EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
Jun 25th 2014 | 10:32 am
#47
Forum Regular
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 85
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
here here, well said,, 
can the euc supporters argue with these facts,, !
can the euc supporters argue with these facts,, !
As some of you have suggested in recent posts, an EUC is not per se illegal, but, since the Municipality is responsible by law to provide a whole series of services (maintenance included), an EUC may be imposed in a very few limited cases with extraordinary circumstances. In any case, an EUC, if first complied with some formalities in its constitution (which is not the case here), then it can be sustained only if (among other requisites) it is made for a definite period of time and there is an economic impossibility of the Council to face the maintenance services.
Well, the EUC was constituted back in 2005 (although it did not come into operation until 2008) and by that time, I can tell you if you were not still here, the Ayamonte Council was one of the richest ones in Spain. So, they could not even dare to try to claim this because everybody knows that, and even if they tdare, they could not possibly justify it with numbers. Regarding the definite period of time, it is stated by the jurisprudence that if no definite period of time is stated, it is considered null since the very beginning or, in the worst of the scenarios, it is considered to last as much as 5 years (meaning from 2009 till 2013). As EsuriJohn has mentioned, the Courts have tested this in the past with decision for and against. But in 2006 the highest Court, the Supreme Court of Spain, knowing about the contradictory decisions, made a decision "en casación de doctrina" meaning unification of doctrine, to state the illegallity of such EUCs. Attached you can find the Decision of the Supreme Court of Spain (sorry, it is in Spanish) containing all these arguments.
These are the legal arguments. Now, I am going to tell you the reality. The reality is that they know they cannot do this, that the EUC is illegal in this case since the very beginning. As some of you might know they tried in the past exactly the same in Isla Canela, but they did not do it because they found the challenge of people from Isla Canela, so they discontinued the EUC. What happened?? Nothing. Isla Canela was not abandoned at all, actually, I can tell you it is nace place to stay, Some people believe that if the Ayamonte Council gets angry because of this class action, they will stop any service in Costa Esuri. This is not true, they just cannot, they are obliged to by law (art. 26 of the Ley de Reglamento de Bases de Régimen Local). The reality is that the Ayamonte Council does not care about Costa Esuri. They put the EUC and made us finance its activities. Do not even think that the extra fee we pay is used in Costa Esuri. We pay our IBI in exchange of the muncipality services, they get the IBI we pay and they use it everywhere else other than in Costa Esuri, and as a substitute they spend only part of the maintenance fee and the bonds from the bank in Costa Esuri. They just do it, and they know that eventually we might discover and may be we will bring an action to challenge all this. But you know what? they do not care, because at the end of the day, the Ayamonte Council knows that half of us are British or foreigners and the other half are from everywhere else in Spain othen than Ayamonte. SO, at the end of the day, they say: "They (people from Costa Esuri) cannot even vote here! Come on, let's do it, there will be no consequences of our acts. They are not going to complain and if they complain, I do not care because they do not vote here. I just want their money"
I am sorry to tell you this, but it is not only true but obvious. That's it. I can understand that some of you prefer to accept this and go ahead with your lifes. But do not think for a moment that if something has come to existence it must be legal. If you have lived in Ayamonte for some years already, you know how things work in Spain and specifically in AndalucÃa. It is not only something that began with the construction boom, it is something that happened in the past and still happens.
Well, the EUC was constituted back in 2005 (although it did not come into operation until 2008) and by that time, I can tell you if you were not still here, the Ayamonte Council was one of the richest ones in Spain. So, they could not even dare to try to claim this because everybody knows that, and even if they tdare, they could not possibly justify it with numbers. Regarding the definite period of time, it is stated by the jurisprudence that if no definite period of time is stated, it is considered null since the very beginning or, in the worst of the scenarios, it is considered to last as much as 5 years (meaning from 2009 till 2013). As EsuriJohn has mentioned, the Courts have tested this in the past with decision for and against. But in 2006 the highest Court, the Supreme Court of Spain, knowing about the contradictory decisions, made a decision "en casación de doctrina" meaning unification of doctrine, to state the illegallity of such EUCs. Attached you can find the Decision of the Supreme Court of Spain (sorry, it is in Spanish) containing all these arguments.
These are the legal arguments. Now, I am going to tell you the reality. The reality is that they know they cannot do this, that the EUC is illegal in this case since the very beginning. As some of you might know they tried in the past exactly the same in Isla Canela, but they did not do it because they found the challenge of people from Isla Canela, so they discontinued the EUC. What happened?? Nothing. Isla Canela was not abandoned at all, actually, I can tell you it is nace place to stay, Some people believe that if the Ayamonte Council gets angry because of this class action, they will stop any service in Costa Esuri. This is not true, they just cannot, they are obliged to by law (art. 26 of the Ley de Reglamento de Bases de Régimen Local). The reality is that the Ayamonte Council does not care about Costa Esuri. They put the EUC and made us finance its activities. Do not even think that the extra fee we pay is used in Costa Esuri. We pay our IBI in exchange of the muncipality services, they get the IBI we pay and they use it everywhere else other than in Costa Esuri, and as a substitute they spend only part of the maintenance fee and the bonds from the bank in Costa Esuri. They just do it, and they know that eventually we might discover and may be we will bring an action to challenge all this. But you know what? they do not care, because at the end of the day, the Ayamonte Council knows that half of us are British or foreigners and the other half are from everywhere else in Spain othen than Ayamonte. SO, at the end of the day, they say: "They (people from Costa Esuri) cannot even vote here! Come on, let's do it, there will be no consequences of our acts. They are not going to complain and if they complain, I do not care because they do not vote here. I just want their money"
I am sorry to tell you this, but it is not only true but obvious. That's it. I can understand that some of you prefer to accept this and go ahead with your lifes. But do not think for a moment that if something has come to existence it must be legal. If you have lived in Ayamonte for some years already, you know how things work in Spain and specifically in AndalucÃa. It is not only something that began with the construction boom, it is something that happened in the past and still happens.
Jun 25th 2014 | 7:21 pm
#48
BE Positive
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,984
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
CERA have commented already and both CERA and Pablo have said they will meet and discuss this action. I'm curious to see the result of that meeting.
Jon
Jun 27th 2014 | 12:07 am
#49
Thread Starter
Forum Regular
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 31
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
Hi,
As I already mentioned in the past, we will held a general information meeting regarding the class action on July 5th at the Casa Grande located in C/ Huelva, next to Plaza del Rosario in Ayamonte (Huelva) starting at 11:30 in the morning (11:30 a.m.). You are all more than welcome to attend. We will inform you about all the issues and circumstances involved in this case, how to proceed to join the action, the cost, and we will also answer any and all the doubts and concerns you may have.
I am looking forward to meeting you on July 5th, but if you cannot make it or you are not in Spain by that day, and you are interested in receiving all the information, please send me an email and I will add you to the email list and I will forward a letter with a brief containing the information discussed in the meeting.
As I already mentioned in the past, we will held a general information meeting regarding the class action on July 5th at the Casa Grande located in C/ Huelva, next to Plaza del Rosario in Ayamonte (Huelva) starting at 11:30 in the morning (11:30 a.m.). You are all more than welcome to attend. We will inform you about all the issues and circumstances involved in this case, how to proceed to join the action, the cost, and we will also answer any and all the doubts and concerns you may have.
I am looking forward to meeting you on July 5th, but if you cannot make it or you are not in Spain by that day, and you are interested in receiving all the information, please send me an email and I will add you to the email list and I will forward a letter with a brief containing the information discussed in the meeting.
Jun 27th 2014 | 12:49 am
#50
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,912
From: Puente Esuri
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
Agree that even the 'EUC supporters' will find it difficult to argue this. However I haven't seen any 'EUC supporters' regularly (or rarely) posting on this forum... From what I've seen, IMO, We are unanimously angry, fed up and suspicious of this organisation... and we have said so many times.
CERA have commented already and both CERA and Pablo have said they will meet and discuss this action. I'm curious to see the result of that meeting.
Jon
CERA have commented already and both CERA and Pablo have said they will meet and discuss this action. I'm curious to see the result of that meeting.
Jon
Jun 27th 2014 | 9:44 pm
#51
BE Positive
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,984
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
I think the following:
Every poster is and has been very negative about the EUC (to say the least!)
Many were upset with the ‘old CERA’. It was one of the most disappointing things for me in CE personally as I expected more from them and their legal authority
Some like you and your supporters feel the ‘new CERA’ is also not worth any respect – and have decided against them, as per your post attached and its response from your supporters.
Some like me feel that the new CERA volunteers need to be given a chance and some respect and time to get going, and hope that they will make positive changes for the CE residents. After years of disappointments re CE, maybe we are 'gluttons for punishment'.... maybe not: I personally am giving them a chance, but experience makes me cautious. Time will tell.
I feel CERA have made a good early start for example: VOTING changes! Something we have wanted for years. Also re the litigation, CERA have not taken sides either way – BUT without endorsing the legal action, they have forwarded the letter from Pablo re the meeting. Thus they have made available the database of CERA for this proposition. Helped Pablo! I think this represents the best way (with the forum) for Pablo to sell his proposition to the largest audience. In no way can you say that CERA have sidelined/ignored/trashed this activity.
In my view this is indicative that CERA are different and open to help drive intiatives for CE residents. IMO a good start, but Time will tell.
Jon
PS I am not a member of CERA, yet - so these are just my personal observations.
Last edited by Jon-Bxl; Jun 27th 2014 at 10:01 pm.
Jun 28th 2014 | 8:51 am
#52
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,675
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
Devil’s Advocate again!
Vicente’s post is very interesting but it doesn’t materially alter what I put in my previous rather long post. To those who are saying “well you can’t argue with the facts†could I gently point out that these are undoubtedly not all the facts but are a very eloquently presented version of the facts – AKA: a legal opinion. I’m sure that that the Town Hall and the EUC could come up with an equally compelling version of the facts to argue in court, supported by other statutes and rulings. If it is as clear cut as Vicente states then there would be no need for a class action, the EUC would put up its hands, the police would move in and close them down and we would all receive our money back. If this were to happen than I would be up there with the cheer leaders, celebrating. [Although, I also think that the tanks are on the wrong lawn, the real villains of the piece are MF but there’s not a lot of point suing them].
But that is not the real world! As Vicente has fluently articulated in his closing paragraphs life is not like that – people and politics mess it up. Here is where I part company with Vicente; for my sins I am a democrat and believe that the democratic process will prevail in the end. The law is a blunt instrument and, to misquote Del Trotter, “who pays winsâ€. The Town Hall has bottomless pockets because it doesn’t have to meet all the legal costs; we, however, have very limited funds – or will have to cough up considerably more than we pay in EUC charges (those of us who do pay
) to fund any legal action. I don’t think it will be a no-win-no-fee arrangement 
ïŠ
The other consequence of any legal action will be the effect on our relationship with the rest of Ayamonte. We all like to be liked and you can’t make people like you while hitting them over the head with a blunt instrument. Vicente is absolutely correct that the Town Hall has a legal obligation to provide certain mandatory services; however, discretionary services are more a matter of goodwill and it is these discretionary services that would improve our quality of life, e.g. a bus service; a postal service; a medical clinic and so forth. Despite what some maintain I don’t believe that CE is an economically sustainable entity in its own right yet – we do not have a commercial centre, hotel, medical centre, police station etc., etc., and I would be very surprised if there is yet sufficient property occupation for the IBI income to cover the costs of providing all the services required – particularly if MF are not paying. Therefore, CE is still a burden on the tax payers of Ayamonte and you can bet that the Mayor will make sure that Ayamontinos are made fully aware of the drain imposed by the Costa Esuri ‘foreigners’. Can we force ourselves onto Ayamonte? Add the additional costs of defending a legal challenge brought by the ‘rich foreigners’ which will either put their taxes up or reduce some of their services and you can see that we will certainly not be flavour-of-the-month. I, personally, would find living in that environment very uncomfortable.
IMHO we should be embarking on ‘muscular democracy’. For example, all who can should be on the Padron and be prepared to vote for whichever party supports our ambitions – EsuriJohn’s campaign before the last elections for Esurians to register and vote was, I think, very effective and had more to do with his difficulties with the Town Hall than he has been credited with.
Secondly, the EUC could be legalised and its statutes made more democratic and transparent – some encouraging steps in this direction have already happened – power bloques will respond to pressure groups. We should think of the EUC as our own ‘parish council’ charged with promoting our interests in Ayamonte. We should weaken the hold that MF, the Mayor and Town Hall have over the EUC and gain control of its budget. This is where the Law can be most effective, I feel, and Vicente would be a great asset for this. The Law should be the servant of democracy and not its master. In this way CE will become more self-sufficient and a good neighbour and friend of Ayamonte. Using legal means to support a drive for democratic solutions (maybe compromises and consensus rather than conflict) would be a far more effective use of our limited funds than the all-out war that a class action would start.
As I said at the start – just playing Devil’s Advocate.
ïŠ
Vicente’s post is very interesting but it doesn’t materially alter what I put in my previous rather long post. To those who are saying “well you can’t argue with the facts†could I gently point out that these are undoubtedly not all the facts but are a very eloquently presented version of the facts – AKA: a legal opinion. I’m sure that that the Town Hall and the EUC could come up with an equally compelling version of the facts to argue in court, supported by other statutes and rulings. If it is as clear cut as Vicente states then there would be no need for a class action, the EUC would put up its hands, the police would move in and close them down and we would all receive our money back. If this were to happen than I would be up there with the cheer leaders, celebrating. [Although, I also think that the tanks are on the wrong lawn, the real villains of the piece are MF but there’s not a lot of point suing them].
But that is not the real world! As Vicente has fluently articulated in his closing paragraphs life is not like that – people and politics mess it up. Here is where I part company with Vicente; for my sins I am a democrat and believe that the democratic process will prevail in the end. The law is a blunt instrument and, to misquote Del Trotter, “who pays winsâ€. The Town Hall has bottomless pockets because it doesn’t have to meet all the legal costs; we, however, have very limited funds – or will have to cough up considerably more than we pay in EUC charges (those of us who do pay
) to fund any legal action. I don’t think it will be a no-win-no-fee arrangement ïŠThe other consequence of any legal action will be the effect on our relationship with the rest of Ayamonte. We all like to be liked and you can’t make people like you while hitting them over the head with a blunt instrument. Vicente is absolutely correct that the Town Hall has a legal obligation to provide certain mandatory services; however, discretionary services are more a matter of goodwill and it is these discretionary services that would improve our quality of life, e.g. a bus service; a postal service; a medical clinic and so forth. Despite what some maintain I don’t believe that CE is an economically sustainable entity in its own right yet – we do not have a commercial centre, hotel, medical centre, police station etc., etc., and I would be very surprised if there is yet sufficient property occupation for the IBI income to cover the costs of providing all the services required – particularly if MF are not paying. Therefore, CE is still a burden on the tax payers of Ayamonte and you can bet that the Mayor will make sure that Ayamontinos are made fully aware of the drain imposed by the Costa Esuri ‘foreigners’. Can we force ourselves onto Ayamonte? Add the additional costs of defending a legal challenge brought by the ‘rich foreigners’ which will either put their taxes up or reduce some of their services and you can see that we will certainly not be flavour-of-the-month. I, personally, would find living in that environment very uncomfortable.
IMHO we should be embarking on ‘muscular democracy’. For example, all who can should be on the Padron and be prepared to vote for whichever party supports our ambitions – EsuriJohn’s campaign before the last elections for Esurians to register and vote was, I think, very effective and had more to do with his difficulties with the Town Hall than he has been credited with.
Secondly, the EUC could be legalised and its statutes made more democratic and transparent – some encouraging steps in this direction have already happened – power bloques will respond to pressure groups. We should think of the EUC as our own ‘parish council’ charged with promoting our interests in Ayamonte. We should weaken the hold that MF, the Mayor and Town Hall have over the EUC and gain control of its budget. This is where the Law can be most effective, I feel, and Vicente would be a great asset for this. The Law should be the servant of democracy and not its master. In this way CE will become more self-sufficient and a good neighbour and friend of Ayamonte. Using legal means to support a drive for democratic solutions (maybe compromises and consensus rather than conflict) would be a far more effective use of our limited funds than the all-out war that a class action would start.
As I said at the start – just playing Devil’s Advocate.
ïŠ
Jun 28th 2014 | 12:00 pm
#53
Just Joined
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 16
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
I’ve read your 6 posts and good to see you actually have something to say!! After 3 years silence from your 1st post you came alive in June and seem to just post mainly smilies. Hiding behind anonymity, we dont know if you have a personal axe to grind, and are scathing about CERA - or are totally disillusioned. On this thread you have some supporters too.
I think the following:
Every poster is and has been very negative about the EUC (to say the least!)
Many were upset with the ‘old CERA’. It was one of the most disappointing things for me in CE personally as I expected more from them and their legal authority
Some like you and your supporters feel the ‘new CERA’ is also not worth any respect – and have decided against them, as per your post attached and its response from your supporters.
Some like me feel that the new CERA volunteers need to be given a chance and some respect and time to get going, and hope that they will make positive changes for the CE residents. After years of disappointments re CE, maybe we are 'gluttons for punishment'.... maybe not: I personally am giving them a chance, but experience makes me cautious. Time will tell.
I feel CERA have made a good early start for example: VOTING changes! Something we have wanted for years. Also re the litigation, CERA have not taken sides either way – BUT without endorsing the legal action, they have forwarded the letter from Pablo re the meeting. Thus they have made available the database of CERA for this proposition. Helped Pablo! I think this represents the best way (with the forum) for Pablo to sell his proposition to the largest audience. In no way can you say that CERA have sidelined/ignored/trashed this activity.
In my view this is indicative that CERA are different and open to help drive intiatives for CE residents. IMO a good start, but Time will tell.
Jon
PS I am not a member of CERA, yet - so these are just my personal observations.
I think the following:
Every poster is and has been very negative about the EUC (to say the least!)
Many were upset with the ‘old CERA’. It was one of the most disappointing things for me in CE personally as I expected more from them and their legal authority
Some like you and your supporters feel the ‘new CERA’ is also not worth any respect – and have decided against them, as per your post attached and its response from your supporters.
Some like me feel that the new CERA volunteers need to be given a chance and some respect and time to get going, and hope that they will make positive changes for the CE residents. After years of disappointments re CE, maybe we are 'gluttons for punishment'.... maybe not: I personally am giving them a chance, but experience makes me cautious. Time will tell.
I feel CERA have made a good early start for example: VOTING changes! Something we have wanted for years. Also re the litigation, CERA have not taken sides either way – BUT without endorsing the legal action, they have forwarded the letter from Pablo re the meeting. Thus they have made available the database of CERA for this proposition. Helped Pablo! I think this represents the best way (with the forum) for Pablo to sell his proposition to the largest audience. In no way can you say that CERA have sidelined/ignored/trashed this activity.
In my view this is indicative that CERA are different and open to help drive intiatives for CE residents. IMO a good start, but Time will tell.
Jon
PS I am not a member of CERA, yet - so these are just my personal observations.
Sorry for the lack of posts but I am a kind of person who prefers to act rather than talk/write
Jun 28th 2014 | 12:03 pm
#54
Just Joined
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 16
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
Devil’s Advocate again!
Vicente’s post is very interesting but it doesn’t materially alter what I put in my previous rather long post. To those who are saying “well you can’t argue with the facts†could I gently point out that these are undoubtedly not all the facts but are a very eloquently presented version of the facts – AKA: a legal opinion. I’m sure that that the Town Hall and the EUC could come up with an equally compelling version of the facts to argue in court, supported by other statutes and rulings. If it is as clear cut as Vicente states then there would be no need for a class action, the EUC would put up its hands, the police would move in and close them down and we would all receive our money back. If this were to happen than I would be up there with the cheer leaders, celebrating. [Although, I also think that the tanks are on the wrong lawn, the real villains of the piece are MF but there’s not a lot of point suing them].
But that is not the real world! As Vicente has fluently articulated in his closing paragraphs life is not like that – people and politics mess it up. Here is where I part company with Vicente; for my sins I am a democrat and believe that the democratic process will prevail in the end. The law is a blunt instrument and, to misquote Del Trotter, “who pays winsâ€. The Town Hall has bottomless pockets because it doesn’t have to meet all the legal costs; we, however, have very limited funds – or will have to cough up considerably more than we pay in EUC charges (those of us who do pay) to fund any legal action. I don’t think it will be a no-win-no-fee arrangement ïŠ
The other consequence of any legal action will be the effect on our relationship with the rest of Ayamonte. We all like to be liked and you can’t make people like you while hitting them over the head with a blunt instrument. Vicente is absolutely correct that the Town Hall has a legal obligation to provide certain mandatory services; however, discretionary services are more a matter of goodwill and it is these discretionary services that would improve our quality of life, e.g. a bus service; a postal service; a medical clinic and so forth. Despite what some maintain I don’t believe that CE is an economically sustainable entity in its own right yet – we do not have a commercial centre, hotel, medical centre, police station etc., etc., and I would be very surprised if there is yet sufficient property occupation for the IBI income to cover the costs of providing all the services required – particularly if MF are not paying. Therefore, CE is still a burden on the tax payers of Ayamonte and you can bet that the Mayor will make sure that Ayamontinos are made fully aware of the drain imposed by the Costa Esuri ‘foreigners’. Can we force ourselves onto Ayamonte? Add the additional costs of defending a legal challenge brought by the ‘rich foreigners’ which will either put their taxes up or reduce some of their services and you can see that we will certainly not be flavour-of-the-month. I, personally, would find living in that environment very uncomfortable.
IMHO we should be embarking on ‘muscular democracy’. For example, all who can should be on the Padron and be prepared to vote for whichever party supports our ambitions – EsuriJohn’s campaign before the last elections for Esurians to register and vote was, I think, very effective and had more to do with his difficulties with the Town Hall than he has been credited with.
Secondly, the EUC could be legalised and its statutes made more democratic and transparent – some encouraging steps in this direction have already happened – power bloques will respond to pressure groups. We should think of the EUC as our own ‘parish council’ charged with promoting our interests in Ayamonte. We should weaken the hold that MF, the Mayor and Town Hall have over the EUC and gain control of its budget. This is where the Law can be most effective, I feel, and Vicente would be a great asset for this. The Law should be the servant of democracy and not its master. In this way CE will become more self-sufficient and a good neighbour and friend of Ayamonte. Using legal means to support a drive for democratic solutions (maybe compromises and consensus rather than conflict) would be a far more effective use of our limited funds than the all-out war that a class action would start.
As I said at the start – just playing Devil’s Advocate.ïŠ
Vicente’s post is very interesting but it doesn’t materially alter what I put in my previous rather long post. To those who are saying “well you can’t argue with the facts†could I gently point out that these are undoubtedly not all the facts but are a very eloquently presented version of the facts – AKA: a legal opinion. I’m sure that that the Town Hall and the EUC could come up with an equally compelling version of the facts to argue in court, supported by other statutes and rulings. If it is as clear cut as Vicente states then there would be no need for a class action, the EUC would put up its hands, the police would move in and close them down and we would all receive our money back. If this were to happen than I would be up there with the cheer leaders, celebrating. [Although, I also think that the tanks are on the wrong lawn, the real villains of the piece are MF but there’s not a lot of point suing them].
But that is not the real world! As Vicente has fluently articulated in his closing paragraphs life is not like that – people and politics mess it up. Here is where I part company with Vicente; for my sins I am a democrat and believe that the democratic process will prevail in the end. The law is a blunt instrument and, to misquote Del Trotter, “who pays winsâ€. The Town Hall has bottomless pockets because it doesn’t have to meet all the legal costs; we, however, have very limited funds – or will have to cough up considerably more than we pay in EUC charges (those of us who do pay
) to fund any legal action. I don’t think it will be a no-win-no-fee arrangement ïŠThe other consequence of any legal action will be the effect on our relationship with the rest of Ayamonte. We all like to be liked and you can’t make people like you while hitting them over the head with a blunt instrument. Vicente is absolutely correct that the Town Hall has a legal obligation to provide certain mandatory services; however, discretionary services are more a matter of goodwill and it is these discretionary services that would improve our quality of life, e.g. a bus service; a postal service; a medical clinic and so forth. Despite what some maintain I don’t believe that CE is an economically sustainable entity in its own right yet – we do not have a commercial centre, hotel, medical centre, police station etc., etc., and I would be very surprised if there is yet sufficient property occupation for the IBI income to cover the costs of providing all the services required – particularly if MF are not paying. Therefore, CE is still a burden on the tax payers of Ayamonte and you can bet that the Mayor will make sure that Ayamontinos are made fully aware of the drain imposed by the Costa Esuri ‘foreigners’. Can we force ourselves onto Ayamonte? Add the additional costs of defending a legal challenge brought by the ‘rich foreigners’ which will either put their taxes up or reduce some of their services and you can see that we will certainly not be flavour-of-the-month. I, personally, would find living in that environment very uncomfortable.
IMHO we should be embarking on ‘muscular democracy’. For example, all who can should be on the Padron and be prepared to vote for whichever party supports our ambitions – EsuriJohn’s campaign before the last elections for Esurians to register and vote was, I think, very effective and had more to do with his difficulties with the Town Hall than he has been credited with.
Secondly, the EUC could be legalised and its statutes made more democratic and transparent – some encouraging steps in this direction have already happened – power bloques will respond to pressure groups. We should think of the EUC as our own ‘parish council’ charged with promoting our interests in Ayamonte. We should weaken the hold that MF, the Mayor and Town Hall have over the EUC and gain control of its budget. This is where the Law can be most effective, I feel, and Vicente would be a great asset for this. The Law should be the servant of democracy and not its master. In this way CE will become more self-sufficient and a good neighbour and friend of Ayamonte. Using legal means to support a drive for democratic solutions (maybe compromises and consensus rather than conflict) would be a far more effective use of our limited funds than the all-out war that a class action would start.
As I said at the start – just playing Devil’s Advocate.
ïŠOriginally Posted by pablovicente
They put the EUC and made us finance its activities. Do not even think that the extra fee we pay is used in Costa Esuri. We pay our IBI in exchange of the muncipality services, they get the IBI we pay and they use it everywhere else other than in Costa Esuri, and as a substitute they spend only part of the maintenance fee and the bonds from the bank in Costa Esuri.
Jun 29th 2014 | 12:16 am
#56
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,377
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
Devil’s Advocate again!
Vicente’s post is very interesting but it doesn’t materially alter what I put in my previous rather long post. To those who are saying “well you can’t argue with the facts†could I gently point out that these are undoubtedly not all the facts but are a very eloquently presented version of the facts – AKA: a legal opinion. I’m sure that that the Town Hall and the EUC could come up with an equally compelling version of the facts to argue in court, supported by other statutes and rulings. If it is as clear cut as Vicente states then there would be no need for a class action, the EUC would put up its hands, the police would move in and close them down and we would all receive our money back. If this were to happen than I would be up there with the cheer leaders, celebrating. [Although, I also think that the tanks are on the wrong lawn, the real villains of the piece are MF but there’s not a lot of point suing them].
But that is not the real world! As Vicente has fluently articulated in his closing paragraphs life is not like that – people and politics mess it up. Here is where I part company with Vicente; for my sins I am a democrat and believe that the democratic process will prevail in the end. The law is a blunt instrument and, to misquote Del Trotter, “who pays winsâ€. The Town Hall has bottomless pockets because it doesn’t have to meet all the legal costs; we, however, have very limited funds – or will have to cough up considerably more than we pay in EUC charges (those of us who do pay) to fund any legal action. I don’t think it will be a no-win-no-fee arrangement ïŠ
The other consequence of any legal action will be the effect on our relationship with the rest of Ayamonte. We all like to be liked and you can’t make people like you while hitting them over the head with a blunt instrument. Vicente is absolutely correct that the Town Hall has a legal obligation to provide certain mandatory services; however, discretionary services are more a matter of goodwill and it is these discretionary services that would improve our quality of life, e.g. a bus service; a postal service; a medical clinic and so forth. Despite what some maintain I don’t believe that CE is an economically sustainable entity in its own right yet – we do not have a commercial centre, hotel, medical centre, police station etc., etc., and I would be very surprised if there is yet sufficient property occupation for the IBI income to cover the costs of providing all the services required – particularly if MF are not paying. Therefore, CE is still a burden on the tax payers of Ayamonte and you can bet that the Mayor will make sure that Ayamontinos are made fully aware of the drain imposed by the Costa Esuri ‘foreigners’. Can we force ourselves onto Ayamonte? Add the additional costs of defending a legal challenge brought by the ‘rich foreigners’ which will either put their taxes up or reduce some of their services and you can see that we will certainly not be flavour-of-the-month. I, personally, would find living in that environment very uncomfortable.
IMHO we should be embarking on ‘muscular democracy’. For example, all who can should be on the Padron and be prepared to vote for whichever party supports our ambitions – EsuriJohn’s campaign before the last elections for Esurians to register and vote was, I think, very effective and had more to do with his difficulties with the Town Hall than he has been credited with.
Secondly, the EUC could be legalised and its statutes made more democratic and transparent – some encouraging steps in this direction have already happened – power bloques will respond to pressure groups. We should think of the EUC as our own ‘parish council’ charged with promoting our interests in Ayamonte. We should weaken the hold that MF, the Mayor and Town Hall have over the EUC and gain control of its budget. This is where the Law can be most effective, I feel, and Vicente would be a great asset for this. The Law should be the servant of democracy and not its master. In this way CE will become more self-sufficient and a good neighbour and friend of Ayamonte. Using legal means to support a drive for democratic solutions (maybe compromises and consensus rather than conflict) would be a far more effective use of our limited funds than the all-out war that a class action would start.
As I said at the start – just playing Devil’s Advocate.ïŠ
Vicente’s post is very interesting but it doesn’t materially alter what I put in my previous rather long post. To those who are saying “well you can’t argue with the facts†could I gently point out that these are undoubtedly not all the facts but are a very eloquently presented version of the facts – AKA: a legal opinion. I’m sure that that the Town Hall and the EUC could come up with an equally compelling version of the facts to argue in court, supported by other statutes and rulings. If it is as clear cut as Vicente states then there would be no need for a class action, the EUC would put up its hands, the police would move in and close them down and we would all receive our money back. If this were to happen than I would be up there with the cheer leaders, celebrating. [Although, I also think that the tanks are on the wrong lawn, the real villains of the piece are MF but there’s not a lot of point suing them].
But that is not the real world! As Vicente has fluently articulated in his closing paragraphs life is not like that – people and politics mess it up. Here is where I part company with Vicente; for my sins I am a democrat and believe that the democratic process will prevail in the end. The law is a blunt instrument and, to misquote Del Trotter, “who pays winsâ€. The Town Hall has bottomless pockets because it doesn’t have to meet all the legal costs; we, however, have very limited funds – or will have to cough up considerably more than we pay in EUC charges (those of us who do pay
) to fund any legal action. I don’t think it will be a no-win-no-fee arrangement ïŠThe other consequence of any legal action will be the effect on our relationship with the rest of Ayamonte. We all like to be liked and you can’t make people like you while hitting them over the head with a blunt instrument. Vicente is absolutely correct that the Town Hall has a legal obligation to provide certain mandatory services; however, discretionary services are more a matter of goodwill and it is these discretionary services that would improve our quality of life, e.g. a bus service; a postal service; a medical clinic and so forth. Despite what some maintain I don’t believe that CE is an economically sustainable entity in its own right yet – we do not have a commercial centre, hotel, medical centre, police station etc., etc., and I would be very surprised if there is yet sufficient property occupation for the IBI income to cover the costs of providing all the services required – particularly if MF are not paying. Therefore, CE is still a burden on the tax payers of Ayamonte and you can bet that the Mayor will make sure that Ayamontinos are made fully aware of the drain imposed by the Costa Esuri ‘foreigners’. Can we force ourselves onto Ayamonte? Add the additional costs of defending a legal challenge brought by the ‘rich foreigners’ which will either put their taxes up or reduce some of their services and you can see that we will certainly not be flavour-of-the-month. I, personally, would find living in that environment very uncomfortable.
IMHO we should be embarking on ‘muscular democracy’. For example, all who can should be on the Padron and be prepared to vote for whichever party supports our ambitions – EsuriJohn’s campaign before the last elections for Esurians to register and vote was, I think, very effective and had more to do with his difficulties with the Town Hall than he has been credited with.
Secondly, the EUC could be legalised and its statutes made more democratic and transparent – some encouraging steps in this direction have already happened – power bloques will respond to pressure groups. We should think of the EUC as our own ‘parish council’ charged with promoting our interests in Ayamonte. We should weaken the hold that MF, the Mayor and Town Hall have over the EUC and gain control of its budget. This is where the Law can be most effective, I feel, and Vicente would be a great asset for this. The Law should be the servant of democracy and not its master. In this way CE will become more self-sufficient and a good neighbour and friend of Ayamonte. Using legal means to support a drive for democratic solutions (maybe compromises and consensus rather than conflict) would be a far more effective use of our limited funds than the all-out war that a class action would start.
As I said at the start – just playing Devil’s Advocate.
ïŠ
Now as for not feeling "flavour of the month" with local Ayamontinos (who are wiser than you give them credit. Why are there protests in front of the ayuntamiento regarding the ERE/redundancies/non payments?), that is something I'd prefer far better than pity for taking it (apologies) "por culo"!
I agree with what you say on the power to vote.
Also, as a suggestion, how about a new EUC + CERA = EUCERA (with a logo in the form of a Bee)?
Jul 9th 2014 | 7:51 pm
#57
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,912
From: Puente Esuri
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
Can any one who was able to attend the meeting at 11.30 last Saturday give us a summary of what was presented and a flavour of the audience reaction and comments please.
Jul 13th 2014 | 8:13 pm
#60
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,022
From: Ayamonte
Re: EUC Costa Esuri. Class action
Hi John, we didn't attend the meeting (went to the Beach Rugby instead) and from what I have been told neither did many others. The only info I have, from someone who did go, is that all interested parties would need to pay a percentage of the costs and in return (should they win) they will get 1yrs EUC payments back + they will not have to pay anymore. I will find out precise costs etc for you if you don't hear anything from anyone else. Regards Bryony
