Akfinans Bank | What Next With TRNC Mortgage Law 11/78?


You have all now hopefully had time to read and understand the implications of Mortgage Law 11/78 section 21.

Lets us rewind back to February and March of 2008 when the true owners of Kulaksiz 5 first discovered the existence of mortgages on their land and homes and first became aware of the duplicity of their builder and landowner. Even then they were unaware of the usurious interest rates being applied to that loan by Akfinans Bank Limited.

We know that the Bank knew of the existence of villas on this land because they commissioned a report by a surveyor back in March 2005, so why they allowed the Tapu to believe that it was just land they were mortgaging is a mystery. We know this to be a fact because we have seen the report and the mortgage document published both in Afrika Gazetesi and in this publication.

You then have to ask yourself the question, “why didn’t the first Advocates approached by the Kulaksiz 5 know of the existence of Mortgage Law 11/78 and in particular section 21 and use this law to put right this situation back in 2008?” Gunes Mentes, after a considerable delay, allegedly went the unlawful enrichment route and Pauline Read’s Advocate went the ‘breach of contract route’. All of the Kulaksiz 5 owners wanted the same thing, to be able to keep their villas.

If the Advocates at that time had used Mortgage Law 11/78 section 21, how could the courts have done anything other than found in their favour? Was it that the Advocates acting for them at that time were ignorant of Mortgage Law 11/78 section 21 or was it something more sinister? We have no way of knowing.

What I do know is that had their initial Advocates, the ones who did the conveyancing, acted with due diligence, as soon as their clients had made them aware of the mortgage on their land, they would have jumped up and said, “they cannot do that, it is in breach of Mortgage Law 11/78 section 21” and immediately filed a case against the Bank.

The total lack of care, of due diligence, by every Kulaksiz 5 owner’s original Advocate has caused them a great deal of unnecessary stress and hardship not to mention the health and financial cost. If the original Advocates had done their jobs properly there would have been no need to seek the help of other Advocates.

Look at what the victims have had to endure:

  1. Costly court cases.
  2. Court appearances numbering over 100
  3. Harassment and intimidation at a time in their lives when they are old and vulnerable.
  4. Stress and health issues.
  5. A huge financial burden they cannot afford.

Now is the time for this to stop. Now is the time for those with intelligence and power to lift the burden from the shoulders of Kulaksiz 5 and see that Justice is done. The law that affords protection for all the victims of mortgage scams has been there since 1978. The question that should bring shame to the legal profession and the judiciary is, ‘why have you all ignored Mortgage Law 11/78 section 21?’ I am sure we would all like to know the answer.

Legal Eagle

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.