The rental insurance company faces a potential fine of €3.6 million that the consumer company (the Ministry of Social Rights) wants to impose on it for carrying out a series of practices that it considers abusive. The leasing manager has already sent his written statement of allegations against the fine and … Wait for the ruling from Pablo Postenduy’s department, which will arrive before December 12. The president of Seguro Rental, Antonio Carrozza, is convinced that the services offered by his company are “completely legitimate” and denies that the tenant is forced to rent them as reported by Consumer Affairs and some consumer associations. He defends his company’s activity, saying: “We have 100 people working to meet the tenant’s needs every day.”
-How was the consumer inspection process?
-We were informed a year ago that the Ministry of Consumer Affairs would conduct the inspection and we did so. The message came to us by letter. What we did from the first moment was open our doors to inspectors. But we found that the inspection process had already begun and they had already done “mystery shopping” to meet several employees. Of all those interviews they were only able to get a telephone interview without introducing themselves, which is also not possible and they use it, that is, there are a series of procedural errors that they made. Our surprise also comes when in the middle of the inspection they announce that they will fine us. This happens in a process that is supposed to be under administrative secrecy, plus the first thing we tell them is to keep it confidential because we risk being punished. But they went beyond that and it’s illegal.
– Your entity has been one of the most active entities in condemning the failure of government housing policies. Do you think this inspection is retaliation for that? There is another company provided by Consumer Affairs whose identity has never been revealed, but is known to have been investigated for rent insurance…
-We think it’s revenge. We have denounced the housing policies of the past seven and a half years as a real failure. But what we say, the entire sector says. What the Department of Consumer Affairs ultimately does is support certain small groups like the Tenants’ Union, and they should obviously applaud his ideas. Between a socialist party that works in the market with ideas and a communist party like Sommer, which wants to confiscate homes and nationalize the market, as any of us who work in the free market do this under the pretext of defending a basic right such as the right to private property.
-Why do you think that the services that rent insurance imposes on the tenant are legitimate services and not abusive, as consumption says?
-It is legitimate, among other things, because we have three rulings from three courts telling us so. Firstly, because what the law stipulates is that the owner will be responsible for the costs of mediation and formalization of the contract as we do. It is the owner in the business of contracting for my services who pays for those services. This was not discussed. From there there are a series of consumer regulations, which they say abusive practices cannot be enforced, and that prices cannot be “dumped”, for example. But we have 30,000 homes under management in a market of 3 million homes. That is, our ability to impose prices or services is very limited because we do not manage even 1% of the market. Consumer Affairs says we only charge insurance that benefits the owner. Among other things, they didn’t read the insurance clause that says my tenants rent it because I provide it to them first. It is also the cheapest on the market and this is because we obviously have the ability to negotiate with insurance companies. But it is not mandatory and this is evidenced by the fact that 80% of our rentals have insurance. That is, there is 20% that they have not contracted, and if they do not have it, it is because it is not obligatory.
– Can you confirm then that Seguro Rental does not require the renter to rent any of the services provided?
– In both cases, he is not obligated. We sell products that are freely contracted by thousands of tenants who reside in the homes we manage.
– Is your company looking for a good tenant?
-a lot. every day. We have 100 people working to meet the tenant’s needs. There are many issues where we provide added value. If the tenant leaves the keys inside the house and it is very late and the landlord is asleep, we send a locksmith so he can enter his house; If your boiler breaks down, we are there to send a technician to you and fix it in time, and so on with hundreds of accidents. Our private area is constantly used by tenants where they press a button and an SMS arrives to the landlord and to us so that all parties are in touch and the process begins.
-Another practice that penalizes consumption is fees for tenant service, which are thought to replace brokerage fees prohibited by housing law. Is this service illegal?
It’s not illegal. Since we started 18 years ago, we’ve designed a service that’s completely different to any estate agency. A real estate agency charges and terminates its service upon signing the contract, but we begin work for the tenant the moment the lease is signed. At that moment we start providing services that no one on the market offers: legal assistance services, accompanying services for the entire useful life of the contract, in incident management, in contracting and negotiating ancillary services to the lease such as electricity, water, gas, fibre… Until we formalize the contract, we do not charge anything. The mediation and formalization costs are paid by the landlord and the assistance service is paid by the tenant, which is completely voluntary and of great added value.
-Does Alquiler Seguro suffer damage to its reputation due to consumer complaints? Have you lost clients?
– We are growing, in fact, we continue to grow by double digits and owners keep coming more to hire our services due to legal uncertainty and arbitrary actions taken by the government, and above all with this conflict of interest that shows that what they are doing generates greater fear in the market.
– What was the rental insurance reflected in the summary of allegations against the consumer penalty?
-We have essentially reversed what we showed in the Claims Division, which is that rental insurance is fully compatible in practice and in theory with the law. We defended our claims perfectly and unfortunately we had to start working now even on the potential lawsuit we would have to file with management if the penalty was confirmed.
-Do you think you will pay the fine in the end?
-no. Our law firms and advisors tell us that it is unreasonable for them to fine us for this type of action. We know very well that these fines will be forgotten after three years. The problem is that no one will make the news when we win this lawsuit. Because we all know that unfortunately, in this country, the news is the punishment, not when you win a trial.
-What will rent insurance do if the sanctions succeed? Will it put an end to questionable practices?
-Since we are convinced that our practices are fully consistent with the law and the market, we will continue to fight for them.
About The Author
