At Last The government is Taking Notice of the Property Scams

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 07:56

If I heard it correctly on the news late last night, the Prime Minister met with the retired Chief Justices Mr. Dayioglu, Mr. Erginel, retired High Court Judge Mr. Bilgehan and someone from theMinistry of Finance to see what can be done and I think their proposals will be discussed with the Central Bank today. I heard it only once and it was too late, so I hope I heard it correctly. Please take it with caution.

Also see msg. 25 etc. http://www.cyprus44.com/forums/46164.asp

ismet

cooper


Joined: 23/10/2007
Posts: 3386

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 08:21

It will be interesting to see if anything comes of it ismet as action speaks louder than words !!

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 09:12

I know what to do for the future in order to prevent a repeat but I have no idea what can be done to the existing mess. I am glad I am not a member of this committee.

ismet

sloan



Joined: 24/02/2009
Posts: 808

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 09:23

Thank you for all your hard work, Elko. I hope the committee realises that there may not be much of a future unless the past mess is sorted out. No matter what assurances are given, trust in the property market will not be reastablished until the past injustices are righted. In this communication/media rich world, the negative publicity is now so strong that it is going to take major changes to overcome it.

catalkoykid


Joined: 15/02/2009
Posts: 1190

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 09:28

thankyou and well done ismet your information is appreciated

TRNCvictim


Joined: 17/08/2010
Posts: 1417

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 09:55

Thank you Ismet we appreciate you letting us know!



sloan (mess 4)



Wise word indeed!

Sundance


Joined: 15/07/2010
Posts: 213

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 12:47

Hello ismet,I sincerely thank you for all the time you take, and advice you give to this forum.



Thank You



Sundace

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 13:05

Didn't the government take notice of the property problems in 2006 and didn't they form the Property Complaints Office and didn't it fail?

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 13:24

msg 8,

Malsancak,

The Properties Complaints office or whatever it was called was a non starter and I did say so right from the start because it had no teeth. If you do a search on the internet you will find my negative comments on it.

If the new committee come up with something new, I will comment accordingly.



One thing they may be able to do is to limit the maximum total interest charged by the banks, say double of the principal. However they can do it only by pressure and not by legistlation because any retrospective legistlation of this sort would be against the constitution. I am almost certain Turkey will foot most of the bill as they did in the passt like when many banks did collapse about ten years ago.

ismet

Molly


Joined: 30/08/2008
Posts: 299

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 14:50

Ismet



The issue of laws and their application puzzles me. For example, the legislation regarding the registration of contracts was introduced in January 2008. The new law states that contracts must be stamped within 30 days and registered within 21 days (why there is disparity between the deadlines is another matter because the contract has to be stamped before you can register it!!). However, there was an amnesty that allowed all contracts prior to 1st Jan 2008 to be registered. Therefore is it not possible that future new laws can be applied with a similar amnesty that will assist previous buyers?



Secondly, there are thousands of purchasers who have problems in getting up to date title deeds because the vendors have not honoured their contractual obligations and the current building regulations are making Final Approval and separation of plots impossible. I understand that at one time it was not possible to purchase a shared title. cont'd

Molly


Joined: 30/08/2008
Posts: 299

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 14:54

Cont'd

Can you confirm if this is correct and when the law was subsequently changed. Furthermore, if there are properties that are adversely affected by the new regulations and the building permit was approved prior to their introduction, is this not a case where laws are applied retrospectively?

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:05

Ismet, I think we all knew that the PCO wasn't expected to work and it was just to stop HBPG protesting, just as scammed homebuyers are now.

I can understand that if you purchase a property which is mortgaged prior to payment then that's not the bank's fault, and so apparently because, according to BARO, Advocates "do not have a duty of care", it must be the buyer's fault. What I don't understand is why raising a mortgage on a contracted property isn't a criminal offence or at the very least, in the case of the bank, a negligent lending policy which should be penalised by courts recognising that the purchaser is obviously the legal (in developed countries) Beneficial Owner of the property.

Just because in the past Greek Cypriots' names were on the title deeds didn't stop the TRNC government ignoring them, so as a show of good faith the TRNC government should ignore bank mortgages granted after payments are made.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:09

Molly,

1. Let me see if I can answer them. Stamping valuable documents goes back to I think 1961 and it is nothing new. the rate of stamp is 5 per thousand if stamped withgin 30 days, then double up to six months and then treble after that. Lack of stamps does not invalidate the document but you cannot make use of it in court or offically like the District Land Office or the Electricity Authority etc.



2. Registration started in January 2008 and it has to be done within 28 days if you wish to do it in order to get some protection. Contracts signed before that date wee given a chance to do it by end of March and later extended to end of July I think. Nobody had to do it, it was only an option and hence no retrospective detrimental action.



3. There has never been any stipulations about share kochans but if you are a foreigner you need PTP before you can have one.



4. The new law about having kochans for off plan properties is awaiting for the completion of byelaws before it

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:11

ctd.

becomes active. Its too technical to explain it here. Basially buyers will have to pay the price in stages direct to the banks or the financial institutions. You will have the kochan and the bank will have the mortgage. However they have to sort out the PTP or its a ndonstarter for foreigners.



Have I answered your questions or only raised new ones?

ismet

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:14

It's a bit like giving money for a tin of baked beans and the shop owner takes the money and then sells the beans to someone else. The owner argues that they were in possession of the wholesaler's invoice and had not yet issued a receipt to the original customer so they could do what they liked with the beans. In developed countries they recognise that legal procedures are there to support common law and not to be used to subvert it. In other words, a contract had taken place which did not need paperwork and that contract was broken and no argument about paperwork can change the common-sense view of what a contract is. In the case of house sales the original contract, registered or otherwise, takes precedence over a mortgage contract which follows and only legal befuddlers seem to think otherwise.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:15

Malsancak,

The business of constructive notice and its effects has to be dealt with by the courts and not the governments. the government may legistlate accordingly but not retrospectively.

PCO was indeed to stop HBPG protesting and I think they fell for it. I recognised it for what it was right from the start.

ismet

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:27

what I am say is that no new legislation should be needed. The current legislation allowing a landowner to have two contradictory contracts running at the same time is illegal and so I'm saying that a second contract, the bank mortgage, is therefore cancelled. Put another way, if you marry two women, one after another, then the second marriage is illegal. Anything other than monotony is illegal in most countries. It's contract law and goes back centuries, even in colonial Britain. Why is everyone having such difficulty with this? It's deliberate fraud, a crime also going back centuries, and I believe you should not legislate to make fraud legal. Any country that does this should be exposed as a place not to trade directly with.

Pugwash


Joined: 06/09/2010
Posts: 1797

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:28

Easy to be wise after the event Elko, why did you not say this before? or did you?

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:35

msg. 18:

Say what before?

ismet

Washerman


Joined: 19/09/2008
Posts: 2301

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:45

Malsancak, where do you think that they got the idea from for the World Cup advert? - TRNC

wanderer


Joined: 05/02/2009
Posts: 1653

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:48

mal

I agree with you on the fraud issue sell the same thing twice is fraud Bang up the builders or vendors for the crime

What makes it more perverse if you bounce cheques for a few lira in the TRNC you go to jail

Fail to pay a mortgage and the people who have not benefited from the mortgage are made homeless

Ismet

Does fraud exist as a legal concept in the TRNC if it does what mal has written should get a few developers and bankers behind bars

There is a point of law in the Uk tht if you buy a car from a garage or private individual that is on on HP because of a previous owner and that HP is in default because of the previous owner .The liability for the debt stays with the last vendor who is classed as a Trade body i.e. a dealer or bank /finance house

The individual non trade buyer gets clear title due to the traders/banks negligence and does not loose

Washerman


Joined: 19/09/2008
Posts: 2301

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:54

If anything stops ownership from passing - it cannot pass, simples! If you do not own something, you cannot sell it! Ownership always remains with the original title holder, unless of course, they sell it and then ownership passes!



Message 21 - I am not saying that you are wrong, but that is a new one one me.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 15:56

msg. 17

Malsancak,

Look at it this way. You ask for a loan from the bank and you show your house as security. The bank checks your kochan, there is no encumbrance on it, puts a mortgage and gives you a loan. Then somebody produces a sale agreement saying that you had already sold the house to someone else but it was not registered with the Tapu. Are you saying that the bank will not be able to sell your house and recover the loan?



To answer your other question:

If you sell your house to two different persons,

1. Its a fraud and you have committed a criminal offence,

2. The first buyer gets the house.

3. The second buyer can sue the seller for compensation/damages and recover what he can.

This is the law in TRNC at the moment subject to usual stringent rules of evidence and proof.

ismet

Washerman


Joined: 19/09/2008
Posts: 2301

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 16:04

Elko, I don't need to answer for Malsancak, but my two penneth worth is - if it can be proved that ownership had already passed to another at an ealier date, the bank cannot register a mortgage at the request of the holder of the Kocan because ownership has already passed. In other words, the property is not his to mortgage.



If they do register a mortgage and the property turns out, not to be the persons that they lent the money to - tough luck bank!



If the bank can prove that this was because the system wasn't working and they relied on a search at the Tapu for clear title - tough luck Tapu office!

deputydawg


Joined: 30/03/2010
Posts: 1727

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 16:18

The legal nub of it is "no man can pass on better title than that he holds himself". Thus a builder who applies for a mortgage after he has contracted to sell to another and even received monies, only has encumbered title. His application which is an application "of the utmost good faith" is fraudulent if he does not disclose this to the Bank. The Bank has a duty to make reasonable enquiry before advancing a mortgage and it is not difficult to visit a property to first check with the person living in the property or establish which estate agent the builder utilizes for marketing. Any court which sees a mortgage as a valid first charge in these circumstances probably has about as much integrity as the builder. For Banks not to advise the tenant of the property upon which that they believe they have a legal charge until years of extortionate interest has accrued beggars belief. The attitude seems to be we were not as cunning as we thought but you cannot do anything about it.

Washerman


Joined: 19/09/2008
Posts: 2301

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 16:21

Deputydawg - so in UK/Int. Law - "tough luck bank" is a fair assesment?

Washerman


Joined: 19/09/2008
Posts: 2301

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 16:29

BUT, according to what we now understand to be the Int. rule of law and ignoring the bank for a minute - if title did not pass from the original pre-74 owner to the new owner. How could it pass from the new owner to the current owner?

deputydawg


Joined: 30/03/2010
Posts: 1727

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 16:49

Washerman, in my view yes and an order for costs against them, but a wizened old fart like me aint ever going to be a Judge

deputydawg


Joined: 30/03/2010
Posts: 1727

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 17:07

Washerman, in my view yes, and a swinging order for costs against them, but a wizened old fart like me aint ever going to be a Judge With regard to deducing title past by going right to the roots, is probably one of the many aspects of the so called land settlement talks which both sides choose to find insoluble. I cannot imagine that deeds which have been held for so many years by both sides with conflicting interests are now likely to be, in at least many cases, an accurate record. Fraud is not confined to just one office or process.

ang1706


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 570

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 17:17

Elko,

Thanks for your informative thread and I hope that something will happen and assist all the people who are in all the different predicaments placed onto them by builders.



I am in the same position as Kulikarniz 5 as my builder Boyut has not the funds to pay his bank (not Afkinans) and we (I believe there are about 50 of us in the same position) are awaiting to see what the bank will do to recoup its loan. I have paid 100% and yet have to be put through this by a builder that was alleged to have frittered away his gains at Casinos!



So I am grateful to any news that you may have and thanks for you taking such an interest and being able to use your position to advise people

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 17:19

Interesting discussion but it boils down to this: Title deeds (the kochan) is a prima facie case (at first glance) proof of ownership. The subject matter of "constructive notice" has never been raised before in the courts of TRNC and thus it will be an uphill struggle to win on that point but it should be tried at the highest court. I have discussed this point informally at the highest levels and nobody can say anything about it for certain until we get a full judgement.

ismet

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 17:22

Ismet



thanks for you help and advise again.



I woul like to ask your opinion



a builder sells properties and purchaser pays in full.



builder has mortgaged the land and doesnt tell the purchaser and doesnt pay the mortgage and no intention of doing so.



the purchase looses the house they have paid for.



this is criminal fraud and there is at least enough evidence to put the case doe a criminal charge before the court.



If and a big if it can be shown the bank also acted with the builder to bring about this situation then again organised criminal fraud to be out before the court.



Why therefore hasnt anyone been arrested and charged and it put before the court.



If in some of these cases and they are all differant, some definately civil some criminal, the builder went to court and found guilty of criminal charges I am sure a message will then be sent.



Why wont the police take action and who in charge could be spoken to re this.



Also why is it so difficult to

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 17:25

contd.



change amend the legislation so that a judge can order the transfer of title deeds.



This country could attract a lot positive advertisement if this was done and showing how they are willing to listen and to attract buyers back to the country or is it correfct they really dont need the money they have bigger investors and this issue is unimportant



honestie

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 17:36

msg. 32,

Honestie,

Suppose the builder argues that he borrowed the money from the bank with good intentions. He wanted to finish the houses and give them to purchasers. Unfortunately things went wrong, CTP came to power, cracked down on illegal workers and the cost of labour shot up (actually true). Fraud is a serious charge and "intentions" is very important. Sorry, not so easy to prove fraud.

ismet

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 17:48

ismet



I appreciate what you say and I assure you I know only too well but if investigated as it should be then there could be enough to prove the intent.



As I am sure you know there is a lot here that hasnt been disclosed but I am also sure by actions and various other things that I am not privvy to then it could be shown there was intent if there is enough to convict is another matter but there has been a prosecution in the mary and geoff case.



Yes criminal fraud is difficult but would and should be investigated thats what the police are here for amongst other things..



I have a builder whojust refuses to transfer as he has fallen out with his son we live there and have done all paid bla bla bla.



If its a case of I have your money but you cant have your house and states he has no intention to transfer surely that becomes fraud.



Just my opinion and have always been one to test case having siad that its going to be harder here.



thanks anyway





honestie

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 17:50

honestie re. msg 32 - Do you realise that most of what you are asking an answer for above is 'legal' practice in TRNC, because they don't know the meaning of civilised and ethical law?



Property fraud is, for litigation purposes, a civil matter, nothing to do with the police. Even if it was, nepotism would ensure the exoneration of most, if not all, TRNC & RoC fraudsters!

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 17:53

Honestie,

I understand fully what you are saying and you have my full sympathy. I always complain that the police here are after petty thieves and they don't want to get involved in elaborate fraud cases. They pas the ball and say that its a civil matter. This happens all the time, not just property cases but all sort of cases. Sad but true.

ismet

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 18:06

msg 36



I do know all the above and certainly was the same in uk when there was a fine line between civil and criminal and I know, it was my job. But and a big but unless its pushed it never does get anywhere and just one day maybe one can only but try.



Theres criminal cases in the uk would never have been looked at and taken seriously eg.domestic abuse and even child abuse so I dont ask out of naivity I just wanted to know who at the top decides if criminal or civil cant just be the local bobby!



Ismet i do know and sad but true but you never know they arrested a large scale mafia gang in Italy a few months ago so maybe there is hope



honestie

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 18:07

but if the builder showed by his action that he never intended to repay the mortgage and the bank by their actions showed he could never afford to repay, then what?

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 18:17

thats my point Malsancak As we dont or I dont know the full extent of paperwork etc and also actions showing there was no intent then it would be a case and certainly investigated. As Ismet said police arent interested and I would just like to know who it would be to take that decision as I say not the local bobby.



It would be interesting to get all the relevent paperwork which may be difficult and put the criminal case together oneself and presenting it to the necessary person who has the power to make a decision.



I know its easy to say that theres no chance but if I had done that many time in my job I would never have got some good results I got despite being warned off many times







And yes before everyone reminds me Im in a differant country I know but will stiil go down any avenue

I can find

wanderer


Joined: 05/02/2009
Posts: 1653

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 18:37

Washerman re my post 21It is fact I spent nearly 40 years in the finance industry the only time an" innocent "buyer is not protected is if its a Lease car where the user only hires it then if he sells it to an innocent purchaser the innocent purchaser has to pursue the seller of the car for his money back and the police do the car seller for fraud

Ismet

say a builder borrows £40k on a dozen houses that are in his name but he has sold on sales contracts a year earlier and are occupied because he has received his money for these houses

The builder never attempts to pay the bank for 3 years and the bank don't bother to chase the payments just add interest

The properties are 7 miles from the bank so the bank manager can inspect that they are occupied and may not give him good and clear title this would be called due diligence and sound practice

There is something criminal that the police should be instructed to enquire after by the government

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 18:50

Wanderer,

You are right, what can I say? People in charge of the government are the political parties and they are biggest crooks, all of them. They spend a huge amount during the elections, far above the grants they get from the government, so the rest comes by hook or by crook as the saying goes. Don't expect that lot to do anything. Sad but true.

ismet

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 19:00

So Ismet, I'm sure the government are going to bring out some new ideas about property transactions but I can't see how any will solve the problem that possession is 9/10th the law. If the ex-pat buyers do not have a kocan in their name at the time they hand over the money then from that point onwards the onus will be on them to get the deeds into their name. Their lawyer, the builder and the government won't be interested in helping them except for more money. Would you personally recommend anything other than NO KOCAN, NO MONEY!?

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 19:02

Ismet



I totally agree with wanderer



I also agree with you sad but true but surely we can still try and who would we or should we speak to at the top re the police



Jackie

Washerman


Joined: 19/09/2008
Posts: 2301

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 19:51

A court cannot enforce anything which is illegal. eg: I sign a contract in which I agree to sell a stolen car to someone and I take the money, but don't deliver. The purchaser cannot sue me because I didn't deliver!

Glynn


Joined: 25/03/2009
Posts: 192

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 19:56

I have just come in on this one and it looks very dry and boring. Would someone who is very very clever be prepared to provide a synopsis?

Washerman


Joined: 19/09/2008
Posts: 2301

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 19:58

Glynn - it all goes back to '74 and what is right and wrong!

Glynn


Joined: 25/03/2009
Posts: 192

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 20:03

Not very helpful Washerman, show me you know what you are talking about!



I promise to be impressed!

Washerman


Joined: 19/09/2008
Posts: 2301

Message Posted:
01/10/2010 20:29

What's the difference between a good TRNC lawyer and a great TRNC lawyer?

A good TRNC lawyer knows the law. A great TRNC lawyer knows the judge.

wanderer


Joined: 05/02/2009
Posts: 1653

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 09:34

Ismet

Until the majority of double mortgaged /memorandums are sorted there is not a way forward for the construction industry people will not buy

They always say we change the law going forward but with the mess that there is now there's no way forward

"Ask what the government can do for its people"

Some Banks in the UK were going bust because of funding issues sound business lending long funding short encouraged to do this by the government

The government nationalised them appointed an auditor and gave them a very narrow brief so that they declared that there was no money for the shareholders

They could do this with the Garry Rob issue and finish the sites sell off the vacant plots the

Finish the incomplete ones ask the owners after they have completed the plots to pay the costs of completion by a mortgage or offer shared ownership so that the government receives rent Or the completed house is sold if the owner does not want it and the government gets paid and the owne

wanderer


Joined: 05/02/2009
Posts: 1653

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 09:35

and the owner to

Just an idea for you to pass on

wanderer


Joined: 05/02/2009
Posts: 1653

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 09:54

Also to collect more taxes

All the builders/developers who have got the buyer so pay the builders taxes capital gains for the title deeds This is a form of income that the government isn't taxing as the builder is not paying his way

So a builders tax debt is £10K ON A PROPERTY 10 properties sold in a year £100k unearned income paid for them by us property buyers 20% tax £20k or if unearned income tax as in the UK 40%£ 40k worth putting an English speaking man on it two days a week the government would rake it in for little outlay as I'm sure that the buyers will have a few scores to settle

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 10:05

An excellent idea, 'wanderer'!



Unfortunately, though, only a 'notion' - why?



Because the government have too many 'cronies' in the property sector - plenty of 'backsheesh' changes hands, and they certainly wouldn't 'lose face' by employing a foreigner, for five minutes, to simply sort the job out!

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 11:18

"A cat’s lick and a promise - the Wise Committee" on http://www.northcyprusfreepress.com/2010/10/02/a-cat%E2%80%99s-lick-and-a-promise-the-wise-committee/

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 15:55

Glyn



if youre clever you wouldnt need a synopsis and if its very dry and boring then maybe youre best not reading.



It isnt to many people .they are interested in the help Ismet has given and his information to anyone on the forum who has an interest in the current affairs even if it doesnt directly inbvolve them.



the start of the thread eplains what it is about as Im sure you know

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 16:13

Glyn's a writer, honestie, not a reader!

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 17:18

sorry malsancak though writers could read as well but then what would I know sometimes I cant even read or write!

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 20:46

honestie,

Don't get upset too much. There are a few people on this forum who hardly contribute anything positive. Just read and then ignore what they write as I do. Not worth a comment.

ismet

honestie


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 468

Message Posted:
02/10/2010 23:32

I agree Iamet but it is annoying when there are people like yourself who take the time and trouble to assist on this forum and then the stupid remarks that follow.



As you say not worthy of comments

apc2010


Joined: 28/07/2010
Posts: 1689

Message Posted:
12/12/2010 01:16

what was the out come of this meeting ...???

pollymarples


Joined: 08/08/2010
Posts: 1778

Message Posted:
12/12/2010 10:00

apc2010 Sweet f.a.