Stoisits: Listed late 19th century mansion in Pressbaum must be protected from damage

Listed late 19th century mansion in Pressbaum must be protected from damage

ORF-Series "Bürgeranwalt" (“Advocate for People”) – Broadcast of September 20th, 2008

The protection of historic buildings always causes tension between the interests of the owner and the authorities and several bodies may be involved on the side of the authorities. These interests were reflected by the numerous participants at the discussion on TV: there were four gentlemen on the one side of the TV studios: the owner of the listed building (Villa Seewald/Pressbaum), the Lord Mayor with the solicitor of the Borough Council and the District Commissioner and on the other side four ladies: Ombudsperson Mag. Terezija STOISITS, two complainants and the President of the Federal Antiquities and Monuments Office.

This case was about the question of responsibility for the protection of a listed building. The Federal Antiquities and Monuments Office (BDA) is of course competent to procure the listing in appropriate proceedings. Responsibility for the ongoing safeguarding of a listed building is, however shared between the Federal Antiquities and Monuments Office and the local District Commission. The latter must act on the instigation of the BDA and take safeguarding measures, in cases of imminent danger on its own initiative.

In the present case the owner had partially removed the roof the mansion before he became aware of the listing and there was therefore the danger of damage due to damp. Initially the authorities responsible for the protection of listed buildings reacted promptly and took care of the listing as well as the installation of a tarpaulin cover. At that time the Office of the Ombudsperson also acknowledged this. Subsequently however, it no longer concerned itself properly with the covering. This has to be criticized in particular, as it is also clear to a layperson, that the provisionally fixed tarpaulin can be easily damaged, especially in case of strong winds and even gales. Accordingly Ombudsperson Mag. STOISITS found that they had waited too long – by months! – until not least because of pressure from the Office of the Ombudsperson, the urgently necessary improvements were arranged. The work was carried out only a few days after the recording of the broadcast.

In summary, the broadcast is an appeal to the responsible authorities (BDA, District Commission), to ensure the timely safeguarding of listed buildings.

Trips to the USA: "Substandard" Passports still a problem

On 17 February 2007 the Office of the Ombudsperson already reported on a spoilt holiday in the USA for a family. As two family members had passports issued between 26 October 2005 and 15 June 2006 they could not enter the USA without a visa. They only found out at Vienna airport just before their departure.

A couple which had planned their wedding in Las Vegas, had a similar experience: at Warsaw airport, from where they were to continue their flight to Chicago, the man was refused his onward journey. The reason: he had a passport issued in March 2006. Initially the situation was unclear to both of them, as there was practically no visible difference between the passports. With the help of an AUA employee an appointment with the US Embassy could be arranged and the situation was clarified. Passports issued between 26 October 2005 and 15 June 2006 are fully valid but do not entitle the holder to travel to the USA without a visa as they are not "biometrically capable". Thus a visa is required. After a lot of effort and hours of waiting at the US-Embassy the visa could be issued. Eventually the couple were able to celebrate their wedding in Las Vegas without the planned three days' preparation, but the enormous stress will remain unforgettable.

The Office of the Ombudsperson found already in June 2007 that the authorities had not implemented conditions stipulated by the USA for biometrically capable passports in good time and recommended advising by post all of the approximately 200.000 persons, who had obtained their passports during this period. After all, these passports are valid until 2016 (!). Neither this recommendation nor the one to offer a replacement free of charge was implemented. The representative of the Federal Ministry for Internal Affairs who was present during the broadcast again confirmed this.

Nevertheless Ombudsperson Terezija Stoisits appealed to the authority for common sense: "There will be similar cases within the next eight years. Besides, a new passport costs €20 less that a visa for the USA. People must be informed individually, anything else would not be citizen-friendly." A change in the position of the Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs is, however not expected in the near future. The hope remains that many people have been alerted to this problem by this broadcast and may be spared this experience.