The Ayuntamiento de Madrid offered on Friday, September 25, 2026, to mediate between the legal representation of Maricarmen Abascal—an 87-year-old woman evicted this week from her home in the Retiro district—and Urbagestión, the property’s owning company, to secure a housing solution following her displacement.
This municipal intervention follows the city’s rejection of an initial proposal submitted by the real estate firm due to legal infeasibility. According to Servimedia, the Empresa Municipal de la Vivienda y Suelo de Madrid (EMVS Madrid) received a communication from Urbagestión Desarrollo e Inversión S.L. proposing that Abascal could occupy the property under affordable conditions and correct habitability.
Upon reviewing the submission, the municipal housing company determined the plan was unviable as formulated. The company’s proposal aimed to integrate the residence into the municipal ReViVa Program, yet the terms failed to satisfy the legal criteria established by that initiative or alternative municipal housing acquisition schemes.
Municipal Mediation and Social Services Support
Following the rejection of the initial plan and Urbagestión’s renewed willingness to cooperate, the Madrid city government extended an invitation through the EMVS Madrid Rental Intermediation Service. Representatives for Abascal agreed to participate in a scheduled meeting on Monday, September 28, at 4:00 p.m., bringing together the property owners under the guidance of municipal housing professionals.
The EMVS noted that this mediation effort aligns with the ongoing assistance provided to Abascal since her housing situation became public. Through municipal social services, the city has supplied her with telecare, home assistance, occupational therapy, and the option of alternative lodging in a municipal residence at no cost.
Urbagestión stated that its proposal sought to coordinate with the city council and other administrations to arrange a stable and affordable housing alternative allowing Abascal to return to the property. The firm positioned itself at the disposal of EMVS Madrid and municipal social services to resolve the matter promptly.
Property Ownership and Conflicting Claims
Addressing questions regarding its holdings, Urbagestión clarified that it does not own the entire building located at Calle Alcalde Sainz de Baranda 46. The company explained that it purchased solely the specific apartment previously occupied by Abascal from the prior building owner, making that unit the only property the firm owns at that location.
Meanwhile, the Sindicato de Inquilinas de Madrid stated that neither the union nor Abascal’s lawyer had received any formal notification regarding the proposal announced by Urbagestión.
Previously, the company issued statements denying that it demanded a rent increase above what the tenant had previously paid. According to Urbagestión, following a written inquiry from the tenant’s legal counsel three years ago regarding a potential new lease price, the firm indicated that a subsidized rent discounted at a reduced rate off market rates could be considered.
