“Outrageous, terrible, what you wouldn’t wish on anyone. For your boyfriend to take your apartment and leave it like that”tweeted lawyer Diego Martín Proetti, who represented a woman who In “good faith” he lent the brand new apartment to a colleaguewho was recently separated and a victim of violence, And He had to evict her.
Along with this sentence, the lawyer released a video about the condition of the house within the residential complex. Buenos Aires station of the Procrear plan, in the Parque Patricios district of Buenos Aires. Destroyed and graffiti-covered walls, broken glass, missing artifacts and areas where the dirt was embarrassing. “Why so much hatred and evil?” the professional asked himself as he shared the filming on his networks @consumer_lawyer and tour the place with Mariela, the victim who managed to take possession of the property after a two-year legal battle.
The apartment doorthat one day was new and white, The opening took place at the end of November in the presence of a bailiff. Mariela found herself in an uninhabitable place, its walls tattooed with anger and the air filled with despair. In March 2023 she loaned it to a friend because she still had an ongoing rental agreement that was very expensive to terminate.
That was the “verbal” agreement The woman would take care of the expenses (expenses and services) but without paying rentas it was a temporary loan. But none of that happened. And a year later, when Mariela had to move, her partner not only refused to leave, but also left her with a million-dollar debt and gave unusual reasons for her actions.
“You really didn’t do me any favors. You should have lived. These are government apartments that they get practically for free. And I also paid for part of it because that comes from all our tax money.” He told her without hesitation.
During the trial, the “squatter” asserted that the agreement was never a deposit, but rather an agreed rent of 75,000 pesos per month. He also claimed that the apartment had moisture problems and broken pipes (even though it was new) and that he had received no response from the owner to his request for repairs.
“What the woman presented to the court was not the rent payments, but the expense payments. She only presented two receipts. Her defense was not legally tenable.” “I haven’t signed anything, but I’m renting” said, although in reality she occupies property that does not belong to her,” explained Proietti, who managed to obtain one positive result of Civil Court No. 67.
Even though the eviction order was issued July 2025, It only came into effect last month. “When the judicial officer asked my client if she accepted the condition of the property in its current condition, she mechanically replied “yes” and tried to hide her disappointment, although this does not imply consent. Accepting the return was merely another legal step and not an act of forgiveness,” Proetti said.
As Mariela crossed the threshold of her own apartment, she felt like an intruder into a dilapidated area. Although he had regained the keys and legal right to these walls, he could not recognize himself in them: The place was no longer his home and he felt alien.marked by neglect and the bitter messages left by the former resident as visible scars on the worn paint.
““You who made me dirty in public, now I hope you have fun cleaning the walls.” He wrote in one of the graffiti. But the most extensive of them was recorded in the hallway: “Here, in this room, The energy of reproduction remains within these walls without adjustments. The commitment to a better future, the certainty that life can belong to everyone. And while favors must be returned, dignity is non-negotiable.”
With this sentence, the “Occupy” left a question about the legitimacy of the award of the Procrear plan. In her text, the woman suggested that Mariela had received the property not out of merit or necessity, but rather thanks to an “adjustment” within the system, a kind of discretionary privilege that, in her eyes, left out those who needed it most.
The woman was convinced that she deserved Procreate more than Mariela. and this has been revealed in several of his publications on Instagram. ““There was a banquet last night and thanks to a public policy that built social housing for people, we were able to share it with a lot of love.” he wrote while eating a choripán on the balcony of the apartment.
During the two years that the “resident” stayed in Mariela’s apartment, living together with the other residents of the complex also became unsustainable. It didn’t take long for complaints from residents of the Buenos Aires train station building to accumulate in the consortium’s WhatsApp group.which was repeatedly rocked by arguments, calls to the police and complaints about loud music.
Neighbors warned about the constant presence of patrol cars in the apartment where the woman lived, while others insisted they were annoyed by the excessive noise and the resident’s indifference to requests to turn down the volume or keep the peace. “I’ve gone there three times and asked 3K to turn the music down. No one else hears it,” protested an exhausted neighbor.while another was straight up honest: “I’ve already shouted at them through the window, they’re fed up with me. I’m fed up with the noise.”
The problems also affected the common areas: several owners reported disputes over the behavior of the woman’s children, who ran and played on the terrace, causing discomfort and, as they were warned, also dangerous situations. The resident’s reaction did not calm the situation, but rather fueled the conflict: “He told me to screw it up, if I decided to live here, to screw it up because there would be music and screaming. Totally rude,” said a neighbor between anger and resignation.
The tensions in the neighborhood thus contributed to Mariela’s personal drama, who had to endure not only the progress of the eviction proceedings and the inability to use her own home, but also that economic burden of paying for two apartments and the 20-year mortgage loanwhile he received daily notifications that the atmosphere in his home was still far from harmony.
Today it is impossible for Mariela to move. “You will have to invest a significant amount in repairs, painting and basic cleaning “To erase these traces and give the room back not only its functionality, but also a sense of belonging that seems far away today, after everything she has experienced,” said her lawyer. “Nobody wants to walk into their house and see it like that,” she added of the fear this situation causes for her client.
Despite the wear and tear, Proietti says it is not easy to claim compensation when there is no signed contract representing the original condition, the lawyer admits: “The legal process only guaranteed the physical restoration of the place.” With regard to the expense and benefit debts, everything appears to be irrecoverable. “Everything is probably confiscated,” he admitted resignedly.
Proietti said that Mariela would use her vacation to get her apartment in order and The final move will take place at the end of February or beginning of March. “When you see everything white and pristine again, you will find that your perspective changes,” the lawyer told him to cheer him up, even though he knows it will take a long time for the scars to disappear.
About The Author
