Orams-Can Greek Cypriots win either way?

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
21/07/2009 22:29

The Orams saga is not over yet but assuming for the worst as far as Orams are concerned, what are the Greek Cypriots aiming to achieve? Most British owners will either get rid of their properties in UK or sell off their properties in TRNC. Well, who are likely to buy these properties on the cheap? Most probably Anatolians, Russians, Iranians and the rich from Middle East countries. So what will it mean for Greek Cypriots? Will it be out of the frying pan into the fire?

ismet

RedSnapper


Joined: 12/08/2008
Posts: 540

Message Posted:
21/07/2009 22:34

Better the Devil you know springs to mind.

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
21/07/2009 22:35

Ismet, I beg to differ. I don't think you will see a stampede of brit's trying to

offload their properties in the TRNC. They'll sit tight believe me.

KatyMcM


Joined: 12/07/2009
Posts: 46

Message Posted:
21/07/2009 22:37

Maybe they cannot think that far ahead!

they only have one view ahead of them, property is now so expensive in the south that they think they can now claim back property in the north as it is cheaper. There is also a resentment about the british buying in the north and not in the south - but the reason is nothing to do with price it is more to do with the friendly people and the natural beauty of the area.

I was in a Greek Taxi and my son told the taxi driver that I was going up north to buy a house, his answer was a scowl and 'you had better not buy mine'.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
21/07/2009 22:41

No1Doyen,

I don't expect a stampede either. In fact I am still hopefull of the outcome from the court of Appeal in UK. I was speculating on the outcome of worst scenario. So either way I can't see how the GCs can win with such actions.

ismet

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
21/07/2009 22:43

I certainly agree with you Ismet.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/07/2009 23:08

Dear Ismet



re msg 1



YAWN.. thee won't BE a shed load of Apostolides v Orams - as any EU citizen with a brain would defend any writ - and use the "IPC is a solution defence"..



OK, the RoC court MIGHT say "no, it's our Turkish Cypriot Property Guardian".. but the ECHR could be involved at an earlier date..



If declared bankrupt , selling off / transferring assets won't deter a UK Official Receiver, Izzie .. they can go back years and set aside "deals" that would appear to be to evade seizure..



I know you are just being hypothetical.... ;)

Turtle


Joined: 28/05/2007
Posts: 2669

Message Posted:
21/07/2009 23:41

How long does bankruptcy last?

Bankruptcy normally lasts for one year. After this time, you'll be 'discharged' from your bankruptcy regardless of how much you still owe.



Your discharge could happen earlier if you co-operate fully with the Official Receiver.





Copied this from the net and just spoke to a builder mate of mine who was declared bankrupt 2 years ago owing about 75K......he is now free of bankrupcy and backs up the above statement

sporty


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 685

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 00:16

ismet,what will be interesting is if echr who is testing out the IPC with i think its 8 or 12 cases for gc property claims in Nov, say that they accept that the IPC is a valid route for compensation,meanwhile the orams could lose their case a month or 2 before this! i still think this has a way to go yet!Presuming that the IPC is given the thumbs up by the echr in nov,this will render any future claims via writs etc a meaningless excercise as any ecj ruling,ie orams case,could surely end up being referred to the echr! only my opinion of course.

Stubs


Joined: 01/07/2008
Posts: 641

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 00:42

Ismet



In some ways the GC authorities have already won.



Who knows what damage it has done to property sales in the TRNC with the publicity it has achieved although in some other ways it also brings back to the news what has happened in Cyprus. Also the longer it goes on the more damage it may do to the TRNC in terms of property sales as the decisions have yet not been made.



The threat of what has happened to the Orams happening to others, causes more grief than what the actual outcome of the case might do.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 07:22

1. Orams have already applied to ECHR complaining about the kangaroo court on the dark side. That may take a few years to come to frution. However CoA of UK may take notice of this recourse and decide to wait for its outcome. This is one possibility.



2. Orams case has already put off many European buyers from buying in TRNC. This may be a good thing to get our own house in order and sort out the mortgages tken out on sold houses.



3. Multiple M have drawn attention to other unwelcome possibilities for the GCs. There is some truth in his arguments.



4. It has encouraged the builders to look for new markets and they are having some success. In the end Orams case may backfire in the face of Greek Cypriots. This is already happening. This case will help GCs realize that even their legal victoies can be hollow and thus they have to decide between cooperation with TCs for a solution or legitimize the defacto situation.

ismet

Stewart


Joined: 19/07/2008
Posts: 1107

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 08:20

What if..you simply sell your uk property...to one of the companies that offer cash, in return for allowing you to live there untill you die?



Legally it is not yours....and you can sub let / rent the house, as another source of income.



Also..what if, you do not own any property in the uk...because you have legally handed it over to your children?..to avoid inheritance tax?

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 08:38

In other words there is more than one way to skin a cat

ismet

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 09:52

re msg 1



Turtle



You won't *be* discharged if you are still under investigation....



re msg 12



Stewart



Once again,



Official Receivers have the power to set aside and reverse schemes / deals if they are deemed to be a method to avoid creditors.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 12:19

i don't think it was ever about who would be the winner.

as the uk only recognises the roc goverment as the only legal goverment in cyprus, where do you expect them to go on this?

there is only one thing they can do and agree with the ecj.

did mr A win?, no ,because he will never be able to live on his land.

the orams risk loosing their uk property when the land they purchased was guaranteed by the trnc gov.



the way i see it , there will be no winner.

girne 29


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 1488

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 12:44

firestarter



Exactly,thats why most of us have been saying that the Orams case was bankrolled by hardliners in the ROC .

Either to

Ensure that the TRNC voted no and therefore make the ROC out to be the goodguys,unlike 2004.

or financially try and ruin the north in the hope that trnc would accept everything the ROC threw at them.



It certainly was not about a guy wanted to live in his property in the north,as the lawyers and ROC govt knew that was never going to happen,and also knew it could have the opposite effect. If the Orams or anyone else can no longer stay in the property ,they should leave the keys in the door and invite any Turk or TC to squat ,but not sell as that would be illegal.Lets see the ROC try and remove them.

girne 29


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 1488

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 13:01

message 16 cont.



On another point, if the Orams paid the compensation based on the Mr A being unable to stay in or use his land.Would they not be able to go back to court and counter sue after a year or so,their case being that as he still hadnt used the land ,they no longer staying in it could not be the reason . Surely you cannot sue for loss of use of something you knew you couldnt use anyway. The echr should have asked for proof of what use of land he was denied by the Orams since 1974.



At appeal, thats what the lawyers should ask." The Orams are off the land so why are you not using it,if as in your case you stated that they were the ones preventing you."

PeeCee


Joined: 16/03/2009
Posts: 133

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 13:02

I agree that Girne 29's suggestion might be a good option. But it doesn't necessarily help those with assets in the UK ripe to be seized. I still find this aspect hard to believe. I just can't see the English courts giving the Orams the rare distinction of being homeless in two countries. Picture Mr and Mrs Oram giving interviews with the world's press from the comfort of their sofa on the nice suburban English pavement outside of the equally nice house from which they have just been evicted and waiting to be re housed at public expense (ie the UK tax payer) whilst some Greek legally runs off with their money. And all this sanctioned by the EU. The tabloids will love this one.

Codger


Joined: 03/04/2009
Posts: 153

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 14:48

Can someone who knows clarify the situation regarding the seizure of the Orams house.



I was under the impression that the assets could only be seized if the Orams could not pay the compensation order which is only a few thousand pounds.



I was also under the impression that the UK courts cannot order the return of the North Cyprus property as its juristriction ends at the cliffs of Dover.



Anbody out there who can shed some light on this?



Codger

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 15:13

ismet



I agree with mmmmm's point in post 7 regarding 'offloading' UK assets.



From the minute the Courts ruled against the Orams, anyone with property in NC would be seen as 'Evading' liability if they tried to offload assets in the UK to Kids, relatives, etc.



It's now too late to use that as a strategy.



That would be treated in Law as being worse than 'Avoidance'.



I also agree with Bill in msg 3, most, me included, will sit tight.



The Orams case was very simple, one Villa on one plot.



Most property in the 'firing line' is now multiple ownership on one 'Title Deed', sometimes with non EU owners, any Legal proceedings would, or could, take many years even to be presented to a Court.





By which time,........ ??





Rob

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 15:27

Dear Codger

re msg 19



The whole essence of the case is whether the non ability of RoC Court orders to be enforced in "TRNC" can therefore mean EU assets can be seized instead..



The Court of England and Wales asked for and got the LEGAL opinion from the European Court of Justice - YES.. it can be enforced in a third EU country.



Now it is up to the Court of Eng Wales ..

Reproman


Joined: 05/06/2008
Posts: 252

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 15:37

"From the minute the Courts ruled against the Orams, anyone with property in NC would be seen as 'Evading' liability if they tried to offload assets in the UK to Kids, relatives, etc.

It's now too late to use this strategy."



laugh out loud!!

Are you telling me I can't sell my house in the uk untill some Greek decides to take me to court!! Get a grip!

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 15:45

Reproman



"The Law Sir is an Ass"



Unfortunately, if the ECJ ruling was accepted by, for example, British Courts,...







Of course you can sell any UK property to anyone, but if you became a defendant in any Cypriot Legal Property action which went against you, the Courts could 'undo' any UK property transaction you have made that is deemed to be an act of 'Evasion' of your liabilities.



It's at present just a 'Legality'.



Personally, I think Hell will freeze over first!



Rob

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 16:15

Laws are basically the same in all countries. If you sell your property to an innocent third party, it cannot be undone by the authorities to the detriment of the innocent third party. Of course if you give it to your close relative it may be treated differently. The safest thing will be to sell it to complete strangers on the market and then give the money to your son to buy a new property in his name for you but must be careful not to leave any proof about the source of the money for the new house. A swiss bank account or even better a safe bank account in TRNC with a higher interest rate would be fine. Just imagine lots of money flooding in to TRNC banks after an adverse Orams ruling!!!

ismet

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 16:34

ismet



I don't want to be pedantic,.... but



If you sell a property to a 3rd party, you would still have received the proceeds from that sale. That is what they go after, not the 3rd party. If you are proved to have given the proceeds to a family member, that family member will possibly lose the property.



It's very doubtful that anyone could make up a story as to how they could give their child a large amount of money shortly after selling a property and any such story being accepted.



If you were on a Jury, would you believe it?



If you have spent it on wine, women & song, they will still Bancrupt you.



For the last year or 2, all Swiss Banks have agreed to 'disclosure'.



It seems the 'Asil Nadir' approach is best! Sink it all into NC & hope for no 'agreement' or EU inclusion.



Rob

aweverard


Joined: 13/07/2008
Posts: 54

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 17:16

Hi Rob (msg 25)



I disagree with you regards gifting/selling UK property post the RoC Orams decision.



Unless you are subject to legal proceedings then the transfer of ownership to another party however it is done is not avoiding in the eyes of the law. additionally, and this is the kicker, if your assets in he UK and TRNC are likely to take you over the IHT threshold then seek professional advise and a lawyer will tell you to put some assets in to trust for your kids and an accountant will tell you to gift them away and start the IHT reduction sliding scale.



Now assuming you have this advice in writing then no court is going to find against you for taking professional advice and if they do then on appeal the professional and their professional governing body are both likely to support you taking the advice as they cannot afford to have their or their member's advice to be found to be wrong by a UK court.

girne 29


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 1488

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 18:40

Peecee message 18.



I know it will not help those with major property investment in TRNC. If you have to pay the penalty charges anyway or face court proceedings,then pay, walk away, but make sure the Greek cannot use the property,for example by making it apparent to anyone who fancies living there that you are vacating and would have no problem in squatters or such living there . .Thus a hollow ,expensive ,victory . After you have delayed the legal process for a few years ,bow out ,pay the charge and leave the keys in the door.Let the GC try with non EU Turk or TC.

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 20:11

aweverard



Recent cases in the UK have demonstrated that a person who has, or should have had, reasonable understanding to believe they may be liable to Legal action against them and 'switches' assets even a few years before any such proceedings commence, can be deemed as having taken 'Evasive' action and the transaction can be considered in the eventual case.



I would imagine that in any such case regarding NC property, prosecuting Council would point to the FO's long standing warning of buying property in NC as the point at which any purchaser was made aware of potential liabilities.





I know that sounds pedantic, but on a brighter note, I personally think that 'matters' will take over from current situations.



Rob

barnaclebill


Joined: 12/12/2008
Posts: 303

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 20:13

Am I missing the plot here but surely to God it is total discrimination against any European if the GC is only going to go after that specfic group of people.



If the land where your property is built on was scrubland before if they want it back the whole lot should be flattened and levelled so it is given back in its origional state.Cant see the neighbours going for that ?



If i owned a house before I gave it back I would pay for the bulldozer to knock it down then he can have his piece of scrubland back.(how many projects have been built on old scrubland opposed to renovations )



Then I would sue the builder and TRNC government for compensation because as far as I was concerned I bought that property on that piece of land following all the rules and laws of the elected Government of the time.They took payment in Taxes and authorised the legal paperwork.



I wonder what would happen if every European put in a legal claim against the TRNC .

PeeCee


Joined: 16/03/2009
Posts: 133

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 20:29

Girne 29 - If push comes to shove I would certainly take your advice on this - victories are always sweet even if hollow (ish). However, I still believe that the political fall out from all this for the UK is considerable should the courts accept the EU advice and seize the UK based assets of the Orams who are law abiding citizens of the UK. As we approach a UK general election none of the mainstream political parties is going to want to give ammunition to UKIP and its worth remembering that the British level of tolerance of EU rules and regulations is paper thin. I firmly believe that the courts will punt all this on to see the outcome of the Oram's appeal (arguably it would be premature to do otherwise) and in the meantime pressure will be on to find a solution to the Cyprus Problem.

Al the Badger


Joined: 06/02/2008
Posts: 130

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 20:52

This just out in Cyprus Mail (which I assume is Greek biased :-



Date fixed for Orams appeal



The British Court of Appeal has set November 11 and 12 for the hearing of the controversial Orams versus Apostolides case. According to Constantis Candounas - the lawyer of Greek Cypriot refugee Meletis Apostolides, who launched proceedings against British couple David and Linda Orams for building on his property in the occupied areas – it is not yet known whether the Appeal Court will reach a final verdict on those dates or later on. “We hope it will be before the end of the year,” said Candounas. In April, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in a seminal judgement that Apostolides could enforce a Nicosia court judgement against the Orams in the UK, even though the case involved exploitation of his property in the north, where the EU acquis is suspended.

AlsancakJack



Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 5762

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 21:14

“We hope it will be before the end of the year,”

Now I wonder why that is? If that does not show how political the whole situation is then nothing does.

AJ

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 21:25

Al the badger



re msg 31





"Greek bias".. you mean GC biased ?.. Greece is a country 300 miles to the west and has just about B all to do with CY, now.. Please don't "encourage" 'em !



The CY Mail is often quoted here .. it was pro Annan.. Some GC papers are quite "enlightened" ... !



re msg 32



AJ



May be his client just wants closure and his money !

HildySmith


Joined: 02/07/2009
Posts: 1708

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 21:51

The UKIP party has been mentioned - why not lobby them, give them the publicity for the election.

They have had some success to date and many many people here are going to vote for them as they have had enough.



Ismet:

one advocate suggested setting up a limited company in TRNC registered somewhere else i.e.Virgin Islands or somwhere outside the EU. Put the property into the limited company. If a group of people on a development formed a limited company and all the properties were under that name they would not be able to get them. (It may make it a bit more difficult for 'directors' to sell their property)

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
22/07/2009 23:01

Mr Apostolides has been awarded monetary damages and the Orams have been ordered to pay Mr Apostolides and to demolish the villa.

It is not necessarily the case that the Orams will loose their UK home.

It is the case that the Villa cannot be demolished because the TRNC administration will hardly allow that action to be taken.

The Orams may well be able to meet the damages that are due. Curently the figure is about £12K. The matter of demolision is a more difficult judgment to have enforced and the ECJ will find it dificult to find a legal and just solution.

Certainly Mr Apostolides will see very little monetary gain and is most definately a rather unpopular old man.

I am sure that most UK citizens will side with the Orams and wonder why Mr Apostolides fails to settle directly with the Orams and get on with his life in his new established new home the ROC.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
23/07/2009 01:50

legal actions involving property, trade and flights bans and political actions are highly successful:



1 those held to be ejoying gains as a result of the '74 events may find their life more difficult



2 there is a large constituency in south cyprus that any gc politician ignors at his peril:

an roc minister recently made a triumphant statement along these lines:

"our first priority will always be the return of properties lost to refugees from the occupied zone"



pardon my cynicism but the guy just has to say something like this for the benefit of his voters

or he's out on his ear: in other words, we should not take it at face value



because blockades, legal action and promises by themselves will never work the magic, rather the opposite:

in another thirtyfive years of such campaigns north cyprus will not be a micron closer to union with the south



so do not expect to find any victors in the cyprus dispute tucked away in the roc...but you will find the losers

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
23/07/2009 09:34

Dear Warren / Waz re msg 35



>>Certainly Mr Apostolides will see very little monetary gain and is most definately a rather unpopular old man.

<<



So, finally, your "mask" completely slips...



"Unpopular" is very subjective. I would assume you'd realise that he is EXTREMELY popular with displaced GCs - therefore more Cypriots will "love" him than not.. " This case has highlighted the CY problem to a wider audience.



As I've repeatedly advised you - I'm pretty sure his action was started WITHOUT the support of the govt. I don't think he cares about what they you or I think. He wants the Ormas' and others to remember whose houses land it REALLY is.



I really don't think there will be loads of repeat cases - and even the RoC govt don't want that.



>>I am sure that most UK citizens will side with the Orams and wonder why Mr Apostolides fails to settle directly with the Orams and get on with his life in his new established new home the ROC.<<



IF they care... most don't.. don

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
23/07/2009 09:35

IF they care... most don't.. don't agree - I believe they'd side with the REAL owner of the land.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
23/07/2009 09:42

Dear Andre_514



re msg 36



>>in another thirtyfive years of such campaigns north cyprus will not be a micron closer to union with the south <<



Depends on what you refer to as "union" .. *I* mean a bi-zonal federation - of autonomous regions - but one state ..



You conveniently forget that TCs already proved you "wrong" in 2004 by voting YES to Annan... and also forget that recent history shows us that deals can be struck in nations with hundreds of years of strife... ( Ireland?)



Funny, how you keep asking me what my "agenda" is.. Why do you constantly "pooh pooh" the chances of a political settlement"? !