Villa Kopeykina: Kostadinov has not declared a garage and an annex. Because they are illegal?

The Chairman of Vazrazhdane NP Kostadin Kostadinov has not declared any purchased by him in December 2019. garage and annex, marked in the Cadastre as an “agricultural building”. The two buildings are visible in the cadastral map and are located in the property with its luxury house in the village of Konstantinovo – a villa zone with a wonderful panorama to Varna Lake. For these buildings there are no construction papers and Act 16, because their former owner believes that they are movable.

The objects are visible on a drone video posted in Dnevnik. We are talking about the buildings 1 and 2, which correspond to the cadastral numbers 38354.502.282.1 for the annex and 38354.502.282.2 for the garage. The villa itself has cadastral number 38354.502.282.3

Kostadin Kostadinov’s introductory declaration No B1825/24.10.2022

, filed when he was elected a member of the 48th National Assembly, lacks a garage of 25 sq.m. and 23 sq.m. of building “agricultural building” type. The same are missing in all previous declarations of Kostadinov as a member of the 47th National Assembly and as a municipal councilor in Varna, filed after the purchase of the property on 10.12.2019.

/No/movable objects

Kostadinov acquires the villa of 150 sq.m. in December 2019 for BGN 215,141. He financed the deal with a mortgage loan for BGN 199,494.66. from Raiffeisenbank. As an earlier investigation of the BIRD.BG showed, the loan has been paid off in the last two years, with Konstantinov’s income as a member of parliament not matching the early repayment instalments. Visibly affected by the revelations, Kostadinov erupted on social media with threats against the author of the publication and promised in his future declaration to show that he has enough income to pay his mortgage ahead of schedule.

BIRD contacted the previous owner of the property, who confirmed that she had sold the villa together with the garage and the annex to Kostadinov. She explained that the two buildings – “a garage and a neighboring hall, a continuation of the garage” – were “prefabricated temporary structures, and are placeable”, and the garage was from the so-called. “plastic sidings”. Inside, everything was “plastic and placeable, not built,” there was “nothing concrete,” but “temporary movable structures.” When asked how the movable objects were mapped on the cadastral map and were listed there at the time of the deal, she suggested that it was a mistake of the Cadastre.

On the spot, however, it can be seen that we are not talking about plastic movable structures, but about serious constructions that meet the definition of “building” or “building” in the Cadastre and Property Register Act: “independent construction of the main or complementary construction under the Spatial Development Act, permanently attached to the land, with organized internal spaces separated from the external environment”.

In addition, the instructions for reflecting buildings and temporary constructions of the Cadastre do not allow the entry of movable objects – they are not reflected in the cadastral map.

The “hall, a continuation of the garage”, listed in the Cadastre as an “agricultural building”, is visibly not used for its intended purpose. The building has glazing windows and has an air conditioner installed on the outer wall, which is not plastic, but massive.

Since the buildings were movable, according to their former owner, there are no construction papers and Act 16 for them. But the factual situation is obviously different, which makes these constructions questionably legal.

Probably because they have no legal status, these buildings are not reflected in either the title deed or the mortgage agreement at the sale of the villa. The deal described in the title deed is for a two-storey villa building with a built-up area of 149.63 sq.m. and 1/4 id. from a plot of land with an area of 1368 sq.m. Thus pKostadinov is not the owner of a garage and an “agricultural building”, but this does not cancel his obligation to declare them because de facto he uses them.

Kostadinov’s name, however, is not found in the KPKONPI lists of discrepancies in the declarations, although the presence of the garage and the annex is easily established by the official data on the cadastral map, satellite images and media publications. Otherwise, the Anti-Corruption and Forfeiture of Illegally Acquired Assets Act explicitly states that the counteraction of corruption is carried out including through a “check, analysis and assessment of property status”.

The case of Kostadinov’s garage and hall reminds of the terrace of the former head of KPKONPI Plamen Georgiev. At the height of the “Apartmentgate” scandal in 2019, an investigation by Bivol found that he had failed to declare the ownership of a large terrace. Subsequently, it turned out that the terrace was built illegally with a barbecue and a shed, which had to be demolished.

***

Разследващата журналистика е разузнаването на гражданите. BIRD се финансира от дарения. Ние не публикуваме реклами. Не получаваме държавни субсидии. Не разчитаме на грантове. Финансирането чрез малки дарения от читатели е гаранция за нашата независимост. Включете се, за да продължим да разкриваме злоупотреби и да държим отговорни властимащите. Използваме Вашите пари за хонорари на журналистите, командировки, изграждане и поддръжка на нашите информационни системи, такси за фирмени и имотни регистри у нас и по света, придобиване на техника и специално оборудване, осигуряване на нашата безопасност и други важни работни мисии. Важно: Ако дарявате всеки месец това ще ни даде възможност да планираме и организираме нашата работа. Благодарим Ви! Нас ни има, защото Вас Ви има!

This post is also available in: Български (Bulgarian)