Maricarmen, an 87-year-old resident of the Retiro neighbourhood, faces her fourth eviction attempt on Wednesday at 7:30 am at Alcalde Sainz de Baranda, 46, after decades of litigation with the property.
Maricarmen, an 87-year-old resident of the Retiro neighbourhood, faces her fourth eviction attempt on Wednesday, April 23, at 7:30 am, from the home she has occupied for over 70 years, at number 46 on Alcalde Sainz de Baranda. The eviction was scheduled for that time, according to La Razón.
The origin of the conflict dates back to 1956, when Maricarmen's father signed a lease agreement. After his death, the contract was transferred to his wife and then to Maricarmen, with a rent updated annually according to the CPI plus expenses such as IBI. It is a contract known as old rent.
The woman, with a 50% disability, managed to get the courts to rule in her favour at first instance, but ultimately the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the investor. The ownership of the building passed in 2018 to Urbagestión, a company that, according to support groups, attempted to increase the tenant's rent by 275%.
Maricarmen is tired but has the strength to keep going,” say representatives from the Tenants' Union.
This organisation claims to have presented proposals to the authorities to resolve the conflict, such as the public acquisition of the home or legislative reforms to strengthen the stability of rental contracts, without receiving a response. They maintain that neither the Madrid City Council, nor the Community of Madrid, nor the central government have offered Maricarmen a housing alternative, beyond a private residence costing over €1,200, “an outrageous amount” for her pension. They also recall that the United Nations has urged the Spanish state to take measures to prevent the eviction and ensure adequate housing solutions.
The Ministry of Housing and Urban Agenda has urged the City Council and the Community to intervene in the eviction and has supported the UN's request to temporarily suspend the eviction. It criticises the City Council for not having addressed the woman's vulnerability “despite having a request on the table for months,” and the Community for not offering a housing alternative or granting her a rent supplement to cover the rent.
Municipal sources respond that the City Council's social services maintain continuous monitoring of her situation: “The Ministry of Housing is lying. The municipal social services issued the corresponding vulnerability report in October 2025 at the request of the court.” They add that the affected person is a user of municipal social benefits, such as the home help service, and that she has been offered “different accommodation resources,” although “she has expressly rejected them when a place has been offered.”
Samur Social will attend the eviction, and if it occurs, the same sources indicate that “she will be offered assistance again within the framework of social emergency.”
You may also like
