Compensation for damages of 200 thousand euros. This is what a neighbor, the auditor Paolo Rossi, asked the singer Eros Ramazzotti. The reason? The construction site at the singer’s home (in CityLife) would have – according to what was complained – caused damage to Rossi’s home. Ramazzotti, however, rejected any responsibility.
The story was reported by the newspaper “La Verità” which published an article entitled “Ramazzotti destroyed my house but now he refuses to pay the damages”.
The case
According to the newspaper’s reconstruction, the story begins in October 2024 when Eros Ramazzotti purchased the apartment upstairs from Paolo Rossi’s, moving his residence there. Rossi’s lawyers explained that the works carried out by the singer would have “seriously damaged the apartment below”, involving the removal and demolition of “all the internal dividing walls, doors and systems and subsequently, in a couple of days, both the floors and the underlying screed were removed using both improper and massive use of pneumatic hammers”. The works would also have caused damage to Rossi’s apartment: a “detachment of the ceiling” in a part of the house.
Hence the legal dispute, since, according to Rossi, the initial willingness of the company appointed by Ramazzotti to stop the work and verify the damage would not have been maintained and operations would have resumed, despite the collapse. Rossi, at that point, would have asked the authorities for intervention. And the reports from the local police and fire brigade would have acknowledged that at the Ramazzotti house “the non-structural walls used for internal division of the rooms had been demolished, the systems had been removed and the floor had been removed”, adding that “this last activity could have been the cause of the detachment of the ceiling to the detriment of the underlying building since a large part of the subfloor had been removed”.
The legal case and Ramazzotti’s no comment
In January 2025, the incident with Ramazzotti and the contracting company would have been “disputed”, but the artist’s lawyer, Antonio Cacciato, would have replied that the report is “in itself not admissible and cannot be shared also because it is generic, unilaterally formed and not found, in support of (generic, broad and unsubstantiated) requests for compensation, it shows an unjustifiably aggressive approach, which certainly makes it less convenient interlocution between the subjects involved”.
This would have led to a lawsuit for compensation for damages, with Rossi’s lawyers quantifying the compensation “at over 200 thousand euros” including temporary rent in another property for the period necessary for the restoration works and asking to also count “the damages to the professional activity carried out in the apartment which was initially interrupted and then at least slowed down and inconvenienced by the events”.
The next attempt at conciliation
Next January 19th, the Milanese judge Carlo Di Cataldo has set the second attempt at conciliation, while his technical consultant will have until February 9th to file the preliminary report and until April 10th for the final one. The two parties will be able to file observations until March 11. Ramazzotti, contacted by Corriere della Sera through its press office, has not yet wanted to make any statements.
The singer’s manager: “Misleading version”
The singer’s manager, Gaetano Puglisi, sole director of Radiorama, the Italian record label founded in 1994 by the singer-songwriter, has issued a note in which he claims that the version of events provided by the press would be “incomplete and misleading” and that “it does not represent the situation in which the properties of Dr. Rossi and Ramazzotti find themselves, who, to date, is the owner of the only unusable apartment in the building”.
Puglisi underlines that “the proceeding before the Court is ongoing and in this proceeding, in addition to Dr. Rossi and Ramazzotti, many other parties are involved, precisely to verify what and who are responsible for what happened. According to our technicians – he states – the damage that Dr. Rossi may have suffered amounts to an amount far and substantially lower than what is reported in the press headlines. It will naturally be the technical consultant appointed by the Court who will verify the objective amount, with a technical and balanced judgment in the which one confides in.” In short, he concludes, “it is unfortunate that we are trying to draw conclusions, which only the ongoing trial will be able to give, exploiting the media coverage of the story and thus continuing to make more difficult a dialogue to which Ramazzotti has always been available despite the total absence of his direct responsibilities”.
