Kikapu wrote:Viewpoint wrote:Kikapu wrote:YFred wrote: If a GC owns a piece of land worth 10000 pounds and a TC spent 200000 on it to build the house, you try an take it away from him after 35 years.
.
The chances are, the land is going to be worth more than the house built on it, so, is the TC who spent 50,000 pounds building a house on a land that is worth 200,000 now, is going to pay the GC land owner the 200,000 which would make the TCs net investment to 250,000, or do you expect the GC to let the TC profit the 200,000 instead.??
This is Kikapu logic for you, the land inceases in value and the house remains the same....typical one sided viewpoint.
In many cases, the land value is higher than the structure sitting on it, if it's a single family home. I'm sure not many spent 200,000 pounds 35 years ago to build a single family home on a land value at 10,000 pounds.!
In any case, you claim your house is not built on GC land, so don't worry about what the land under your house is worth. If it's GC land, be prepared to pay through the nose if you want to keep living in that house after a settlement.!
If people have invested on GC land then the majority of TCs have exchanged land in the south which according to your logic will be worth much more so they can sell it off and pay the GCs.
You have not seen the standard of houses being built in the TRNC and youd be suprised how many villas are valued over 200.000 pounds, shows yet again how out of touch you really are with the realities of the situation.
