The Provincial Court of Santa Cruz de Tenerife has condemned the Athenaeum of La Laguna to turn off 51,000 euros to a sports store who suffered the effects of fire that took place in the cultural entity in October 2019compared to the 1,500 euros set in the first instance.
The establishment occupied one of the dependencies of the building of the Laguna society on a rental basis and also suffered the consequences of the fire.
The initial sentence concluded that the damages claimed by the business were not proven and indicated that the premises should have damage insurance, as established in the lease, to alleviate the damages on the merchandise.
The cultural entity maintained that the claim was “abusive” in that the store was not affected by fire or smoke, but only by part of the 10,000 liters of water used by firefighters.
For this reason, they point out that it would have been enough to close it and then sell the products in the secondary market at a bargain price, that all the merchandise would never have been purchased and that it should not be appraised at the retail price.
In short, according to the Athenaeum, it would have been enough to dry it and then liquidate it at a bargain price, while at the same time opposing compensation for having had to move to another place since it could have continued in the same place.
The location of the second location on Calle Herradores is considered a more expensive enclave, with a better situation and they maintain that the reforms in the latter were “luxury” and unnecessary.
The owners of the establishment quantified the damage and loss of merchandise at 29,500 euros, another 9,500 for amortization of jobs and 1,500 more for loss of profits that corresponds from the date on which the fire took place until they were able to move to the new location.
They point out that they had civil liability insurance, which is the one required in the lease contract, but that it only covers damages caused by the exercise of the activity and use of the premises.
They argue that the troops who participated in the extinction and the Urban Planning Department determined the need to prop up the burned building and in fact the complete rehabilitation works have not yet begun and only a provisional metal roof has been installed.
On October 11, they sent a burofax to the Ateneo indicating that they were leaving the premises without the entity showing any opposition, to which is added that they had already paid the monthly payment and that they were never informed when they could reoccupy it, for which they demand the refund of the proportional part of the income that is quantified at 2,226 euros.
After the fire, the experts were able to verify the strong smell of smoke, that the store was propped up and the clothes had gotten wet, as well as their packaging.
The valuation was made at cost price and the merchandise was not sold to present it as evidence in the legal proceedings.
The Court finally concludes that indeed the owners of the business premises suffered damages from the fire and the extinction work and losses in the items that were useless for sale.
The merchants were barely able to enter the damaged establishment to remove the essentials since it was then sealed for weeks.
At that time, only a provisional roof was installed, so the merchandise remained exposed to the weather and dirt due to the removal of rubble.
Firefighters were barely able to recover a computer and items that were prepared in bags on a counter near the entrance. An expert verified fifteen days later that the stocks were wet and deteriorated and what was contained in the first sentence was dismantled, in which it was concluded that the smoke only ascends, so it is not possible that the premises had a strong smell of burning.
The Court supports the assessment made by the owners of the business, except for the costs of traveling to the new premises, which implies around 51,000 euros in compensation.
Leave a Reply