Media Player Los Gigantes!

Author Topic: Community politics imprisons 90yr old - Florencia - Los Gigantes  (Read 6229 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dolly Diver

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1422
90yr old Vera is a prisoner in Florencia apartment - Los Gigantes, due to comminity politics.   

Read the full story www.losgigantes.com/news

Direct link http://losgigantes.com/news/?p=682

Offline losgiganteskid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
Have to agree that on the face of it, it seems a very heartless and spiteful thing to do.

I can only think that when the lift was installed and the cost (and upkeep) were to be shared by those that wanted a lift, having declined (for reasons that seem common sense) you were left with a those that had subscribed and those that hadn't and for someone who hadn't to now step forward and say I didn't want to be party to it when the lift was installed (or to share in the upkeep) but would now like to use it as a  "one off" , not for me, but for a very frail elderly lady would seem a step too far for those community owners that have been and are currently paying for the lift.

Suppose it's like saying there is no pool in our complex but will all owners that would like one and pay a contribution for the build and upkeep step forward - then at a later date one of the owners who had not subscribed to the cost stating they would like to use the pool as a one off.

I wanted to be the Cincinnati Kid - but couldn't spell it

amunette

And this sums up exactly why LG is like it is. People who are inflexible, jobsworthy and downright selfish have taken over the village. Name and shame the local businessmen, evil self-centered g*ts. Poor old lady.

Offline amibovvered

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 628
  • Age: 2012
  • Location: living in Tenerife
And this sums up exactly why LG is like it is. People who are inflexible, jobsworthy and downright selfish have taken over the village. Name and shame the local businessmen, evil self-centered g*ts. Poor old lady.

Not ALL of Los Gigantes is like this but clearly we have some people that are.  Is this not something that could be taken up with the local council as I'm certain that were the lady in question to be Canarian something could/would have been done about it.  In the meantime you should at least give the story to the Canarain Press as well as to the English freebies.  Naming the offenders wouldn't do any harm either.

Offline Dolly Diver

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1422
Vera and Janice's story was taken to the local council.  They were unable to help - said it was a private matter.

Lawyer says denounce them, community law is on their side.  However as it is a civil case, not criminal it would be a year before it ever went to court.  The cost of it all was never discussed.

Most people agree with Amunette send the story to the local papers, especially the Canarian ones.  The story is being translated now.

The ladies are very happy now that they are down on the coast.  Vera with a lot of help can just about manage the stairs and has been out.  Lets hope that a few of the neighbours will lend a hand when its needed.

[attachment deleted by admin]

orange

In reality - this boils down to not being in sheltered or other suitable accommodation.

It is no good blaming or pointing blame at the community - they do not exist to provide suitable accommodation and circumstances.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2008 by orange »

amunette

Orange, the community has a lift, they are refusing temporary access, even if paid. Nothing to do with sheltered accomodation etc, just a few jobsworths who are going down the "you did not contribute, you cannot use" route. Even though payment has been offered to cover usage.

webbie

I can see this from both sides, but especially from the Community. You cannot just chose willy nilly when you decide you want to use community facilities, just because it suits you. A lift now for a few weeks, the pool because its summer and the kids are off school...... etc.   If you want the facilities you pay full price for 12 months a year, If you opt out, then that's your problem.

A few years ago, at a Community meeting, a person in my block, on the top floor, kicked up so much at a fuss about costs, that he was allowed to opt out of paying for the lift. 4 months later he broke his leg and was refused, rightly, permission to use the lift. He hobbled up and down the stairs for 6 weeks. After his leg was out of plaster and at the next Community meeting, he insisted on paying for the lift and EVER other Community facility. He saw the errors of his way. It just goes to show........

You never know what hand, or in his case leg, life is going to deal you. So to avoid any future Community problems, shut up and pay up !

Offline Dolly Diver

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1422
You are wrong Webbie. That is not the case according to a lawyer.  If some members of a community want to put in a lift or heat the swimming pool they cannot force other members, who maybe can?t afford it, to pay up and they can?t deny its use to others either  once that facility has been installed.  It?s community law. 
A denuncia should be issued, however as it is a civil case and not criminal it would take a year at least for it to come to court.
The ladies are still offering to pay and Vera is still a prisoner in the apartment.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2008 by Dolly Diver »

orange

Dolly - I agree with you over this.

It is a warning to any Community that wants to make additional changes not being part of maintaining the building.

That they cannot make these agreements on the basis that only those who want them and go on to pay for changes  - will have sole and not community use.

The 'problem' outlined here started at the stage that some of the Community made the agreement to fit the lift and some Community Members AGREED as long as they did not contribute. Made even more complicated by the use of a lock to enforce the agreement.

This was the stage that Community Law should have been brought into question. The President did a poor job on this and if he/she did not know the legal position. The President should have got advice.

A good question to a President when matters such as this crop up. Does he/she know the legal position?

All changes must be 100 percent agreed and however paid for - all the Community can access and use what has been provided.

But it not just agreeing and not contributing. Ongoing costs need to be considered etc - don't agree to anything without looking at the full and future picture!

Especially - Lift Maintenance and running costs for Heated Pools.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2008 by orange »

Offline linda

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 733
  • Location: Sydenham UK
I agree if someone is taking the mick but if this case is true surely ro help the lady for a while would be goowill gesture and show community spirit whioch i feel lg is all about

Offline Mr Max

  • Old Hand
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
You are wrong Webbie. That is not the case according to a lawyer.  If some members of a community want to put in a lift or heat the swimming pool they cannot force other members, who maybe can?t afford it, to pay up and they can?t deny its use to others either  once that facility has been installed.  It?s community law. 
A denuncia should be issued, however as it is a civil case and not criminal it would take a year at least for it to come to court.
The ladies are still offering to pay and Vera is still a prisoner in the apartment.


Doesn't the "Horizontal" law provide that if the majority of members of a community vote in a proposal, the minority are obliged to follow suit?

I believe it does.  That said, the community is at liberty to make its own decisions.  Therefore, if this community allowed some occupants to opt out of paying for the installation of a lift (presumably because of the high cost of doing so) and a system of pass keys was introduced thereby only allowing those who paid for the facility to use it, I believe the situation in this case is legally fair and proper.

Whether it is morally correct is another matter. 

Can't see how a denuncia will help, other than to keep those who issue them in work.  It will get added to the 25 million others on somebody's desk somewhere.

Offline el presidente

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
  • Location: Playa Arena
There is a very informative book called You & the Law in Spain by David Searl.
The book covers all aspects of moving to Spain and includes a chapter on The Law of Horizontal Property.
It is considered to be a President's Bible although community Law can vary here in the Canaries.
www.santanabooks.com
sales@santanabooks.com
or
www.aldingtonbooks.co.uk
sales@aldingtonbooks.co.uk

Hope this helps!

el presidente






orange

Mr Max - concerning repairs and maintenance, general running costs - YES

But not for improvements and capital investment.

How can the majority have control over an individual?s finances?

The individual obviously needs to allow for community fees involving repairs and maintenance.

There is now a 5 percent sinking fund to assist with major repairs as well.

Not allowing for unknown expenditure on other matters is outside repairs and maintenance.

Allowing a majority to railroad that expenditure whether that person can afford it is another.

Do not agree to anything if you do not want it and are not prepared to pay for it (including ongoing costs).

Do not agree to changes just because you are not paying. You may lose the use of that common area or
facility within that agreement (but not within the law).

We are in 100 percent unanimous vote for these changes - not what the majority want (Source: David Searl)

Where the lift lady went wrong was agreeing, this would no doubt give the 100 percent of agreement.

?Yes I will agree but only if I pay nothing now or in the future concerning the lift and have full use?

There is one exception that is for facilities for the handicapped, ramps etc. It only needs a 60 percent majority to put them in.

This is an important issue because I doubt the majority that want a certain item - will fully disclose the position.

Offline Dolly Diver

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1422


[/quote]

Doesn't the "Horizontal" law provide that if the majority of members of a community vote in a proposal, the minority are obliged to follow suit?

[/quote]

Only if it is a matter of maintenance or general upkeep of the building for example painting.  New installations, unless deemed essential by law for example when the law changed many communities were forced to make new installations of sewage pumps, although it was a new installation it was compulsory.  However,  an example of a heat pump for a pool, if voted for by the majority is not obligatory for everyone to pay as it is a new installation,  if the yes vote decide to go ahead and pay the cost themselves they cannot stop any other member of the community for using the pool but they can insist that the entire community pays the maintenance and running costs as part of their quota.

orange

Hello Dolly

My interpretation is not of the majority wanting and paying for something.

It needs 100 percent Community Permission to have it in the first place.

In the example you give of heating a pool, after purchasing and installing the equipment. Then all have use of it whoever pays for it. This is agreed.

That they can then go on to insist that the whole of the Community then pays for its upkeep. This is forcing costs on people who did not give their
permission in the first place to purchase something in excess of what community fees pay for as required by law.

They did not pay for it, did not want it. This backdoor approach would lead to leasing the equipment and all sorts of deals - that could place the cost
on those who would not pay for it (eventually).

The problem is when the member of the community gives permission and is promised use if they give that permission.

Then the ?You have to pay the ongoing costs because you are using it? comes into play. No doubt, it is at this stage that you
will be reminded of the permission you gave!

Obviously if the pool was heated from build - that is a different matter.

I am sure that the Lift Lady does not pay ongoing Lift maintenance?

Again this is all about permission.

amunette

Well, law and politics aside, I still think a community that cannot bend a little and let an ill lady PAY to use the lift as a one-off is no community at all, just a bunch of very selfish individuals.

Offline linda

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 733
  • Location: Sydenham UK

NikkiGQ

We owned an apartment on the third floor of a building and we had to pay towrds the upkeep of the lift, even though we rarley used the lift,, the fees where astronomical however we paid up along with all the owners as you never know when the lift was going to come in usefull,, EG my broken ankle,, used the lift,,, EG my grandparents visiting,,, used the lift.

Unfortunetly its not an option to opt out and then back in when it suits you or those occupying your apartment, if your part of a community of owners things can get very political when paying for utilities are involved.. I can understand the group tht say Hey hang on a minute you didnt want to pay towrds this lift but now when it suits you do !!!!

MMMMM tricky one this ! good luck.

orange

NikkiGQ 
 
I expect that the Lift was there and part of the building when you moved in?

The original matter is not that tricky, the apartment owner gave their permission
for the lift but declined to pay a share for it, as they did not want to use it.

It is this agreement that is in question - I am sure that the apartment owner will
look at the full picture of community proposals in the future.

Witholding permission for extras - until the full details have been worked out.

Just look at the complications this Apartment Owner has caused themselves in
any future sale (of the Apartment).


amunette

Again, whatever the finer points of community law, I still think the community is acting in a selfish manner. It would be nothing for them to accept payment for this one-off occasion

I really think this issue encapsulates the ongoing problems in LG. Too many petty minded people with money have bought into the resort, and they now think they own it, so exercise power when they can.

Andy0210

Hey don't worry about it this is just another example of the minority of the community of Los Gigantes, who gives a damn an old woman is stranded in her apartment, she isn't from Los Gigantes so why should she be allowed in the village!
Somebody prove me wrong and tell me that this isn't a horrible place?

orange

Lets hope she didn't bring a dog with her.....

june bleith

And this sums up exactly why LG is like it is. People who are inflexible, jobsworthy and downright selfish have taken over the village. Name and shame the local businessmen, evil self-centered g*ts. Poor old lady.

Do not tar us all with the same brush please.
Not nice,not nice at all.