Cyprus-Forum.com

[Mr. T]

Personally I don't approve of such one-sided, self-interested condemnations.

Take it elsewhere please. It says worse about the poster than anything else really, IMHO.

Not like those you continually make about Turks then!!!

The evidence against the Turks is there for all to see!

They are already condemned by the UN and ECHR.

Besides there are enough Turks, including you, around to give the counter-claims. This builder is not here to defend himself, so it is highly unethical of the poster to make such remarks.

But of course Mr T, you would not see it that way, as your morals and ethics leave a lot to be desired.

So now anyone who notices your vehement hate against TCs, Turks and everything Turkish albeit that they have no Turkish blood like me have to be Turkish. Very strange logic indeed.

You know nothing of my morals or ethics so why do you demean yourself even more by making such stupid remarks.

Since you support the racist ethnic cleansing against GCs by Turks and TCs, then you are morally corrupt.

You also seem to support condemning people who do not have representation to counter claims, so you are ethically deficient.

I know enough! .... End of!

Not 'end of'.

Being neither a TC nor a GC, unlike you I do not take a 100% blinkered, one sided view of the story up to 1974 as you prove yet again by your 'racist ethnic cleansing' comment.

Where have I said anything about supporting the idea of this thread. I merely pointed out how hypocritical you are. To jog your memory you said
'Personally I don't approve of such one-sided, self-interested condemnations '
but this is the basis of your numerous comments on varied subjects which you turn to spurious hatred of all things TC and Turkish.

[tayl0r]

I hate shit developers.

really...why lie?

[Free Spirit]

It is my understanding that title deeds are issued by the land registry office and that the developer has nothing to do with this. Have I got it wrong?

Surely the developer/builder owns the land initialy, these deeds are held until building work is completed and are supposed to be transfered to the new owner.
What usualy happens is that in many many case (the majority in fact) the builder/developer re-mortgages the land part way through building to finance his next project, the solicitor quite wrongly completes without the exchange of the title deeds leaving the new owner in a vulnerable position of the bank etc really owning their property even though they've handed over the full amount.

[pantheman]

It is my understanding that title deeds are issued by the land registry office and that the developer has nothing to do with this. Have I got it wrong?

Surely the developer/builder owns the land initialy, these deeds are held until building work is completed and are supposed to be transfered to the new owner.
What usualy happens is that in many many case (the majority in fact) the builder/developer re-mortgages the land part way through building to finance his next project, the solicitor quite wrongly completes without the exchange of the title deeds leaving the new owner in a vulnerable position of the bank etc really owning their property even though they've handed over the full amount.

FS, I disagree with this statement, although it does happen, it doesn't happen on the scale as you are making out.

Further, when your solicitor is drawing up the contract, he can ask for a bank waiver to state that once you have paid your money the land your house is sitting on is untouchable even if the developer defaulted with an outstanding mortgage.

The lawyer cannot issue title deeds at this time, as the project is not finished and untill such time the developer cannot even apply to have a final certificate inspection. Given the amount of building work currently ongoing, 5 years is a min, however it also depends on the size of the project. Building 5 houses against 85 houses it is likely the 5 houses would be completed first and so getting the deeds would be quicker.

If mr P. Livadiotis said 2 years (whats in the contract) then that would have been optimistic. Usually the period of time is after the project is finished.

[Free Spirit]

FS, I disagree with this statement, although it does happen, it doesn't happen on the scale as you are making out.

Further, when your solicitor is drawing up the contract, he can ask for a bank waiver to state that once you have paid your money the land your house is sitting on is untouchable even if the developer defaulted with an outstanding mortgage.

The lawyer cannot issue title deeds at this time, as the project is not finished and untill such time the developer cannot even apply to have a final certificate inspection. Given the amount of building work currently ongoing, 5 years is a min, however it also depends on the size of the project. Building 5 houses against 85 houses it is likely the 5 houses would be completed first and so getting the deeds would be quicker.

If mr P. Livadiotis said 2 years (whats in the contract) then that would have been optimistic. Usually the period of time is after the project is finished.

I'm not going to get invlve in a long winded debate, I went to 'Buysell' with a list of 20 resale propertues only 4 had title deeds.

Nobody specified project this farce applies right across the board, it is also common practise for one small part of an appartment complex to remain in the hands of the developer thus preventing the issue of title deeds.

It is also a falacy to say that you have to wait for the whole project to be completed before title deeds can be issued, this is just another example of the developers excuses, our project where we recently rented was incomplete yet the earlier properties had received their title deeds.

Our rental last november still had no title deeds after 15 years and that project was built by one of the two largest Cyprus developers.


The 5 year minimum issuing time does not make financial sense; with so much potential revenue waiting what government in its right mind would not employ more staff and enlarge the department.
Sorry but the real reason is as was stated earlier corrupt developers and lawyers.

[Sega]

I hate shit developers.

really...why lie?

There all idiots, this is how they make there money. But look, land and house sales will drop and then you will only see the best of the best developers standing. It's karma's little way of saying hello.

[Sega]

It is my understanding that title deeds are issued by the land registry office and that the developer has nothing to do with this. Have I got it wrong?

Surely the developer/builder owns the land initialy, these deeds are held until building work is completed and are supposed to be transfered to the new owner.
What usualy happens is that in many many case (the majority in fact) the builder/developer re-mortgages the land part way through building to finance his next project, the solicitor quite wrongly completes without the exchange of the title deeds leaving the new owner in a vulnerable position of the bank etc really owning their property even though they've handed over the full amount.

You trying to say that even once the owner has completely payed the house off, the developer can remortgage it. What if the company goes bust? What then? Even if you have a contract that states you will be paid the full amount back if they fail to give you the deeds you will still be left hosrt as the the company has gone bust. What are solicitors doing to prevent this?

[Free Spirit]

It is my understanding that title deeds are issued by the land registry office and that the developer has nothing to do with this. Have I got it wrong?

Surely the developer/builder owns the land initialy, these deeds are held until building work is completed and are supposed to be transfered to the new owner.
What usualy happens is that in many many case (the majority in fact) the builder/developer re-mortgages the land part way through building to finance his next project, the solicitor quite wrongly completes without the exchange of the title deeds leaving the new owner in a vulnerable position of the bank etc really owning their property even though they've handed over the full amount.

You trying to say that even once the owner has completely payed the house off, the developer can remortgage it. What if the company goes bust? What then? Even if you have a contract that states you will be paid the full amount back if they fail to give you the deeds you will still be left hosrt as the the company has gone bust. What are solicitors doing to prevent this?

What I said was that part way through construction the developer/builder very often takes out a re-mortgage using your property/land as surity and this is the real reason why most people do not get their title deeds because although the corrupt solicitor has completed on the deal and given your cash to the builder/developer, the bank are holding your deeds to fund the buiders next project.
In one village where we were considering a house purchase the owners only had the deeds to the land.

[Sega]

It is my understanding that title deeds are issued by the land registry office and that the developer has nothing to do with this. Have I got it wrong?

Surely the developer/builder owns the land initialy, these deeds are held until building work is completed and are supposed to be transfered to the new owner.
What usualy happens is that in many many case (the majority in fact) the builder/developer re-mortgages the land part way through building to finance his next project, the solicitor quite wrongly completes without the exchange of the title deeds leaving the new owner in a vulnerable position of the bank etc really owning their property even though they've handed over the full amount.

You trying to say that even once the owner has completely payed the house off, the developer can remortgage it. What if the company goes bust? What then? Even if you have a contract that states you will be paid the full amount back if they fail to give you the deeds you will still be left hosrt as the the company has gone bust. What are solicitors doing to prevent this?

What I said was that part way through construction the developer/builder very often takes out a re-mortgage using your property/land as surity and this is the real reason why most people do not get their title deeds because although the corrupt solicitor has completed on the deal and given your cash to the builder/developer, the bank are holding your deeds to fund the buiders next project.
In one village where we were considering a house purchase the owners only had the deeds to the land.

That sucks. In the most part it's bank at fault who allow them to put down somebody elses house as security. Something seriously has to be done to prevent this from happening. The developers told me that the reason people do not get title deeds were because the land registry is very slow, but I suppose this was another lie.

[Feisty]

What I said was that part way through construction the developer/builder very often takes out a re-mortgage using your property/land as surity and this is the real reason why most people do not get their title deeds because although the corrupt solicitor has completed on the deal and given your cash to the builder/developer, the bank are holding your deeds to fund the buiders next project.
In one village where we were considering a house purchase the owners only had the deeds to the land.

Whilst I don't dispute there is a problem with deeds, please get your facts right.
A developer cannot re-mortgage or even mortgage a property if it has been sold, only the land.
If an owner has deeds to the land the developer cannot re-mortgage any part of it.