Co-ownership is Not Always a Good Idea

Co-ownership is becoming quite the thing these days, and it all works beautifully if you get along with everyone and no one pulls out or dies and leaves his share to a cousin. Indeed, if one of the co-owners dies, their share of the property passes to their heirs, who become the new co-owners or "co-heirs," requiring a legal process to define and adjudicate the inheritance.

Let us look at the case of several children inheriting a single property – to be divided up peacefully, but then in time, maybe the children of the children become involved. It’s a mess. Should you buy a property with, as it were, a bit missing (now owned by a cousin who lives in Argentina)? Certainly not. Google AI says: ‘A property with multiple owners is legally known as ‘un proindiviso’, a joint ownership or co-ownership, where the property is not physically divided, but rather each owner has a share or percentage of the entire property without a specific, delimited portion. This situation commonly occurs after an inheritance or a joint purchase. To sell, modify, or enjoy the property, the agreement of all co-owners is generally required, although any co-owner can request the division of the property’.

Many years ago, I was living with a girlfriend in a large house (with three kitchens) divided into five shares by the grandfather. We had two fifths. When the old auntie died (she lived upstairs), my companion became the owner of another chunk of the house: closing off a door, it became a rental. This after the old girl had failed to leave a will, but the other relatives had agreed to waive their share (of the three rooms in question).

A fourth fifth belongs to some company, and they had never used or claimed it. We knocked a hole through the wall and used it for an office.

The fifth fifth, that’s to say, the remaining bit, belonged to a cousin who rented it out to African field workers.

A house like that is largely unsaleable, unless my friend were to previously buy the cousin out (no doubt he would be after a sizeable chunk of money) – and probably ratify the two rooms she took from the company who had ignored them ever since they were sold (along with a piece of land) by another cousin some forty years previously. No doubt the abogados could help.

So, the lesson here is – don’t buy a house with various owners – even if one of them ‘never shows up’. If you inherit a property, or rather part of one, then maybe insure it heavily against a surprise fire.

I used to know an English poet (and his elderly mother) who would spend a few months each year in Bédar (a charming village in Almería) endlessly searching for something that rhymed with ‘orange’ (or for that matter, naranja). They had a gypsy family living in the same small and rather cramped house – since they owned a share. Rather a large gypsy family as I remember.

Unsurprisingly, they didn’t have much in common with John and his mum.

In answer to all of this, I was intrigued to find an advertisement from some outfit that can solve your co-ownership problems by buying you out. They say: ‘Not owning a home in its entirety is difficult, but being able to sell your portion doesn't have to be. Find speed and security with a company that buys your share’ (I’ve got their address if you’re interested). One can only imagine how they turn a profit.

As for getting rid of the Argentinian co-owner, perhaps it’s for the best to hope that he never shows up. If you still want to buy, then – says the always helpful Google AI – ‘to purchase a property with multiple owners (a joint ownership), you must obtain the consent of all co-owners for the sale, sign the purchase agreement with all of them, or have one co-owner sell their share to another owner, and process the purchase through a public deed before a notary…’. Good luck with that. If on the other hand, you are thinking of just buying one share, or maybe winning it at cards, then I would say you need to think again…

Divorce, inheritance, another usufruct co-owner, a fellow with a guitar with dibs on the bathroom… all these and other reasons make a quiet and enchanting little house in a forgotten pueblo – or maybe a flat off La Gran Vía – an utterly hopeless proposition.

Catch Begoña, You've Caught Pedro

There are certain subjects which are based on cast-iron certainties which through experience, prejudice and tribalism, leave us convinced of the integrity of our own opinion. Belief in a flat-earth is a good example of this – as is anything to do with politics.

Is Begoña Gómez, the wife of Pedro Sánchez guilty of some wrongdoing, yea or nay? Well, you know, everyone in Spain has already decided.

As to what she may have done, or law she might have broken… Nobody can answer that, but anyway: ‘to the guillotine with her’!

Despite any evidence after 18 months of looking under stones, Judge Peinado has failed to uncover anything, but give him his due, he will keep on gamely searching until Sánchez is out of office and the whole exercise will lose its purpose.

I mean, there must be something. None of us is perfect. I once stole a chocolate bar from Woolworths (come to think of it, perhaps that’s why they went broke).

The original complaint came from Manos Limpias, an association of unrepentant Francoists that are rarely taken seriously by anyone placed anywhere to the left of Atila the Hun. ‘With more than 6,000 members, Manos Limpias does not submit accounts or hold the meetings required by its by-laws. Furthermore, it has no representation in any workplace, and its representation in the civil service is unknown…’ Them.

Early last year, Manos Limpias had handed in a wad of press-cuttings from outfits like OKDiario and El Debate suggesting that Begoña was a bad ’un. One particular complaint, about obtaining a credit under false pretences, turned out to have been a woman from Cantabria with the same name. Manos Limpias by the way was the group that complained about the Infanta Cristina (she was later absolved) and let’s see, ‘… They are known for appearing as accusers in high-profile political court cases. Although most of them never come to fruition’.  By accident (or design), their complaint against Begoña fell into the hands of Judge Juan Carlos Peinado – of whom Gabriel Rufián said last week ‘Everyone knows who he works for’ – that’s to say, the conservatives (his daughter is a PP politician). ‘Since that first complaint, almost a year and a half ago, this investigation has grown relentlessly. Nothing has been closed, even though Peinado's accusatory theories are failing due to a lack of evidence. The case has grown with more alleged crimes, each one more difficult to justify…’

There are better than 9,000 pages compiled in 19 volumes, four people under investigation, and more than thirty witnesses questioned, including Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, his Minister of Justice Félix Bolaños, and several Ibex company presidents. These are the key figures in the case that Peinado has been pursuing for almost eighteen months against Begoña Gómez. We read that ‘Peinado sends Begoña Gómez to trial with a ruling lacking evidence of any crime’.

Last Wednesday, he told her that if she finally faces trial for a charge of embezzlement attributed to her for the work performed by her assistant, ‘a jury will determine her guilt’.

Juries in Spain are nine people ‘chosen by chance’.

As we saw above, everyone these days has made up their mind about their politics and nothing, certainly not any essay of mine, will persuade them differently – and we also know that the jury will be composed of people from Madrid, where at least 55% are conservative voters. Does anyone believe that a jury chosen from among Madrid residents to judge Pedro Sánchez's wife would not be tainted? Faced with such a controversial and politicized issue, which occupies hours and hours on every radio and television channel, are there any citizens left who don't already have a preconceived opinion?

So, what is this all about?

Embarrassing Pedro Sánchez for as long as possible, with his wife, his brother (another Manos Limpias case without merit) and his Attorney General (yet another one). We can’t catch him for his economic policies – Spain is getting full approval from the credit agencies – but we can wear him down and open the door to the prospect of an undoubtedly inept future PP/Vox combination.

A case like this, says the Google AI, can take about ten months before the jurors (and the reporters) arrive. What if she loses (La Cope, the bishops’ radio, kindly reckons her chances of losing the case stand at 92.8%)? One newspaper, the ABC, says she could get between two and six years of prison, although ‘the crime of embezzlement (Peinado’s current accusation), can only be attributed in principle to a public official (un funcionario): a condition that Gómez does not hold’.

Would Pedro Sánchez then have to quit?

Probably.

But I’m just venting here – Begoña shouldn’t think of this as ‘lawfare’, more as an historic example of the vengeful masses clamouring for her husband’s head.

 

Putting out the Fires

 

The terrible fires that have burned some 400,000 hectares (about 1,550 square miles) are now extinguished thanks to some sterling work by the firefighters, with help from other regions and even other European countries. Bravo! Fierce rain also made a welcome but slightly late arrival in the north over the weekend.

Bringing the danger home to my corner of Spain, our nearby municipality of Lubrín (Almería) lit up the sky on Thursday last week as 400 hectares burned in a scrub fire.

We saw those large yellow water-planes repeatedly flying over us to load in the Garrucha harbour. All very scary.

Fire-prevention is the key lesson to be learned. In other times, the country-folk would clean out the mountains (if nothing else, at least for firewood). Goat-herders and hunters would be present, helping in their different ways.

Now everyone has moved to the cities: better jobs, more nightlife and a Corte Inglés for that shopping thrill. A quote from a more substantial organ than my humble newsletter: ‘…the exodus of farmworkers to cities in recent decades "has created vast areas of flammable scrub on abandoned land"’.

The PP leader Feijóo feels that the answer to the fires in Spain lies in putting ankle-bracelets on every person that would feature on a proposed list of registered arsonists. The more likely cause, global warming, is still a step too far for conservatives (a bit like the school shootings in America: it’s pretty damn obviously the availability of guns and not the video games). From El Mundo, we read that a proposed deal by Sánchez to form a united front against national disasters has flown too close to the sun: ‘The PSOE and the PP dismiss the possibility of a State Pact on climate change to prevent wildfires. Sánchez's party accuses the Partido Popular of "institutional disloyalty," while Feijóo's party criticizes the government for using the "wild card" of climate change to "evade responsibility"’.

How anything and everything in Spain is political; and Feijóo’s only driving interest is to somehow make it to the top before he is defenestrated by those bunching up behind him (Ayuso, Moreno, maybe Mañueco and others). 

The larger fires occurred in three regions – all controlled by the PP. These were Castilla y León, Galicia and Extremadura. Apparently, during the winter season, none of their agents managed to participate in the Government’s working group to define the inventory of firefighting resources, nor did they attend any of the eight meetings with Civil Protection last year, where the number of available resources must be detailed for coordination of their use in emergencies’.  The idea was – let the central government handle it, until the first fire roared into life. The minister Margarita Robles was called to explain herself in the PP-dominated Senate: "The work of prevention and preparation corresponds to the autonomous communities. What happens is that it is more convenient to do nothing throughout the year".

So now, as the political season returns once again after the summer hols, the usual angry (and largely pointless) fighting will be, as usual, in earnest in the Spanish parliament.

In the hope that the building’s fire extinguishers have been checked.