It has come to our knowledge that there's been problem with squatters within the community for quite some time. It seems that the President, Vice-president and Administrator have tried to keep the property owners unaware of this situation as much as possible. Property owners are “shareholders” of the community and it becomes strange when important information isn't distributed to the property owners.
Some squatters have started to rent the apartments, but have stopped paying the rent and continued to live in the apartments for free. Other squatters have illegally got access to the apartments from the beginning. Legally it's a big difference if people break into an apartment or if they can get in without using any force, e.g. when using a key to get in. The Criminal Law (“Código Penal”) is only applicable when someone breaks in to an apartment, otherwise it's the Civil Law (“Código Civil”) that is applicable. The police only deals with issues within“Código Penal” and when the squatters can show a key to the entrance door, then the police won't do anything. For issues within “Código Civil” one has to press civil matter charges in court, which can be time consuming especially if the squatters has got under-aged children.
Some property owners might find it handy to let workers at the community keep a key, but then one is not in possession of all keys to one's apartment and one can end up in trouble if the the wrong people get hold of the key. If squatters get into the apartment with a key, then the “Código Penal” is not applicable and it will be more difficult and time-consuming to reclaim the possession of one's apartment.
The community has got the right to get into apartments on request, but the community do not have any right to have a key. If a key is lost, then it's a good practice to buy a new lock to secure that no one unwanted can enter the apartment with a key. Changing the lock-cylinder is easy if one can open the door with the key, but is much more difficult if this is not the case.
Tenants that stopped paying rent and became squatters
An example of squatters that started with renting the apartment is a penthouse in Bloque 3 where a family with under-aged children lived without paying any rent for many years. It's believed that the property owner couldn't keep up paying the mortgage and it was first when the apartment was repossessed that the squatter-family got out of the apartment. The son is known for being involved with drugs and stealing things within the community. Apparently, members of the squatter-family even tried to get back into the apartment again after they were forced out when the apartment was repossessed, so the owner had to block the entrance door and windows of the apartment with steel sheets to prevent them to get back in the apartment.
It's important that property owners avoid to rent their apartments to the wrong kind of people to reduce the risk of ending up with trouble. Furthermore, it's not fair towards other property owners and/or dwellers to have to live with the problems unwanted tenants create.
Drug dealers squattering in repossessed properties
Apartment 1-D in Bloque 6 is an example of squatters getting into a repossessed apartment that was marketed by Solvia. It was the young man who lived with his squatter-family in the penthouse in Bloque 3 that got into the apartment with some friends in January 2018 after his family were evicted. “Jefe” who is renting a flat in Bloque 6 supported the squatters from the very beginning. There were lots of youngsters getting in and out of the apartment having parties with plenty of drugs. The smoke of dope were so heavy in periods that the property owner living next door had to keep the windows closed and when the situation was extreme the smell of dope even went through the wall.
“Jefe” and the young man with a Pitbull, who is closely associated with “Jefe”, seem to have spent lots of time in the apartment with the squatters. The young man with the Pitbull is an old friend of the the squatter who lived in the penthouse in Bloque 3. Both have frequently for some years been hanging around with “Jefe” smoking dope around the entrance of Bloque 6, attracting lots of other youngsters from outside the community.
The whereabouts of the President, who also lives in Bloque 6, and the Administrator rise a question about their interest. The next door property owner requested the southern gate (“Puerta sur”) to be closed permanently for awhile, since lots of people were pouring in and out of that gate, going to the squatter apartment. The President was reluctant to close the southern gate and the same kind of reluctance was later expressed by the Administrator and his assistant during the community meeting in March 2018. The lock was soon thereafter broken for everyone to get in and out of the gate without a key. The lock was broken for about one year before it was repaired again.
Threats
In March 2018 “Jefe” knocked the door of the property owner next door to the squatter flat 1-D and delivered threats in person. It backfired, due to a recording, and it came up in court where “Jefe” was found guilty.
Changing squatters
A group of men from Morocco arrived to the squatter apartment, who was trained by “Jefe”, and they frequently passed parcels that were dug down in the private garden of the squatter apartment during the middle of the night.
The bank that owns the apartment is believed to have made a deal with Moroccans, where they were paid to leave the squatter flat. The bank came to access to the squatter apartment a Monday, but during the weekend a young couple with two children had moved in. This couple seem to be friends of the young man with the Pitbull who behaved as a landlord on behalf of “Jefe”.
Domestic violence
The young mother in the squatter apartment was frequently beaten up by her partner. The police got enough of the domestic violence and asked the next door property owner to appear in court as a witness. The court case was dismissed after the young mother withdrew the accusations against her partner.
False accusations
The young mother reported the next door property owner to the police for being violent. The only details the young mother got right was the mobile number of the next door property owner. It's just a few people within the community that have the number. It's believed she got the phone number from the mother of the young man with the Pitbull, who's had the number from before. Again the young mother withdrew the accusations in minutes just before the court case was supposed to start.
Becoming squatters in another apartment
Eventually the young squatter family moved out and moved in as squatters to another apartment in Bloque 2. It's unclear how they got access to this apartment.
The extra worker that became a squatter
The President proposed, during the community meeting in March 2018, that a man she knew should be hired during the summer as an extra worker. The man was said to be handicapped and therefore would cost less for the community. The man seemed to know “Jefe”. Soon after he had started to work the squatter flat in Bloque 6 (1-D), which “Jefe” showed big interest in, was connected illegally to electricity. It's been reported that the extra worker went into an unoccupied apartment in Bloque 2 and became a squatter there himself during the summer meanwhile he was working at the community. He is believed to have moved out, but it's seems that his father replaced him and now lives there as a squatter. The apartment seems to have been connected to electricity and there is a sign outside showing installation of Securitas Alarm.
There's information circulating that this extra worker has sued the community for unfair dismissal. The budget for the extra worker (“Nominas- REFUERZO DE VERANO”) was 2,000 EUR in the decision made by the community meeting on 24 March 2018. In the annual report of 2018, then it shows that the community had spent 8,645.31 EUR on the extra worker during 2018, which is 432% over budget! How is it possible that a temporary worker during the summer, with a deduction for discapacity, can cause such a huge unforeseen cost? The question was asked during the community meeting, but the Administrator avoided to give a meaningful explanation. The President was also trying to sweep the issue underneath the carpet by saying that was the past and now we have to focus on the future.
Legislation:
Related articles at: