A manager who markets 88 protected housing units under cooperative regime in the Madrid town of San Lorenzo de El Escorial (16,500 inhabitants) requires that buyers of the ground floors and penthouses of the complex pay a “terrace tax » which can go up to 38,500 euros, according to the documentation to which elDiario.es has had access. This amount, which is not mentioned in the deed, is charged for alleged improvements to the home. In reality, this is just a way of avoiding the legal maximum price at which these homes can be sold due to their protected nature.
The Community of Madrid considers this practice “a fraud with regard to qualification”, while the manager defends that it was the cooperators who accepted, for reasons of “equity”, that accommodation with larger terraces pay an “additional contribution” and denies any wrongdoing.
“They told me that if they did not charge this amount, they would not receive their invoices,” says David R., who spoke to the Aurora director’s office in El Escorial a few weeks ago to request information about the project. In the documentation provided by the seller, and which this newspaper was able to examine, three amounts appear: 328,429.38 euros of provisional cost of the house and annexes, 29,700 euros of “terrace costs” mentioned above – both with VAT – and 10,000 euros. contribution in euros to the cooperative. In total, 378,129.38 euros for a house of 120 square meters in this municipality in the northwest of the Community of Madrid, 50 minutes from the capital. For other accommodation, this “additional contribution” for the terrace amounts to 38,500 euros.
The main thing is that this urbanization is favored in a limited price housing regime (VPPL), a typology designed to facilitate access to housing for the middle classes. The legislation allows family units earning between 78,750 and 90,000 euros per year to opt for this type of protected housing, based on a range which takes as a reference the multiple-effect public income indicator (IPREM) and the number of family members. the family unit. The other conditions are to be of legal age and that no member of the family owns another apartment. Houses cannot exceed 150 square meters.
In addition, Community of Madrid regulations establish that in a “zone B” city, such as San Lorenzo de El Escorial, the price of housing cannot exceed 2,430 euros per square meter. In the case of the property to which David R. aspired, with 120.85 square meters of useful space, its maximum cost should be 293,665.5 euros excluding VAT. However, the price at which the manager offers the accommodation reaches 325,572.16 euros excluding tax. That is to say, it exceeds the limit set by law by more than 30,000 euros.
To this amount must be added taxes and the contribution of 10,000 euros to the cooperative to reach the total investment of 378,129.38 euros. It turns out that the provisional cost of the house and annexes – without “terrace costs” – amounts to 298,572.16 euros. In other words, it exceeds the legal limit by only 5,000 euros, which shows that the “terrace right” is only a way of circumventing the regulated price which sets the amount per square meter prescribed in the official modules.
Consulted by elDiario.es, an authorized spokesperson for the Housing Department of the Community of Madrid considers that the reported case “would be fraud with regard to qualification”. And let us recall that the law on the system of sanctions relating to protected housing in the Community of Madrid qualifies as a serious offense, punishable by a fine of 1,501 to 6,000 euros, to “require, for whatever reason (…) any amount not authorized by the applicable regulations, including sums which could result from the expansion of equipment or the replacement or improvement of qualities.
From Aurora they defend that they act in this project “only” as manager of the cooperative and that it is the members of the cooperative who approve an action plan that guarantees the “technical, legal and economic viability” of promotion by stipulating the allocation costs. accommodation and means of payment “according to the maximum price of the module”. They also claim that it was the cooperators who agreed “as a matter of principle of fairness” that housing with larger terraces “pay an additional contribution to the cooperative”, taxed with their “corresponding tax”.
In this sense, the manager ensures that the cooperative “complies with all municipal planning regulations and the standards established by the Community of Madrid for VPPL” and that the agreements adopted comply with the statutes and regulations of the cooperative within the framework autonomy. cooperative law.
“They invited me to leave”
“As soon as I started asking uncomfortable questions, they told me that’s it. They invited me to leave, telling me that these apartments were perhaps not for us and that we should look for more accessible ones,” says David, who was evicted from his home during the crisis and who saw in this promotion the opportunity to access a property that belongs to him.
Javier de Osma, director of the Land and Housing Registry of the Confederation of Housing Cooperatives of Spain, associates this type of “bad practice” with the high purchase value of the land on which the houses are built. According to him, this makes it “very difficult” to allocate housing at the strict value of the module, without contributions higher than those necessary to pay for housing at the value provided for by law. “Administrations are looking the other way. And the problem comes from the cooperator, the promoter, the customer…”, maintains this expert.
Last February, the Community of Madrid increased the price of social housing after several decades. For example, the maximum sales price per square meter of useful space in zone B – where El Escorial is located – increased from 1,970.8 to 2,430 euros. An increase of 23.3%. However, De Osma claims that the “problem” is that this increase has not led to a limitation of the price of land, which has increased in many cases.
This expert believes that this type of subterfuge “is not something exceptional”. “I don’t know if I would dare say that it’s illegal, but it’s certainly not ethical at all,” he emphasizes. Regardless, she places greater emphasis on other practices she considers more harmful, such as requiring large contributions to the co-op’s share capital to circumvent the limits of sheltered housing. elDiario.es revealed a few months ago that a manager of protected chalets in Las Rozas was demanding 200,000 euros from each member of the cooperative for this concept above the legal price.
