then they will not have them - and the only details that the municipality hold are your CE address (I tried to give them my UK address and contact details and they were not interested) The Data Protection laws operate in Spain too and so one official body cannot give out your details to another. If your administrator has your contact details then they might send you a reminder but they are not obliged to. In Spain - as is pointed out elsewhere - it is your legal duty to pay your bills on time even if you haven't received it!! The onus is on you to find out not on the authority to track you down. It's part of the fun of having property in Spain
Just to add to your onus is on you remark....
We have a direct debit account with Telefonica, but during August holiday last year someone forgot to take the DD out for the payment. They took Septembers and cut us off for not paying August.
Appanently it was our fault for not checking the DD had been taken out. lol
Nov 25th 2009 | 7:53 pm
#230
Forum Regular
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 117
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
EUC is a Collaborating Urbanistic Entity (in Spanish). It is normally set up when the developer has discharged his legal responsibility for the urbanisation and hands it over to a community of residents to manage. This normally happens some years after the complete completion of the urbanisation. The EUC should be set up on behalf of the residents as a legal and judicial entity - which means that it can legally charge fees (which seem to be collected through the municipal revenue collection services). It is registered with the Spanish authorities. So far so good - and is what is expected to happen.
However, in the case of Costa Esuri there are a number of issues:
1. Martinsa Fadesa went into administration before the completion of the urbanisation - so they should still have responsibility for the maintainance of the urbanisation still. As they are still trading in administration and not legally bankrupt there is a possible legal case against them (but I am not a lawyer so cannot really comment)
2. MF provided a promissory note to cover the costs of maintaining the urbanisation. Because they are in administration this promissory note is now worth very little, if anything.
3. There is still an ongoing cost to maintain the urbanisation which the Ayamonte council was being forced to cover. And (quite rightly in my opinion) the Mayor did not see why the citizens of Ayamonte should pick up this extra cost.
4. The Mayor (I think) proposed the early creation of the EUC to cover the shortfall by charging the property owners for the upkeep of the urbanisation. On the face of it it sounds like an equitable solution, although there is a case which says that the owners are in effect being expected to pay twice - once in the price paid on the assumption that no additional charges would be incurred until the urbanisation is compete and all facilities in place - and then again through the creation of the EUC before MF have discharged their responsibilities under contract.
5. The actual creation of the Management Board of the EUC is shrouded in mystery - and looks like a stitch-up between the local politicians and the developers. It may not be and may be quite legitimate but because there has been so little information from the EUC Board then these rumours are bound to circulate.
6. According to Spanish law - the EUC should be convened at a General Assembly to which all property owners should be invited. It does not appear that enough effort was made for a representative General Assembly. I know that I personally as an owner did not receive an invitation and indeed was completely unaware of the meeting until long afterwards.
7. There is already in existence the Intercommunity Committee - which is made up of Presidents from each community within the urbanisation, who themselves have been democratically elected. The Intercommunity levees a charge and provides a number of services concerned with upkeep of the public areas of the urbanisation. It seems to me that there is a big overlap between what the Intercommunity is funding and what is being funded through the EUC. Again, it seems to some of us that we are paying many times for the same services. There was a proposal that the Intercommunity should become, in effect, the EUC. This does seem to have its attractions, particularly in simplifying the complexity and showing we, the owners, where our money is being spent. However, this was actually voted down by a sizable majority by the Intercommunity committee.
I don't know where that leaves us? We could let sleeping dogs lie, accepting that sometimes a good solution comes out of a murky process. Or we could seek some legal advice - but I don't know how that would be organised or funded. At the very least we should expect some clear and transparent messages from "our" EUC Board Members.
However, in the case of Costa Esuri there are a number of issues:
1. Martinsa Fadesa went into administration before the completion of the urbanisation - so they should still have responsibility for the maintainance of the urbanisation still. As they are still trading in administration and not legally bankrupt there is a possible legal case against them (but I am not a lawyer so cannot really comment)
2. MF provided a promissory note to cover the costs of maintaining the urbanisation. Because they are in administration this promissory note is now worth very little, if anything.
3. There is still an ongoing cost to maintain the urbanisation which the Ayamonte council was being forced to cover. And (quite rightly in my opinion) the Mayor did not see why the citizens of Ayamonte should pick up this extra cost.
4. The Mayor (I think) proposed the early creation of the EUC to cover the shortfall by charging the property owners for the upkeep of the urbanisation. On the face of it it sounds like an equitable solution, although there is a case which says that the owners are in effect being expected to pay twice - once in the price paid on the assumption that no additional charges would be incurred until the urbanisation is compete and all facilities in place - and then again through the creation of the EUC before MF have discharged their responsibilities under contract.
5. The actual creation of the Management Board of the EUC is shrouded in mystery - and looks like a stitch-up between the local politicians and the developers. It may not be and may be quite legitimate but because there has been so little information from the EUC Board then these rumours are bound to circulate.
6. According to Spanish law - the EUC should be convened at a General Assembly to which all property owners should be invited. It does not appear that enough effort was made for a representative General Assembly. I know that I personally as an owner did not receive an invitation and indeed was completely unaware of the meeting until long afterwards.
7. There is already in existence the Intercommunity Committee - which is made up of Presidents from each community within the urbanisation, who themselves have been democratically elected. The Intercommunity levees a charge and provides a number of services concerned with upkeep of the public areas of the urbanisation. It seems to me that there is a big overlap between what the Intercommunity is funding and what is being funded through the EUC. Again, it seems to some of us that we are paying many times for the same services. There was a proposal that the Intercommunity should become, in effect, the EUC. This does seem to have its attractions, particularly in simplifying the complexity and showing we, the owners, where our money is being spent. However, this was actually voted down by a sizable majority by the Intercommunity committee.
I don't know where that leaves us? We could let sleeping dogs lie, accepting that sometimes a good solution comes out of a murky process. Or we could seek some legal advice - but I don't know how that would be organised or funded. At the very least we should expect some clear and transparent messages from "our" EUC Board Members.
I agree that Ayamonte residents should not pay for upkeep of CE. But I am not sure that CE has yet been adopted by the town hall etc. I am not sure but once adopted it is for the council and/or EUC to manage and maintain. But what if the works we adopt are faulty and we have to pay out to maintain.
In the uk the adoption process is a formal procedure. There has to be an inspection of the works and defects corrected before adoption or a bond provided by the developer that provided a guarantee in case of default that the works to be adopted will be made good etc.
Not sure if this is relevant here.
But something is not quite adding up.
Nov 25th 2009 | 10:47 pm
#231
Banned
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 232
From: Too far from CE
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
Hi, does anyone have an idea of the amount of these bills, for example a 2 bed apartment?
Nov 26th 2009 | 12:14 am
#233
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 615
From: Shenfield, Essex
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
We have had two separate notifications today - one from our Management Co (Purple Parrot) and one from ADA. Both have an extract from a letter from Steve Tipper (EUC Treasurer) who says that the deadline for payment has been extended for non-residents to end of December - which gives a little more room for maneuver.
He also provides an email address for L&G who have offered to collect your bill from the tributaria, tell you what you owe and accept transfer into a client account so they can pay it for you and then send you a receipt and DD form for next year, by snail mail to your home address - for free!! (well, as they actually get paid from this income you can see what's in it for them
He also provides an email address for L&G who have offered to collect your bill from the tributaria, tell you what you owe and accept transfer into a client account so they can pay it for you and then send you a receipt and DD form for next year, by snail mail to your home address - for free!! (well, as they actually get paid from this income you can see what's in it for them
They have not received the bill and even if they do will not pay as, in their view, the EUC is not legal. Now, don't all yell at once, I am merely passing on some info. as, not the first time, the legality of this particular EUC has been questioned. Has anyone been advised what the penalty is for non-payment?
Nov 26th 2009 | 1:16 am
#234
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,675
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
I also received the mail from ADA and was about to send a note to give the go ahead. However, on reflection (and based on the amount of conflicting comments on this site) decided to contact someone who is resident on CE to ask what they were doing.
They have not received the bill and even if they do will not pay as, in their view, the EUC is not legal. Now, don't all yell at once, I am merely passing on some info. as, not the first time, the legality of this particular EUC has been questioned. Has anyone been advised what the penalty is for non-payment?
They have not received the bill and even if they do will not pay as, in their view, the EUC is not legal. Now, don't all yell at once, I am merely passing on some info. as, not the first time, the legality of this particular EUC has been questioned. Has anyone been advised what the penalty is for non-payment?
The the EUC fee is, therefore, a local tax and therefore the same penalties apply as for any other tax. The first step for non-payment is a fine of 5% (I heard and I don't know if that is monthly or a 1-off). The next step is legal action with, as the ultimate sanction, a criminal record in Spain and they can seize your property to defray the debt and expenses.
The only legal option seems to be to get involved in the democratic process (through the Intercommunity presidents who have a vote) to get the rules changed and don't forget to pay the bill as otherwise you won't be allowed to (Catch22).
Nov 26th 2009 | 1:30 am
#235
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,912
From: Puente Esuri
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
I also received the mail from ADA and was about to send a note to give the go ahead. However, on reflection (and based on the amount of conflicting comments on this site) decided to contact someone who is resident on CE to ask what they were doing.
They have not received the bill and even if they do will not pay as, in their view, the EUC is not legal. Now, don't all yell at once, I am merely passing on some info. as, not the first time, the legality of this particular EUC has been questioned. Has anyone been advised what the penalty is for non-payment?
They have not received the bill and even if they do will not pay as, in their view, the EUC is not legal. Now, don't all yell at once, I am merely passing on some info. as, not the first time, the legality of this particular EUC has been questioned. Has anyone been advised what the penalty is for non-payment?
There is talk of forming an owners association which seems to be what defeated the nascient EUC at Canela. I will certainly join and vote to remove the EUC since it seems to me to be taxation without representation. Time will tell as they say.
Nov 26th 2009 | 2:14 am
#236
Forum Regular
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 245
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
Google Translation
Hello, I just received the letter for direct debit payment of EUC (174 euros), all sent by the ayto. I have no idea or what type of tax is, or to use the money, or if it is legal ... I live in Bilbao so I called the City of Ayamonte to find out and tell me they know nothing and they send me a phone!! Mobile! of a law firm which I call but do not answer
As a municipality may give an official stamp on a collection of those who know nothing and even refer you over to the mobile tel no one responds
Te agradeceria me enlighten you a bit about this because it is my intention in principle is not paying religiously since I already pay the IBI (quite expensive by the way) and my receipts and intracomunidad community.
Hello, I just received the letter for direct debit payment of EUC (174 euros), all sent by the ayto. I have no idea or what type of tax is, or to use the money, or if it is legal ... I live in Bilbao so I called the City of Ayamonte to find out and tell me they know nothing and they send me a phone!! Mobile! of a law firm which I call but do not answer
As a municipality may give an official stamp on a collection of those who know nothing and even refer you over to the mobile tel no one responds
Te agradeceria me enlighten you a bit about this because it is my intention in principle is not paying religiously since I already pay the IBI (quite expensive by the way) and my receipts and intracomunidad community.
I translate my letter (I wish it´s better than Google!!!)
Maria Dolores, say that she has received a EUC´s bill (174 €) and she ask for information about what it this. She has call to the Council and they say that we have call a lawyer. This is López, Gutiérrez, Consulting, S,C. Abogados. They are managers´EUC. Curiously, I have information that this enterprise that before this company was call López, Gutiérrez, Castillo, S.C. Sorprise!!. Castillo is the mayor (Antonio J. RodrÃguez Castillo) that he´s lawyer. Both enterprise have same adress in Ayamonte and Isla Cristina...
I don´t pay anything. I am going to legal appeal because: don´t exist the acknowledgement of receipt and the Council isn’t authenticated for to ask for the bills.
If somebody want my document, my e-mail adress is: [email protected] (Only you need to write your information)
IT´S VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU SEND THIS DOCUMENT BEFORE 2 DECEMBER. YOU MUST TO GO TO POSTAL SEND WITH A STAMP WHICH IT SEE THE DATE. YOU NEED TO HAVE TWO COPIES: ONE IS SEND TO COUNCIL AND OTHER IS YOUR PROOF.
Regards,
Spanish_lawyer
Thank so much Mike J for your translation.
MarÃa Dolores, te escribo la carta en español.
Los abogados a los que te dice el Ayuntamiento que llames son López, Gutiérrez, Consulting, S,C. Abogados. Ellos son, los gestores de la Entidad UrbanÃstica de Conservación. Curiosamente, tengo información que demuestra que esa empresa se llamaba antes López, Gutiérrez, Castillo, S.C. Curioso!. Castillo es el Alcalde de Ayamonte, que es abogado. Ambas empresas tienen la misma dirección en Ayamonte y en Isla Cristina.
No voy a pagar ni céntimo. Yo voy a recurrir por que: no existe acta de recepción de las obras y el Ayuntamiento no está legitimado para pedir el pago de los recibos.
Si alguien quiere ese documente, mi e-mail is: [email protected] (Tú sólo debes poner tus datos)
ES MUY IMPORTE QUE LO ENVÃES ANTES DEL DOS DE DICIEMBRE. TU DEBES IR A CORREOS Y ENVIARLO CON EL SELLO EN EL QUE SE VEA LA FECHA (EN ESPAÑA SE LLAMA CORREO ADMINISTRATIVO). ES NECESARIO QUE VAYAS CON DOS COPIAS: UNA LA ENVÃAS AL AYUNTAMIENTO Y LA OTRA ES LA PRUEBA DE TU RECURSO.
Saludos.
Spanish_lawyer
Nov 26th 2009 | 2:20 am
#237
Forum Regular
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 245
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
Hello Maria Dolores, here it is. I have tried to do the best i can:
Hello, I have just received the letter to pay the ECU (174€) by direct debit, everything sent by the town council. I have no idea either what kind of tax it is, nor what this money is used for, even if it is legal… I live in Bilbao so I have called to the Ayamonte town council to inform about it and they tell me that they don’t know anything and give me a lawyer’s office’s telephone “mobile†to which I call to but nobody answer me.
How can an town council give an official stamp about charges about which they know nothing and besides that, they send you to a mobile phone in which nobody answer.
I would be very grateful if you inform me a little about all of this because my intention in principle is not to pay due to I already pay religiously the IBI (quite expensive, by the way) and my community and intercommunity bills.
I leave my e-mail
thanks
kind regards,
marisol
Hello, I have just received the letter to pay the ECU (174€) by direct debit, everything sent by the town council. I have no idea either what kind of tax it is, nor what this money is used for, even if it is legal… I live in Bilbao so I have called to the Ayamonte town council to inform about it and they tell me that they don’t know anything and give me a lawyer’s office’s telephone “mobile†to which I call to but nobody answer me.
How can an town council give an official stamp about charges about which they know nothing and besides that, they send you to a mobile phone in which nobody answer.
I would be very grateful if you inform me a little about all of this because my intention in principle is not to pay due to I already pay religiously the IBI (quite expensive, by the way) and my community and intercommunity bills.
I leave my e-mail
thanks
kind regards,
marisol
Gracias Marisol. Tu inglés es fantástico!!!!. Yo he contestado a MarÃa Dolores. Si tu necesitas ayuda, puedes contactar conmigo. Saludos!!!.
Nov 26th 2009 | 2:25 am
#238
Forum Regular
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 245
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
EUC is a Collaborating Urbanistic Entity (in Spanish). It is normally set up when the developer has discharged his legal responsibility for the urbanisation and hands it over to a community of residents to manage. This normally happens some years after the complete completion of the urbanisation. The EUC should be set up on behalf of the residents as a legal and judicial entity - which means that it can legally charge fees (which seem to be collected through the municipal revenue collection services). It is registered with the Spanish authorities. So far so good - and is what is expected to happen.
However, in the case of Costa Esuri there are a number of issues:
1. Martinsa Fadesa went into administration before the completion of the urbanisation - so they should still have responsibility for the maintainance of the urbanisation still. As they are still trading in administration and not legally bankrupt there is a possible legal case against them (but I am not a lawyer so cannot really comment)
2. MF provided a promissory note to cover the costs of maintaining the urbanisation. Because they are in administration this promissory note is now worth very little, if anything.
3. There is still an ongoing cost to maintain the urbanisation which the Ayamonte council was being forced to cover. And (quite rightly in my opinion) the Mayor did not see why the citizens of Ayamonte should pick up this extra cost.
4. The Mayor (I think) proposed the early creation of the EUC to cover the shortfall by charging the property owners for the upkeep of the urbanisation. On the face of it it sounds like an equitable solution, although there is a case which says that the owners are in effect being expected to pay twice - once in the price paid on the assumption that no additional charges would be incurred until the urbanisation is compete and all facilities in place - and then again through the creation of the EUC before MF have discharged their responsibilities under contract.
5. The actual creation of the Management Board of the EUC is shrouded in mystery - and looks like a stitch-up between the local politicians and the developers. It may not be and may be quite legitimate but because there has been so little information from the EUC Board then these rumours are bound to circulate.
6. According to Spanish law - the EUC should be convened at a General Assembly to which all property owners should be invited. It does not appear that enough effort was made for a representative General Assembly. I know that I personally as an owner did not receive an invitation and indeed was completely unaware of the meeting until long afterwards.
7. There is already in existence the Intercommunity Committee - which is made up of Presidents from each community within the urbanisation, who themselves have been democratically elected. The Intercommunity levees a charge and provides a number of services concerned with upkeep of the public areas of the urbanisation. It seems to me that there is a big overlap between what the Intercommunity is funding and what is being funded through the EUC. Again, it seems to some of us that we are paying many times for the same services. There was a proposal that the Intercommunity should become, in effect, the EUC. This does seem to have its attractions, particularly in simplifying the complexity and showing we, the owners, where our money is being spent. However, this was actually voted down by a sizable majority by the Intercommunity committee.
I don't know where that leaves us? We could let sleeping dogs lie, accepting that sometimes a good solution comes out of a murky process. Or we could seek some legal advice - but I don't know how that would be organised or funded. At the very least we should expect some clear and transparent messages from "our" EUC Board Members.
However, in the case of Costa Esuri there are a number of issues:
1. Martinsa Fadesa went into administration before the completion of the urbanisation - so they should still have responsibility for the maintainance of the urbanisation still. As they are still trading in administration and not legally bankrupt there is a possible legal case against them (but I am not a lawyer so cannot really comment)
2. MF provided a promissory note to cover the costs of maintaining the urbanisation. Because they are in administration this promissory note is now worth very little, if anything.
3. There is still an ongoing cost to maintain the urbanisation which the Ayamonte council was being forced to cover. And (quite rightly in my opinion) the Mayor did not see why the citizens of Ayamonte should pick up this extra cost.
4. The Mayor (I think) proposed the early creation of the EUC to cover the shortfall by charging the property owners for the upkeep of the urbanisation. On the face of it it sounds like an equitable solution, although there is a case which says that the owners are in effect being expected to pay twice - once in the price paid on the assumption that no additional charges would be incurred until the urbanisation is compete and all facilities in place - and then again through the creation of the EUC before MF have discharged their responsibilities under contract.
5. The actual creation of the Management Board of the EUC is shrouded in mystery - and looks like a stitch-up between the local politicians and the developers. It may not be and may be quite legitimate but because there has been so little information from the EUC Board then these rumours are bound to circulate.
6. According to Spanish law - the EUC should be convened at a General Assembly to which all property owners should be invited. It does not appear that enough effort was made for a representative General Assembly. I know that I personally as an owner did not receive an invitation and indeed was completely unaware of the meeting until long afterwards.
7. There is already in existence the Intercommunity Committee - which is made up of Presidents from each community within the urbanisation, who themselves have been democratically elected. The Intercommunity levees a charge and provides a number of services concerned with upkeep of the public areas of the urbanisation. It seems to me that there is a big overlap between what the Intercommunity is funding and what is being funded through the EUC. Again, it seems to some of us that we are paying many times for the same services. There was a proposal that the Intercommunity should become, in effect, the EUC. This does seem to have its attractions, particularly in simplifying the complexity and showing we, the owners, where our money is being spent. However, this was actually voted down by a sizable majority by the Intercommunity committee.
I don't know where that leaves us? We could let sleeping dogs lie, accepting that sometimes a good solution comes out of a murky process. Or we could seek some legal advice - but I don't know how that would be organised or funded. At the very least we should expect some clear and transparent messages from "our" EUC Board Members.
Are you lawyer?, MikeJ. I have a lot information and it´s all true!!!. I agree you.
Regards,
Spanish_lawyer
Nov 26th 2009 | 5:28 am
#239
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,675
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
Mike J
Nov 26th 2009 | 11:08 am
#240
Forum Regular
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 245
Re: Costa Esuri - Ayamonte - EUC
Your information about EUC are true. I had just finished my legal appeal. I don´t pay anything. EUC is totally illegality. You could be a good lawyer!!!.
