The Orams Case - Review of Recent Developments

Marilyn


Joined: 29/08/2008
Posts: 14


Message Posted:
21/09/2008 12:52

Forum member may be interested to read about the latest turn of events the European Court of Justice. I did'nt realize that thsi drama had been running for so long. Let's hope Linda and David are bearing up.

http://www.wellestates.com/north_cyprus_orams.htm

Lov

Marilyn

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 393


Message Posted:
21/09/2008 15:06

Marilyn

thanks for the update.



I have copied some to the 'Illegal Immigrants' thread, hope you don't mind!





rob

BIllie Boo


Joined: 21/09/2008
Posts: 5


Message Posted:
22/09/2008 18:29

Marilyn

One remark in the story surprised me - their house in Brighton is more at risk than the villa in Lapta. Surely, this cant be true ?

Billie

Hector


Joined: 26/08/2008
Posts: 374


Message Posted:
22/09/2008 18:40

Be aware that Marilyn is simply using this forum in order to promote Wellington Estates which I disagree with.

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
22/09/2008 19:15

Billie Boo,



That's all about the prospects (or not) of a UK resident having their property in Britain seized under European law for occupying GC property in the TRNC. The case is still being debated.

Marilyn


Joined: 29/08/2008
Posts: 14


Message Posted:
22/09/2008 19:31

Dear Hector

You really can be negative. I would have thought that this story is of serious interest to all of us who have bought a property here. Just because it is on a company website doesnt mean it is rubbish. If all the comment on the Orams was as well written as this, many of us would be much clearer in our own minds.

Lov

Marilyn

Nunu1


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 399


Message Posted:
22/09/2008 20:49

I met Linda and David Oram at Ercan last November flying back to UK.

Very nice couple, I had a brief chat with them and wished them well.



The outcome of their case will no doubt set the Precedent for many other land and property disputes going on between the North and the South.



Mr Talat and Mr Christianos are currently in talks to come to a solution, one of the most complex in the World I would guess.



My opinion is that should any compensations be due in any cases, I think Governments, UN and EU should borne the costs rather than individuals. What do other members think?



nunu

McSteviet



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 789


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 07:08

Very well written piece.



I don't care where the information is published, as long as it is published and accurate, for all our sakes.



Thanks Marilyn for letting us know where to look on this very important subject for all of us.



MC

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 2732


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 07:44

Nunu1. I agree partly with what you say regarding the payment of compensation. However I do feel that we will have to 'put our hands in our pockets' at some point. I just can't see the UN or the EU paying any compensation at all. Turkey will pay some percentage but not all. I certainly feel that we will not have to give up our properties though, under any circumstances.

wynyardman



Joined: 15/12/2007
Posts: 2645


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 07:47

nunu,



I wholly agree that there should be compensation for all sides (if there is to be a just and fair settlement) BUT IT MUST BE AT 1974 PRICES.



What I cannot get my head around is...we have bought exchange land. If the former land owner is to be compensated (If I have to pay him the land value, that my villa is built on) then will I then own the land that was offerred in exchange, or am I just expected to pay twice for the same land?



My builder stated in my contract, that he was the owner of the land, and therefore had the right to sell it. Will I be able to sue the builder for the original cost of the land, if I have to pay the owner again.



Can anyone give me a balanced explanation? PLEASE!



Well posted Marilyn, I agree with mcsteviot. Well explained.



wyn

RedSnapper


Joined: 12/08/2008
Posts: 305


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 08:08

I agree that IF any compensation is to be paid it should be paid to both sides or their successors. In the case of any "TRNC" land it should be the developer who sold it to you and the person he bought it off and possibly other owners since 1974 who should pay, as it was approved at the point of sale by the TRNC legal system. However judging by my limited knowledge and experience it will be the foreigners(British) who may be eventually looked to for any moneys.

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 2732


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 08:37

Wyn. I agree - it must be 1974 prices.

RedSnapper


Joined: 12/08/2008
Posts: 305


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 09:02

And if they wanted to add interest to say for example 1000 pounds at 5% p.a compounded over 25yrs it would more than triple it!!

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 10:50

Nunu: "My opinion is that should any compensations be due in any cases, I think Governments, UN and EU should borne the costs rather than individuals. What do other members think?"



On the other hand why should taxpayers elsewhere be expected to bail out gamblers? Shouldn't people who choose to get involved in controversial dealings be responsible for their own decisions?

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 2732


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 10:55

Yes, just like the Northern Rock!

ilovecyprus



Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 1571


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 10:55

That is a good point PP. I don't think one can expect the EU or UN to pay compensation.

ilovecyprus



Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 1571


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 11:05

not unless they were absolutely sure that it would secure peace in the region - perhaps?

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 2732


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 11:14

Mark, even if it was to secure peace in the region, I am certain the UN and the EU would not put a compensation package together.

ilovecyprus



Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 1571


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 11:31

I agree Bill. Surprisngly Cyprus isn't classed as a risk in respect of an outbreak of war.



Turkey are not going to be able to pay. Perhaps the Americans would have paid in exchange for the military base (if this was more than just a rumour) but they surely would not have any funds now after bailing out their financial institutions. I would also expect that their military budget is close to being exhausted spent on campaigns in Iran and Afghanistan.



What has really surprised me is the lack of news that the Cyprus affair has generated on the International stage. If an agreement is reached it would impact thousands of people in one way or the other, in ways that the world may have not witnessed before or for a very long time.

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 2732


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 12:04

Sadly it doesn't appear to be 'big' news anywhere. I think the situation has gone on for so long people are turning a blind eye to it.

Nunu1


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 399


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 13:04

As this is a very difficult issue with the History and Politics, I think it needs to be handled in a sensible way by the Governments to come to a workable solution. I personally believe the Turkish Government should borne the majority of the costs/compensation where due for land loss etc.



(Due to the Turkish invasion)



However, both Turks and Greeks lost land...etc.



I have been told many times most of the land is exchange land, so this must have been legally exchanged on both sides? Yes/No?



If the outcome is for Lawyers to sort all land disputes/exchanges....it will be another 40 years before its all sorted!



Maybe I will enroll to study to be a Lawyer....(And brush up on my Turkish and Greek!)



nunu

Nunu1


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 399


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 13:21

In addition to my last posting, The land purchaser ie the builder/developer should if need be contribute to any compensation should it be due and not the property purchaser.....Thats my opinion....You buy a property in good faith...if the land is stolen or not legally owned....then the developer should be held liable...Again not the house buyer.



Most of us that have bought would simply not be in a financial position to pay compensation...what happens then? 5 thousand properties for sale!

The market is dead now!.....if anything the Presidents need to include policies to improve house prices/purchases proceedures if anything!?



Kochans/Titles and Permissions to purchase issues come to mind!!!!



nunu

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 14:30

Nunu1: "I have been told many times most of the land is exchange land, so this must have been legally exchanged on both sides? Yes/No?"



The answer is a firm "No". Ten minutes research should give you all you need to know. But I'll bet you've checked it out already. ;)

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 14:35

Nunu1: "You buy a property in good faith...if the land is stolen or not legally owned....then the developer should be held liable...Again not the house buyer."



Good faith is an unheard of concept in North Cyprus. Developers are for the most part Turkish or Turkish Cypriot. They will be protected and will never have to pay a penny as long as a foreigner has signed the contract. They have rights. Foreigners have none worth a jot.

Nunu1


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 399


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 14:35

PtePike...Yes I am aware not all is legally exchanged.....So....hence the Governments need to deal with this.........leaving it to individuals/owners and Lawyers it would never get resolved done etc...



nunu

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 1379


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 16:52

wyn re post 10.

in the event of a solution i think the builder will be long gone.



compensation was ordered by the e.u court ,regarding a woman who has the turkish army occupying her land. i don't think even then they have paid her out.



the problem with the 1974 prices is: if the gc's give back the tc's property and land in the south, they can sell it at todays prices. so why would they accept 1974 prices for their land?



would you sell me your land and villa at 1974 prices? no.



the e.u could step in but will they?



the british gov has advised about buying in the north so why would they help?



my personal thought on it would be: anyone who has a full time home here and no other home elsewhere should not be made homeless. the trnc gov should compensate, as they allowed the sale, issued the deeds and took the tax.



those who have only holiday homes should be given there money back. claims in the courts against those who sold it should be upheld and compensation paid by the seller so to speak. the trnc gov should enforce that.



how many gc's would actually come and live in the north?



i believe that some would but others wouldn't and all they are after is to sell it on for profit. which is ok. i don't think that gives them the rights to kick out another eu citizen and make them homeless for profit. again i think it should be a point that if they are given it back, they shouldn't be able to sell it for say maybe 5 years. rules for both north and south.



i have a tc neighbour who wants to now look at his land in paphos, he only wants the money not to live there. on the other hand i have met gc's who want to go back and live in famagusta.



i think its a very different ball game from the property being your only home to a second or third home or as an investor. selling for profit or living there.



i have two tc's friends who both live on exchange land. one is a policeman and the other in gov now. neither have any idea of what is about to happen with the property issue. both have loads to loose.



if i hear anything from them i will let you know.

wynyardman



Joined: 15/12/2007
Posts: 2645


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 17:58

firestarter,



I can see why you chose that name to post.



If any settlement followed your suggestions, the courts would not be able to allocate you a slot for the next 1000 years.



Compensation all round settled inter Government, with perhaps a sweetener thrown in by the EU.



If the EU pay for solar farms to provide electricity, and the water pipeline is completed to plan, by Turkey, and paid for by the EU, all the rest will fall into place.



Exchange land will be ratified, with compensation elsewhere! There will of course be side deals to accomodate local sensibilities.



Simple as that!!! Just my thoughts, thats all!



wyn

MUSIN M


Joined: 26/06/2008
Posts: 639


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 21:08

nunu



the land you have bought on," in 74 was worth nothing you couldn,t give it away" as you are aware i have bought on the same site and prior too this i did some ,well lots of research ,however this is not the reason i bought ,i bought

becouse i fell in love with the site .

when we saw the site it just had pegs in the ground ,we looked back at the mountains and then at the sea and bang .

you have nothing to worry about.



musin

JONNY


Joined: 21/09/2008
Posts: 10


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 21:57

is there greek land in the turkish notrh

ilovecyprus



Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 1571


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 22:00

msge 29



Greek Cypriot not Greek (mainland Greece)

Nunu1


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 399


Message Posted:
23/09/2008 22:12

MusinM. Eehn Shalla! (Excuse my spelling please correct me) I feel comfortable in what you have said, I too stood on that site with Nadav and the big map and chose my apartment. It felt right, very Spiritual, I trusted my gut feeling.



I too fell in love with the location.........



nunu

BIllie Boo


Joined: 21/09/2008
Posts: 5


Message Posted:
24/09/2008 21:18

I looked into the compensation matter with several 'experts' in 2004 when the Annan Plan was topical. A figure of £4 - £5k per plot was estimated for compensation to dispossessed greeks. This was either for Esdeger or TMD land. In October 2004, the TRNC government 'guaranteed' all TRNC title deeds and by implication agreed to pay this compensation

Billie Boo

pilgrim



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 903


Message Posted:
24/09/2008 22:26

Billy Boo ,

aware of TRNC guarantee, but don't think they have the cash if they had to pay.

mickey rourke


Joined: 27/08/2008
Posts: 153


Message Posted:
25/09/2008 05:06

Well then pilgrim, NEITHER DO WE

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 2369


Message Posted:
25/09/2008 05:25

I think most people would be happy to pay this type of sum to expunge any claim on their home...



Mick were you never advised to put this sort of sum aside just in case?

frontalman



Joined: 28/02/2008
Posts: 133


Message Posted:
25/09/2008 07:42

The Greek Cypriot parliament was privy recently to a visit by a member of the ECHR to inform them (try to let them down lightly) that things in the Orams case, and others, were likely to go against them. Long faces were plentiful, apparently. This was all printed in the Cyprus Mail so must be true!

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 217


Message Posted:
25/09/2008 08:15

humans love certainty, it makes up for our smallness and weakness



this is why we dream up things to fill in what we don't know

given a hypothetical situation that a compensation package

could ever be agreed for both communities to benefit,

it is impossible at this time to be imagine how it might work...

a practical figure might be between three and six grand

simply because it can't be much more or nobody could pay it!



certainly never put your trust in guarantees from either side:

we saw what happened to the guarantees in the 1960 constitution

but yes, it is accepted that the government of the north

has made various promises and I do not doubt their sincerity



in the highly unlikely event of any of this ever happening,

and assuming you actually had to find the cash yourself,

the value of your modest home built on scrubland would jump



just thank your lucky stars you would not have to stump up

for gc-occupied larnaca airport!



trnc property prices already include a discount for legal conundrums



andre

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
25/09/2008 10:20

JONNY: "is there greek land in the turkish notrh"



Yes, most of the land (and houses built on it) is legally owned by Greek Cypriots - by some accounts about 80%.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 1379


Message Posted:
25/09/2008 12:42

wyn re post 27



i don't need the courts to give me any of their time!

my title deed is pre 1974 turkish tile.

i sleep very well at night!



where i was coming from was that this issue should be based on more personal circumstances.

if it is your only home, why should a gc who wants just to sell for profit be allowed to make you homeless.

where as someone who purchased to make a profit and lives elsewhere, should have to give the land/house back to its original gc owner who wants to live in it.





everyone to their own choice, but don't go crying over spilt milk if it all goes wrong.

only time will tell.



larnaca airport is a little different. the land was taken by the roc gov to expand the airport. just like goverments do in other eu countries for the same purpose or road widening ect. yes the roc gov will have to compensate under the compulsary purchase rules. but this happens all over even in the uk.

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
25/09/2008 15:08

I agree with msg 39

Jolly Tar


Joined: 17/09/2008
Posts: 3


Message Posted:
25/09/2008 17:00

Thanks Frontalman for that piece of information in your post 36

Marilyn


Joined: 29/08/2008
Posts: 14


Message Posted:
05/10/2008 12:16

I heard that the Orams house at Lapta was built on a plot which already had a derelict and abandoned property on it. Can anyone comment on this ?

Lov Marilyn

wynyardman



Joined: 15/12/2007
Posts: 2645


Message Posted:
05/10/2008 19:59

Fire-starter,



'my title is pre 1974 Turkish Title.......I sleep very well at night'.



How about if all property on Cyprus is made Leasehold on a 99 year lease? Whilst I would

not be terribly happy if that route were taken, I could see the rationale if it helped settle the

Cyprus Problem. Guess if that happens we will all be in the same boat (from an inheritance

point of view)



wyn

dy1259


Joined: 10/08/2007
Posts: 324


Message Posted:
05/10/2008 20:14

I sleep very well at night with my TRNC exchange title especially knowing TCs have had some justice from all this.

wireless


Joined: 10/08/2008
Posts: 19


Message Posted:
06/10/2008 01:01

message 38



JONNY: "is there greek land in the turkish notrh"







Yes, most of the land (and houses built on it) is legally owned by Greek Cypriots - by some accounts about 80%.



simply a lie and propaganda, if you genuinely want to delve into history than the vast majority of the cyprus was owned by the 'evgaf' which was fundamentally islamic and not greek at all.



the facts are that both sides lost land and lives, both sides have security now. The majority of GC's are not at fault it was the minority or greeks that wanted enosis that caused the problems, it was this minority that cajoled the greeks cypriots into wanting enosis as to reject it was anti greek! in a similar fashion the recent years vote on the anand plan was rejected as anti greek (gc's were told that to vote for was a vote against the church and their religion). it was in the face of this intimidation that the greek cypriots rejected the anand plan that had already been agreed by the turks.



we have a solution - we are living it right now - enjoy it!

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
06/10/2008 21:02

msg45: "...simply a lie and propaganda, if you genuinely want to delve into history than the vast majority of the cyprus was owned by the 'evgaf' which was fundamentally islamic and not greek at all."



You wish it wasn't true. Take a trip to the land registry in Nicosia, check the title register and see for yourself the massive patches of blue all over the map of Kyrenia district and the north. Then ask yourself why the land registry in Kyrenia no longer allows public access for property title searches. Clue - it's because they hold the same records. As I said, around 80% of property in the TRNC is legally owned by Greek Cypriots. Not political, just fact.



Who is "evgaf", BTW? Surely if you're going to start quoting historical religious organisations you are capable of getting their names right.

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 455


Message Posted:
06/10/2008 22:48

Do you mean EVKAF? The Charity started by the Ottomans?

http://www.cypnet.co.uk/ncyprus/history/ottoman/evkaf.html

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 455


Message Posted:
06/10/2008 23:06

Or this may be interesting reading?

http://www.cypnet.co.uk/ncyprus/history/ottoman/evkaf.html



Varosha - Was it ever greek? Ehhh NO!

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 455


Message Posted:
06/10/2008 23:08

OOOpps Sorry I meant to paste this.

http://www.lobbyforcyprus.org/press/press2003/reu190503ghosttown.htm

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 2369


Message Posted:
07/10/2008 07:22

The systematic appropriation of Turkish Cypriot land by stealth... changing "ownership" by means other than legitimate purchase and falsification of "deeds" is not a new thing... For the likes of Pike it serves their purpose only to pick a fixed point in history and try to hold that this proves the land is Greek Cypriot... The famers who historically owned the majority of land not held in trust by the Evkaf were predominantly Turkish... this fact is well documented.. So how did the Greek Cypriots come to be majority "owners" of the land? Well they were left in charge of running the shop... so it was quite easy for them to achieve this sleight of hand....



This happened in the UK too... In Edinburgh in fact when, not too many years ago, workers in the Land Resgistry there helped themselves to parcels of land for whom no known living owner could be identified... They applied (during their work hours mind) to have the ownership made over into their own names.. so they were being paid to by the public to appropriate land making themselves rich.... Cheeky buggers...

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 1379


Message Posted:
09/10/2008 08:47

groucho

in the years before 1974 the gc's put preasure on the tc's to buy their property at cheep prices and drive them out. hoping that they would go over/back to turkey.



wyn re post43

i don't think the goverment can legally sell an internationally recognised title deed as freehold and later reduce it to a leasehold for 99 years. you purchased what you purchased. i first heard this on the 1st of april!!

i was told last week that the gov had brought or is about to bring in, a new law stating that you cannot sell your house here until you have owned it for 3 years (from when your name goes on the kochan). if you do there will be some sort of tax implication.

i have been talking to a few people about it and they seam to think it is bull. but i was told by tc friends who are pretty well connected. i don't know if anyone connected with the hbpg has heard this?

wynyardman



Joined: 15/12/2007
Posts: 2645


Message Posted:
09/10/2008 11:25

firestarter,



From postings on this board.....nothing the TRNC Government does, is internationally recognised.



Any law of the land of an Internationally recognised Government can be changed by statute



can't it?



wyn

Lincsman


Joined: 02/04/2008
Posts: 87


Message Posted:
09/10/2008 13:55

I feel I have to put my opinion on the land issue. If the widely bandied about figures are correct prior to 74 the TC population of 18% owned land across the island of some 30%. If the land of what is now TRNC was 80% GC owned 20% TC owned that means that TC's must own between 30/40% of the land in what is now the ROC(if my maths is right). I have always felt that the ethos between the 2 communities was different after 74 the GC's generally dreaming of "going home" whereas the TC's having established themselves in the north generally had no intention of returning to their previous lands so I think that the "exchange" land system was fair. Whilst it was not with agreement of the previous owner in the north at least it gave the opportunity for people to make a fresh start. For example would you develop land if it was only "rented" to you? And in addition the lands left behind by the TC's in the south must be worth far more per donum in today's money.

MUSIN M


Joined: 26/06/2008
Posts: 639


Message Posted:
09/10/2008 19:52

the turkish came to the north to stay and thats whats going to happen.the seeds have been planted and have now rooted and rooted deep ,theirs no way you can up root them now.



musin

long live the kktc

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
10/10/2008 10:45

Lincsman: "I think that the "exchange" land system was fair. Whilst it was not with agreement of the previous owner in the north at least it gave the opportunity for people to make a fresh start. For example would you develop land if it was only "rented" to you? And in addition the lands left behind by the TC's in the south must be worth far more per donum in today's money."



Much as people occupying someone else's property would like this to be the case, it has no moral or legal basis whatsoever. The people who count here are genuine displaced Cypriots. Those who came after to try and make a cheap buck are a different kettle of fish and can be dealt with accordingly.

Lincsman


Joined: 02/04/2008
Posts: 87


Message Posted:
10/10/2008 11:37

To Pte Pike,



If you had been in charge, what would you have done differently?

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
10/10/2008 20:47

Lincsman,



I would have prevented the sale of Greek Cypriot properties in the north. It was against the law to do this in the TRNC until around 1990. Since then it has become an unregulated free-for-all - and the issue has become a major barrier to settlement. Instead of following the GC example of not allowing the private sale of TC property, greedy developers fuelled by willing buyers started throwing up holiday homes everywhere. North Cyprus has been spoiled by overdevelopment, much of it shoddy and hideous.



Instead of trying to work towards a sustainable future and encouraging talented TCs to build the economy, the dead wood authorities took the easy way out and turned a ready asset belonging to refugees into a cash cow with no need to plan for the future. It doesn't take a genius to work out that unless you actually produce something, you can't rely on property development to sustain an economy. I would have made it attractive to invest in the TRNC - not created obstacles.

ilovecyprus



Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 1571


Message Posted:
10/10/2008 23:26

Just dug out an interesting video looking at the land dispute. It's a year old mind you and 20 minutes long.



http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=CG7aKOBTapM

Lincsman


Joined: 02/04/2008
Posts: 87


Message Posted:
11/10/2008 10:15

ILC a fairly balanced report for a change. Whatever next! reporters getting "both sides of the story" in the future.

ilovecyprus



Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 1571


Message Posted:
11/10/2008 13:07

Hi Lincsman



Like yoiu I thought it was well balanced. I guess it has highlighted PP's claim that property occupancy in the North has made reunification much harder, if not impossible.



The last 5 minutes of the video really highlights the reality of the property issuse which ishows it is a complete mess and probably unresolvable without large amounts of pain and distress for many.



For sure, the GC lady would desperately move back to her place on the front in Kyrenia. Who wouldn't, it is absolutely beuatiful and prime retail. I am sure the TC occupants would not want to relinquish their hold on that property, nor the English occupiers of one the flats (that Turkish General did well to sort himself out a prime location )



If you could persuade the TC' family to reclaim their home in the South, what then happens to the GC occupants - and the chain goes on and on.

Aussie


Joined: 17/06/2007
Posts: 366


Message Posted:
11/10/2008 17:23

As I understood it the property compensation scheme contemplated in the Annan plan provided in the majority of situations where properties had been owned by Turkish refugees and subsequent purchases compensation would be payable to former GC owners rather than them having the right of return.



Given the large number of Turkish properties in the same position in the south most of the compensation would be naturally offsetting and paid by a property compensation body taking control of all of these affected properties.



You would expect the end result of the current negotiations to be something similar.



Could you really imagine TC's voting in favour of a solution where most would be forced to leave their homes here and return to the South ?



Also the issues about respective GC/ TC property ownership doesn't take into account all of the respective government owned and non titled land existing in 1974 which should be equally and indivisibly owned by both communities.



Aussie

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
11/10/2008 19:51

Aussie: "Could you really imagine TC's voting in favour of a solution where most would be forced to leave their homes here and return to the South ?"



The proportion of genuine TCs who would face being uprooted is a fraction compared to Turkish settlers and their dependents who were shipped in to occupy GC property. This is a red herring, IMO. You also have to take into account the huge numbers of TCs who cashed in their chips years ago and emigrated.

Aussie


Joined: 17/06/2007
Posts: 366


Message Posted:
11/10/2008 20:39

Pike



There are still large numbers of TC's here plus many who have returned from 1974 to date when it was safe for them to do so and they can vote.



Are you saying there is no significant TC population here ?



Many GC's also emigrated and many more have sold property since 1974 as well.



Time does not stand still and it was perfectly reasonable for TC's to sell there exchanged properties in the North as they saw fit. It was made difficult or impossible for most to have sold their land in the South even if they wanted to as an alternative due to the ROC policies and effective control of these properties.



Aussie

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2345


Message Posted:
11/10/2008 20:47

Aussie: "Time does not stand still and it was perfectly reasonable for TC's to sell there exchanged properties in the North as they saw fit."



Only because Turkey's tame puppet Denktas allowed them to do so - thus creating one of the biggest obstacles for future settlement and bringing a new meaning for wholesale corruption and nepotism.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 1379


Message Posted:
13/10/2008 07:19

wyn re post 52

my pre 1974 title deed is recognised by the roc goverment and the e.u courts of human rights.



lincsman re post 53

in your sums you forgot about the % of pre 1974 foreign owned title deeds!



pike re post 62

i totally agree. my friend who lives just outside the village comes from paphos, he doesn't want to go back there. he would be financially better off to do so, but he won't be going.

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 2369


Message Posted:
13/10/2008 08:08

Firestarter...



Pike msg 62 was quoting Aussie, so who are you agreeing with? Aussie or Pike...



Aussie said "Could you really imagine TC's voting in favour of a solution where most would be forced to leave their homes here and return to the South ? "



your last para seems to concur with this opinion, which was Aussie's not Pike's

Lincsman


Joined: 02/04/2008
Posts: 87


Message Posted:
13/10/2008 09:56

I do concur with Aussie on this. I re-iterate the point that I don't believe that the average TC wants to return to the South to reclaim their lands. To Pte Pike IMO I think it was unrealistic to expect the lands not to be sold for development, who can blame the TC's for wanting some of the perceived tourism/investment that the South has received. In addition the Annan Plan did not envisage wholesale resettlement anyway, so at the end of the day it comes down to compensation.

Lincsman


Joined: 02/04/2008
Posts: 87


Message Posted:
13/10/2008 10:00

To ILC I do agree that there are so many unfortunate situations, but I do believe that any settlement has to take into account the fact that anything other than token resettlement will not happen.

ilovecyprus



Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 1571


Message Posted:
13/10/2008 10:23

As the TC lady said at the end of the video, th TC's have the right to benefit in the same way as the GC's have done.

It is unrealistic to have expected the TC's to not have taken advantage of one of their primary assets which is land, es