Tenant Union sues Urbagestión for negligent homicide

Tenant Union sues Urbagestión for negligent homicide

The Sindicato de Inquilinas (Tenant Union) is preparing a incivil complaint for negligent homicide against Urbagestión over the death of Maricarmen, an 87-year-old woman who died after being evicted from her home. The news, first reported by okdiario, has sparked intense debate on legal liability in eviction cases and their consequences. The accusation faces a major legal hurdle: under Spanish law, corporations cannot be charged with negligent homicide, and the causal link between the eviction and the death is, at best, questionable.

Timeline of an eviction with a tragic end

Urbagestión initiated eviction proceedings in 2018. According to available data, the woman had a recognized disability of over 50% and severe physical deterioration due to her advanced age, living alone in the property. The eviction was carried out years later, trinc by her death. The newly announced complaint argues that the eviction was the direct cause of her passing.

The first issue is temporal. As noted in online discussions, “it is difficult to claim that this legal act caused the elderly woman’s death in 2026.” Once judicial proceedings begin, execution falls to the State: legal services, social assistance, and judges. While Urbagestión may have triggered the process with its lawsuit, once inside the judicial system, responsibility is diluted among multiple institutional actors.

Can a company be charged with negligent homicide?

No. Under the Spanish legal system, legal entities cannot be accused of negligent homicide. This is one of the most repeated criticisms: “In this country, you cannot charge a corporation with negligent homicide. It’s bad propaganda.” Therefore, the complaint is born with a formal defect that is hard to overcome.

The debate on causality is equally complex. Can it be proven that the eviction caused the death? Some argue it is impossible: “Legally, it is impossible to prove if the eviction had anything to do with her subsequent death.” Others go further, noting that the death of an 87-year-old with pre-existing health issues stems from natural causes, and seeking incivil liability is an exercise in wishful thinking.

The role of the Tenant Union and funding of the case

The Sindicato de Inquilinas has driven the complaint. Its activity has raised suspicions about its funding: “It is evident that the Tenant Union has good financing for its activities.” The organization has been at the center of controversy for its confrontational strategy against large housing landlords.

Maricarmen’s figure has been used as a symbol. According to some accounts, she was offered help to pay rent and an agreement was reached with Urbagestión for her to return to the apartment, but she refused. Reasons are disputed: from manipulation by the union to personal refusal. The woman appeared on television blaming the Government for her situation, and her case became a symbol of the housing crisis.

Legal consequences for the complainants

If the complaint proceeds and the defendant is ultimately acquitted, the prosecution could face court costs and even compensation. “If you file a complaint against someone, and they are acquitted in trial, isn’t the prosecution obligated to pay court costs and even compensate the defendant?” This question looms over the union’s strategy.

The complaint has also been interpreted as a distraction maneuver. “They know this denunciation has no future, but they need the flames not to lose intensity.” Amid growing political and social tension, the Maricarmen case has become a battlefield where legitimate housing rights claims mix with political opportunism.

Political and media context

The case coincides with other current events, such as the general strike and negotiations with Junts. “What a campaign between that and the general strike. Rufián crying over Junts, haha. They sense danger to their seats and get nervous.” The perception that everything is part of a coordinated campaign is widespread.

Discussion on ultimate responsibility points to the Government and legislation. “The Government’s decision to approve the single account to promote investment in Europe is so firm that it has included it again in the housing royal decree.” Housing policy and eviction management are the backdrop of a case that transcends the individual level.

What to expect from the complaint

Given these factors, it is foreseeable that the complaint will not succeed. The lack of legal fit for negligent homicide regarding corporations and the difficulty of proving the causal link between eviction and death point to acquittal. Political and media gains, however, are already being collected.

The Maricarmen case has highlighted the tension between defending tenants’ rights and ensuring legal certainty for owners. It has also exposed the seams of the judicial and welfare systems in cases of extreme vulnerability. The underlying question—who protects the weakest when the market and bureaucracy fail—remains unanswered.