A Businessman from Benalmádena Buys the Military Government Building for €4.5M

18 October 2018 – Diario Sur

The former Military Government building, located at number 6 Paseo de la Farola, no longer belongs to the Ministry of Defence. On 24 September, the deed of sale was signed before a notary whereby this property, constructed in the 1950s and in disuse since the early 1990s, will pass into the hands of a company linked to the Benalmádena-based businessman Antonio González, owner of the 5-star Vincci Aleysa hotel and the Don Gustavo tourist apartments. The Ministry of Defence put the building up for auction for €5 million last year but did not receive any bids for it in the first or second rounds. As such, the lot was opened up to the option of being acquired directly by any interested party at the asking price established in the second round of the auction, and that is what happened in the end.

The property has been purchased for €4,538,987 by the aforementioned businessman behind the Hotel Aleysa in Benalmádena, who has still not explained what he is going to use the building for (…). The property spans a surface area of 2,438 m2, distributed over four floors (the ground and first  floors measure 631.12 m2 each; the second floor spans 597.11 m2 and the third floor measures 202.66 m2) and stands on a plot measuring 1,063 m2, which is classified as for community use, which means that it cannot be used for residential, hotel, commercial or office purposes, unless a modification of the urban development plans can be carried out to modify the use of the plot.

Sources close to the new owner of the property (….) indicate that it is very possible that the building will be renovated and turned into a high-end nursing home for the elderly, in the form of sheltered housing with the corresponding medical and social support. “We think that this is a very good location for that”, said the sources, who admitted that this option would avoid the need to undergo any urban development processes, which could take at least a year and which would force the businessmen to establish some kind of economic or land compensation for the loss of a community space for the city. Another option could be to dedicate the property for use as a private clinic relating to the world of aesthetics and wellbeing, in which other businessmen are also interested.

Plans

In any case, the intention of the new owner of the Military Government building is to define his plans over the coming months so that the building can be used once again (…).

Original story: Diario Sur (by Jesús Hinojosa)

Translation: Carmel Drake

Bank Of Spain Buys 142,000m2 Plot In Madrid For €40M

29 December 2016 – Inmodiario

The Royal Spanish Mint (‘Fábrica Nacional de Moneda y Timbre’ or FNMT) no longer complies with the conditions set out by the European Central Bank (ECB) for the printing of bank notes. As a result, the Bank of Spain has been forced to purchase a plot of land in Madrid’s Vicálvaro neighbourhood from the Ministry of Defence.

Through its company Imbisa, the FNMT has paid almost €40 million to the Institute for Housing, Infrastructure and Defence Equipment (Invied) for a plot of land measuring 142,000 m2, where it is going to build a new factory.

The plot of land acquired for the construction of the new facilities – which will house around 720 employees – is located in the east of Madrid, between the M-40 motorway, the old Vilcálvaro road and Avenida de Daroca (see map above).

The company Imbisa was constituted by the Bank of Spain in June 2015, with share capital of €50 million, in order to comply with the new regulations issued by the ECB, which required bank notes to be manufactured by private companies under tender, or by the national central banks themselves.

The institution led by Luis María Linde (the Bank of Spain) owns an 80% stake in Imbisa and the FNMT will continue to hold the remaining 20% stake until December 2017, when those shares will also pass into the hands of the supervisor. (…).

Once the agreement has been formalised, Imbisa will make a payment amounting to €1.97 million (…) and the balance, in other words, €37.4 million, will be handed over when the public sale and purchase deed is signed.

Despite the purchase of this land, the new factory will not be operational until 2020, by which time it is hoped that the new property will comply with all of the security requirements established by the ECB for the printing of bank notes. (…).

Original story: Inmodiario

Translation: Carmel Drake

Supreme Court: Gains May Be Unfair If Banks Make Profits On Sale Of Foreclosed Properties

23 February 2015 – Expansión

The Supreme Court has established a doctrine and clarified the jurisprudence on the understanding that a bank may be unfairly rewarded in the event that it obtains a significant profit on the sale of a foreclosed home.

The High Court reached this conclusion after studying the case of a bank that launched foreclosure proceedings after the borrowers failed to meet their repayment obligations. The entity foreclosed the home for half of the value specified in the deed (escritura).

In this case, given that not all of the loan was paid off (following the foreclosure of the property), the bank filed a lawsuit against the borrowers and their two guarantors, for the difference between the debt and the value of the foreclosed property, plus interest and execution costs.

However, the borrowers had understood that, as a result of the action (the foreclosure), the debt would be considered to have been repaid, since the value of the property had been set by the bank itself on the basis that it would cover all of the debt relating to the mortgage. They argued, therefore, that the entity had obtained unfair gains.

Establishing doctrine

Although the (local) court rejected the claim and denied the existence of unfair gains, the Provincial Court of Córdoba upheld the appeal of the defendants and concluded that the foreclosure of the property at auction for a 50% discount was equivalent to a deed in lieu. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court did not share that ruling.

According to established case law, the Supreme Court Chamber, which has studied this case, stresses that “in principle, the exercise of the legal right to demand the unpaid part of the loan from the borrowers (following the foreclosure of the mortgaged property for 50% of its appraisal value) could not be regarded as a case of unfair gain”.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court qualified its statement and noted that in the cases in which the foreclosure (of the property by the bank) is followed by a subsequent disposal (of the property) at a much higher price that the foreclosure price and for a very significant gain, then “it should match it with any outstanding loan and any claim made by the creditor to (share in) the profit”.

The Supreme Court Chamber insists that this clarification is supported by recent legislation introduced to strengthen the (legal) protection for mortgage borrowers.

Original story: Expansión

Translation: Carmel Drake