Elderly Homeowner Loses Bid to Block TAMA 38 Project in Petah Tikva
Translated & summarized from Ynet by baba
An elderly homeowner in Petah Tikva lost her legal challenge to a TAMA 38 urban renewal project. The Supervisor of Real Estate Registration ruled that the project had secured the necessary majority consent in February 2022, before a law amendment protecting elderly residents took effect in July 2023. The court found her claims contradicted by her own representative's prior admission and her own testimony. She has been ordered to sign the TAMA 38 agreement within a month or have it signed on her behalf, and pay 5,000 shekels in costs.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- An elderly homeowner's attempt to block a TAMA 38 project in Petah Tikva was rejected by a real estate supervisor.
- The supervisor ruled the project had majority consent in February 2022, before a new law protecting elderly residents took effect.
- The homeowner's claims were contradicted by her representative's prior written admission of majority consent.
- The homeowner admitted during testimony that she had signed the agreement previously.
- She was ordered to sign the TAMA 38 agreement within a month or face it being signed by her representative.
- The homeowner was ordered to pay 5,000 shekels in legal costs.
An elderly homeowner in Petah Tikva has failed in her attempt to halt a TAMA 38 urban renewal project, after claiming she was entitled to benefits for elderly residents under a law amendment passed in 2023. The Supervisor of Real Estate Registration in the city, Meir Porat, ruled that the project had already secured the necessary majority of residents' consent in February 2022, prior to the law's amendment, thus making the amendment inapplicable to her case. The building in question is a three-story structure with nine apartments. Eight of the apartment owners initiated the legal proceedings, having signed an agreement with a development company to demolish the existing building and an adjacent structure to construct two new ten-story buildings. The ninth apartment owner, the defendant, had refused to sign the agreement.
The woman argued that one of the apartment owners signed the TAMA 38 agreement only after the amendment protecting elderly tenants took effect in July 2023, meaning the required majority had not been achieved. She asserted that the deal was not finalized and that she was entitled to full rights and benefits for elderly residents. In contrast, the plaintiffs contended that the owner's signature occurred about a year and a half before the law amendment came into force, rendering it irrelevant to her situation and obligating her to sign the TAMA 38 agreement. They presented a letter from the elderly resident's representative from June 2022, which acknowledged that the required majority had been obtained in February of that year.
Supervisor Porat found that the letter clearly indicated the elderly tenant's guardian had admitted the project's required majority was secured long before the law amendment's effective date, undermining the woman's claims. The letter explicitly stated that the legal majority was achieved in early February 2022. Porat noted that this admission created a clear estoppel against the defendant's later attempt to claim the majority was not obtained, calling it an attempt to "hold the rope at both ends." The supervisor also addressed the homeowner's testimony, which he found to be contradictory. She admitted during her examination, "I know I signed, my lawyer came to my home and had me sign the contract again." Porat concluded that the claim of a lack of legal majority was demonstrably false, as evidence showed the owner had signed the TAMA 38 agreement in February 2022, well before the July 2023 amendment. Consequently, the supervisor ordered the elderly resident to sign the TAMA 38 documents within one month, or the tenants' representative would sign on her behalf. She was also ordered to pay 5,000 shekels in legal costs.