Ex-pat wins case against builder and then takes bank to court

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
14/11/2009 13:13

"Whilst registering my Contract of Sale in February 2008, I, like so many others, discovered that the builder and landowner of my development had taken out mortgages on the site. One in the sum of £,1600.00 sterling and one in the sum of 100,000TL."

Read more on http://www.northcyprusfreepress.com

dozza67


Joined: 11/07/2008
Posts: 607

Message Posted:
14/11/2009 13:50

Absolutely well done. I do hope it all turns out right for you and we admire your courage and stamina in going through all this. BRAVO.

Earlybird


Joined: 28/04/2009
Posts: 816

Message Posted:
14/11/2009 14:06

Well done Pauline, excellent. I hope many people will sign the petition. Too many home buyers here are just sitting back and letting their money be drained away and doing nothing. Good luck as you proceed. Good for you!!!!!

smithy


Joined: 17/07/2008
Posts: 5301

Message Posted:
14/11/2009 14:35

What can I say, Congratulations Pauline it paid off in the end, so happy for you

maddy


Joined: 12/01/2009
Posts: 24

Message Posted:
14/11/2009 15:31

Hi Pauline



so pleased for you. Who was the builder?



Maddy

IvorBankloan



Joined: 14/08/2009
Posts: 180

Message Posted:
14/11/2009 16:26

Spiffingly well done.

You have my amiration.

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
14/11/2009 17:23

I have the names of everyone concerned but I've emailed Pauline to see what names she is willing to release at this point.

Hector


Joined: 26/08/2008
Posts: 2352

Message Posted:
14/11/2009 19:30

Pauline is doing what should have been done long ago and she is to be truly congratulated and admired. If she wins, and I really pray she does, it will be an enormously important case on a par with the Orams. If we knew who was taking action, for what and against who, it would be extremely useful to victims and their lawyers. A successful outcome of her case will send a huge message that dishonesty does not pay and give immense hope to those who have been similarly mistreated by builders, bank etc. Well done Pauline!

rocking


Joined: 05/11/2008
Posts: 421

Message Posted:
15/11/2009 05:38

Absolutely fantastic - well done great news. Let us hope people who have problems with builders, banks and (not in your case solicitors) try and do what you have done. A read David and Goliath story.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
15/11/2009 07:19

Pauline,

You wrote: "I started proceedings in September of 2008 and after securing Injunctions on sufficient property and land to cover my claim ...."

1. Do the developer and the owner of the land have sufficient property to meet your claim which is not actually mortgaged?

2. The injunction expires when a judgement in the case has been delivered i.e. it is a temporary measure until the case is decided upon. Now that you got a judgement in your favour I am sure your advocate has pt a memorandum on the same property i.e. a copy of the judgement is filed with Land Registry and you asked them to stop the transfer or a new mortgage on the same land. The next step will be an order from the court for forceful sale but I understand you have to wait for six months before you can start the process on tht front.

ismet

http://www.elkocyprus.com

PS: You can e.mail me your reply and I will put it up here since you have not managed to become a member of C44 yet!

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/11/2009 09:36

Pauline Read emailed me:

"I will contact the advocate tomorrow and ask permission to give you their name. With regard to the builder and bank, at the appropriate time I fully intend to give them the publicity they richly deserve."

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
15/11/2009 09:56

Pauline Read - you're a star!



I trust you will also be awarded your legal costs in this case, which I'm sure are liable to be substantial?



I also hope that HBPG may be able to take advantage of your information, in order that so many others can hopefully be helped out of their grave, 'no-win' situations.



I do, however, have one reservation, which is: why should you, having (handsomely, I guess!) paid your advocate, subsequently divulge your 'success formula' to anyone, for, to coin a phrase: 'less than the price of a postage stamp'?

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
15/11/2009 10:11

Tenakotou (msg. 12)

wrote: "I trust you will also be awarded your legal costs in this case, which I'm sure are liable to be substantial?"

Pauline in the original article wrote this: "Interestingly, the Judge also awarded my Advocate some costs."

There lies the answer but I suspect Pauline did not have a full explanation of what all this meant! Guess what?

ismet

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
15/11/2009 10:42

Let's hope all will be revealed, Ismet - but, like I said, why should she divulge all for nil recompense from those who plan to use her case details as a precedent?

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/11/2009 11:03

As Pauline says in her article, "Meanwhile back at Girne District Court on Friday 6th November 2009 the judge ruled in my favour and I was awarded £120,000 (£23,800 more than I had paid) an amount that just about covers all I have spent on home improvement, fees etc." See http://www.northcyprusfreepress.com for the rest of the story.

As for further recompense - perhaps she is writing a book?

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
15/11/2009 12:01

Pauline Read emailed me with this:



"I have been reading some of the postings with interest. Incidentally I am the one who

tried to join and could not because I have a free e mail address (some new rule I understand).



With regard to the costs, I do know exactly how much was awarded but I think it is for the

Advocate to divulge, not me. I totally understand everything that went on, I am writing a

book so it is not in my interest to release everything until the appropriate time, but please

be assurred; , many things I am , a fool is not one of them.



The Injunctions were temporary but then were made permanent, but Ismet, please be

reassurred that my back is securely covered. I have always been a belt and braces girl!!!"

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
15/11/2009 13:16

Pauline (msg.16)

Just one small correction:

The normal practice is to apply for an injunction ex-parte i.e you ask for an injunction temporarily until the other side has a chance to defend. So you got the injunction temporarily to start with. After a hearing it became permanent until the court decides on the main case. Hence once the judge ruled on the case the injunction is not there any more. I am sure your advocate has already got a copy of the judgement and used it to put a memorandum on the same properties. It can be fatal if he overlooks that. Just a friendly warning, that's all.

ismet

Ozbey


Joined: 04/03/2009
Posts: 304

Message Posted:
16/11/2009 11:21

This case is so important that it needs to be kept up at the top.

All those with similar problems need to read it, and wherever possible take the same action.

MarkVPiazza


Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 530

Message Posted:
16/11/2009 11:43

Quote from the NCFP article



"In November 2008 the original debt of £1,600 and 100,000TL was said to be 650,000TL – today it is said to be 1 Trillion TL! Obscene rates of interest must be being applied."



This is how local banks balance sheets make them look solvent - small debts with massive interest applied, that haven't got a hope in hell of ever being repayed



Be very carefull out there



Mark

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
16/11/2009 13:22

I doubt whether the numerous banks who allowed these *loans on fully paid up property will be prepared to 'write *them off with a smile' - 'the chickens must come home to roost', and soon!



These banks have used the buyers of the affected properties as guarantors for these loans without even asking the buyers' permission - if that isn't blatant fraud, no matter what the 'law' states, I'm b^ggered if I know what is!