Perhaps TRNC Central Bank Auditors Should Investigate Akfinans Bank?


I am not pointing a finger, nor am I accusing Akfinans Bank Limited of being anything other than the well run, or as well funded Bank it appears to be.

In light of what is happening and in particular the events surrounding the mortgage given to Abdurrahman Guney and Yuksel Yilmaz in November 2005, both of whom were allegedly already in default on the small mortgage given to them in March 2005; was this a wise decision on the part of the Bank? Was it fair and reasonable to apply an interest rate of 250% at inception and even though we have heard that the Bank allegedly never intended to charge that rate and was taking into account inflation, are we to accept this in light of the fact that a debt of under 100,000 lira became 2,077,000 lira some five years on.

The Bank allegedly admits to entering the security on the mortgage document as bare land, yet we know of the existence of a Survey allegedly commissioned by the Bank in March 2005 which contradicts this statement. The Bank allegedly claims that some of the properties were not completely built in 2006 yet every Contract of Sale pre dates 2006, so what is the relevance of this statement?

The bank allegedly claims that one of the owners has let his property and not paid stoppages, but this has nothing to do with the Kulaksiz 5 -v- Akfinans Bank Limited case and is between the owner and the Inland Revenue department. The bank has allegedly claimed the Landowner was not aware that the properties had been sold and yet his co-borrower was the builder who sold these properties, are we to believe that the man who entered into the mortgage loan with Mr Yuksel Yilmaz kept the details of the sales from him? Surely as Mr Yilmaz lived on the same site, he would have observed all the British pensioners occupying these villas. Pauline Read can produce his original signature on her Contract which is identical to the one Yuksel Yilmaz demonstrated to her on a piece of paper when she, her partner and Yilmaz were spending a social evening together. Of course the most telling fact is that the Bank allegedly claim the owners knew of the mortgages; how? The Bank certainly never told them, neither did the borrowers. They found out in early 2008 in the course of registering their Contracts at the Tapu, the Estate Agents Law of 2008 allowed this for the first time.

However all this is, as has been claimed before, “SMOKE AND MIRRORS”, the real question is, did Akfinans Bank Limited deliberately misinform the Tapu of the provenance of the land and in doing so allegedly violate their Human Rights of the Kulaksiz 5 and break Mortgage Law 11/78 section 21?

Is now the time for Central Bank to send in a team of impartial Auditors and go over this Bank’s mortgage records with a fine toothed comb? Are Kulaksiz 5 their only victims?

Instead of publicly accusing Pauline Read of carrying on a vendetta against Akfinans Bank Limited, perhaps the time has come for them to put their house in order and police their members?

Power to the people

Citizen Smith


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.