Ask an European Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
I am an spanish attorney
I am working on your answer right now
please stand by
Its a very hard case you got but you have a cance to fight to get your money back
There are a lot of construction companies donw in Spain and the banks have got the propieties, finished or not
Its very hard to get into the judicial procedure against the company but spanish law forces ( even when no bank did it ) the compañy and bank to endorse the amounts recibed
I mean that the bank has to answer for your money ( Amount recibed for the company and the legal interest )
Actually, as I said, no bank did it even when it is compulsory by law
The law its 57/1968
Now you know it I am going to advice you how to manage
The bank knows he has to pay
Once we know it, we can take 2 ways. ( And they know it also)
The easy one its to gently ask for our money ( just the money given ) or the hard one, demanding in court the money and the interest and damages
I think that knonwing that you can use now both ways and the hard one could be used later on, I will contract an attorney to demand your money out of court, and if denied in court
In order to manage I am going to provide you a site of english attorneys specilist in the matter
In short, you have a lot of chances to get your money
I have clients in the same situation like you since 20 years ans it is now when they are getting their money
I can no be contracted for you because the sites rules do not allow me to do so :(
But, I recomend you, go ahead, and I am sure you got a big chance to get it ( may be not easy and neither in ashort time ) but fight for it
I will be here if needed
I gently ask you for a good rate of my answer, if you do not do it the site does not pay me Thank you
CLAIM and responsibility the banks that granted a endorsement GENERAL and not one INDIVIDUAL to each buyer according to the law 57/1968, in the return the amounts delivered by buyers to the PROMOTOR.Como is known by the majority of the buyers of real estate in Spain and investors, the law 57/1968, of 27 July, regulating the perceptions of advance amounts in the construction and sale of housing, despite being a very short law, only 6 articles in force, represents a very important guarantee for any buyer who wants to buy a property on plane or under construction.According to this law the promoters of houses that get buyers money before starting construction or during the same shall ensure the refund of these amounts with more legal interest (according to modification after the management of the building law), through a contract of insurance or guarantee of bank or savings bank.Thus in the case not to start work on time or not to deliver them, the buyer who must be treated as a consumer might choose between the termination of the contract and the money back or the extension of the contract. Requesting the return of the promoter or delivered to the Bank or insurance which guaranteed it.In addition this law says in its article 7 that the rights afforded by this law to the assignees (buyers) will have the character of inalienable.In this scenario, there have been cases in which banks have refused to pay the collateral granted claiming that buyers money was not deposited in the special account that for this purpose the promoter must be open at the Bank, or claiming that the guarantee had a period of validity and after this had expired. Mostly the jurisprudence has confirmed that these circumstances that are unrelated to the buyer and not dependent on him, but the Bank and required by law promoter, can not suppose that buyer loses its guarantee and your money, so the judges and courts, have been condemning in these cases banks to return buyers their money.Also occurs in which banks passed for a promoter or a specific promotion, a collateral line, or even a general endorsement by a number, but they have not individual guarantees to each of the buyers for the money delivered.Thus, in these cases although the promoter has not delivered housing buyers, bank refuses to return the money, claiming that only the general guarantee or collateral line is not enough, and having no individual guarantee in its favour, the buyers may not require compliance, as they are not beneficiaries of any warranty.This is an attitude and response which we understand to be contrary to law, then the buyer? consumer is informed that there is a co-signer or collateral line approved, promoter even puts it in the contract, and buyer understands that your money is guaranteed, but the Bank does not comply with its obligation and does not carry out the individual guarantees, and alleges the lack of these to evade its responsibility.So as we have said for the previous cases (lack of deposit into the special account or expiration of the guarantee), we understand that in this case, should be to required liability to banks, by law 57/68 being an inalienable rights, also in contrary case law leave to banks and developers the ability to give guarantees so that in practice they may not chargerewarding his bad faith.Some court has ruled in the sense already pointed out, in judgment of the Court of first instance and Velez instruction nº 1, Malaga, September 1, 2010, this Court has understood that the Bank despite not having granted a guarantee individualized to the plaintiff, is responsible for the refund of money paid over the legal interest, while the fact that there was only a general and insufficient guarantee to cover the quantities delivered by the buyers must make disappear the obligation of the Bank and harm the rights of consumer purchasers.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).