TRNC Law Firm accuses Akfinans Bank of breaking property laws

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 16:27

read more about it at http://www.northcyprusfreepress.com/2011/04/15/trnc-law-firm-accuses-akfinans-bank-of-breaking-property-laws/

Smity



Joined: 14/09/2009
Posts: 826

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 16:37

Wow thats gonna put the a stick in the spokes of the bank bosses bike

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 16:44

There'll be a gnashing of teeth and a foaming of mouths in the boardroom tonight at Akfinans - don't forget this is not some hack making it up, these are the words of Boysan Bora Advocate bringing the case right out to the public, no one can second guess on this one. Brave man.



Pauline Read had no part in this story, except maybe as one of the victims.



Watch the writs start flying.

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 16:51

that's just the English version, the Law Firm has also sent Turkish language copies to Turkish & Turkish Cypriot media. There is also rumoured to be a major quality UK newspaper interested in the story.

Jovial_John


Joined: 31/01/2009
Posts: 1024

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:08

WOW - get out of that AKFinans.

Can anyone confirm this "Section 21, of 11/78 Mortgage Law of TRNC" - the case seems to hinge on it. If it is right then it will bring relief to many other other worried people.

tonienite


Joined: 16/02/2011
Posts: 3

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:10

Great reporting.



Hope all the banks are watching this and ducking from similar exposure they may have in construction.

Also, at last, let's hope the government now looks up and realises just what's happening.



And I do hope the Turkish version will be published in local TC papers, we need everyone in TRNC up to date on this, not just those suffering, with everyone supporting Kulaksiz 5 and then all other similar and subsequent situations.



It's time to put a halt to the greed of the few and get TRNC back on track as the place to be, rather than the place to avoid.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:13

I read through two thirds of it and I could not take any more. Sorry but I see it as no more than a publicity stunt. My heart is with the victims but such rhetoric will not get anybody anywhere. I hope I am wrong.

ismet

rocking


Joined: 05/11/2008
Posts: 421

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:13

Great news that someone has the balls to say 'publish and be damned' let us hope the tide is turning. I am overjoyed for these people - good luck on 19th April. Let us hope all papers publish this .

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:18

Is this not the basis on which the ECHR declared that the people on the disputed land in the TRNC also have rights.

LadyVelda


Joined: 12/09/2009
Posts: 19

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:20

Hope someone informs Mr. Alpan Uz of this!!

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:37

ismet, what point of law is incorrect? Is it point 1-

"The houses were built for homebuyers by Kulaksız Construction Ltd. according the contracts signed between Kulaksız Construction Ltd and the homebuyers. Homebuyers did nothing against the laws of TRNC. They followed all conditions of the contracts. They paid their sale prices. In 2005 the possession of the houses were handed over to them. They have been living in their homes since 2004. Homebuyers did not consent to a mortgage on the land. Akfinans Bank Ltd. Lent money to Kulaksız Construction Ltd. And mortgaged the land without knowledge of the home buyers. The mortgage is a contract between Akfinans Bank Ltd. and Kulaksız Construction Ltd. According the basic principle of law two people cannot make an agreement between themselves and interfere with the rights of other people. Akfinans Bank Ltd. is that they can include the rights of other people in the agreement they made with the Construction Company."

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:39

cont.../ Ismet, are you saying that Boysan Boyra Law Firm have got it wrong and that Advocate Boysan Bora specifically has got it wrong?

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:42

Well Ismet, I think you had better tell Boysan and his associates of your fears, he seems pretty gungho and whilst you think it is a publicity stunt, it is pretty specific and basically engaging the public in what is an utter disgrace I have no doubt writs will fly, neither do I suspect does Boysan and his associates. I am surprised that you came to such a conclusion after reading only two thirds.



In other words, the shutters have been taken away.

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:49

A publicity stunt? You do surprise me Ismet.

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:51

the document is available here also

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EJZJzrtb9YduSBdQhjVNHEZ-9KtxKxiZtZzk_Z-kecs/edit?hl=en

just in case

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:55

or even shorter

http://tinyurl.com/675q6fh

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 17:58

Has there ever been a precedent in the TRNC where the case has been laid out for all to see? Maybe if it had been felt we had been getting a totally fair crack of the whip, it would not have been necessary. Maybe if Akfinans had not been anticipating the verdict and not waiting for it before allegedly repossesing villas illegally, it would not have been necessary.



Where else in the world is anyone allowed to repossess a property without a court order, and then be allowed to keep it?? WHere the police threaten to arrest the owner if they set foot in the garden??

jimmyG


Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 900

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 18:32

Well I guess it needed some form of incendiary device to bring this to a head & I hope to God this is it despite Ismet's cynicism - for once Ismet I hope that your opinion is wrong.

matula


Joined: 07/07/2008
Posts: 647

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 18:32

You disappoint me Ismet with your negativity.

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 18:33

Ismet or is it the second point they got wrong:

The view that when an immovable property is mortgaged everything on the land is included in the mortgage is not a valid argument. Such an unfair argument has never been accepted by any Court anywhere in the world. It is against the basic principles of the law. It is against the laws of TRNC also. According to Section 21, of 11/78 Mortgage Law of TRNC the creditor before mortgaging the property is obliged to search and see whether other people have any right on the mortgaged property or not. The law obligates the creditor to name even a tenant residing on the property. This obligation of the law is not for decorative purposes. Unfortunately the Bank failed to mention that the homebuyer’s homes exist on the land. They did not ask for the consent of the homebuyers. Therefore the mortgage contract may not include the homes of the homebuyers.

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 18:36

Legal, opinions will always differ. On this occasion I go with Boysan's take on things because I know that Boysan has access to top notch second and third opinions.

madethemove


Joined: 19/05/2009
Posts: 24

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 18:46

Ismet



Are you some authority on the laws of the TRNC, your view seems arrogant and dismissive, what part of message 22 did you not understand?

jimmyG


Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 900

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 18:52

Re : Msg 22 - Ismet was not voted most helpful member for nothing and he has a far far greater understanding of the TRNC & its legal system than most members of this Forum so yes he does speak with some authority.

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 18:54

To be fair, Ismet has always been a friend to property victims. He gave his time and effort to the Candleit Vigil.

I know his concern is that we do not raise our hopes only to have them dashed. On this occasion ismet, we are not, but when you have nothing left to to loose, hope is all you have to cling to. We have no illusions.



Never give in, never give up.

EsentepeGal


Joined: 12/09/2010
Posts: 144

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:07

madethemove

Your attitude is that, that most ex pats cringe away from, The Man is a TC and has, i'll bet a far greater understanding and the realities of TRNC Law, bet that you got new number plates too ;)

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:10

It is so easy to write something that everybody wants to hear but telling the truth may hurt. Of course I would love Boysan to win this case and I sincerely hope he does. I cannot say much about his chances at ECHR because that is very much out of my depth. However, I see no connection between the rights of TCs who have been using land that previously belonged to GCs and this case.

I have looked at trhe mortgage law and the relevant paragraphs quoted in the main article. The reference to tenants is a very valid one because one normally buys a property with the tenant on it i.e. tenancy agreements are valid.



The gist of the matter is that the bank knew of the buyers or at least the bank is supposed to have had "constructive notice" of them. I am not sure if this point has been fought out in court at the highest level. Some high court judges have shown interest in this point and I supplied them with some precedences from UK but they are not too sure about it.



ctd.

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:11

Ive read the whole article and think at last a law firm has taken the gov to task .



I agree with misunderstood I do think ismet, who is so supportive of the cause ,is concerned hopes are dashed.



could this have positive knock on effects for people who have memorandums on their land too which the advocates also refer to as mortgages or has it to be banks specifically.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:17

ctd.

The way most judges see it is that the bank lent money to the "owner" of the property against a mortgage on it. The owner is defined as the person that has the title deeds to the property. We can shout our head off on this but it does not change the law. The main failure of the law is that the new legistlation about registration of the sale contracts came too late for these people. As they say they locked up the barn after the horses escaped.



As I see it, at this stage a publicity drive may do more good than a fight at the courts and I have no objection to continue the fight on all fronts. However that does not stop me being realistic. I will be more pleased than anybody else to be proved wrong in my views and I hope I am.

ismet

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:22

Ismet, the K5 purchasers were not tenants and had no tenancy agreements in place. They were party of a contract to purchase and as they had paid in full they have a beneficial interest which when Akfinans Bank took over K5 they took responsibility for - that's partly in point 3. Akfinans Bank did not take over K5 they took over Kulaksiz Construction's contract with the K5 purchasers. This document is brilliant!

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:30

msg. 29

Malsancak,

The laws of TRNC acknowledges tenants but not beneficial interest. I know a well known advocate who used to go to auctions and tried to keep the price down by saying that the property was let for 20 years and paid in full in advance. So people would not be interested but a relative of the owner would get it cheap. Thus the bank involved would be effectively cheated.

ismet

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:35

malsancak



I agree I think the article is brilliant lets hope thing are on the up for them they deserve it and for all others stuck in this minefield

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:44

Ismet, it's not about the TRNC law specifically saying it recognises beneficial interest it's about a judge accepting that the principle of beneficial interest is covered by an existing law. Case Law in the UK is where a judge interprets the law. However, if you are saying there is an example where Case Law rejects the principle of beneficial interest then you'd be right. Which case was it?

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:46

Ismet, do signatures on a legal contract mean nothing in the TRNC? If so, we are all truly dammed.

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:47

Remember there are 10 points in the document, e.g. point 4 deals with the 250%pa interest rate charged by Akfinans Bank:

No right can be extended to the degree of robbery. The interest rates of Banks all over the world are limited. In Europe it is about 5% per cent (five per cent) per annum. If a bank claims more than 6 or 7 per cent, the Governments will consider that the transaction is not fair, an offence against the consumer and take measures to protect people. If a Bank asks % 250 interest it would be considered a robbery and a crime. Measures would be taken against such a Bank.

TRNCvictim


Joined: 17/08/2010
Posts: 1417

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 19:57

It was so good to read, set out so well, misunderstood maybe it will get you all somewhere! I hope so because you certainly all deserve too!



I too think Ismet is worried about getting all your hopes up! he has always been helpful to property victims, certainly to Aga's!



You deserve some good news!



Onwards & Upwards!

trnclion


Joined: 25/04/2009
Posts: 61

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 20:09

MSG 34: How come High Street banks in the UK can charge 9%+ then for loans?

Day time TV in the UK features adverts for loans in excess of 2,400%pa morally wrong but legal.



Surely if a person/company accepts the negotiated rate offered by the lender they do so at their own risk?

wanderer


Joined: 05/02/2009
Posts: 1653

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 20:17

UK cost of credit

the 2400% loans are short term lending and not covered by the consumer credit act as they are under 9 months if my memory serves me well

Credit and store cards are quite high and covered under the consumer credit act

Though any unreasonable cost of credit can be opened up by a court and charges be made against the lender

Most of the exorbitant credit charges are in the weekly credit charges in the sub prime market

Harold2555



Joined: 19/04/2008
Posts: 1139

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 20:27

I think the point at issue at least with the "tenant" part is how widely are the courts going to define tenant. my worry is if they takee a very narrow definition of the term then the homeowners would most likely fall out of the definition. Clearly the spirit of the law should protect them but if a very prescriptive view is taken, it may not. I do not know the tendancies and tradition of TRNC judges in this and certainly Ismet would have a far better idea than all of us I assume.



The UK has specific rules on the position of anyone who has an interest in a property having to agree to subsume thier common law rights to a mortgagor. this even includes children who have reached majority still living in the parental home. but UK Judges are often predisposed to apply common law quite widely.



Let us hope that it is the same in TRNC.





H

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 20:56

have I misunderstood the document as its not just about TRNC law its also about ECHR so if the TRNC refuses to adhere to its own law and the judges see it in their own way then they only have themselves to blame when it reaches the ECHR if it has to get to that stage . Unfortunately it may take too long for the people concerned who have thought and are still fighting for theirs and others rights but I think this has to be the time when the TRNC judicial system has to wake up and see the consequences.



It may be just a thorn in their side at the moment but thorns do tend to get infected and nasty be interesting to see how this thorn is dealt with!

newscoop


Joined: 23/12/2007
Posts: 2197

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 21:16

Yesterday the GC's voted to implement one of Elko's long cherished notions



Specific Performance Law



Does Ismet foresee a similar thing happening here?



or are large slabs of bacon going to be airborne over Girne before it ever happens?

Brinsley


Joined: 04/04/2009
Posts: 6858

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 21:25

Msg 40





Elko's long cherished notions Specific Performance Law (sic)



You're on form tonight, I suggest you have a discrete word with Ismet's wife and ask how many blue diamond shaped pills he needs to pop!



Richard

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
15/04/2011 21:36

Akfinans Bank thought to keep everyone in the dark was to their advantage, it was. Boysan Bora had the courage to pull this whole distastetful epsisode out into the light. It is unbelievable that all the details are out for you all to see. What isn't in there is the occasion when the Bank Manager phoned me and told me not to tell potential purchasers of the landowners house that there was a mortgage on it, I still told them. Or that someone with a voice remarkably like the Bank Managers phoned me in England in November 2005 to tell me that my pool was being dug out, the Bank that didn't know there were houses on the land, bear in mind one of the mortgages was given in NOvember 2005. Or that the Bank Manager who gave Yuksel Yilmaz and Abdurrahman Guney the loan, told me he and Yuksel Yilmaz were best friends.

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 07:14

I got up this morning and thought, did that really happen yesterday. Did I really see a TRNC advocate break ranks and actually come out and say publically what we all already suspected.

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 07:28

I wonder how long it will be before Pauline gets her phone call from her 'dishy' secret service policeman.?

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 09:43

Ismet: are you telling us that no court in TRNC recognises the mortgagee's and the bank's [alleged] collusion in this glaringly obvious and blatantly preconceived 'conspiracy to defraud', despite having the 'right of [TRNC] law', as titleholder?



How can any judge, in TRNC or elsewhere, fail to recognise 'conspiracy to defraud'? Allegedly, not a single 'Kurus' was repaid on the first loan, yet the bank saw fit to grant a second loan - the mind simply boggles at the lawlessness that has even allowed this travesty of justice [in anyone's language] and violation of basic human rights to occur!

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 10:19

Anyone with a modicum of sense can see what Tenakoutou is saying is true, does that include the judiciary, well time will tell - it proved a very difficult taks actually finding an Advocate a. willing to take us and the system on b. someone without connections to a bank. I applaud this Advocate's extremeties.

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 10:26

lET US HOPE THAT THIS DOES NOT RESULT IN THE BLOOMING OF THE CORCHIDACTUS - be ready all you bontanists out there.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 10:51

msg. 45

Ten,

In civil cases the courts are bound very strictly with the pleadings i.e. what is claimed and what the defence is. Then the court gives its judgement and if anybody does not agree they can appleal. If there is no appeal, that is the end of the matter. If there is an appeal, the appeal court gives its judgement and that is the end again. There is no appeal to the Privy Council as in the Colonial Days. However there can be a complaint to ECHR if any of its clauses is compromised. However, it is useful to note that ECHR is not an Appeal Court. ECHR has jurisdiction as far as the European Charter on Human Rights is concerned and they are strictly bound by this charter. I know all the frustration involved in litigation and it does not always follow common sense. I wish the victims good luck and I have every sympathy for my friend Boysan Boyra in his endeavours but let us not peg our hopes too high.

ismet

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 11:38

I think that the public accusations by a TRNC law firm are the biggest step forward in the history of property problems, going even further than HBPG in naming and shaming publicly

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 13:03

We do not peg our hopes on anything but the ECHR ismet, but if the TRNC were to ask justly and accep the allegation t that there was an obvious intent to scam from day one then that would be a bonus - but - we are not holding our breath



Justice is fickle master/mistress.

suehowlittle


Joined: 31/10/2010
Posts: 1202

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 15:06

But it cannot fail to give us hope - and when you have nothing then hope is a wonderful, if ephemerel thing!



Fingers crossed, have to agree that when an Avocat is 'fighting the good fight' and not afraid to call out the corrupt side in this matter for a legal punchup, then there is a chance........

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 16:58

It should also be noted that [allegedly] nepotism was the, obviously, insidious ingredient that precipitated this whole evil episode - another factor for any court to consider while determining whether, or not, this 'scam' was, indeed, preconceived.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 17:16

msg. 52, Ten wrote: "...another factor for any court to consider ...."

I am afraid courts world over do not operate in a coffee shop style manner. They are bound by the pleadings and if such an argument did not take place in the original pleadings no court can take such an argument into account. Therefore one has to employ a good lawyer right from the begginning and plan ahead properly, otherwise its too late to bring in new arguments.

ismet

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 17:33

neptotism and then some, an advocate acting for three of the purchasers, is by his own admission related to the Bank family. not that I would suggest that would colour his opinion!!



I think ismet that these are new cases, in that the original advocate acting for the group and prior to my joining the group is no more so it is not a continuation of his case. I have joined the group because I have no real faith in ever receiving my court award. There are several cases including the ECHR.

Bishop


Joined: 14/04/2011
Posts: 13

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 17:39

nepotism & corruption now there are words that sit well with trnc

misunderstood


Joined: 08/04/2011
Posts: 1004

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 19:01

But suddenly there emerges an honest man, Boysan Bora and he tells it like it is. How refreshing.

It may all go too deep for him to make a difference, but at least he'll try. We all know that our only real hope is the ECHR

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 19:29

Ismet: An [alleged] fraud of this magnitude is hardly of 'a coffee shop' nature, and if the admission was not admitted originally, this should be considered by the court [even later] as pure deceit and dishonesty, as has been this whole 'scam' from its conception - yes, 'conception by perverse ingenuity', rather than inception.

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
16/04/2011 19:32

Msg 57: Correction = 'innocently conceived inception'.