Developers reject apartment owner's allegations

The developers of a block of apartments have filed a counter protest claiming that allegations made by an apartment owner were completely unfounded.

Mario Borg and Raymond Camilleri filed the protest in their personal capacity and on behalf of the company M & R Holdings Ltd and claimed that Rose Marie Portelli's allegations were merely an attempt to taint the company's good reputation.

Ms Portelli filed a protest in the First Hall of the Civil Court last week claiming she had undertaken to purchase a flat in an apartment block known as Summer Field, Qawra, from the two developers.

The flat, which was in shell form, was supposed to be completed by October 2004. However, as the works were not completed on time and as Ms Portelli had not yet managed to sell her previous residence, the parties agreed to extend the promise of sale agreement between them. In January this year, Ms Portelli sold her previous residence but her new flat was not yet ready. The two developers instructed her to move her furniture into the flat and promised her that the flat would be ready soon.

In February, Ms Portelli concluded the contract of sale with the developers but, up until the end of April, Ms Portelli was still unable to move into the flat as it was not yet completed, even lacking the electricity supply.

In the wake of some thefts from the apartment block, Mr Borg and Mr Camilleri paid half the expenses for an alarm system in the block but the system could not be used as there was no electricity. As a result, an agreement was reached by the parties whereby the developers were to provide Ms Portelli with alternative accommodation free of charge.

However, in May, thieves burgled Ms Portelli's flat and stole furniture worth Lm5,000 and also damaged the main door and the internal doors of the flat. After this incident, the developers promised to complete the entire block by the end of July but failed to do so. Thus, Ms Portelli called on the developers of the block of flats to make good for damages sustained due to their "gross negligence".

The developers rejected her allegations as unfounded.

They claimed they never sold any apartment through their personal capacity and the sale was done by the company as laid down in a contract, dated February 4, which stated that the apartment was being sold in a semi-finished state.

Although it was true that the works were not finished on an established date, this was because the signing of the contract was postponed on three occasions because Ms Portelli had not yet sold her previous residence. The company chose to renew the promise of sale agreement to accommodate Ms Portelli.

Mr Borg and Mr Camilleri added that they never instructed Ms Portelli to move her furniture into the apartment.

As for the electricity supply, there was nothing in the contract which obliged them to apply for its provision.

Moreover, there was no date established by when the company was to complete works on common parts. The common parts were now complete yet Ms Portelli still lived in an alternative accommodation for which the company was paying Lm230 a month.

Referring to the burglary, the developers rejected allegations that they may have been responsible in any way.

They claimed that Ms Portelli was merely trying to damage the company's good reputation and called on her to retract her allegations. They also held her liable for any damages suffered.

Lawyers Adrian Delia and Gillian Mamo signed the counter protest.