Relevence of a kocan

Deniz1


Joined: 28/07/2009
Posts: 3829

Message Posted:
21/10/2009 08:13

Any one know what would happen if i didnt get my kocan. Everytime i think i have enough money to do it the rules and charges change. My property is registered at the land office and the stamp duty is paid. The property is paid for. Now the interest rates have dropped my money is not accumulating as quickly so the deeds have to wait. Help!!

cyprusairsoft



Joined: 22/06/2009
Posts: 2066

Message Posted:
21/10/2009 10:04

dont worry dont see them as important at all

keithcaley



Joined: 13/06/2008
Posts: 2521

Message Posted:
21/10/2009 10:15

Deniz1,

I think it's the contract that's registered, not the land itself.

I wouldn't rely on that!

At the Pia Bella Conference, the head of Baro mentioned that "It is generally considered that everything on the land, including buildings, is the property of the legal owner of the land, that is, the person in whose name the Koçan is registered"

As I understand it, this means that despite you having paid in full, having received the keys, moved in with furniture, etc the Koçan holder can legally re-take possession of the property and literally eject you onto the street

You can then sue him for breach of contract, of course - not that it would be a lot of consolation

I have direct knowledge of a threat, by a builder, to do exactly that - although in the event the dispute that triggered the threat was sorted, and the builder didn't follow through

The worry is whether the builder, knowing that he's going to be sued anyway, decides that he may as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb...

joandjelly


Joined: 24/02/2008
Posts: 2953

Message Posted:
22/10/2009 11:40

I was just re-reading the legal answers given by Naomi Mehmet on Lincguide and one related to a builder who had changed the locks on a (empty) villa after the purchaser had taken possession (i.e. she had been given the keys). Naomi said this was illegal (see quote below)

"Once a person has taken possession of a property, the builder does not have the right to enter the property without that person’s consent. If your friend was given a set of keys by the builder and thereby took possession of the property i.e. if your friend can prove that she was in possession of the property, then the changing of the locks by the builder is a criminal offence and a complaint can be made to the police for criminal trespass."

breezyboy


Joined: 14/05/2007
Posts: 1179

Message Posted:
22/10/2009 11:50

I am in the same position as Deniz1. I have been advised by my new advocate who is taking action against the vendor, that it would be better to get the Kocan as soon as possible.

His point being that if the vendor goes bust or the principle shareholder dies then huge problems could arise.

He also confirmed that as I was given the keys and a completion statement, stating that I had paid in full, and the contract was registered, then no action could be legally taken by the vendor against the property.

Tatlisu4me


Joined: 26/01/2008
Posts: 436

Message Posted:
22/10/2009 13:54

Just cannot understand why BARO made this comment then ? -



At the Pia Bella Conference, the head of Baro mentioned that "It is generally considered that everything on the land, including buildings, is the property of the legal owner of the land, that is, the person in whose name the Koçan is registered"



As I understand it, this means that despite you having paid in full, having received the keys, moved in with furniture, etc the Koçan holder can legally re-take possession of the property and literally eject you onto the street

keithcaley



Joined: 13/06/2008
Posts: 2521

Message Posted:
22/10/2009 14:59

breezyboy / joandjelly,

Those are very interesting and relevant quotes, thank you.

However, I think that it shows there to be a divergence of opinion amongst the legal profession, as until this is actually tested in a courtroom, they are just that - opinions. No offence intended to your learned advisers of course!!

Or to you, for that matter.



Tatlisu4me,

I feel that I should point out that the quote from the head of BARO was the bit enclosed by the "quotation marks" - the final comments were my own.



I think that the recent situation where Villas were due to be auctioned 'from under the feet' of the purchasers highlights the severity of the situation in which many of us find ourselves - and, as has been mentioned, even if you feel safe with the Vendor what about his heirs / creditors?

breezyboy


Joined: 14/05/2007
Posts: 1179

Message Posted:
22/10/2009 16:02

Hi Keith

I share your view on the need for a court case to prove what is in fact the law.

However I am relying on my change of lawyer. My previous attorney was very good at what they did but had an aversion to litigation.

My new guy has a track record of winning and the comparison is like a poodle and a rottweiler. ( I say that having owned three of the latter and none of the former ).

With the new judges installed I hope they will be as good as their word and when they have disposed of the backlog of 600 cases they take a good long look at the problems faced by property purchasers.

scoobydoo


Joined: 10/11/2008
Posts: 2434

Message Posted:
22/10/2009 16:26

I think I would be agreeing with keith's sentiments about the villa's that were due to be auctioned.



I would be considering getting my kocan just to avoid future potential problems.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
22/10/2009 16:48

I am lost for words. What the head of baro said is true but your interpretation is totally wrong.

The person who has a kochan in his names have all the rights subject to any encumbrances.

If someone takes out a mortgage on the property, then the rights of the kochan holder are curtailed accordingly. The same is true when you have your sales agreement registered with the Land Registry. Now you should all know by now what are the effects of registration.

ismet