No respite for two co-owners who have been fighting since 2013 to save their home and their building. Succession of co-ownership trustees, poor workmanship, design office in disarray… All the ingredients are there to ensure that the small co-ownership does not emerge from danger or insecurity.
The essentials of the day: our exclusive selection
Every day, our editorial team reserves the best regional news for you. A selection just for you, to stay in touch with your regions.
France Télévisions uses your email address to send you the newsletter “The essentials of the day: our exclusive selection”. You can unsubscribe at any time via the link at the bottom of this newsletter. Our privacy policy
18 rue Bernard in Marseille has seen 6 trustees in 10 years: Auriol (with whom the co-ownership is in proceedings), Citya, Siga, la Comtesse, Gespac Immobilier and now Ajilink, judicial trustee… But what trustee today would spend time on a building of 12 lots, with problems, and in fact no profitable? This is a fact that is not isolated to Marseille. The story of a small co-ownership, between rue Bernard and rue Levat, Belle de Mai district, not far from the Convent, a popular festive place for Marseillais. Placed in simple danger in 2013, building B of this co-ownership is still not habitable.
Building B was placed in simple danger in 2013.
•
© DR
“Not only did the trustees not take care of the copro, but worse, they made the situation worse”
a co-owner out of breath
The work begins in 2017, after following a classic procedure: commission an architect, a design office, companies… but nothing goes as planned. The design office went bankrupt and the defects multiplied.
“The companies destroyed staircases, brought down master walls, without any destruction plan and without any shoring. The stairs built are out of standard! 22 cm compared to 18 cm normally, with irregular steps”
Irregular and non-standard steps. Companies are increasing the number of faulty workmanship at 18 rue Bernard.
•
© DR
More than 40,000 euros are spent without any action on the disorder. According to the co-owners, the companies did not bother to follow the town hall’s recommendations.
After numerous water leaks, a fire, vandalism and several attempted squats, the two co-owners involved in the management of the building are at their wits’ end.
“Nothing helps, neither the presence of lawyers, nor the formal notices. Today, due to the negligence of successive trustees, our building is no longer even insured. A judicial administrator has been charged with management, but he still hasn’t come to the building.”
Ten years after the first threat, the town hall returned. The unsanitary housing management service has once again issued a security order, with more important reasons.
Between 2013 and 2024, despite reports from certain co-owners and warnings from the town hall, disorder remains a threat to the public and residents of the co-ownership. A story which terribly echoes the ghost of the rue d’Aubagne which has once again hovered over the city since the end of the trial last December.
