New twist to Stephania Carabott's house saga
The in-laws of Stephania Carabott have no title over the house they have thrown their son's widow out of, it was announced this evening.
But it is yet unclear whether Mrs Carabott will be allowed to continue living in the house she had lovingly shared with her late husband for 10 years.
Mrs Carabott and her husband Noel, one of the four victims of the Simshar fishing boat tragedy, had been leasing the house from Noel's father Joseph and his sister Dolores. A judge has given Mrs Carabott four months to leave.
But in an unexpected twist of events, the Parliamentary Secretariat for Lands said in a statement this evening that according to research carried out by the Government's Property Division, the in-laws had no title on the property so much so that the Joint Office stopped accepting agricultural lease from them in April 2007.
The secretariat said that in July last year, the Joint Office refused a request from the notary of the Carabott family for Suzanne Buttigieg nee Carabott, Noel's sister, to be recognised as the farmer.
Asked whether Mrs Carabott would be able to continue living in the house, a spokesman for the secretariat said he had no further information to give at this stage. He said that the division would be taking action within the remit of the law.
16 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
GiovDeMartiino
Mar 22nd 2009, 08:07
Taraw kif xorta wahda se ssib min jeqred issa li forsi dil-povra armla mhux se titylef darha? Taraw? L-importanti llum li nippruvaw inzebilhu lill-gvern u lill-knisja. U ma ndumux ma nisimghu b'ohrajn li jilmentaw li HUMA ma kinux nghataw fejn joqoghdu f'cirkostanzi jisbhu hafna lil dawn. Ga gara erbat ijiem ilu fil-kaz tal-vittmi tan-nar tan-Naxxar. Xi hadd ilmenta, u forsi bir-ragun, li lilu ma tawh ebda kumpens!!!!!!!!!!!!Povri ministri..
Maria Pace
Mar 21st 2009, 23:57
@Susanne Buttigieg
The Times do not need to clarify anything. We, the general public, do not know who you are and frankly, we don't really care.
So according to you, if a certain Joe Borg does something, The Times will have to mention that the particular Joe Borg is not the same Joe Borg as the other thousands in the directory.
Dennis Zammit
Mar 21st 2009, 23:11
To Susanne Buttigieg
5 days for what ma'am?
Pity that the bad habits of teh victim and their consequences held them from legalising their stay in the house.
S.Magro
Mar 21st 2009, 08:47
@Susanne Buttigieg
Mela "hmar" wiehed hawn ?
It's nice to hear that Government's Property Division had done a good research
SMuscat
Mar 21st 2009, 06:07
@Keith Davis
I am not a lawyer but I doubt that it is as clear cut as you described it. I'll let a lawyer to volunteer a clarification on your point.
Stephen Borg Cardona
Mar 21st 2009, 00:09
Only God knows what other funny goings on are occurring in joint office properties. Shouldnt the police investigate this sort of thing ?
Christopher Mamo
Mar 20th 2009, 23:55
@ Susanne Buttigieg
Whoever you may be, your name is Susanne, not Suzanne (with the "z"), as reported!!!
Susanne Buttigieg
Mar 20th 2009, 20:12
I would like to clarify and inform the general public that I Susanne Buttigieg i'm not the same tenant of the said property. I will give you 5 days notice to clarify such things otherwise I would turn on alternative measures given by the law.!!!!!!!!!!
Keith Davis
Mar 20th 2009, 20:01
No exceptions should be made to the rules. If she should get an exception, who should not there after?
D Vella
Mar 20th 2009, 19:05
The circumstances in this are are rather different and exceptional. Stephania Carabott should be allowed to live in her house.
Joseph Galea
Mar 20th 2009, 18:29
Give this lady and her children a break. How many downturns can one take in such a short time? Get the lease in order and live happily ever after.
Keith Davis
Mar 20th 2009, 18:14
@Jamie
If one steals and sells them to another person, the person receiving such items is also considered breaking the law. I think that although this is somehow a different case the lands division or whoever owns the land can not let the property to the person residing there simply because certain rules where broken.
If you are receiving or being granted something, you need to verify all the facts pertaining to it.
Peter Bonnici
Mar 20th 2009, 18:10
Somebody didn't do his homework !!
Christopher Mamo
Mar 20th 2009, 18:03
So, if I got this right, it means that the in-laws were illegally renting out (read making money of) government property. As proprietor of this money, I would (and do) want it all back, plus interest.
jamie pace
Mar 20th 2009, 17:43
wow..what a piece of good news for mrs stephania carabott....one only hope the good news continues with the secretariat for lands granting her the permision to keep the property and continue living there....
J Sammut
Mar 20th 2009, 17:35
May justice be done with this victim.