Andalusian property developers propose anti-eviction system similar to unemployment benefits

The idea, championed by Ignacio Peinado from Malaga, chairman of Fadeco Promotores, is designed to create a public system "for individuals or families who, after many years of meeting their obligations, end up losing the home in which they have spent a large part of their lives".

"We should ask ourselves whether our social protection system still has some unresolved issues," Peinado says, drawing attention to the current unemployment benefit system.

"When someone who has been working for years loses their job, our system does not oblige the employer to keep them in their post. There is not even any discussion about them continuing to work for a while longer. Nor is the state required to find them an equivalent post in another company. What we do is provide that person with financial protection."

The idea is to apply a similar approach to certain situations involving the loss of one's home. Peinado clearly sets out who the beneficiaries would be: "Individuals and families who have been paying their rent or mortgage regularly for years and find themselves in unforeseen circumstances that prevent them from continuing to do so."

If they are ultimately forced to leave their home, this could trigger "a housing benefit (...) in much the same way as job loss triggers unemployment benefit".

This would take the form of a state benefit enabling them to cover the cost of alternative accommodation for a period of time, the amount and duration of which would depend on their circumstances, their financial situation and their past history, just as unemployment benefits are not the same for all workers.

Peinado highlights that this is not about protecting squatters. "If a person enters a property by force or without legal title and is eventually evicted, that eviction should not entitle them to housing benefit. They must leave the property as soon as possible and the fact that they have squatted there cannot become a path to receiving benefits."

"At the other end are those who have been paying their rent or mortgage for years but, as a result of a loss of income, illness, a family breakdown or any other unforeseen and verifiable circumstance, are no longer able to meet these payments and ultimately lose their home. That is where protection should come in."

The assistance wouldn't necessarily have to be the same for everyone. Its duration could be linked to the length of time for which obligations have been met, with maximum limits and an amount based on personal circumstances and the reasonable cost of rent. All of this would be subject to criteria relating to income, prior compliance and the absence of fraud, among other things.

"A system like this would be fairer, precisely because it would allow for swift action against fraud, abuse or squatting, while offering financial protection to those who have genuinely suffered an unforeseen event and who, after years of meeting their obligations, find themselves left out in the cold," Peinado says.

"We are not talking about replacing individual responsibility, but about preventing a one-off financial setback from turning into permanent exclusion from housing."

Peinado staes that, in order to access the assistance, the person would have to leave the property they can no longer afford to pay for, "so as not to jeopardise the legal certainty of the owner or the creditor".

"This would also have a significant benefit, as there would be fewer legal proceedings, resulting in financial savings for the administration and a considerable reduction in the backlog of cases in the courts," he explains.

According to Peinado, the new system would not necessarily place an extraordinary burden on public funds. "We could even consider setting up a housing protection fund: a very small contribution spread across a very broad base can build a powerful safety net for when someone really needs it. We need to work out the figures and design it properly from a technical point of view, but the fundamental idea is to change the approach: not to wait until an eviction takes place to realise we have a problem."

For Peinado, this also "provides a great deal of legal certainty for the landlord and the creditor, because it speeds up the removal of those who have stopped paying".

"At the same time, the tenant will receive financial assistance for the coming months, which they can use to find alternative accommodation or get their finances back on track. This would provide certainty for all parties," he says.

Given the risk of encouraging non-payment in order to qualify for the new support, Peinado says that access to the benefit must be linked to prior compliance and to unforeseen, verified circumstances. "It is not a question of rewarding non-compliance, but rather of protecting compliance. If a person has been rigorously meeting their obligations for years and finds themselves in an exceptional situation, the system should recognise that previous behaviour, just as we have protection when we lose our jobs."

Access the broad Spain national news archive