• HOUSING: The Government 'sneaks' into the decree for vulnerable consumers a greater shielding of the occupation against evictions

  • New measure: The anti-eviction decree will only be applied in the case of dependents or victims of gender violence

The controversy surrounding the anti-eviction decree did not end with its approval in extremis at the end of December.

The rule continues to generate a stir

a month later, especially as a result of the surprise change that the Government 'sneaked in' yesterday Wednesday in the decree that regulates the figure of the vulnerable consumer.

What changes have been made?

The Government has modified Royal Decree 37/2020 on urgent measures to deal with situations of social and economic vulnerability in the field of housing, through a final provision in Royal Decree 1/2021 for the protection of vulnerable consumers .

The first modification

refers to article 1 bis

, which in December established the "suspension during the state of alarm of the eviction procedure and of the releases for economically vulnerable people without a housing alternative in the cases of paragraphs 2.º, 4.º and 7th of article 250.1 of Law 1/2000, of January 7, on Civil Procedure "and now adds" and in those others in which the eviction brings cause of a criminal procedure ".

This allows to extend the protection of minors, dependents and victims of violence in civil proceedings, that is, when there is a lease contract, and also in criminal proceedings, that is, when there is no such contract and the owner considers that a crime has been committed. .

On the other hand,

the letters b and c of article 7

, which regulates the exceptions to the suspension of launches in cases of occupation

,

are changed

.

One of those exceptions, the one that collects the letter c, is the

main focus of the controversy

.

In the first version it established that the eviction continues "When the entry or stay in the property is the consequence of a crime" and in the new version it is worded as follows: "When the entry or stay in the property has occurred through intimidation or violence against people ".

That is to say, the generic mention of the crime is eliminated and it is limited only to cases in which there is violence or intimidation of a person to enter the property. 

Does that increase the shielding of illegal occupation?

The legal sources consulted by

EL MUNDO

do not coincide in a single position and also appeal to technical issues in the drafting of the standard.

Some of these sources interpret that, indeed, the change does increase the shielding of the occupation, since it enables the person who occupies without a contract, even committing a crime without violence or intimidation, to continue occupying the house until May if the judge considers it so.

A home that, yes, must belong to a large holder, be it a natural or legal person.

In this case, and as long as the occupant meets all the vulnerability requirements established by the decree, the judge can assess whether or not to initiate the eviction process.

"They have established guidelines that tell you how you can usurp a home without being so easily thrown out of it," says

Miriam Nasser,

a specialized lawyer at PlusLegal Abogados.

José Ramón Zurdo

, lawyer, mediator on leasing issues at the Madrid City Council and general director of the Rental Negotiating Agency (ANA), agrees on this interpretation.

"By modifying letter c of section 7, the legislation opens the door for the judge to suspend an eviction in the event that, for example, a crime of encroachment occurs, the home is empty, is owned by a large owner of housing and that the occupants meet the vulnerability requirements, a fact that before this change the judge had no possibility of suspending, "he explains.

Technical issues

Other legal sources, however, relate the changes to technical issues inherent to processes in which the rules are changed in haste.

Consulted by EL MUNDO, these sources explain that the new wording extends the protection to the procedures that are initiated by civil means and, now also, by criminal means and that modification, which is included in article 1 bis, in turn requires that technical modifications in letters b and c.

"If it had been left as before, by now introducing the question of criminal procedures, a crime would always have occurred since all usurpation is in itself a crime. That is why they have limited it to intimidation or violence," they point out.

This is also the explanation given by sources from the

Ministry of Transport, Mobility and Urban Agenda

, who assure that the change seeks to expand the protection of minors, dependents and victims of gender violence in vulnerable situations.

"If the wording of section c had been kept as it was, these groups could not have been taken into account," they explain.

What does the decree say?

The rule does not cover occupations without a contract that have occurred after the extension decree came into force last December and, for those that occurred before and affect large owners, it will

only apply in the case of vulnerable people dependents, victims of gender violence or people who are in charge of other dependents

or minors.

In other words, the decree prohibits the removal of vulnerable tenants while the state of alarm lasts and as long as there is a lease agreement.

When there is no such contract, the agreement introduces a distinction between the small owner -the one who has less than 10 properties- and the large holder -the one who has more than 10-.

In the event that the owner is a private individual, the eviction will continue, but in the case of a large holder, they will be prohibited only if the occupants are dependents, victims of gender violence or persons who are in charge of other dependents or minors.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

  • Evictions

Covid-19Clamor of the autonomous communities so that Salvador Illa comes out of his apathy before the third wave of the pandemic

Politics Pablo Casado accuses Salvador Illa of persecuting the CCAA of the PP: "Neither governs nor lets govern"

Foreign AffairsPablo Iglesias breaks into the Conference of Ambassadors to be held next week and which was postponed due to the great snowfall

See links of interest

  • 2021 business calendar

  • FC Schalke 04 - 1. FC Cologne

  • Getafe - Huesca

  • Cordoba - Real Sociedad

  • DSC Arminia Bielefeld - VfB Stuttgart

  • Alcoyano - Real Madrid, live