Sanción que pudiera corresponderle

[Perikles]

A friend has just received an official letter with legal Spanish which is rather difficult. It is set out in paragraphs like this.

Fecha de Infracción

xxx

Normas sustantivas infringidas

lists of laws he was breaking bla bla bla bla

Tipificación de la Infracción

'Crime' allegedly committed (not a criminal issue, it concerns tourism laws)

Calificación Jurídica de las Infracciones

Grave

Sanción que pudiera Corresponderle

18,000 euros

Yes, a fine of 18,000 euros. Now the rest of the document drones on about a right to appeal and so on, but clearly gives to understand that the fine has been imposed, at that level. He can pay it, but this does not prejudice his right to an appeal.

My question is the following: If I were to translate
"Sanción que pudiera Corresponderle " I would translate it as "Fine which could be imposed" suggesting it is not certain. This would conflict with the rest of the document.

So yet again, after this long and boring introduction, why the subjunctive pudiera?

Is it to be understood that this is certainly a fine imposed, or could it be understood as a hypothetical possibility?

This is kind of important. Thanks.

[aleCcowaN]

It's probably the top of a scale, and probably who issues the transgression bill is not who decide how much is the fine. I don't know, but "pudiera" certainly says it is not yet a settled business (but sometimes you have just a few days to appeal or they make it very tricky and expensive to avoid it settled that way). So, rush to the solicitor's office. Basically, take into account that laws and legal procedures differ widely from one Spanish speaking country to another.

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

As I understand, "Sanción que pudiera corresponderle" suggests this is not what he has to pay yet... to me, it means that this is the maximum amount your friend would have to pay after the whole situation has been evaluated, or after he has appealed. Alec's advice is right, your friend must definitely communicate with the government officials to see what he has to do.

[Perikles]

Thanks both. What I do not understand is that the rest of the letter (6 pages) clearly states that he has to pay this amount, but has the right of appeal. Paying the fine does not prejudice that right. It does not indicate that the amount to be paid has not yet been determined. This is legal terminology which I don't really understand. He thus has the choice of a) paying that fine or b) appealing it. If he appeals, the amount may get reduced, or the appeal may fail and he gets huge legal costs as well. I'm glad it's not me.

[aleCcowaN]

You may have two appeals, and administrative appeal -by convincing the official that the infraction was a minor one- and a bench(?) appeal with you having the fine reverted(?) [my apologies, my legalese is so bad] The first appeal -and all the "pudieras" in the world- allow certain business to exist. Modern legal systems try to avoid those business, so they only became more intricate. Fines also became higher to deter infractions. That also boosted even more intricate business as it deter everyone from doing the right thing. Your friend need someone who knows the angles of the language, if you catch my drift, not to engage in corrupt practices but to spot and uncock those. In that language "pudiera" means "let's negotiate".

But it'll surprise me a lot having ... petty? ... low? ... ah! minor officials doing such a thing in a Spanish speaking country

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

Here, when such things happen, we have to pay the fine, and after our case has been evaluated, sometimes we get back the amount that has been paid or a part of it... which would justify the "pudiera".
I also think some "negotiation" is needed, and I agree that it doesn't have to imply a corrupt practice, but an official evaluation of the situation. Your friend must have a legal advisor and contact authorities as soon as possible, so he'll know for sure what actual problem he's facing.

Something else that might explain this "pudiera" is that this kind of documents are originally pre-made templates for everything, even if the content of the document won't match in the end the titles of each section... ;(

[Perikles]

Originally Posted by AngelicaDeAlquezar

Here, when such things happen, we have to pay the fine, and after our case has been evaluated, sometimes we get back the amount that has been paid or a part of it... which would justify the "pudiera".

Yes, possibly this is what is expected. The problem is that the fine is so huge he just can't pay it, and the lawyer he will need will charge him a fortune as well. He is also clearly guilty as charged with no obvious defence. So things look grim for him.

Thanks both.

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

In that case, he might just find someone who speaks Spanish fluently and who will accompany him at the office, so he'll clearly know what his options are... even if paying such amount will be the only chance.

Maybe there is a possibility to contact a company who hires money for this kind of problems leaving something in pledge, like a car or jewelry or something like that, so one can make small payments to that company to get the guarantee back. If you get back the money from the authority, you can also get the security back sooner.

Good luck.

[pjt33]

Originally Posted by AngelicaDeAlquezar

Maybe there is a possibility to contact a company who hires money for this kind of problems leaving something in pledge, like a car or jewelry or something like that, so one can make small payments to that company to get the guarantee back. If you get back the money from the authority, you can also get the security back sooner.

The verb is "to pawn", and the company is a "pawn shop" (although I think that usually connotes security like jewels rather than cars).

[Perikles]

Originally Posted by AngelicaDeAlquezar

In that case, he might just find someone who speaks Spanish fluently and who will accompany him at the office, so he'll clearly know what his options are... even if paying such amount will be the only chance.

They have no office, and typically for Tenerife there is no information as to how to appeal, nor any information as to how to pay the fine. We are dealing with peasants.

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

Originally Posted by pjt33

The verb is "to pawn", and the company is a "pawn shop" (although I think that usually connotes security like jewels rather than cars).

Thank you, I was looking for this term to make the comparison.
A pawn shop just lends the money and after the bill expires, one must pay the whole amount they lent at once.
However, in this specific case, I was rather thinking about a company of "fianzas" (they specialize in paying bails and fines)... they pay the amount themselves and you repay them, little by little. Most of them ask for this guarantee, and some just make you sign a contract.


@Perikles: I know a little about such "bureaucrazy"... but there must be some governmental office where you can have this kind of information...

[Perikles]

Originally Posted by AngelicaDeAlquezar

@Perikles: I know a little about such "bureaucrazy"... but there must be some governmental office where you can have this kind of information...

The problem is that the fine is imposed because of the application of a new law, and nobody quite knows how to deal with it. Governmental offices are terrible at giving information, and there are very few people available to help. He will have to hire a lawyer, it is that simple.

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

Oh my... well, hopefully he can find the best solution for him. Good luck again.

[Luna Azul]

OMG!! what did your friend do??. Don't tell me..

If I were to receive one of those notices my first reaction would be that the amount of the fine is still indeterminate. So I would appeal, if for no other reason, to clarify the intended amount of the fine.

But it seems to me your friend is in real trouble.

[Perikles]

Originally Posted by Luna Azul

OMG!! what did your friend do??. Don't tell me.. ...But it seems to me your friend is in real trouble.

It's no secret. Here in Tenerife you have housing complexes of two types: A touristic complex where there is a licence to let out your apartment for holiday makers, and a residential complex, where you are not allowed to do this. For the last ten years, people have been ignoring this and buying apartments on residential complexes and letting them out to generate money to pay their mortgages. The Canarian government has taken no action, until now, when suddenly they have decided to stop it. There must be thousands of residential owners who do this, and almost everybody has ignored warnings and assumed the government would be as incompetent as usual and fail to do anything. This time they are all wrong. This time, the government inspectors have examined internet websites where people have been advertising their property for holiday letting, so it was very easy to catch them. Even the advertising is illegal, and people are still doing it. The general opinion is that it is economic suicide for the government (further collapse of housing market etc.) but they are just too stupid to see it.

[irmamar]

Which institution sent the fine? Was it AEAT? Is it from the state government, from the regional government or a local (town) fine?

Your friend could go to the "Oficina del Consumidor" (in the town hall), just to ask, I don't think they can help him, but they might explain it better.