Home Blog Page 655

Cyprus attracts retired Britons

RECORD numbers of Britons are fleeing the country for more appealing climates, lower taxes, more affordable property and fewer traffic jams. Latest figures from the Office for National Statistics show that 200,000 people left Britain for good in 2007, and the majority of them were retirees.

However, many of those who live the dream underestimate the financial implications. Many couples retiring to Spain, for example, think they will pay lower tax, only to be hit by a wealth tax of 0.2% to 0.5% of their worldwide assets.

And many couples fail to realise that in Spain and France, unlike in Britain, inheritance tax can be levied on assets passed between a husband and wife – and the rate is 30% on average.

According to a recent Sunday Times survey, Cyprus offers more advantages to the Briton pensioner who decides to live abroad.

Cyprus ranked first in the survey as it is regarded as the most suitable place for Britons to retire. The island is followed by Panama, France, Belize and Spain.

Cyprus is popular for 3 main reasons:

  • Low income tax.
  • Low property prices.
  • No inheritance tax.

Property prices in Cyprus start from about £77,000 against £110,000 in Panama, £140,000 in France, £90,000 in Belize and £137,000 in Spain. (The Sunday Times admits however, that Cyprus is rapidly catching up with prices in more established retirement hotspots such as France and Spain).

Retired residents from overseas are taxed on their pensions at the rate of 5% above about €3,417 a year, whether it is a state, company or personal pension. To qualify for the low rate, you must have lived in the country for at least 183 days.

Alternatively, you can pay the normal rates, in which case the first €19,500 is tax free, rising to 30% on €36,301. So the smaller your income, the better off you are under the normal system.

Retired residents from overseas are taxed on their pensions at the rate of 0% in Panama, up to 50% in France, 1.75% in Belize and up to 42% in Spain.

The inheritance tax in Cyprus is 0% if the pensioner is no longer domiciled in the UK, in Panama and Belize it is also is 0%, while in France and Spain inheritance tax is 30%.

Among the advantages that Cyprus has is the short distance from Britain and English is widely spoken. A further bonus for Britons is that Cypriots drive on the left hand side of the road (most of the time).

Construction loans boom despite Banks’ measures

Despite measures taken by the Central Bank of Cyprus earlier in the year, loan growth hit a 10-year high in December 2007.

According to the Central Bank’s figures, loans made by the commercial banks rocketed

Specific Performance what Protection?

Scam IconIn 2001 we bought a plot of land and had a house built on it. We decided to move to somewhere closer to town and we’ve been trying to sell. We’ve had a few people around and one couple put in an offer which we accepted.

But when their lawyer did a search he found that there was a mortgage on the land and he advised them not to buy. I went to see him and he told me that a mortgage was taken out by the land owner from the Co-op Bank after we had bought it.

Is this true? When we bought the land our lawyer told us that it couldn’t be mortgaged because we had a specific performance contract at the land registry.

How could he mortgage the land after he’d sold it to us. Isn’t that fraud?

Answer

I suspect that you bought a plot of land that is part of a much larger plot, which has yet to be sub-divided into smaller, individual plots for each of the houses. If this is the case, there will be just one Title Deed for the larger plot of land.

What the landowner can do, quite legally, is take out a mortgage using the land as collateral, even though he has sold part of it to you. The financial institution that loaned the money, in your case the Co-op bank, then registers the mortgage against the Title Deed of the land at the Land Registry.

This is where the problem lies because the Land Registry only has the one Title Deed against which the mortgage can be registered.

But this problem should be resolved when the mortgage is paid off. When this happens, the bank will remove the mortgage from the Title Deed. This will enable the landowner to arrange for the division of the land into individual plots and Title Deeds to be issued for each of them.

But you have a couple of problems address. Firstly, there’s no way that you can force the landowner to pay off the mortgage. And even if he does pay off the mortgage, you may have to wait many years before your Title Deed is issued.

I suggest you take legal advice on this matter. You could also try approaching the Co-op Bank to see if they’ll provide you with a mortgage release certificate stating that the piece of land you’ve bought is free from any mortgage.

I don’t want to sound too negative, but there is a couple living near me who are in a very similar situation. The bank refused to issue them with a mortgage release certificate and their lawyer has been trying for quite some time to sort things out; so far without success.

Is it fraud? In some countries probably; but the antiquated laws in Cyprus are in dire need of modernisation to provide protection for property buyers.

(I wrote an article about this a couple of months ago. You can read it at Cyprus Title Deed Scams)

Cyprus property developers claim expat tried blackmail

Scam AlertTHE PARALIMNI Cyprus property developers at the centre of a police assault investigation involving a British home buyer yesterday countered the allegation by accusing him of blackmail.

Conor O’Dwyer, 38, spent six days in Larnaca hospital last week after being allegedly assaulted by the father and son developers, who were later arrested and held in police custody for four days.

They were released on Monday pending further investigations.

It was the second time in less than two years that the two men had been arrested for allegedly assaulting O’Dwyer. The earlier charges were dropped.

O’Dwyer has widely publicised the details of his property dispute with the developers on YouTube and on the website lyingbuilder.com.

The dispute centres on the cancellation of his contract by the property developers some half way through payment, even though the house in Frenaros was already registered in his name at the land registry.

O’Dwyer had complained because he said the developers were not sticking to the original plans he was paying for. They then cancelled the contact accusing him of not paying the next instalment. The developers then sold the house to someone else, telling O’ Dwyer they were keeping his £75,000 sterling for damages.

Yesterday on their website, Karayiannas Developers and Constructors said O’Dwyer’s claims that they had misled him into purchasing the property were defamatory.

Under a link entitled “The Karayiannas saga… To find out more about the true events…”, a statement from the developers claimed that O’Dwyer had masterminded a plan to extort a newer more expensive property and exorbitant damages from the company.

Karayiannas said the British buyer had ignored reminders to pay the next instalment for the property, so they cancelled the contract as a last resort.

After the cancellation of the contract, Mr. O’Dwyer set his plan in motion seeking for his revenge. A revenge originating from the fact that the value of the house he would have bought increased due to the current value housing boom,” said the statement.

The alleged plan involved O’Dwyer secretly taping a conversation with Marios Karayiannas and later using that tape recording as a threat to blackmail the company for “a private villa worth £400,000 and £100,000 in cash“, failing which he would create a website “defaming the company in such ways as to cause it great financial losses“.

He was in plain and simple words blackmailing his way into a luxury villa and cash in hand,” the statement said.

But the company had “failed to adhere to his blackmail requests“.

O’Dwyer says he repeatedly attempted to make the contested payment, having decided to keep the house despite the differences between the original plan and the finished product, but claims Karayiannas refused to take the due payment, deciding, O’ Dwyer said, that he was giving them too much hassle over the terms of the contract.

After Karayiannas sent him a letter in March 2006 cancelling the contract, they kept refusing the payment. The final time O’Dwyer tried to send payment was through a court server, he said.

The same month Karayiannas’ lawyers sent him a letter – published on his website – saying: “As you committed essential breaches of your contract, you are hereby notified that they [Karayiannas] cancel the said agreement and retain the money already paid, towards damages.

Another letter a month later said: “Even if for any reason in the end of the day it is decided that they [Karayianas] had no legal ground to cancel it due to your behaviour, they do not want you on their property and they hereby notify you that they are not willing to complete the house and deliver it to you.

The deal is over and they will never ever deliver to you your house.

On Tuesday evening, O’Dwyer gave a full statement to police about the January 14 incident in Frenaros, which saw the Briton end up in hospital.

Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2008

Title Deed trap and the emergence of self-help groups

The Politics of Homeownership and Title Deeds (1)

We have been consistent in explaining, and drawing attention to the sorry state of affairs which exist regarding the matter of homeownership and the issue of title deeds.

Recent developments in the field and concerns expressed from readers merit a return to this topic by taking a more thorough look at what is happening and to draw conclusions and learning lessons from experience. In the next three issues of In Touch we will dwell on first, some of the major developments and concerns that have recently surfaced and the issues arising; secondly the provision of illustrative material (case studies) to demonstrate the seriousness and severity of the problem and finally our opinions and advice to readers and consumers in general who are thinking of entering the immovable property market what to look for and what to avoid in their dealings with developers or sellers.

Cyprus Property Action Group

The formation of the Cyprus Property Action Group is a welcomed development. It is not surprising that the Group was initiated and formed entirely by the British community in an attempt to combat the growing problem of purchasers experiencing serious personal, financial and legal liabilities as a result of a combination of lax and exploitative relationships in the housing market in favour of the seller, a tradition of neglect and political apathy and outdated, confusing and contradictory laws. It is not surprising because this community in particular not only constitutes one of the largest groups of purchasers hence their first-hand knowledge, predicament and exasperation with the lack of progress but also because this community has a long tradition of “community action” and “self-help”. One of the present authors, in an early research paper, has characterized this need for self-help when everything else fails as something akin to “Robinson Crusoe had a better servant than Friday: Robinson!” (Community Development Journal, 1979, “The myth of a radical trend in British community work”, vol. 14, issue 1, pp.3-13). In short, what others can do or will not do, you can do better yourself.

Since its formation, together with the fact that the political terrain is gradually changing to the better with the election of overseas-born municipal councillors, the Group has managed to bring out in the fore the problems of homeownership and to some effect. They have managed to reach the national media and achieve headline status. This prompted various critical editorials in the Greek and English national press and state and commercial television channels. They have set up a website and are available for advice to those who need it. Lastly but not least, they have managed in this short period to meet up with the Finance Minister and put forward their grievances and proposals. Although such self-help developments and the emergence of pressure groups are riddled with problems in sustaining themselves and becoming effective in the political process, we believe that the Cyprus Property Action Group have an important and necessary role to play in the process of making positive changes to current legislation and practices.

The Legal Scene and Law Reform

The House Legal Affairs Committee is considering amendments to current practice to provide legal safeguards and protection to purchasers on signing the contract of sale prior to the issue of a certificate of approval and subsequently, all things being equal, the provision and transfer of title deeds to the purchaser. However, it is important to mention that this is not the first time that the authorities have attempted and aborted the task of finding a workable solution to the problem of so many “titleless” properties and the subsequent problems this social and legal phenomenon causes for purchasers in particular. As we reported In Touch (issue 8, pp. 20-21, 2007) the authorities have been tossing with various ideas and schemes to rectify matters, from turning a blind eye to irregularities and breached building regulations to changing current rules to allow purchasers to apply for the issuing and transfer of separate title deeds with or without the seller’s and/or developer’s consent, cooperation or participation and, assumingly, without regard to whether the title in question is mortgaged by the developer or a third party (as for instance, it is common practice for a developer to build on land which is owned by others and who in turn are heavily mortgaged to even more others). Furthermore, the authorities have even considered, and are still considering, to amend legislation to allow for title deeds to be issued without the certificate of approval but as we argued elsewhere this may lead to opening a Pandora’s box that may unleash other complicated legal and social consequences which may outweigh the benefits.

In the present attempt to amend current laws, the idea is to establish the contract of sale, which must be deposited and registered at the Local District Land Office within two months of the agreement, as taking legal precedence over the expected title deeds. In other words, the submission of the contract of sale to the District Land and Survey Office ought to, following the amendment, establish the contract as proof of ownership rights equivalent to holding the title deed to any property. It will be interesting to see how this amendment will proceed or reach the statute book bearing in mind the many political and financial interests involved in making laws and in particular in a situation where collusion between diverse interests, tradition and neglect have allowed so many bad practices and exploitative relations to emerge and become embedded in the very social and political structure of the state as though they are “legitimate”.

Title Deeds, Legal Ownership and Explanations for the Current Problems

A rough estimate is that anything between 80 to 90% of properties in Cyprus are without title deeds on the name of the people who live in them. Indeed the figure grows to 95% for all new properties. There are many reasons for this but for us there are three causes which are in the main responsible for the current mess.

First, there is a historical reason. In our view, following the Turkish invasion and the influx of nearly a third of the population into the free parts of the Island as refugees caused a serious social, political and personal upheaval particularly in terms of personal suffering, social accommodation and physical accommodation. In terms of the latter, we believe that the authorities were forced to take a more relaxed approach to housing and construction of housing estates for accommodating the vast housing and other needs of the population. In short, what many have not realized is that the relaxation of the rules and the violation of building and planning rules to build new housing estates (on both Greek and Turkish owned land) out of expediency and a good cause, has had a gradual unanticipated social effect on the general approach to existing laws and regulations about building and planning permits, final certificate of approval and title deeds. This sliding scale to the worse, has gradually filtered through to most areas of the construction industry particularly in the provision for private housing. In other words, the need for ways to accommodate immediate housing needs at a time of a socio-political crisis and disaster has, in the course of time (33 years to be exact), let to a practice of the authorities turning a Nelson eye to continuous and blatant violations of building laws and regulations by allowing developers, vendors and purchasers of property a free reign in illicit relations. This side-effect of the war and the invasion which has escaped attention and the expressed apathy and/or neglect or inability of the authorities to do something about it, has led to a highly volatile and dangerous stage. A lot of people without title deeds are now living in fear of the housing bubble bursting and, apart from the broader economic and political repercussions which may follow, may find that they are the real losers faced with financial disaster and loss of their homes by default.

Secondly, there are long delays in the issuing of new title deeds and currently it may take up to eight years or more due to the backlog before the fact. This is partly due to the anachronistic practices present in the system which are threatening the system with collapse under its own weight in processing a backlog of applications and partly due to the developers’ inertia, financial obstacles (see below regarding mortgages), lack of certificate of approval due to construction problems or illegal buildings or modifications to buildings carried out in breach of the original plans and permits.

Thirdly, the problem with many properties is that they are heavily mortgaged to third parties (such as for instance, Banks) on delivery to purchasers by developers. Here we must draw attention to another complication. It is not uncommon that buyers and their legal representatives fail to recognize and check out the detail that there may be other interests in the transaction. That is to say, the developer may build on land owned by a third party (individual or institution) which means that the developer may not owe any money but the third party (the real owner) may do! In another twist to the relationship, both the developer and the owner of the land (if they happen to be two different legal entities) may both have substantial loans taken as security on the land and the houses built on that land. Therefore, until these financial obligations, whatever their nature, are cleared first, there is no chance whatever for title deeds to be issued to the rightful owners of the property who should be in the first place the buyers. Simultaneously, until those debts by developers and others are cleared there remains the risk of default (i.e. failure to repay the loans) and the real prospect of Banks or whoever is owed the money to force a sale to recoup the losses meaning that the unfortunate buyer is left in real terms homeless and destitute. So, the existence of this phenomenon of mortgaged properties at the time of delivery means that substantial delays in the issuing of title deeds may incur unless such financial obligations are cleared up first which is not often the case.

The Multiplier Effect of “Titleless” Properties

As can be understood, each major explanation or reason above provides, unfortunately, new opportunities for further delays or risks. For instance, if it takes ten years for title deeds to be issued on a property, it is almost illogical to think that for ten years homeowners will refrain from carrying out any improvements to their property. By definition these improvements could be the nail in the coffin for under the law no improvements or amendments of any type can be carried out to any property as they are deemed to breach the original building and planning permits. In such a case a certificate of approval may be withheld and thus no title deeds. As we are on this subject of changes and additions to a property, these include basic things such as sheds and believe it or not satellite dishes exceeding one meter in diameter. Given that satellite dishes are springing up all over Cyprus without permit we estimate that infractions of the law are widespread and begs the question what will happen if, in the current state of affairs, the authorities attempt to enforce the law. A permit is required for installing a satellite dish but unfortunately again a homeowner cannot apply for a permit unless s/he is the legal owner of the property. In the absence of title deeds the legal owner remains the developer or whoever holds the title deeds. It is the developer again who needs to apply for such a permit and, thus, without his cooperation, the purchaser is not in a legal position to argue and, in his/her ignorance, by carrying out a small alteration or addition, succeeds, at the same time, to fall foul of the law as well.

It is also important to remember or recognize that lack of title deeds may mean other disadvantages for the purchaser. Other than being prohibited from carrying out any alterations to the property, without legal ownership of a property the purchaser cannot raise any loans on the property either at the time of raising capital for the purchase or during possession unless s/he gets a guarantee from the legal owner who assumingly is the vendor. More serious if in the course of waiting for title deeds the purchaser needs to sell the property this cannot be done unless the original contract is cancelled and a new contract is signed by the developer or legal owner. This means that unless this is an obligation stipulated in the original contract prior to cancellation, the developer or legal owner may refuse to do so and where s/he may oblige, s/he may require the payment of a fee. It is not unusual for developers to ask for a fee of up to CYP3,000 (or more as some cases show) for the benefit. In short, it is a case of tails you lose, heads I win.

Dealings in Illegal Transactions: Contradictions & Unanticipated Consequences of the Law

However, out of all this mess there is nothing like the worst possible contradiction and liability in social and legal terms than the fact that any property which is delivered (hence the act of passing on the keys to the buyer by the seller) and received (hence accepted and occupied by the purchaser) prior to the issuing of the certificate of approval is an illegal act – in both civil and criminal law. In short, here we are as a nation busy building houses and on completion we deliver them to buyers unfit for occupation, given that most of these constructions are delivered without a certificate of approval, and buyers who, in turn, accept and occupy them in good faith without recognizing that by doing so makes them, as they occupy an illegal building, illegal occupants. For those who still doubt what we have been saying and warning for a long time here is what the revised and outdated law of 1959 at the time the Republic of Cyprus was about to be launched declares in uncompromising terms: “No person shall occupy or use, or cause, or permit, or suffer any person to occupy or use, any building unless and until a certificate of approval has been issued in respect thereof by the appropriate authority” [CAP. 96(10(1)]. In addition, how many people know that on completion of a building the developer (assuming of course that he/she has the relevant permits and in our experience some do build houses even without permits) is required within 21 days to inform the authorities of completion and the authorities in return have to furnish the developer with a certificate of approval as opposed to the current long delays mentioned earlier often extending over eight years or more? [CAP.96(10)(2)].

So, is there any recourse to the law to force a developer to issue title deeds? Yes there is and, no, there is not. There is in the sense that a purchaser could seek a court order to force the seller or developer to take all appropriate and necessary action to provide for all requirements for the issuing of separate title deeds within a specified period of time. This means that the vendor is put under a legal obligation and the court’s observance that s/he will comply with the order. But this remedy only applies to contracts of sale which are deposited and registered, within two months from being signed, at the Local District Land and Survey Office. Unfortunately, many buyers fall in the trap (possibly to save money) of buying direct from developers without good legal advice, or where they seek legal advice this falls well short of expectation, are led into signing contracts which are not worth the paper they are written on and which on many occasions are not ever deposited at the District Land Office. Furthermore, even where legal action against the vendor is possible and taken one should not ignore the fact that calling on the law through litigation to put things right does not mean that the law will find for the plaintiff (refer here to our previous articles, In Touch, Issues 10 and 11, pp. 20-21, 22-23 respectively). Also, apart from the financial and personal sacrifices and the required staying power to see matters through, there is also the possible and most serious by-product of such action which has to do with the above stipulation by the current law concerning delivering and receiving an illegal building. Action against the vendor for non-compliance may also lead, through counter-action by the vendor (or the authorities) in both the civil and criminal court against the purchaser (plaintiff) for illegal entry and occupation of an illegal building! If this is not a mess created by the law and circumstances described earlier we would like someone to tell us what a mess is.

Summary & the Role of the State

We are dealing with an historical social and legal issue which has been allowed to develop to a point whereby many a people are now finding to their distaste the pitfalls they have allowed themselves to fall into whilst, at the same time, collusion between the authorities, developers and vendors in general has managed to downgrade the significance of that, and to create the impression or pretence that the situation does not exist or if it exists it will sort itself out by some fine tuning of the legislative process. We believe that no such fine tuning can save the situation from calamity unless the authorities consider the interests of purchasers and drastically but carefully amend the law by re-defining the responsibilities of all involved and setting the social exchange between the interested parties within a transparent and modern legal framework that takes into account the complexities of today’s fast changing housing market. Diverse interests must be re-defined and re-worked to ensure that old and present bad practices come to an end. Only in this way will the economy and social relations of the housing market be safely restored and prevent a gradual but obvious collapse. The future of a healthy national economy and a regular income by the Government out of such transactions in tax alone (over CYP200 million per annum) depends on that and by the authorities taking note of the writing on the wall or face the fate of another Babylon.

Professor Dr. Andonis Vassiliades & Maria Chimonides

© Prof. Dr. Andonis Vassiliades, October 2007. No part of this article may be used or reproduced in any form without prior written permission from the authors.

Professor Dr. Andonis Vassiliades is Professor of Law, Criminology & Penal Justice and a Clinical Psychotherapist.

Maria Chimonides is a Lawyer and a Legal Consultant.

They are at The Law Office & Research Centre:
Main Office, Larnaca: Kalogreon 16, Ria Court 19, Office 101, 6016 Larnaca
Branch, Oroklini: George Griva Digeni 16, Office 3, 7040 Oroklini (Close to the Bank of Cyprus)

Tel.: +357 24624449, +357 24654011
Fax. +357 24621336
E-mail. [email protected]

The article above first appeared in In Touch Magazine, pp. 30-33, issue 12, 2007

Buyers and their odyssey: case studies

The Politics of Homeownership and Title Deeds (2)

In last month’s issue of in In Touch we critically examined the historical, social and legal issues, outdated laws and legal contradictions and the collusion between the authorities, developers and vendors in general which have gradually let to the present sorry affair regarding “titleless” properties.

The quest for unlimited and unchecked competition for financial gain and pecuniary advantage in the construction industry makes the construction, selling and buying of “titleless” properties even more of a ruthless, immoral and legally risky act.

In this Part 2 on the subject, we provide actual, real examples of buyers and their troubles in the property market. The case studies have been selected to demonstrate the point and diverse concerns and are not intended to be typical of all experiences. Indeed, we selected the less extreme and appalling cases to avoid emotive charge and unfair presentation. In part, such more serious and appalling cases, including cases of properties built and bought without even planning and building regulations permits let alone the certificate of final approval, have been deliberately omitted because they are at the moment being heard in Court and reference to them may jeopardize the due process of law.

Case Study 1

Background

A group of detached houses built 11 years ago by a construction company through various deals with the land owners. Disputes between the construction company and the land owners ended with the land owners bought out by the construction company through third parties who were then compensated for their financial support by each being given a share of the land and two houses each at the time of construction.

Registered owners and complications

There were five registered owners: the two partners of the construction company and three other private individuals. The latter raised capital on the value of the land and houses hence the involvement of three banks as well. Soon, one of the private owners fell out with the partners of the construction company and relations between them turned sour. As if to make things worse, the construction company, following the completion of the development, remained a company in name only. The two partners, following disagreements, went their own way. In another twist, one of the private owners died without a will and without an officially and legally appointed administrator of his estate. He left his grown up children and their families and his mistress (who then married to another person and had a child from the new husband) to sort things out. As if that was not enough, the mistress, husband and child lived in one of the properties in question owned by the deceased man’s estate.

Legal wrangles and title deeds: the first six years

Due to the above complications and lack of interest the issue of title deeds remained dormant for the first six years. The various parties, whose consent and signatures were needed to proceed to applications for title deeds, had by now dispersed across the Island and abroad. The task of finding each relevant party and securing consent appeared daunting at best and, at worst, an impossible task. One missing signature, and without a power of attorney to cover for such eventuality, would have spelled disaster and no title deeds. Also, obvious breaches of the original planning permits and consents by both the construction company and the purchasers of the properties meant that there was a distinct possibility that the authorities could refuse title deeds on grounds of illegal constructions. Added to this, the two main parties to the title deeds, the ex-partners of the construction company, refused to cooperate. They insisted that this was the task of individual purchasers and they had no cash or time to spare!

The next five years and the quest for title deeds

After five years of almost daily and direct negotiations with diverse interests; legally sorting out the mess left over by one of the private owners on his death to execute and administer his estate; reaching agreement with his ex-mistress and her family to vacate the property (on agreement for compensation); making six return journeys to Paphos, eight to Limassol and three to Nicosia; many telephone calls and written exchanges with parties living abroad at the time; 16 visits to the Land Registry; five to the planning and building regulations offices; six inspections on site with officials; three visits to banks; eight meetings with the construction company; keeping purchasers motivated and informed; resolving regular disputes among them as they could hardly understand the workings of the context they had found themselves in; dealing with refusals by some of these to contribute to the costs; five court appearances; direct challenges and appeals to the authorities to see reason and to expedite the complicated work of issuing title deeds; confrontations with, challenges and legal threats to rogue parties particularly the construction company; sorting out unpaid bills and taxes and repayment of bank loans, the title deeds were, finally, issued – but at a price.

Postscript

As much as it is difficult to believe, within three months of receiving their title deeds, one of the relevant authorities threatened to instigate legal proceedings against the owners unless they demolished or restored their properties to their original planning permit state! Add to that, the omission by the construction company to install the necessary sewerage underground system for the properties to be connected to the main system, meant the owners were and remain legally liable. They now face litigation unless they provide for such a system at a very prohibitive financial cost to them.

Case Study 2

Background

A couple in their eagerness to buy their “dream” home – an old terraced property – had arranged, without seeking first independent legal advice, to reserve the property by handing out to the estate agent 1,000 Cyprus Pounds which was treated by the owner as non-refundable deposit. They also promised to pay a further 1,000 Cyprus Pounds to the owner within a week. The owner advertised the property with vacant possession, full title deed and ready for transfer and registration.

Legal advice and consultation

Following the appointment of legal advisers, the intended purchasers were advised they had acted against their own interest by handing out cash and promising to pay even more without first making sure that any deposit paid should be in the first instance refundable and subject to a satisfactory search on the title of the property. They informed the estate agent that no further money would be provided until the status of the property’s title could be ascertained. The owner was requested to fill in a vendor’s questionnaire about the property. Despite his strong objections and complaints at first, he relented and completed his responses and signed to satisfaction. In particular, that he was the rightful owner of the property, that he had every right to convey and transfer the property to the purchasers and/or their successors in title, that the property was free of any disputes, and that it was not burdened with any financial or other obligations to a third party.

Search on the title

Contrary to the assurances of the vendor the search identified serious problems with the property. These contradicted his promises and claims. The property was heavily mortgaged to a bank; there were boundary disputes with one neighbour; and the property did not come in physical terms only. There was also a social and personal “gift” included in the price. The purchasers, on entry, would have found an ex-wife with children happily living there and in oblivion that their ex-husband and father had sold and disposed of the property without their knowledge and consent.

Outcome

The purchasers were advised to walk away before they incurred serious financial and other losses. But they insisted that all avenues at resolution should be attempted. After nearly a year of such attempts at resolution; threats of legal action against the vendor and his agents for making false statements and misrepresentation of facts; the vendor still insisting that the purchasers owed him money; continuous but fruitless efforts with the bank and his ex-wife to come to some acceptable arrangement, the purchasers heeded advice and turned their back on the deal. Happily, the vendor under pressure returned the deposit to the purchasers and the deal was terminated. The purchasers thus saved their initial investment and, in the long run, they had probably saved themselves from ruin. It cost them though a lesson about the property trap and a year’s legal fees for activity undertaken on their behalf. Both could have been avoided had they sought out advice in the first place.

Case Study 3

Background

An elderly couple spent all their life’s savings in acquiring what they thought and were promised to be a freehold property. They paid the agreed price of the detached bungalow via their legal adviser who also drew up the contract of sale. On taking possession, and after six months of living there, they could not understand why they had problems with the provision of services (e.g. electricity, water and telephone) and why they had no proper postal address. They sought a second independent legal opinion and advice.

A sale of contract unworthy of use

On studying the contract the independent legal advisers were stunned by the poverty of the contract. Other than other serious technical and legal flaws identified in the contract, it was obvious that there was no search on the title as the contract had totally missed or omitted to mention the registered owners of the land onto which the house was built and that they in turn were heavily mortgaged to a major bank. The only vendor mentioned was the company that built the property. In consequence, by not including the owners of the land, the contract of sale had failed to create an estate in land over the whole property. The real owners of the land, who made the agreement with the developer to build the property on their land, should have been included in the contract as vendors and co-owners for without that the remedy provided under Law 96(I)1997 would not apply and could not be invoked against them. Even if the contract was accepted (and in this case due to its blatant poor quality was not accepted) by the District Lands Office for specific performance purposes, there would not have been any remedy provided to the purchasers in any civil actions filed before a Court since the co-owners, the absolute owners of the land, were not party to the agreement. Furthermore given that the contract was not even registered at the District Lands Office there was no chance of any remedy being applied against the vendors in any dispute over, for example, title deeds and their transfer and registration on the name of the purchasers. Simply, the contract was a scrap of paper with little legal value if any. There was nothing in it to prevent the vendors, in the absence of any legal charge on them, from re-selling or disposing of the property, or re-mortgaging it at will, or just not complying with the terms of the contract with legal impunity.

Action and outcomes: six months on

Following numerous considerations and contacts with the relevant parties, a new contract of sale was drawn up by the legal team. This included all co-owners (the developer and land owners) and the interests of the bank. They also succeeded in getting the bank to issue a written waiver to the purchasers. The co-owners carried out all necessary work for the provision of services and they provided for a separate title deed and its transfer and registration on the name of the purchasers in a specified period of time. The contract of sale was duly registered at the District Lands Office for specific performance purposes. This heralded the successful and satisfactory completion of the task but at the cost of six months’ of constant and daily attempts at conclusion and new legal costs to the purchasers.

Postscript

The purchasers were lucky in this instance. For, among other opportunities, the relevant parties involved were willing to cooperate, despite their differences, to see the task through. The developer, co-owners, bank and authorities where relevant, all proved willing to oblige. In any other situation the two purchasers would have been in a very threatening and risky position regarding their asset. They are currently considering what appropriate action to take to recover their losses due to professional negligence and possibly fraudulent claims.

Professor Dr. Andonis Vassiliades & Maria Chimonides

© Prof. Dr. Andonis Vassiliades, October 2007. No part of this article may be used or reproduced in any form without prior written permission from the authors.

Professor Dr. Andonis Vassiliades is Professor of Law, Criminology & Penal Justice and a Clinical Psychotherapist.

Maria Chimonides is a Lawyer and a Legal Consultant.

They are at The Law Office & Research Centre:
Main Office, Larnaca: Kalogreon 16, Ria Court 19, Office 101, 6016 Larnaca
Branch, Oroklini: George Griva Digeni 16, Office 3, 7040 Oroklini (Close to the Bank of Cyprus)

Tel.: +357 24624449, +357 24654011
Fax. +357 24621336
E-mail. [email protected]

This article first appeared in In Touch Magazine, issue 13, 2007