Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

Why hasnt the EU member 'RoC' given backthese refugees properties or paid compensation, where the EU now.

why does the trnc not give the gcs houses back instead of selling it and not allowing them to go home just because your not recognised or in the eu? well turkey is trying both.. does not mean they are exempt from rules

you are the ones who claim to be European and abide by all the rules obviously not, you only apply the rules that benefit GCs.

the trnc is part of nowhere so does that mean you guys can ignore every law? the eu/un ones? the turks are not only abiding to the laws that suite them? when it suits them they are happy to listen to eu/un laws and condem countries for not abiding by them..

for a "state" that is trying to become legal and ignoring all the laws thats not good. you claim to be a state yet ignore all the laws.

tcs and gcs should be allowed to go home, though i can see a flood of gcs going to re claim their homes if turks allowed it, they cant have flood of gcs in the north that would be bad for them

We dont claim to be part of the EU or apply their laws 100% but dont forget nor does most of the world. You are the ones who claim to be European and respect human rights, so start acting in that fashion as no one buys your lies.

Why do you claim it would be bad for us if the GCs returned to the north?

[Viewpoint]

VP

Why hasnt the EU member 'RoC' given backthese refugees properties or paid compensation, where the EU now.

Because you have not given back what belongs to GC refugees. (childish response to a childish comment)

On a more serious note I hope the TC's who have filed suit win. They ought to have their properties given back to them. But be careful TC"s because you could shoot yourselves in the foot. By expecting to receive properties back from the RoC the same Court may find that GC's should be given their properties back. Can mama Turkey afford (a) to give properties back and (b) pay compensation and truly pay compensation for denying GC's their assets. Remember its the same Court.

You are the ones who claim to abide by EU laws and respect human rights...these people are cliaming their rights, you are the one who are being childish by stating your rights are not rights because Turkey arrived due to your desire to be a Greek island.

I hope they get their rights back as well.

[Viewpoint]

But as far as I know there is no issue about TC's getting their properties back. I don't believe is unreasonable for the RoC's rule that TC's wanting properties back should live in the RoC for a period of six months. That way stops double dipping into refugee properties in the occupied area.

How do you expect people to stop their lives in the north and move south? how will it stop double dipping? this 6 months crap is just a ploy to stop people form attempting to get their properties back.

[humanist]

Its a lot more than what your giving. But as per usual the Turks are all about taking ..... go play your sob story to someone else. Even when we agree with you you seem to find something else to winge about

[Viewpoint]

Its a lot more than what your giving. But as per usual the Turks are all about taking ..... go play your sob story to someone else. Even when we agree with you you seem to find something else to winge about

Sorry could you repeat what we agree about?

You to can go to the IPC and claim your property or compensation, you dont even have to live in the north for 6 months.

[Nikitas]

As far as I have investigated, double dipping means having accepted illegal deeds to GC property in the north or having otherwise dealt with Gc property for financial gain.

Merely occupying GC property does not count. Is this so? So people who are merely staying in a GC house allocated to them by the TRNC would not be disqualified from retaking their properties in the south?

[Kikapu]

As far as I have investigated, double dipping means having accepted illegal deeds to GC property in the north or having otherwise dealt with Gc property for financial gain.

Merely occupying GC property does not count. Is this so? So people who are merely staying in a GC house allocated to them by the TRNC would not be disqualified from retaking their properties in the south?

Nikitas,

Those TCs who gave their property deeds on the property they own in the south to the "trnc", it then becomes the "property" of the "trnc", and if and when these TCs try to get their properties in the south, whether they still have the GC property in the north or sold it, they then become "double dippers", which is also punishable by the "trnc" on those TC who attempt this venture, because the "trnc" believes they are the new owners of the TC's property in the south and not the TC owner himself, because he was compensated with stolen GC property in the north.!

You can see the whole thing is legal and on the up and up in the north on how the stolen GC properties are dealt with.!

[CopperLine]

As far as I have investigated, double dipping means having accepted illegal deeds to GC property in the north or having otherwise dealt with Gc property for financial gain.

Merely occupying GC property does not count. Is this so? So people who are merely staying in a GC house allocated to them by the TRNC would not be disqualified from retaking their properties in the south?

Nikitas,

Those TCs who gave their property deeds on the property they own in the south to the "trnc", it then becomes the "property" of the "trnc", and if and when these TCs try to get their properties in the south, whether they still have the GC property in the north or sold it, they then become "double dippers", which is also punishable by the "trnc" on those TC who attempt this venture, because the "trnc" believes they are the new owners of the TC's property in the south and not the TC owner himself, because he was compensated with stolen GC property in the north.!

You can see the whole thing is legal and on the up and up in the north on how the stolen GC properties are dealt with.!

Does that make sense Kikapu ? If a TC with property in the south moved to the north and "gave their property deeds on the property they own in the south to the "trnc", [and] it then becomes the "property" of the "trnc"" then how can they then claim for their southern property if they do not have title deeds ? The RoC authorities are surely not going to return properties to claimants who cannot produce title ?

There's something not quite right about this account.

On a broader point, if the TRNC does not hold the title deed then there's absolutely nothing they can do regarding property claims in the south by TCs or anyone else. If TRNC does have the title deeds of erstwhile TC property owners of the south, they're useless bits of paper whose value and purpose cannot be realised by the TRNC. In this respect of "exchange title", and TC title in the south the TRNC authorities are involved in one big fiction, or self-delusion, I should say.

[Kikapu]

As far as I have investigated, double dipping means having accepted illegal deeds to GC property in the north or having otherwise dealt with Gc property for financial gain.

Merely occupying GC property does not count. Is this so? So people who are merely staying in a GC house allocated to them by the TRNC would not be disqualified from retaking their properties in the south?

Nikitas,

Those TCs who gave their property deeds on the property they own in the south to the "trnc", it then becomes the "property" of the "trnc", and if and when these TCs try to get their properties in the south, whether they still have the GC property in the north or sold it, they then become "double dippers", which is also punishable by the "trnc" on those TC who attempt this venture, because the "trnc" believes they are the new owners of the TC's property in the south and not the TC owner himself, because he was compensated with stolen GC property in the north.!

You can see the whole thing is legal and on the up and up in the north on how the stolen GC properties are dealt with.!

Does that make sense Kikapu ? If a TC with property in the south moved to the north and "gave their property deeds on the property they own in the south to the "trnc", [and] it then becomes the "property" of the "trnc"" then how can they then claim for their southern property if they do not have title deeds ? The RoC authorities are surely not going to return properties to claimants who cannot produce title ?

There's something not quite right about this account.

It makes perfect sence, CopperLine, contrarary to how it may look on the surface.

First of all, all the properties of all the TCs and GCs in the south has been all computerised. To receive confirmation of ones property, one does not need the original deed issued 50+ years ago, because it is all documented by the RoC Land Registry. This is how I managed to get all the relevant property documents belonging to my mother's side of the family, despite most of her siblings having traded their original deeds (or just copies ) with the "trnc" in order to receive GC properties in the north. All the property of my mothers side of the family are documented, even some we we did not know about and had no deeds for them. Anyone who may want to do "double dipping", all they had to do is to go and get a copy of their property deeds from the RoC's land registry, assuming of course, that they are the sole owners of the land. If they have extended family members who also have shares in the Grandparent/parents property, this is where the whole process of "double dipping" comes to a halt, since chances are, some of the siblings already received GC properties in the north and have agreed to forgo their properties in the south to which the "trnc" has taken ownership of their properties. Then one gets into legal matters in solving which family members owns what and how many Dönüms to be worked out by probate if there isn't a will around. Not so easy to get all the family members to agree to do a "double dipping" when they have GCs properties in the north given to them by the "trnc" in exchange for their deeds in the south. Any TC found out by the "trnc" who has agreed to such exchange and is then try to sell his property in the south, will be punished by the "trnc", since the "trnc" believes they have already compensated the TC owner with the GCs property. In another words, the "trnc" has become owners of TCs property by giving the TCs some stolen GC property. What a deal, what a racket.!

On a broader point, if the TRNC does not hold the title deed then there's absolutely nothing they can do regarding property claims in the south by TCs or anyone else. If TRNC does have the title deeds of erstwhile TC property owners of the south, they're useless bits of paper whose value and purpose cannot be realised by the TRNC. In this respect of "exchange title", and TC title in the south the TRNC authorities are involved in one big fiction, or self-delusion, I should say.

You are correct to a point with the above statement. However, what the "trnc" hopes to do with those TC deeds that they got in return for giving out stolen GC properties to the TCs, is to exchange them with the RoC for greater land to become part of the north state once the dust settles down and that everyone is ready for a settlement. For every piece of land that a TC owner sells his land in the south recorded by the RoC land registry, that is one piece of land the "trnc" does not have to add it to become part of the north state. That's the reason why the "trnc" is just as hard on "double dippers" as the RoC is. The fact that the RoC does not recognise what the "trnc" does or does not do, is another point all together.!

[Kikapu]

Turkish invasion has cost Cyprus over €100 billion

By Stefanos Evripidou
Published on July 28, 2010


PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS and companies have lost over €109 billion as a result of the Turkish invasion, according to a study by the University of Cyprus (UCY).

The report was prepared by the university’s Economics Research Centre, headed by Panos Pashardis, and published in Sunday’s Phileleftheros. It did not include losses incurred by state and church-owned properties.
According to the study, total losses of per capita income for the period 1974-1990 amount to €4.65 billion at current (2009) prices.

Definite private losses relating to privately-owned goods destroyed or stolen amount to €7bn, with half of these losses in the form of private housing units and their equipment. From the €7bn, the biggest loss came from housing units (€3.5bn), followed by private businesses (€2bn) and merchandise and commercial vehicles (€1.5bn.

One figure that may concern UN facilitators attempting to bridge the gap between the two sides in negotiations on the property issue is the value put on occupied properties in the north, which at 2009 prices reaches €82.1bn.

The report also calculated that Greek Cypriot property owners in the north incurred losses from lack of use or access to those properties since 1974 amounting to €15.78bn. State and church properties, including buildings, equipment, monuments, roads, ports, airports, forests etc, were excluded from this estimation since it is not possible to calculate losses emanating from those properties.

According to the UCY study, the state absorbed the largest part of the negative repercussions of the invasion, increasing state expenditure by 80 per cent in the period 1974-76. The state lost use of the Nicosia international airport and Famagusta port which handled almost half of imports and 43 per cent of exports.

The agriculture sector was most affected by the invasion while the tourism industry shot up in the two decades after the war, in large part as a result of government incentives given to speed up growth in the sector, including low interest rate loans and tax relief measures.

The study also highlighted that Turkish Cypriots losses resulting from loss of use or access to their properties in the government-controlled areas in the period 1974-1997 amounted to more than €2.2bn at 2009 prices.

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/turki ... n/20100728