North Cyprus Property Victims | Protectionism


North Cyprus Property Victims – Protectionism

Christmas morning 2013. I am in the UK for the first time in 8 years, it’s raining. I have the Turkey ready to pop into the oven, a mountain of vegetables to prepare and I have to say I am feeling very mellow.

I have a little repeat to offer you by way of an article, but as usual it bears repeating since it is about another law in north Cyprus that seems to be protectionist towards its own. Seems to be, but if you read section 53, you will see as usual the Bank appear to be using it for it’s own purposes….to silence its critics and the press.

Publishing And Spreading Around False Statements And News

53. Any person who has deliberately taken an action which could damage the reputation of the Central Bank or any other bank or its assets or disseminated inaccurate information to that effect, are deemed to have committed an offence and on conviction are liable to a fine of up to TL 15,000,000,000.- (fifteen billion Turkish liras) or to an imprisonment of up to seven years or to both.

I think the first sentence absolves anyone who has told the truth about what Akfinans Bank Limited actually did.

They did give a mortgage on land they knew was built on and did not declare this when they submitted the mortgage document to the Tapu. The existence of a survey carried out on their behalf in March 2005 puts their knowledge of the true provenance of the land beyond doubt.

They did charge 250% as shown on the mortgage document.

They did take my villa and the villa of Eva McCluskey without a court order.

They did take the borrowers to court and obtain a repossession order without telling or involving the true owners thus denying the right to object. The Judge who granted this order changed the interest rate to 80% per quarter compound, astonishing because annualised it is even greater than the initial 250% which most find incredible anyway.

They say we knew of the mortgage but did nothing, of course we did not, but this admission by them confirms they knew of our existence long before we knew they had any interest in our homes. Why did they NOT contact us then, it is not as if they did not know where we were.

Was this act fraud from day one? You be the judge.

So why, you may ask, does Bank Law 39/2001 still exist? We all know why it was enacted back in 2001, but is it needed or even relevant now?

Never give in never give up.

Pauline Read

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.