Because although the Council of Ministers has approved the referral to the Cortes Generales of the draft law of measures of promotion of the rent of houses of December 12 of 2008 and that it aims among others to streamline these processes of eviction, however measures that are collected are insufficient. They will not solve the problem of notifications tenants which is the main cause of the delay in these processes. Since currently in the Judicial path only are considered as valid notifications which are personally collected by the defendant or by someone who take care of her. If the subpoena or demand delivery attempt placing the tenant for the marking of the trial does not occur at first, because this this absent, has abandoned the property and is not located him, the framework of the process in the courts quite stretches in time. Having to re-quote you again, after find another home through Patrimonial investigation service through the same court, and finally if this also fails, you must be placed by edict. And not only this, but what after obtaining the owner the eviction judgment in its favor, to file new lawsuit requesting the execution of the same to get the launch and recover, as we say the use and availability of the property.

This procedure causes a great delay in the courts and who finally gets out injured is the owner who wait months and months to be able to recover the availability of premises, Office or home. The Government therefore has to amend the law (in the procedures of evictions) that with respect to the guarantees of defence to be given to the tenants, at the same time owners have a Judicial process according to which proclaimed the Spanish Constitution, and that article 24 of our Constitution, which guarantees the right of all persons to obtain effective judicial protection of the judges is collected and courts in the exercise of our legitimate rights, without that it may occur in any case helplessness. The law has to be amended and since the Association requests the Government its modification to avoid delays at the sites to tenants in the courts, and must be placed these only once. And if the same refusal by not be located the tenant, but the summons was communicated n the domicile stated in the contract as the domicile of the defendant, this should be valid without the need for new subpoenas that only cause unnecessary delays in the process and that only hurt the owners demanded. ASI has stated that the Secretary Gral, the Association Mrs.