The rent strikes announced in March by around a hundred residents of two buildings in Villa de Vallecas managed by the Nestar vulture fund are increasing as the conflict intensifies. It has already reached other buildings managed by the company in Carabanchel, Villaverde, Parla, Móstoles and Pinto, until it is supported by 900 tenants. In the meantime, those affected by the Vallecas blockade have filed a collective complaint before the Courts of Plaza de Castilla, in coordination with the Madrid Tenants Union.
Residents of the buildings located at number 7 Martín Muñoz Street and number 12 Corral de Almaguer are acting due to “abusive” clauses in their contracts. In these, Nestar requires them to assume the garbage rate, community, IBI or non-payment insurance. The leases are for seven years, but the fine print states that the landlord “reimburses” these costs to tenants only for the first three years.
In fact, tenants continue to pay the remainder of their rent, leaving only the amounts corresponding to what they consider to be “unfair terms” unpaid. So it’s not about stopping paying the rent, but rather about what they consider to be against the law. Non-payment insurance amounts to around 380 euros per year, while the rest of the costs can inflate the monthly payments by more than 50 euros.
Sara is one of the tenants who no longer pay the rent increases generated by these provisions and who joined the complaint. She and her husband signed the contract in 2018, covering all of the aforementioned costs. In 2021, they agreed to renew the contract for another seven years, with this “bonus” on rates (and not on non-payment insurance) for the first three years in exchange for a monthly price increasing from 691 to 730 euros.
“At that point we had to accept because we couldn’t go anywhere else. “My husband earned 1,000 euros and I was in an ERTE,” she tells Somos Madrid. Today, their economic situation remains delicate. Sara is a pattern maker, but in April she was laid off from a bag factory. Since then, she has worked organizing weekend events and as an instructor. He has just joined an Amazon warehouse, where he works night shifts.
Flaws, eternal works and a swimming pool that no one asked for
According to Sara, once the majority of tenants agreed to renewal three years ago, Nestar embarked on a strategy to inflate community spending in preparation for the end of bonuses in 2024: “They started to organize the building to resolve energy deficits, but they took the opportunity to install a swimming pool. During this time, they did not change the windows which did not insulate. With the swimming pool, the price of the community, and therefore the rent, increases. »
As if that wasn’t enough, the company responsible for the work “drew holes in the walls, destroyed parts of the building and let everything get bogged down.” Nestar fired the construction company and for three months the materials or scaffolding remained in Sara’s building without anyone removing them. It is not for nothing that the lawsuit also refers to the current state of the housing, in addition to the unfair terms.
The organization of the neighborhoods intensified with the end of the “bonuses” in September of this year. Sara and her husband tried to find alternative accommodation before applying, but this proved impossible due to the current situation in the real estate market. To illustrate the “unfairness” of having to assume the ICI, she points out that if they did it themselves as owners instead of paying fees imposed by Nestar, they would pay a reduced amount, since her husband is disabled : “We would only pay 5%. “That doesn’t make any sense.”
Negotiate, support and fight
Andrés Pradillo, member of the Tenants’ Union, speaks in a conversation with this newspaper of “up to nine unfair clauses and three rent increases”. In addition to those linked to the cost of monthly payments, he emphasizes that others are linked to “consumer rights, such as the entry of the property into the accommodation without prior authorization from the tenants”.
Pradillo recounts how they came to take the legal route after trying to negotiate with Nestar: “At first, they responded to the tenants by simply informing them that they were within their rights to implement increases through the clauses. When residents chose to move beyond individual approaches through out-of-court claims and opted for collective bargaining, the fund stopped responding to communication attempts. They hope that in response to the complaint, the entity will “sit down to negotiate.”
The participation of the Tenants’ Union also aims to provide support to those affected: “They need to know that they are not alone. This is why we are mobilizing so that a greater number of tenants who suffer from these unfair clauses join, through door-to-door and rallies. He adds that “it’s the neighbors who set the tone.” Sara also appreciates the financial support the union provides to many of her neighbors.
“When they start to see themselves powerfully, to see that they are not alone but that there are hundreds or thousands of people in the same situation, the fear begins to change sides,” explains Pradillo. He says that faced with initial doubts, “tenants are starting to realize that the idea of suing is a shield if they try to evict them and not something that makes it easier to evict them.”
While waiting for the trial to be admitted, they are not sitting idly by. They are still waiting for Nestar to sit down to negotiate, but at the same time they are ready to fight. “Tenants collect and attach all receipts for future returns,” explains Andrés Pradillo by way of example. “Since May, we have kept all the invoices,” confirms Sara. She knows that it is a “very long” process, but she is convinced that over time “the rest of the blockages will be added”, both to the non-payment of the clauses that they consider abusive and to the complaint. .
Nestar defends himself: “The clauses have been explained”
Nestar (previously operating under the names Lazora and Azora) is one of the country’s leading landlords, and more specifically the third largest fund in Spain in terms of number of properties. Its parent companies own a total of 13,000 homes throughout the country, 800 of which are spread across 42 blocks in the Community of Madrid.
The entity defends itself in statements to this newspaper: “All clauses are valid and compliant with the law, incorporated in the signed contracts and explained before their signature, and therefore perfectly known to the signatories.” Nestar sources also deny “the accusations of abuse and threats made by certain tenants”.
Sara explains what exactly her experience was when signing: “We saw the offer for the apartment in 2017 at SIMA [Salón Internacional Inmobiliario de Madrid]. They told us it was going to fly, but they would reserve it for us if we paid 565 euros. That’s what we did. When we went to sign in July 2018, we found unfair clauses. They told us that we had the right not to sign, but that we would lose these 565 euros. At the time, it was a very painful amount, which we didn’t really have enough of.” Finally they chose to leave their signature.
When they begin to see themselves forcefully, to verify that they are not alone, the fear begins to change sides. Tenants are starting to realize that the idea of a lawsuit is a shield if they try to evict them and not something that will make their eviction easier.
Regarding the most recent decision until this new judicial process, that of the Court of First Instance of Parla which declared illegal the recovery of non-payment insuranceemphasizes that “it considers three of the four clauses under appeal to be valid”. Despite this, they appealed because they understand, regarding non-payment insurance, that “its impact is consistent with the Urban Lease Law, as recognized by the judgment itself.” They consider that this is “a common practice which remains justified”.
Fund sources ultimately reject that these judicial decisions serve to create legal precedents: “This decision (like that of Catalonia, also appealed) does not constitute jurisprudence, it cannot therefore be extended to other similar cases . Nestar analyzes each case concerning its tenants individually in order to better respond to each situation. In the case of the Barcelona judicial resolution, it annuls nine of the ten clauses denounced by a neighbor of Granollers in the contract that Nestar (then Azora) had asked her to sign, considering them “abusive and fraudulent”.
Pradillo warns against the expansion of this practice: “Abusive clauses are imposed by all vulture funds, and increasingly also by real estate companies. Ultimately, it’s a way to increase rent before fulfilling and renewing contracts. If we don’t stop it, the strategy spreads. We must take into account the fact that vulture funds play the role of radicalizers who carry out maneuvers which then affect other rentiers.”
