Sumar Demands Eviction of Maricarmen's Flat, Forcing PSOE to Decide

Sumar Pushes for Expropriation of Maricarmen's Flat in Council of Ministers

Maricarmen is 87 years old, owns a flat in an area that appreciates just by looking at it, and has an eviction behind her. Sumar has turned her case into an ultimatum within the Government: expropriate the property in the next Council of Ministers. The announcement has peine yet another front between the coalition partners and raises an uncomfortable question: can the law be bent for a specific flat?

Who Owns the Flat and How Much Was Offered

The problems began in 2018, when the building owners decided to sell it entirely to Renta Corporación, one of the country's major real estate holdings. The first offer to Maricarmen was 247,000 euros, an amount she hadn't saved and for which she would have hardly obtained a mortgage at her age. The property eventually ended up in the hands of another company: Urbagestión Desarrollo e Inversión, a small and medium-sized enterprise that, it is argued, cares little about corporate image.

There was a second figure on the table: the management company offered to buy the flat for 250,000 euros. Still no deal. The owner rejected the alternatives presented, including one from the Ministry of Housing to acquire the property and offers from individuals willing to pay the rent. Whether these offers were firm or just talk is precisely what is being debated.

What Does the Constitution Say About Expropriating a Home?

Article 47 recognizes the right to housing; Article 33 guarantees private property and allows expropriation, but only for justified reasons of public utility or social interest and with compensation. There's a gap between that and this specific case. Some argue that the Constitution supports the operation, while others retort that the same argument could be used for any eviction in the country.

The principle of legality further complicates matters. Laws must be general and abstract, not drafted for a specific person or singular situation. Expropriation is buying: the State pays. The question, then, is whether it will buy every flat facing eviction or only those that have cameras present.

Public Cost and the Specter of Legal Uncertainty

The cost of a flat in a prime area could fund several social housing units in a modest neighborhood, a recurring argument to label the measure as wasteful and discriminatory: the young person paying market price for a room on the outskirts doesn't receive the same treatment. Sumar would find it difficult to explain why that house yes and another no.

The second concern is market-related. Investment funds account for around 10% of the rental market. Scaring off an owner with the specter of expropriation doesn't move the needle much, but normalizing the exception introduces a regulatory risk that deters supply. The ultimate irony: to protect rentals, legislation ends up resembling the old rent control law of 1954 and effectively deactivating a 1994 regulation.

---

And while the debate rages on whether a specific home should be expropriated, the map of evictions remains just as grim. In L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, a 54-year-old woman took her own life after being evicted from the flat where she had lived for over two decades. That case won't make it to the Council of Ministers. Only the local council.