North Cyprus Property | Shared Kocan Better Than None at All


North Cyprus Property | Shared Kocan Better Than None at All

You many wonder why I am repeating this article so soon after its initial publication. The answer is that this is an example of where many of those on Kocan 3881, which is a shared Kocan, have already had their share of that Kocan transferred by the Tapu into their names. The Advocate acting for at least one of the petitioners against me tells me she is advising her client to do the same now that my interest in his land/property has been removed and he is able to do so.

It seems many who have had their Kocan put into their names have it on the land only and I am assured by an Advocate that it is perfectly legal to do this and leave it that way. He did however point out that it may cause problems when trying to sell. I have another friend who did have to get parcelisation and separation done to satisfy the Advocate acting for her purchaser, although she had spent many happy years in her villa with the Kocan only on the land prior to selling. I guess it is a matter of personal choice but if you are in doubt, talk to your Advocate who did the initial conveyance.

If I had been able to transfer my property in Karsiyaka (K5) when I received my PTP and invited the builder to meet me at the Tapu back in June 2008, it would have had to be on a shared Kocan basis, I would have felt protected by that transaction. Sadly because of the mortgage, the builder was unable to comply with this condition of my Sales Contract, which was of course another Breach of the Contract caused by the first Breach of the Contract…the mortgage.

“Cyprus Law | Pauline Voluntarily Removes Auction Memorandum
Tuesday, July 16, 2013 by Pauline Ann Read


Cyprus Law | Pauline Voluntarily Removes Auction Memorandum

The deed (Freudian slip?) is done, I have completed all the paperwork required to release the memorandum on Kocan 3881 and the owners at the site in Arapkoy no longer have any impediment on the land their homes stand on. At the same time I also removed the charge on Kocan 4155 also in Arapkoy as this was part of the same award.

My advice to the owners is, get your legal representative to ensure you are protected because as soon the paperwork in completed by the Tapu, you will be vulnerable, the ownership will appear in the name of that serial fraudster, cheating company Kulaksiz Construction Limited, and we all know what they do with anything in their name.

All those years, all the money, all the stress endured in looking for justice has been made void by this action. MM 209/09 was the number given to this Court Order. How very interesting to see that Kocan 4155 is part of this order. Some might say that since the Deleted Bank also have/had a memorandum on this site, their Advocate who was acting in this case for the owner who sees me as scum (Kocan 3881) should surely have passed this case on to someone else as in my opinion there is a conflict of interest. I would also suggest that the outrage demonstrated by the young man against me could be directed at his Advocate who did exactly the same on behalf of his Bank clients to an owner on Kocan 4155. It is hard to see but it shows MM 104/09 the Bank’s name, the amount of 105,328 lira with the hallmark interest rate of %80 and the date it was applied 20.05.09 before mine; oh the interest rate against mine was 4%. From today my memorandum has been removed by me.

Of course we all know of the mortgage put on the K5 site which started with an interest rate of 250% per annum and was changed on the Repossession Order to %80 per quarter compound.

The Advocate who assisted me today asked me three times if I was sure I wished to remove the memorandum. I replied that I was sure and knew what I was doing and I explained that I was not prepared to do to others what the Bank did to me and all the other K5 owners. No one influenced me in this decision, it was entirely mine. Certainly at no time did any one from the legal team acting for Kulaksiz 5 imply or state that I would be removed from the K5 case if I continued with the auction. Our legal team are ethical and honest and do not resort to such tactics.

The Tapu were very helpful and removing the memorandum was made easy for me. I will resist making any other comment.

However, after leaving the Tapu, I received a phone call from the Advocate who had been contacted by the Tapu asking if I also wish to withdraw case MES 87/2010. My answer was in the affirmative since this is the forced sale order and since I had just removed the memorandum, there was now nothing left to sell. You Could Not Make It Up.”

It saddens me that so many of us have been caught in the property scam situation here in north Cyprus and still having to part with more and more money. One of our Kulaksiz 5 legal team has now branched out into partnership with two of his colleagues. All three are in my opinion honest professional young men and I wish them all well. Whilst in a new partnership, the member of our legal team will still assist in the K5 case.


This is not an attempt to give legal advice, I am not qualified to give.

Never give in never give up.

Pauline Ann Read

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.