Land Registry, Ismit, pls help!

Speedypaul


Joined: 28/03/2008
Posts: 65

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 12:40

Ismit, you posted the following:



Kay,



I am sorry but you are totally wrong on this one. If you get a mortgage on any land, it is registered there and then and from that moment on it will come up in all searches. The inefficiency is on the side of compulsorry sales. Once you have your contract registered with a clean bill, that is the end of the matter. There cannot be a hidden mortgage unless there is a clear fraud to hide it and not shown on your registration papers.



ismet



My situation is this, bought early 2006, Land registered in March 2008 (when it became apparent), all came back well, big relief. However in the last two weeks, it has been uncovered that in Nov 07, my builder transfered 5/9ths of the site to his children and raised a mortgae on that. Im told that this did not show up on the search as the seach went against the remaining share in the builders name. Surley this must be incorrect, the search should be against the whole title deed???? Any advice ?

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 13:03

Paul,

What you have stated is not clear or complete. Did your agreement cover a villa or apartment that was going to be built on a plot covered by a number of title deeds or was it on one title deed but the owner later divided it up and transferred part of it? I cannot comment unless I know exactly what your contract specified.



The important point here is that is your contract sufficiently clear what you agreed to buy and is this land safe without a mortgage on it? If it is safe, never mind what happened.



Imagine a situation wherebye your agreement covered several plots but your building is sitting on a plot that has not been transferred. This would be a difficult one for the civil servant to sort out on his own and he may well use his descretion and accept your registration. He could have refused it alltogether since part of it is transferred to others. I am just guessing on what happened.

ismet

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 14:02

I think now the situation is much clearer. My daughter and son in law jointly bought two flats out of 8 flats just behind the Ship in Girne. As part of the bargain they asked and got a share title deed for 2 out of 8 shares. They are free to sell these two shares to anybody they like or even mortgage it and borrow money from anybody willing to lend the money. Suppoe they mortgaged their share. In my view there is no need to show this mortgage on the registration since it does not affecct their share.



If you buy a villa out of say 40, effectively you are buying one share out of 40. This menas that the land owner is free to sell the other 39 shares and indeed if you ask me he is also free to mortgage the remaining 39 shares but knowing how the civil servants think, they will put every obstacle they can to avoid a mortgage onece a share has been registered with them.

ismet

Speedypaul


Joined: 28/03/2008
Posts: 65

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 15:34

The problem is that the shares 9/9ths have all been sold, except one. These have not been logeded against the title deed as the owners do not have their PTP. The builder has then transfered 5/9ths to his family members and raised a mortgage on these. 1/9th has been transfered to a Turkish owner but now only 3/9ths are in the buliders name ie 8/9ths have been sold to us, the owners.

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 15:40

sounds like a lot of 9ths to me

Speedypaul


Joined: 28/03/2008
Posts: 65

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 15:42

The problem is that the shares 9/9ths have all been sold, except one. These have not been logeded against the title deed as the owners do not have their PTP. The builder has then transfered 5/9ths to his family members and raised a mortgage on these. 1/9th has been transfered to a Turkish owner but now only 3/9ths are in the buliders name ie 8/9ths have been sold to us, the owners.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 15:50

So 8 units were sold but one, a Turkish Cypriot got a sahre title deed and the remainder 7 units sold with no title deeds yet but builder owns only 3/9th of the plot. Hence he is 4 villas short.



In my view two things must be done:

1. Stop all payments if anything is outstanding and sue the builder for breach of contract and thus compensation.



2. sue the builder and his daughters and sons for fraudulent transfer of the property and ask the court to cancel the transfer.



In my view two separate actions should be started but all buyers come together and have a joint action in both cases. The lawyers may wish to start separate actions simply for more money. Joint actions has a further advantage in terms of security for costs. You will be asked to guarantee payment of costs in case you do not win the case. This will be (a) in the form of a bank, (b) direct payment into court or (c) an acceptable local person to undertake to pay in case you loe the case.



ctd.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 15:53

Note: Even though the Civil Procedure Rules foresees the Fraudulent Land Transfer to be dealt with an application, there are some drawbacks in this procedure and it is much better to start it with a writ. There is a very important High Court Decision on this matter. I know the subject very well because I have done it personally and got the result I wanted.

ismet

Speedypaul


Joined: 28/03/2008
Posts: 65

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 16:08

In the light of the recent events ie Advoactaes saying that they have NO "care of Duty" and that they will only do what they are told to do, this is good information. I will look very carefully at the fraudulent transfer route. Of course this will be hampered by the fact that a 2/9ths share, now in his daughters name has had a sizable mortgage raised on it.



My question though was of the process of land registry and how this wasnt pick up at the time. My point is that if this has happened to me, there could be alot of people out there thinking there safe, with Land regisrty protection, when there not.



Kind regards - SpeedyPaul

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 16:46

Ismet, if there are "dealings" on the land after registration, what steps do the District Land Office take to notify you of the dealings, say for instance the land has been sold to another person since registration. In the UK if you register a caution against a property, then HMLR have to inform you if there are any dealings on the land.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 17:08

Kay, if your registration is for the full share of the land, the owner should not be able to sell it or mortgage it. If you have a share registration i.e. if you bought a villa out of 40, you have 1/40th share, hence the owner can sell the rest or in my opinion can mortgage the rest. Now what happens if Tapu registers oversold properties i.e. what happens if Tapu registers the sale of 45 propeties when actually the total number is 40? This may be possible for old contracts but if it happened after the deadline of 30th April 2008, in my view Tapu is responsible.

ismet

cocos


Joined: 04/04/2008
Posts: 129

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 19:05

If this has only just come to light I'm sure there are many people who may have registered and been told there were no mortgages but in fact it will transpire later that there are. What a complete nightmare. I would've thought the land registry should have checked the whole kocan that is listed in your contract of sale, not just shares of it that were divided later and fraudulently.

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 19:32

Ismet, sorry but that doesn't really answer my question.

The whole of the land is on 1 title deed and there are 6 houses built on the land. To my knowledge there has not been parcelisation (I may be wrong but I don't think so). Therefore if the landowner has now sold the land to someone else, do the Land Registry have to notify me and the other people with villas on that land, that the land has been sold to someone else?



Also, what protection have we got against the new owner taking a mortgage out on the whole of the land? Bearing in mind of course that it is not parcelised into plots.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 20:58

Kay,

If your sale agreement is with landowner no.1 and now landowner no.2 owns it, you should not be able to register your sale agreement. If you had registered it whilst landowner no.1 had the title deeds, he should not have been ablto to transfer it to no.2, if he did the Tapu is responsible.

Over to you Kay.

ismet

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 21:33

Thanks Ismet. Can you or anyone else, give me the telephone number for the Tapu in Girne please. I will contact them next week.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
07/11/2008 21:56

+90 392 xxxxxxx

8152178

8154757

8156686

8158437

8160991

Is that enough?

ismet

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
08/11/2008 00:29

Many thanks.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
08/11/2008 14:39

lots of the problems are with the tapu office.

my friend purchased his land in 1990. got planning permission and built 2 flats and a shop underneath.

this year 2008, the neighbour measures his plot which he has only owned for 2 years.

the tapu office gave the neighbour my friends forcourt to his flat and shops.

they have been arguing this since april this year.

the roc land records show that the forcourt belongs to my friend. as does the original kochan.

the tapu office said it was the british who changed the records.

they have been out and looked about 4 times now.

nothing still decided.

both hold kochans for the land.

they asked my friend if he would give the neighbour part of the land, and he quite rightly said no!

the saga continues.

after seeing this go on between 2 cypriots, what hope do us brits have?