Cyprus-Forum.com

[-mikkie2-]

or was exchanged for land lost by TC ion south

Sorry Erol, but on whose authority was this 'exchange' made? By 'trnc' issuing their own title deeds and giving them to TC's or by consent of the original and legal owners?

[erolz]

or was exchanged for land lost by TC ion south

Sorry Erol, but on whose authority was this 'exchange' made? By 'trnc' issuing their own title deeds and giving them to TC's or by consent of the original and legal owners?

I was not making any comment on the rights and wrongs moral or legal about the TRNC issued deeds. I was juts pointing out that there ARE (legal or not) 3 main types of deeds issued. Those that are for TC owned proerty pre 74, those that relate to echanged land and those that relate to given land. As far as foreign buyers go they purchase almost totaly exclusively from the first two categoris and not the third. That was all I was mentioning.

[MicAtCyp]

Hi Erol,

I was referring to this.

To be honest I dont think he will be visiting the north in the near future if at all, so he has nothing to worry about.

And you are soooo happy of that, aren’t you? Come on, say it!

for which the writer DID NOT disapprove.
Or you think it was not provocative enough to deserve a reply?

[MicAtCyp]

O I forgot,
the subject was in the thread "GC lawyer entrpped" or something.

On the easy part of your post Mikkie already replied. Thanks Mikkie.

[erolz]

Sorry but I am confused now. What is being asked of me (if anything)??

I simply commented on

where the state itself gives our properties to the settlers and they sell them to foreigners?

by pointing out that this senario is actually extremly rare. Foreginers buying land that was based on exchanged land or on pre 74 TC owned land is a much more common senario than the one quoted above. That's all I was pointing out. Nothing more. No comment on leaglity of TRNC deeds or anything else.

I also commented on

And not only that, we even see members of this forum cynically expressing joy and applauding this illegality...

where I simply asked for some examples where TC had cynically expressed joy and appluded (the sale to foreigners of land given to turkish settlers). If we have seen it then a link to such expression of joy at this should be able to be provided.

[insan]

by pointing out that this senario is actually extremly rare. Foreginers buying land that was based on exchanged land or on pre 74 TC owned land is a much more common senario than the one quoted above. That's all I was pointing out. Nothing more. No comment on leaglity of TRNC deeds or anything else.

erolz, I think instead of using the definition of "exchanged land" , it would be better to use the definition "the land that TCs suppose they have the equivelant in South". This is their main argument about selling some of the properties belonged to GCs.

[erolz]

by pointing out that this senario is actually extremly rare. Foreginers buying land that was based on exchanged land or on pre 74 TC owned land is a much more common senario than the one quoted above. That's all I was pointing out. Nothing more. No comment on leaglity of TRNC deeds or anything else.

erolz, I think instead of using the definition of "exchanged land" , it would be better to use the definition "the land that TCs suppose they have the equivelant in South". This is their main argument about selling some of the properties belonged to GCs.

OK. It's just I thought we were talking about land that was given to mainland settlers being sold to foreigners - as that is what was in MicAtCyp post. If we were / are talking about this (and I am no longer sure?) then this situation is extremely rare in my understanding (and certainly as rare or rarer than the 'abuses' MicAtCyp refers to re former TC properties in the south which was the comparrision).

I feel I am sinking into a mire of misunderstading and being misunderstood here?

[Alexandros Lordos]

I feel I am sinking into a mire of misunderstading and being misunderstood here?

No, what you are saying is very clear, at least from where I stand

Just one more question for you: What is the difference in market prices between original TC properties (the first category) and GC properties that had been given to TC refugees "in exchange"? Are original TC properties available in sufficient quantities, and in good locations, to cover the demand of foreign buyers? Or are most of the offered plots and houses GC owned?

Back to MicAtCyp's description of what is happening in the south with TC properties: If houses have been demolished to build Tennis courts, then what will the original owner be getting after a Comprhensive Settlement? A Tennis court? This is clearly unsatisfactory, and perhaps one area where the Annan Plan should be improved for TCs: Original TC owners should have the right to insist that whatever is currently standing in their properties should be demolished, and a new house built for them instead, of the same size and value as their original home (if they want a bigger house, they should be able to pay the difference and ask for a bigger house).

[erolz]

Just one more question for you: What is the difference in market prices between original TC properties (the first category) and GC properties that had been given to TC refugees "in exchange"? Are original TC properties available in sufficient quantities, and in good locations, to cover the demand of foreign buyers? Or are most of the offered plots and houses GC owned?

To be honest I am not sure what kind of 'premium' there is. I will try and find out for you. In reference to the second part of the question, no I do not think there is sufficent quantites or quality of former TC owned properties to meet the current demand and I would guess that the vast majority of property on offer for sale here falls into my category 2 (former GC owned but 'awarded' to TC refugess in exchange for all rights to their property in the south revenrting to the TRNC state).

[insan]

Original TC owners should have the right to insist that whatever is currently standing in their properties should be demolished, and a new house built for them instead, of the same size and value as their original home (if they want a bigger house, they should be able to pay the difference and ask for a bigger house).

How will we calculate the loss of value of TC properties that ruined and derelict by GC government in 1963-67 period? How can we calculate the loss of development of TC properties in 1963-67 period at the time that GC leadership had imposed heavy embargos upon TCs and oppressed majority of TCs to quit their government jobs and some other jobs jointly established with GCs. How will we calculate the loss of value of TC properties in 1967-74 period while Makrios still was insisting on majority rule and far right under the leadership of Grivas still were making schemes and organizing to achive Enosis? How will we calculate the loss of value of TC properties in 1974-2005 period because of lack of care by GC administration? I know TC leadership also has its share in this huge loss but what's the share of GC leadership that was exerting hard to implement the Akritas Plan in order to achieve their goal; "majority rule" and Enosis when compared the share of TC leadership that on one hand was exerting hard to preserve "political equality" of TC community and on the other hand retaliating Enosis with Taksim?