North Cyprus Property | Visiting the Supreme Court Registry

North Cyprus Property | Visiting the Supreme Court RegistryWITHOUT PREJUDICE

North Cyprus Property | Visiting the Supreme Court Registry

Tomorrow, in the company of my Advocate, we go to the Supreme Court Registry to lodge the Mandamus case.

This is not entirely new to me because, when I wanted to Appeal the Repossession Order given by Judge Mehmet Turker to the bank on the 20th November 2008, I also had to get ‘leave’ to Appeal, which was granted, although this was through the High Court, not the Supreme Court. The preparation for this case took many trips to the High Court to prepare for the hearing and indeed when the hearing date arrived we had even had Yuksel Yilmaz the landowner served with the papers in Hatay, Turkey. This is what happened:

Pauline Read’s court case against the Bank
Friday, January 29, 2010 by Name & Address Supplied

When the TRNC High Court threw out my case against the Bank, because I had won the case against my builder, I thought that was the end of the matter. You can imagine my surprise when at the end of last week I received an e mail from my Advocate which read:

‘In relation to the recent High Court Case, the defendant’s lawyer has submitted the invoice for costs in the amount £1000. We will need to make this payment to *********************** urgently. I would be grateful if you could bring this money to the office on Monday so that we can make this payment.’

Not unnaturally I queried this and was informed in writing that the High Court had ordered that I pay the defendant’s Advocate’s legal costs. I was also told that the amount was not stipulated and that if I objected the Court Registrar would calculate the amount based on court guidelines.

My Advocate checked the guidelines and felt the costs would be around 3400TL and since the Bank Limited Advocate was asking for less than this, it would not be in my best interest to dispute this. I realised that I had no choice but to pay and so emailed back to say that I would pay this amount but that when I brought the money to the office I would expect to receive a copy of the invoice and court order before parting with my money.

I went in on Monday with the money but was informed that the Bank’s Advocate had not supplied a fatura and therefore they would not take the money from me. I most certainly would not have parted with it unless I saw and obtained a copy of the Court Order. I was told I would be phoned when they had the required paperwork.

On Tuesday morning I received a phone call from my Advocate’s office telling me that my Advocate had been talking with someone in Lefkoşa at the court and that if I withdrew the case then I would not have to pay the £1000 costs. If I did not withdraw the case, the High Court would throw it out and I would have to pay the £1000 costs. Now, I thought they had already thrown it out but as it looked like I had no choice I decided to withdraw the case but my words were I WITHDRAW THE APPEAL UNDER DURESS.

What is worrying is that on the 11th January 2010 the TAPU VE KADASTRO DAIRESI posted a notice on the Koop and the Coffee Shop in our village regarding our properties in mortgage to the Bank Ltd. I am told this is the first step in the process that leads to an auction – 13 properties are involved, 10 of which have British Purchasers, 2 are occupied by the families of the landowner who took out the mortgage and 1 is empty. The site has been abandoned by the builder, Kulaksiz Construction Limited, there are no roads, no street lights and we are still on builder’s electric four years after the first purchaser moved in. The building is of such poor quality that I will be surprised if any are still standing ten years from now.

Watch this space.

Follow Pauline’s Story:

Article 1
Article 2
Article 3
Article 4
Article 5
Article 6

How interesting therefore that the ‘remedy,’ ie. the Memorandum on assets owned by Kulaksiz Construction Limited, has been withheld from me, the VERY reason given by the court for NOT allowing me to proceed with the Appeal is now having to be fought for again. That I had won, AND had received an Enforcement Order, is being ignored by the very system we are all told to have faith in.

At the point the Appeal was denied, I was told I did not need two remedies for the same problem. Little could that Judge have realised that almost four years on, that remedy is also being denied to me and I am having to go cap in hand and beg for justice, yet again.

Even more ironic, had the Appeal been allowed, there is a very good chance other owners may well have asked to join in and, had we ultimately won, we would have been at the point that the legal team for Kulaksiz 5 might well be at, at the end of the current case, ie. the properties will back in the situation they were at the time just prior to the mortgage being given to the landowner and the builder way back in November 2005. Another ‘missed’ opportunity to right a terrible wrong. Have Kulaksiz 5 suffered for four years because of this missed opportunity and importantly, how many more years are they going to be allowed to suffer.

Never give in never give up

Pauline Ann Read

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.