Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

not at all. this was done recently and what happened in 1974 does not matter. only current values were used. it really cannot be simpler. it is the only way to do it. it is the only way it is going to be done if you want it to adhere to eu rules, and you do like the way things are done in the eu right/

[supporttheunderdog]

And the first words of the Irish Parliament in their EU presidency?

http://www.incyprus.com.cy/en-gb/Cyprus/4170/32164/no-eu-membership-without-cyprus-soloution

[Kikapu]

not at all. this was done recently and what happened in 1974 does not matter. only current values were used. it really cannot be simpler. it is the only way to do it. it is the only way it is going to be done if you want it to adhere to eu rules, and you do like the way things are done in the eu right/

Can you tell me as to why the Turkish owned properties in the north are worth far more than stolen GC properties in the north, on a like for like properties?

So when it comes to using today's valuations, why only use the lower valuations that are put on the stolen GCs properties and not use the valuations that are higher on the TCs properties in the north. Could it be the GCs properties are valued lower because they already have owners and that they are sold off illegally.?

How can the north have two tier land valuation? One for the TC owned properties at a much higher value and one for stolen GC properties at much lower value. Is this not a definition of Racism, and you think the EU is going to set the price at lower valuation on GC properties as a benchmark to do the exchange of the lands that would favour the TCs over the GCs. Are you mad?

[supporttheunderdog]

not at all. this was done recently and what happened in 1974 does not matter. only current values were used. it really cannot be simpler. it is the only way to do it. it is the only way it is going to be done if you want it to adhere to eu rules, and you do like the way things are done in the eu right/

Bearing in mind rulings of the ECHR I do not think it matters since the stolen property of Greek Speaking Cypriots still belongs to them. Likewise the hand over for points of Property in the south is a legal nonsense bearing in mind the complete illegallity of the Puupet psuedo-Regime in the in the illegally occupied North part of the ROC.

[Lordo]

i dont know why you ask me. i have had nothing to do with the gc properties in the north on principle. all my properties are legit pre 1974 tc. you cant get any more legit than that my friend.

Why should it be racism. so what you are saying the reason why karpaz is cheaper then lefkosa it is for anti-karpazian reason. it is called capitalism. people will pay what they like and charge what they like. market decides my friend and very few people can buck the market. it has nothing to do with racism. there is racism but it is nothing to do with that.

[Kikapu]

i dont know why you ask me. i have had nothing to do with the gc properties in the north on principle. all my properties are legit pre 1974 tc. you cant get any more legit than that my friend.

Why should it be racism. so what you are saying the reason why karpaz is cheaper then lefkosa it is for anti-karpazian reason. it is called capitalism. people will pay what they like and charge what they like. market decides my friend and very few people can buck the market. it has nothing to do with racism. there is racism but it is nothing to do with that.

Now you are trying to take the piss by acting stupid to try and avoid to answer the questions put to you, otherwise you wouldn't bring Karpaz and Nicosia to make a price comparison against each other. Why don't you compare TC and GC land prices next to each other in those regions and see what the differences are!

I wasn't accusing you of anything regarding GCs properties in the north. I was just asking you as to why you want to use today's much reduced land values of stolen GCs properties in the north and not the much more valuable TCs properties in the north on a like for like properties as a benchmark to be used when pricing the exchanges with TCs properties in the south? Any logical explanations?

[Viewpoint]

Disputed properties are less desirable than undisputed land...now do you get it Kikapooooo.

[Kikapu]

Disputed properties are less desirable than undisputed land...now do you get it Kikapooooo.

If the property has an owner with deeds before 1974, they are not disputed properties.

Is your property a disputed property?

Are all the TCs property in the south also disputed property?

[Viewpoint]

Disputed properties are less desirable than undisputed land...now do you get it Kikapooooo.

If the property has an owner with deeds before 1974, they are not disputed properties.

Is your property a disputed property?

Are all the TCs property in the south also disputed property?

They are according to us as they are in the TRNC.

NO

Yes by the "RoC" administration thats why we have to go to court and live south 6 months etc etc.

[Kikapu]

Disputed properties are less desirable than undisputed land...now do you get it Kikapooooo.

If the property has an owner with deeds before 1974, they are not disputed properties.

Is your property a disputed property?

Are all the TCs property in the south also disputed property?

They are according to us as they are in the TRNC.

NO

Yes by the "RoC" administration thats why we have to go to court and live south 6 months etc etc.

"trnc" has no say so on properties in the north on pre owned pre 74. The EU courts have already established that.

If your property is not disputed, then neither is anyone else's.

TCs properties in the south are not disputed either. The laws in the RoC are designed to stop people like you from "Double Dipping".