The Madrid City Council evicted about 30 people a couple of years ago under the argument that it was going to undertake works in the common areas of the building of the San Francisco Senior Apartments, located at 1 Jerte Street, in the Centro district, near the Latina area. These are elderly people, some of whom have low incomes or do not have a large family network to be cared for. Most had to find housing solutions under pressure from the council.
One of the occupants, Bartolomé Alejandro Ibáñez García, who occupied number 308 D, sued the City Council and remained in the building. Now, the judge of the administrative litigation court number 13 argues in order 231/2026, accessed by La Vanguardia, that there was no risk of imminent collapse to “justify the eviction.”
The opposition’s stance
In this context, the Madrid PSOE defended this Monday that the judicial order on the eviction of the residents of the San Francisco Apartments “exposes” the government of José Luis Martínez-Almeida, as there was no technical report supporting it nor “risk of imminent collapse.”
“People were torn from their homes, from the San Francisco apartments, elderly people, when there was no technical report supporting it,” declared Ana Lima, the Madrid PSOE councilor responsible for Social Services, in a video sent to the media.
The official highlighted that there was no risk of demolition, nor risk of imminent collapse; however, “only with an internal note was it decided to tear them from their homes. “This is how Almeida governs, with maximum harshness towards his neighbors,” she concluded.
Read more The judge raises the official death toll from the Valencia DANA to 231
Likewise, the councilor denounced that “they were taken to residences, forced” without studying other “adequate” alternatives to this situation, something she reproached as “not good management,” but rather “opacity,” “insensitivity,” and “political irresponsibility.”
In the order of the Madrid Court of First Instance, the magistrate rules out a case of demolition or imminent collapse, which would “undoubtedly” justify an eviction.
It is also ruled out that rehabilitation works cannot be compatible with the resident’s continued stay in the building, and the text details that there is no expert or technical report explaining concretely what risks are associated with a resident’s stay in the building.
Read more A 60-year-old man dies after falling from a fourth floor while fleeing the flames
