Originally Posted by pablovicente

Answering Jon-Bxl and confirming what EsuriJohn says, for commercial law in Spain a company may be dissolved and in liquidation, but that does not mean it does not exist, actually it keeps its legal status until the bankruptcy process and the liquidation is completely finished. The consequences of the dissolution are basically, that the company ceases in its ordinary day-to-day activities and the directors and administrators are substituted by the liquidators (3 liquidators: probably 1 from KPMG, 1 lawyer and a representative of the major creditor -SAREB). But the company still has the obligation to defend the interest of the creditors, for example, it has to still fight the lawsuits MF has all over Spain for breach of contract and so on.

The commercial judge has not accepted the liquidation yet and still has not decided about who will be the liquidators. In any case, Bankruptcy will last at the very least 3 to 4 years. Thus, as you can understand, by March 26th MF will be on its feet. Although, to be honest, I do not get what interest could have MF to appoint a member to the EUC committee for the next 4 years, and which person would agree to take that role on behalf of MF...

By the way, if owners get the power to manage and run the EUC after the March 26th meeting, they should decide if they prefer either to run or to dissolve the EUC, since they would have the power to do so as well, specially now that MF will not have the motivation of keeping the connivance with the Town Hall anymore (and that the Town Hall has not any vote power)...These are just an owner's son thoughts, not my lawyer thoughts.

To MikeJ, EUC has performed its job, true. Someone (not me) could say though that they did the job poorly and overbilling in more than 100% the fees of the administrators (mayor's friends) over the years, and still it would be, probably, a fair view as well. Anyway, what I must disagree is in the asseveration of the consequences of not having the EUC working. We have a very close case -Isla Canela. As you know, there is an EUC there. It worked from 2001 to 2005, then, the owners blocked it. It still exists, but it does not work at all since then and it is the TownHall who takes care of the maintenance, with no cost to the owners. As you may know as well, the Town Hall has decided to restart the EUC of Isla Canela again now. This time, it seems the owners will block it again. Consequences: Isla Canela is perfectly maintained... In Costa Esuri, there is no power or lobby power from the owners' side though. The CERA does a good job in the community, but when dealing with the Town Hall, there may be conflicts of interests.
Eventually, it is just a question of who has the legal obligation of taking care of the maintenance; it is not that if the owners do not pay for that, noone will do it. Actually, owners already do pay for that with the "legitimate" and "no few" taxes...

But yes, this is an already discussed issue, and I understand other views as well, specially coming from foreign owners.

Originally Posted by Jon-Bxl

Thanks Pablo for your insightful comments about this bankruptcy... and the timing of the EUC meeting.

I am curious to see if anyone will turn up, however! I would guess running an EUC in the current circumstances, is not high on their priority list.

Re the discussion about the EUC itself, I'm afraid I have for a long time been unhappy and totally distrustful of this organisation. Sure they have done some things, but they HAD to with the money they get! I got very concerned (for example) when the was no proper accounts presented for years... and lots of other stuff we've discussed at length on the forum.

If a new EUC is created of actual residents then I would like to see an immediate ring-fencing of the millions at the bank - from the guarantees. Also we would need to ensure that that money isn't used for 'normal works' that should have been done anyway based on our Tax payments. For example Teedup mentioned that the roundabout needs resurfacing, I think this should not come out of this 'Guarantee money' but the 'normal' fund at the town hall.

Its good that CERA are on the case with this and have actually been to the bank (I believe) to check the account status.

Anyway I still wonder who will turn up from MF at the meeting...

Jon

Originally Posted by MikeJ

Actually Jon - if you look at the statutes and the note recently circulated by CERA - the EUC is responsible for that roundabout (and all the other roads) and not the town hall.

Originally Posted by MikeJ

Actually Jon - if you look at the statutes and the note recently circulated by CERA - the EUC is responsible for that roundabout (and all the other roads) and not the town hall.

Originally Posted by olivia

The Town Hall are so short of staff and funds they can't maintain their existing commitments in Ayamonte. The open spaces and little parksh the developers were forced to construct when the resedential areas both sides of the road into town were built are in a dreadful state of neglect. The one I look onto is testiment to the situation. Broken benches never seen a coat of preservative in 10 years. Lights smashed. Childrens play equipment broken and dangerous. Bins never emptied for months on end. Grass not cut. In fact a guy now brings his goats. Last year they had no money for fuel For the machinary they were using hand tools and the Hotels down at the coast were buying the fuel for the mowers.

Originally Posted by Carol&John

My understanding is developers aren't forced to construct.*

The town planning department approves the plans with the proviso the newly constructed community maintains their (intercommunity) common areas. The town planners must ACCEPT the finished work firstly.

HAS COSTA ESURI BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE TOWN PLANNING DEPT.? The EUC statutes were modified way back in 2008, I recall, saying the EUC was in effect upon drafting of the constitution in 2005. Did anyone vote through this issue?

As for the hotels, well I should think so! They should be responsible for maintaining their intercommunity, and pay IBI or the commercial equivalent (I'm not saying they don't.)

* If you are referring to the grassy area known as the "Era de los Enamorados" near "La Villa" (with the dried up ponds) then this was developed, IIRC, with the aid of EU funds. You'd think, wouldn't you, that with all that money some would have been "put aside" for maintenance?

Originally Posted by Carol&John

My understanding is developers aren't forced to construct.*

The town planning department approves the plans with the proviso the newly constructed community maintains their (intercommunity) common areas. The town planners must ACCEPT the finished work firstly.

HAS COSTA ESURI BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE TOWN PLANNING DEPT.? The EUC statutes were modified way back in 2008, I recall, saying the EUC was in effect upon drafting of the constitution in 2005. Did anyone vote through this issue?

As for the hotels, well I should think so! They should be responsible for maintaining their intercommunity, and pay IBI or the commercial equivalent (I'm not saying they don't.)

* If you are referring to the grassy area known as the "Era de los Enamorados" near "La Villa" (with the dried up ponds) then this was developed, IIRC, with the aid of EU funds. You'd think, wouldn't you, that with all that money some would have been "put aside" for maintenance?

Originally Posted by Carol&John

It's all confusing.
The situation in Isla Canela may be different from that in CE. I've seen a report about the PGOU de Isla Canela issued in 2012. The difference between a "entidad de compensación" and "conservación" escapes me. Perhaps EsuriJohn can tell us?
This may be best placed in the EUC AGM thread.

Originally Posted by pablovicente

There are Junta de Compensación and Entidad Urbanística de Conservación, both in Isla Canela and Costa Euri. They are different terms referring to different things. A Junta de Compensación is the entity where the constructors or promotors or owners of the land of an urbanization work together (if they are more than one) in order to build and maintain the urbanization until it is receptioned/accepted by the Town Hall, and/or substituted by an EUC.

Both the PGOU of Ayamonte (where Puente Esuri is integrated) and the PGOU of the CITN of Isla Canela are pretty similar in this sense.

Originally Posted by EsuriJohn

There speaks an expert so you don't need any misleading comments from me.

I do like when someone uses the correct legal name for where we live. PUENTE ESURI is so much nicer than Costa Esuri which is misleading since the nearest beach is at IC! We do live at the bridge of Esuri which links the modern structure to the ancient Phoenician name for the area.

Originally Posted by pablovicente

There are Junta de Compensación and Entidad Urbanística de Conservación, both in Isla Canela and Costa Euri. They are different terms referring to different things. A Junta de Compensación is the entity where the constructors or promotors or owners of the land of an urbanization work together (if they are more than one) in order to build and maintain the urbanization until it is receptioned/accepted by the Town Hall, and/or substituted by an EUC.

Both the PGOU of Ayamonte (where Puente Esuri is integrated) and the PGOU of the CITN of Isla Canela are pretty similar in this sense.