Cyprus-Forum.com

[EricSeans]

Paphitis,

Your words as a Cypriot mean a lot to me. I can only speak for myself, but yesterday's decision, the implications behind it and the reactions in the north have made the efforts of some of us trying to change attitudes from within worthwhile. I look forward to the day when we can again travel from one end of Cyprus to the other without having to show passports or being monitored and questioned at length by security police about the origins of our family names, which happened to me over the years.

Are we to presume that you too is one of the ...wise investors in the occupied part of Cyprus ( Not my words but those of the British foreign office , the UN and the EU ) , if so congratulations on your triumphant investment !!

Hi Miltiades,

As you can see I say "Bellapais 1968-" so to date. As my parents were not Cypriot the deeds are foreign owned from then (in fact we were living there in 74), mortgage paid to Bank of Cyprus etc etc.

So this will increase the value of my pre-74 deeds that my family own but not that of land in dispute.

I hope there are more people like yourself in the "trnc", who do not compromise your values by possessing stolen property, as well as standing up for what is right.

People such as yourself and Eric Seans, deserve our respect. I think Rose may be another. You are all very brave people. You guys are heroes for standing firm on your morals, and for also speaking out against those that take advantage of stolen GC property.

[DT.]

Paphitis,

Your words as a Cypriot mean a lot to me. I can only speak for myself, but yesterday's decision, the implications behind it and the reactions in the north have made the efforts of some of us trying to change attitudes from within worthwhile. I look forward to the day when we can again travel from one end of Cyprus to the other without having to show passports or being monitored and questioned at length by security police about the origins of our family names, which happened to me over the years.

Are we to presume that you too is one of the ...wise investors in the occupied part of Cyprus ( Not my words but those of the British foreign office , the UN and the EU ) , if so congratulations on your triumphant investment !!

Hi Miltiades,

As you can see I say "Bellapais 1968-" so to date. As my parents were not Cypriot the deeds are foreign owned from then (in fact we were living there in 74), mortgage paid to Bank of Cyprus etc etc.

So this will increase the value of my pre-74 deeds that my family own but not that of land in dispute.

I hope there are more people like yourself in the "trnc", who do not compromise your values by possessing stolen property, as well as standing up for what is right.

People such as yourself and Eric Seans, deserve our respect. I think Rose may be another. You are all very brave people. You guys are heroes for standing firm on your morals, and for also speaking out against those that take advantage of stolen GC property.

I just think you're an a***hole Eric

[EricSeans]

aweverard.

How's Beijing? To be frank I always had you down as a supporter of partition and the TRNC, since you frequently challenged my views on the northern BBs.

How could I have been so wrong?

But watch out for companies doing this:

"Offshore Company

1. Cook Islands Trust - $12,995
2. Nevis LLC - $1495
3. Swiss Offshore Bank Account - $550

Total discounted to $15,040

Many experts agree that the strongest asset protection tool in the world is the asset protection trust formed in the Cook Islands (south of Hawaii). When the judge in the US, for example, demands that the trust funds be brought back to the US and given to your enemy-at-law, the licensed, bonded trustee in the Cook Islands (who is outside of the US judge's jurisdiction) can refuse to comply. This puts you in a position of impossibility to comply with the judge's orders to return the funds. Your money remains safe and secure beyond the reach of the courts.

The Nevis LLC will be 100% owned by your Cook Islands trust. You are the manager of your offshore companies (in this case, the Nevis LLC). You are the signer on the accounts and have complete management control. This places a legal tool inside of the LLC that you can control until the legal duress arises."

Should the court decision follow the legal advice!

[EricSeans]

Paphitis,

Your words as a Cypriot mean a lot to me. I can only speak for myself, but yesterday's decision, the implications behind it and the reactions in the north have made the efforts of some of us trying to change attitudes from within worthwhile. I look forward to the day when we can again travel from one end of Cyprus to the other without having to show passports or being monitored and questioned at length by security police about the origins of our family names, which happened to me over the years.

Are we to presume that you too is one of the ...wise investors in the occupied part of Cyprus ( Not my words but those of the British foreign office , the UN and the EU ) , if so congratulations on your triumphant investment !!

Hi Miltiades,

As you can see I say "Bellapais 1968-" so to date. As my parents were not Cypriot the deeds are foreign owned from then (in fact we were living there in 74), mortgage paid to Bank of Cyprus etc etc.

So this will increase the value of my pre-74 deeds that my family own but not that of land in dispute.

I hope there are more people like yourself in the "trnc", who do not compromise your values by possessing stolen property, as well as standing up for what is right.

People such as yourself and Eric Seans, deserve our respect. I think Rose may be another. You are all very brave people. You guys are heroes for standing firm on your morals, and for also speaking out against those that take advantage of stolen GC property.

I just think you're an a***hole Eric

That's not what you were saying last night.

[-mikkie2-]

"In short if one has no assets then there is no tax liability nor can a claim be made against the non-existent assets. As trusts in the UK take assets out of your ownership the assets cannot be claimed in a court case. But please correct me if I am wrong."

I think you are partly correct. However, if the Orams put the asset in trust in their childrens names, they would then have to pay fair rent to the trust for living in the property. If their property is mortgaged then I am not sure that the property can be held in trust - the lender would have something to say about that.

What I am saying is, either way, the Orams would have to pay somewhere along the line.

[Jerry]

Surely the whole point is that the carpetbaggers will have the greatest difficulty in doing any thing with their properties, no one will want to buy them, older residents will be reluctant to spend too much on maintenance, many of them will end up living in slums. The Brit community in "trnc" is on a slippery slope to nowhere.

[Kifeas]

"The aim was to take the Orams assets in the UK, so if those assets are not in an EU state it will not be easy to take, hence the whole offshore trust and company thing. Also the telling part was the bit about you keeping operating the assets until and legal problem arises."

It is not possible for a main residence in the UK to be held in an off-shore trust. The simple fact of the matter is a property is a fixed asset. It also affects taxation - the residents of such a property would have to pay rent to the trustee otherwise you will fall foul of UK tax laws! The Inland Revenue would then have something to say about that. It also would mean that the asset would be locked away in such a way that it would actually be a drain on your finances rather than a benefit.

To get around this the Orams would basically have to sell everything they have in the UK and hold any proceeds in offshore accounts. It would also mean the Orams would not be able to set foot again in the UK, because as they are domiciled there, they would still be liable for UK taxation. Obviously, once the Cyprus problem is solved they would be screwd again. Basically they will be screwed either way!

As it was Mrs Orams who was served with the writ if she transfers the UK assets to a trust (offshore or not) with her children (assuming they have some) as beneficiaries she than has no assets in the UK.

In short if one has no assets then there is no tax liability nor can a claim be made against the non-existent assets. As trusts in the UK take assets out of your ownership the assets cannot be claimed in a court case. But please correct me if I am wrong.

People are forgetting one thing, which is that Orams or anybody else to be found in their place, may as well become arrested either in the south or anywhere else in the EU and either be made to pay their dues or become jailed on failure to abide by the RoC court rulings they have or will have against them in the future. Therefore, it is not only the seizure of assets found anywhere in their possession, but also further consequences upon failing to honour a court judgment calling upon them to do certain things, such as compensation payments etc. This holds true of non-EU nationals such as Israelis, etc, who will be convicted by RoC courts for trespassing GC property in the north and then are found anywhere in the vicinity of the EU, and such people do travel in the EU as well.

Having said that, it is also necessary to point out that the target of all these procedures undertaken by Apostolides and his layers, were not the Orams themselves, but more importantly, through the Orams’ conviction, to discourage perspective foreign “buyers” of GC properties in the north from doing so, a task that became apparent after the decision of the occupational regime (“trnc”) to encourage the unprecedented looting and cementing of GC properties upon the rejection by GCs of the Annan plan. In a sense, Orams became victims of this despicable attempted policy of the TC leadership to destroy the prospects that would allow the return of GCs back into the north, by eradicating their property rights though the cementing of their land and selling of it mainly to foreigners. Had it not been for this policy on the part of the TC side, most likely Apostolides and other GC refugees would not have considered taking such a path against the Orams. The moral perpetrators of Orams misfortune are the TC leadership, the occupational regime and Turkey, which tried to make use of the provisions of the rejected monstrosity bearing Kofi Annan’s name, to create further, more and newer fait accomplices against the violated human rights of the GC property owners in the north.

[Kikapu]

I always wondered when the Apostolides won a judgement against the Orams in Nicosia courts, that they simply did not put a lean on the property owned by the Orams in the UK, which they would have been in line to be paid off when the house was eventually sold off or needed refinancing, but instead they took a more difficult path to get the Orams to sell their house in order to collect the money, which the UK courts rejected with the help of Mrs. Blair. Subsequently, the Orams sold their UK home and hid the money like criminals on the run. So why didn't the Apostolides just put a lean on the property in the UK that belonged to the Orams. Well, giving this weeks results, perhaps they were not after the money from the Orams after all, but to get a landmark ruling from the EU that will benefit all the GC's who properties has been sold off to others. In the end, that's what they have done which will benefit all the GC's with property in the north, than just getting money for themselves. I believe lawyers for the Apostolides were pretty sure they will get such a ruling and they went for it.

I think this changes the dynamics of the negotiations right now, specially when it comes to the property issues. Talat was making a lot of suggestions like compensating most and returning property to some, claiming that the GC properties has changed too many hands, therefore it would be impossible to return the properties back to their original owners . Well, this ruling in effect tells Talat, it does not matter how many times the property changed hands, the person who last bought the property is the one is going to have to pay the original legal owners by returning the property back. Then the last person can go after the person who sold them the illegal property and down the line to the person which the land was given to by the "trnc". Ultimately, it will be the "trnc" that will be left holding the bag and it is non of the concerns of the original legal deed owners business how many times his property changed hands, because he was not part of it. So, I can see Christofias telling Talat, "look here comrade Mehmet; it is not in my hands anymore to work something out with you on their property issues as to how many you are willing to give back, because the EU will say, all the property will need to be given back, because each GC owner will be able to sue the illegal owners of their properties once a settlement is reached, or even if there is a agreed partition and the north becomes part of the EU, the same will happen." This is really going to put Talat in a corner that he won't have any arguments for. I see the Human Rights noose tightening little by little around the "trnc's" and Turkey's neck concerning the GC's properties in the north..

[Get Real!]

Paphitis,

Your words as a Cypriot mean a lot to me....

Only problem is he's not a Cypriot man.

[Jerry]

"The aim was to take the Orams assets in the UK, so if those assets are not in an EU state it will not be easy to take, hence the whole offshore trust and company thing. Also the telling part was the bit about you keeping operating the assets until and legal problem arises."

It is not possible for a main residence in the UK to be held in an off-shore trust. The simple fact of the matter is a property is a fixed asset. It also affects taxation - the residents of such a property would have to pay rent to the trustee otherwise you will fall foul of UK tax laws! The Inland Revenue would then have something to say about that. It also would mean that the asset would be locked away in such a way that it would actually be a drain on your finances rather than a benefit.

To get around this the Orams would basically have to sell everything they have in the UK and hold any proceeds in offshore accounts. It would also mean the Orams would not be able to set foot again in the UK, because as they are domiciled there, they would still be liable for UK taxation. Obviously, once the Cyprus problem is solved they would be screwd again. Basically they will be screwed either way!

As it was Mrs Orams who was served with the writ if she transfers the UK assets to a trust (offshore or not) with her children (assuming they have some) as beneficiaries she than has no assets in the UK.

In short if one has no assets then there is no tax liability nor can a claim be made against the non-existent assets. As trusts in the UK take assets out of your ownership the assets cannot be claimed in a court case. But please correct me if I am wrong.

People are forgetting one thing, which is that Orams or anybody else to be found in their place, may as well become arrested either in the south or anywhere else in the EU and either be made to pay their dues or become jailed on failure to abide by the RoC court rulings they have or will have against them in the future. Therefore, it is not only the seizure of assets found anywhere in their possession, but also further consequences upon failing to honour a court judgment calling upon them to do certain things, such as compensation payments etc. This holds true of non-EU nationals such as Israelis, etc, who will be convicted by RoC courts for trespassing GC property in the north and then are found anywhere in the vicinity of the EU, and such people do travel in the EU as well.

Having said that, it is also necessary to point out that the target of all these procedures undertaken by Apostolides and his layers, were not the Orams themselves, but more importantly, through the Orams’ conviction, to discourage perspective foreign “buyers” of GC properties in the north from doing so, a task that became apparent after the decision of the occupational regime (“trnc”) to encourage the unprecedented looting and cementing of GC properties upon the rejection by GCs of the Annan plan. In a sense, Orams became victims of this despicable attempted policy of the TC leadership to destroy the prospects that would allow the return of GCs back into the north, by eradicating their property rights though the cementing of their land and selling of it mainly to foreigners. Had it not been for this policy on the part of the TC side, most likely Apostolides and other GC refugees would not have considered taking such a path against the Orams. The moral perpetrators of Orams misfortune are the TC leadership, the occupational regime and Turkey, which tried to make use of the provisions of the rejected monstrosity bearing Kofi Annan’s name, to create further, more and newer fait accomplices against the violated human rights of the GC property owners in the north.

Kifeas, I'm not sure if this would ever be a criminal matter within the EU. The action against Orams and others is a civil one although I suppose they could be arrested for contempt of Court if they do not comlpy with a court order. I'm sure sooner or later Copperline will clarify this point.

If I recall the "improvement" and exploitation to GC land actually started before the AP was rejected in response to the clause in the plan that said TCs could keep GC land that they improved or developed. I remember this quite clearly because the thieves who took my father's house spent thousands on it a few months before the referendum, it was quite obvious to me why they did it. You are absolutely right about the motives for the development of the stolen land, the stupid Brits who "bought" the property don't realise that they were simply being used by the Turks as pawns. Serves them right, I have even more contempt for them than I do for Denktash or Ecevit who at least felt they had a reason (wrongly) for what they did. The British and other thieves had only one motive - GREED!