Law amendment to regulate Spanish 25,000 properties put on fast-track by Junta de Andalucia

LAST UPDATED: 3 Feb, 2015 @ 09:23
17
SHARE
Law amendment to regulate Spanish 25,000 properties put on fast-track by Junta de Andalucia

By Jacqueline Fanchini

A PRE-election move to amend chaotic urban planning laws in Andalucia has been fast-tracked at the Junta following talks between the PSOE and the IU.

The amendments will regulate 25,000 homes under the so-called Law on Urban Planning of Andalucia (LOUA).

The changes, that would attempt to regulate homes built on isolated clusters on non-developable land, will be ready in January.

Despite the deadline being just four months before the municipal elections, Junta boss Susana Diaz insists the changes are not ‘an electioneering measure’ but ‘the response to a drama suffered by thousands of people’.

However, it is feared the amendments will not help the many British expats whose homes in the Axarquia, Almeria and Chiclana are already under threat of demolition orders.

It comes despite requests from the British Embassy to find solutions for those in the midst of judicial proceedings, or who have already been handed demolition orders.

17 COMMENTS

The Olive Press are not responsible and do not moderate individual comments before they are posted. Anyone who uses racist, sexist, homophobic or xenophobic language or hate speech will be blocked.
  1. If these new amendments are not going to “help the many British expats whose homes in the Axarquia, Almeria and Chiclana are already under threat of demolition orders” then it’s not good enough is it? What’s the point in wasting time implementing some half measure that only partially sorts the problem out?

    I take it this means that the Junta de Andalucia will go ahead and demolish the houses that have already received their demolition orders – that should be a real vote winner.

    How’s this for an idea, why don’t the Junta de Andalucia break with tradition and actually get something right for a change.

  2. get something right for a change.? Indeed, maybe like asking for a permit before building or re-building ? How many “victims” did not follow the law and did want they wanted to do, whitout checking if the paperwork was ok ?

  3. That’s what lawyers were for in Spain Luc de Waen, how many of them were dishonest and/or negligent? The whole property business in Spain is a minefield for unwary people and needs the crooks, scammers, and deceivers removed.

    Then the whole industry needs proper and honest regulation, transaction costs to halve, and quick redress through the Courts, but pigs will fly over Spain before any of that happens!!!!

    Not forgetting that the building standards are dreadful on most large developments and need improving. More pigs flying overhead!!!!

  4. luc de waen, in answer to your question, hardly any of them and we actually know someone who went entirely by the book and came off worse than people who did not.

    What makes you think that following the various rules and regulations makes any difference to the outcome? The Junta de Andalucia moved the goal posts and retrospectively changed the laws anyway so it’s all academic really.

    It is easy to blame the victim but frankly, it’s just a cop out to make people feel less vulnerable about their own situation.

    Ask yourself this, what were the Junta de Andalucia doing during the 15 year period that these so called illegal houses were being built? Don’t you think it was their job to police their region? This entire situation demonstrates that they are incapable of creating and enforcing workable laws.

  5. Most buildings built more than six years ago are no longer suceptible to demolition under the 2012 amendment to the LOUA. The only ones that can be demolished are those built on public land, tracks or river beds, or those so badly built that they constitute a danger to the occupants or the public. What the amendement hopes to do is organise the registering of all the buildings so that they can be declared, Legal or outside the regulations and thus registered, deeded and taxed. Only those in a un legalisable situation will have to be demolished.

  6. Pedro, I sincerely hope you are right. This would go a long way to solving the problem because the vast majority people fall outside this demolition remit. It also sounds as though they intend to set up a legitimate land registry system which would give people legal certainty when purchasing rural property – I hope.

    When you say “tracks” I hope you mean houses built literally on tracks and not houses on private land which are accessed via tracks.

  7. i understand your point and agree with the fact that, if people had their papers in ordre, they should be protected on a Europeen level…here in Catalunya, a lot of people just builded, reformed without any paperwork….I myself am selling a house, but still don t know if i stay in Spain, though i love the weather…i have been looking for a legal finca o masia…but 95% here are not

  8. Iesten ap Robert : i thought that once a house is in registro de propriedat and cadastre…one would be a bit safer….a lot of people buy cheap, and don t check these things…i have seen many houses demolished in Catalunie,, none of them had the correct building papers, or where illegal from the start–with no registro , nore cadastre..

  9. That’s what the Priors thought Luc, and there are other examples. Properties with all the correct paperwork, bought in good faith, suddenly become illegal due to a technicality. The Spanish authorities move the goal-posts when it suits them. There is no legal certainty in Spain, and even less justice when things go wrong as the court system is not fit for purpose.

  10. The distinguishing feature of the bill currently going through parliament is that its content was proposed and promoted and paid for by the home owners associations AUAN and SOHA.

    The bill does not claim to be a magic wand or a cure all for the woes of the Andalusian property market but, if passed, it will mean that more people will be able to obtain paperwork for their houses.

    We have several other initiatives in the pipeline.

  11. @Iestyn ap Robert….Yes, the Priors did have the correct paperwork but their lawyer, knowing full well the legallity of the project was dubious because of the status of the land, failed to seek and obtain authorisation from the Junta.

    And how many other houses in the same project have been demolished?…None…..So will this proposal halt such injustices?….Yeah, right.

HAVE YOUR SAY...