84-Year-Old Faces Eviction After Rent Hike of 275%

€1,450 Pension Cannot Cover Demanded €1,650 Rent

There is a staggering fact: an 84-year-old woman has lived in the same apartment in Madrid since 1956. Seventy-two years. Now, on the verge of turning 85, she faces eviction because the property owner demands €1,650 per month, while her pension is only €1,450. The increase over what she previously paid is 275%. The case, first reported by El Plural, has a name: Maricarmen, a resident of the Ibiza neighborhood in the Retiro district, one of the most expensive areas of the capital.

The story begins in 2018, when the family owning the building sold the entire property to Renta Corporación, one of Spain's major real estate holdings. The next day, the building passed into the hands of Urbagestión Desarrollo e Inversión SL. Since then, the judicial calendar has not stopped turning: she won at first instance, appeals trinc, and last March the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the company. The High Court maintains that the second subrogation of the contract—after the death of the original tenants—can only last two years, unless the cohabiting descendant has a disability greater than 65%. Maricarmen is 84 years old and has reduced mobility of 50% trinc hip surgery. It was not enough.

From 1956 to 2024: Chronology of a Protected Contract

Maricarmen's father signed the old tenancy agreement (*renta antigua*) in 1956, when she was barely approaching adulthood. The rent was updated annually according to the CPI, plus the IBI (property tax). After her mother's death, Maricarmen took over the contract nearly twenty years ago. The ownership claims that this contract should have expired in 2007. The courts initially sided with her, but the company's administrators—Ricardo Alonso Fernández and Fernando Alonso Fuentes, according to the Madrid Tenants' Union—did not give up.

The Supreme Court ruling is what has set off all alarms. The organization describes it as "unprecedented" and argues that it "prioritizes the formal requirements of subrogation over the spirit of the law, over the legislator's intent, and over the social reality through which laws must be interpreted." The company offered a rent of €1,650, below the €2,650 demanded for similar properties in the building, but far above what the pensioner can afford. The alternative presented to her is homelessness.

Is Maricarmen an Isolated Case or a Repeated Pattern?

It is not a unique case. The Tenants' Union describes a procedure that repeats itself: they buy apartments rented before 1985, minimize maintenance until they become uninhabitable, pressure tenants to leave, try to get them to sign waivers of their right to subrogation, or look for formal defects to litigate for years until some court allows them to evict. "Vultures are scavengers who wait for their prey to die, but in this case they are impatient predators who harass their victims until they seize the loot," the organization concludes. Similar cases have been documented in other cities, such as that of an 87-year-old woman in Cádiz.

The legislative response proposed by the union is the so-called "Maricarmen amendment": modifying the Urban Leases Act (*Ley de Arrendamientos Urbanos*) to eliminate the two-year limit that the Second Transitional Provision sets for descendants of the subrogee who do not reach 65% disability. "This is a small and extremely vulnerable group, mostly elderly women who cared for their parents and, upon their death, inherited their rental contracts," they explain. With the new Supreme Court doctrine, many of these women, with low pensions, would be doomed to destitution.

Market Rules: Arguments from Those Who See No Injustice

On the other side of the scale, part of the analysis argues that the old tenancy agreement is an unsustainable privilege and that the owner has the right to update the price. It is argued that Maricarmen had decades to save or buy a home, and that with a €1,450 pension she can afford lower rents in other parts of Spain. "With that pension, she can go live in a €500 home in the province of Madrid, or more within the city," notes one of the positions recorded. Another current points out that the inherited old rent constitutes an anomaly that distorts the market and that those who enjoy it have benefited from enormous savings over the years.

The counterpoint comes from those who consider that the problem is not the lady, but the fund: "It is not the same to screw over a tenant who complies to make speculative shit, especially when it is a fund that bought the entire building to do what they do." The discussion shifts to the role of large holders and housing as a financial asset. An economics graduate summarizes it thus: "Human beings are more than Demand, Supply, prices, and them. Life is too short to be such an idiot as to align with the real estate company that wants to throw an 84-year-old woman out of a flat."

What Does the Supreme Court Say About Subrogation of Old Rents?

The Supreme Court established in March that the second subrogation of an old tenancy agreement—the one occurring after the death of the first holder and their spouse—can only extend for two years, unless the cohabiting descendant proves a disability greater than 65%. Maricarmen, aged 84 with 50% reduced mobility, does not meet this requirement. The judgment is final and opens the door to eviction, scheduled for May 31. The union denounces this as a formalist interpretation that ignores social reality.

The Business of Buying Buildings with Old-Rent Tenants

Renta Corporación is a real estate group specialized in the acquisition, transformation, and sale of properties in major urban centers, especially Madrid and Barcelona. Listed on the stock exchange since 2006, it is headquartered in Catalonia. The 2018 operation fits its model: buying whole buildings with old contracts, managing the exit of tenants, and repositioning the asset. Urbagestión Desarrollo e Inversión SL is the company listed as owner and plaintiff. The company's administrators, according to the union, control more than a dozen companies in the agri-food and real estate sectors.

Maricarmen's case has become the symbol of a broader conflict: that of large holders versus old-rent tenants, a small but extremely vulnerable group. The question hanging in the air is whether legislative policy will react before the eviction is carried out or if, conversely, the market will continue to dictate the sentence.