same old problem it seems

[minesahauf]

Hi All
Can anyone explain what happens if the builder goes bust and you have not recieved tapu and bank has put a charge on the property you have already paid for as has happened to me,i've heard so many different stories.
would appreciate any helpful info.

 

[juco]

I am sure someone more knowledgable will explain, but my understanding is that the builder has taken out loans using the tapu as colateral. The bank will sell the house to get its money back. The fact you have paid over a sum of money probably doesnt come in to it as the house was never in your name.

 

[yalimart]

if the buider cant pay the bank back, the property will be auctioned at a starting value of 60%, if it doesnt sell it will be auctioned for 40% of value
The bank will get their money back if the bids are high enough, if there is a balance the builder will get that to keep, that isnt your money.
I assume you dont have a charge on the property yourself. if not your money has gone completely, the crazy thing is the builder (or friend can buy the house back and sell it again)

not good news im afraid, there are many threads on the subject.

it is like an interest free loan for the builder

martin

 

[minesahauf]

Hi martin,yes we do have a ipotek on the property,according to our lawyer the charge was only put on the property in between us paying and waiting on the tapu.

 

[yalimart]

i would check on the status of the ipotek and the level of his debt, check that the solicitor actually put the ipotek on the property.
If the bank had the first charge on the property then they get first shout on any monies raised at auction, if you had the second charge then if there is a balance to be had it will go to you.
have you seen the ipotek, I believe it has to be renewed annually, when did you place it ?

what has your lawyer said ?

I am no expert by any means but have friends going through the same process so i am relating what they were told a few weeks ago.

I must admit I have my suspicions about your ipotek as i cant see the bank lending on a property that already had a charge on it, and when you placed your charge on it surely it would have surfaced then

hope im wrong

martin

 

[Valian]

I have to agree with Martin. I don't think the bank could have put a charge on your property if there was already an ipotek on it.

However, it is also my understanding that you can have an ipotek put on the property to cover full or part of the value. For example - say you paid £80,000 for your property but your ipoktek was only for £40,000, presumably the bank could have an ipotek against the other £40,000? Do you know if your ipoktek covered the full value?

Also, was your sales contract notarised? That also makes a huge difference with the courts.

 

[alison09400]

It could be that the it was money from the bank that enabled the builder to start building in the first place.....not necessarily a loan taken out afterwards.

That would mean that until the bank received back all the money it loaned noone could get a Tapu.

Either way until the Tapu is in your name, the property isn't yours.

 

[yalimart]

I have to agree with Martin. I don't think the bank could have put a charge on your property if there was already an ipotek on it.

However, it is also my understanding that you can have an ipotek put on the property to cover full or part of the value. For example - say you paid £80,000 for your property but your ipoktek was only for £40,000, presumably the bank could have an ipotek against the other £40,000? Do you know if your ipoktek covered the full value?

Also, was your sales contract notarised? That also makes a huge difference with the courts.

Hi Val,

I was going to mention that, but I cant see the banks out there being the second charge holder as using your example, if the property goes to auction at 60% there would only be 8000 left to service the second charge, I just sold a property to a turkish guy and the bank wouldnt let him have the mortgage until I paid my final electric bill of 18 TL.

I think minesahauf perhaps should pm celtic for some proffessional advice, it would be well worth the small contribution.

martin

 

[yalimart]

It could be that the it was money from the bank that enabled the builder to start building in the first place.....not necessarily a loan taken out afterwards.

That would mean that until the bank received back all the money it loaned noone could get a Tapu.

Either way until the Tapu is in your name, the property isn't yours.

good point allison but the bank would secure the loan with a charge on the origanal tapu unless he had other collateral, and minesahauf does say that the charge went on after they paid some money over.

ether way like you say the bank hold all the aces

martin

 

[les&Tasha]

Minesahauf,

Do you have the Ipotek document in your posession? You should have been given an official copy of the Tapu with the Ipotek stated on it. Celtic can correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that a tapu which has an Ipotek on it cannot be subject to a new charge unless the original Ipotek is discharged.

So if you had an Ipotek on the Tapu for your property the builder could not subsequently present it to a bank as collatoral for a further loan. If the bank had an ipotek charge on the tapu before you tried to place yours you would have been informed by the Tapu Cadestre when you tried to place your Ipotek. I would question your avocat very carefully, you need that Ipotek document! It is the only viable connection between the money you have paid and the property deeds.

 

[carolk]

Excellent advice all round, particularly from Les and Tasha.

 

[Mary]

This is complicated I will try and explain.
Firstly you must go to the Sales Contract... if it was notarised it is valid, if not this contract is of no use.
Secondly the Solicitor...If the solicitor was looking after your interests an Ipotek would have been put on the property for the full amount, Yes Les and Tash are correct. Whilst waiting for the Military Permision or not. Also the Solicitor should have done searches on the builder and the property before you parted with any monies this would have given you sufficient information as to his liabilities and his obligations in completing the build. It would also have shown up if the land the builder has built on belongs to him or if there were any other land issues and debts etc.
Thirdly.....The debt placed upon your property you must find out how much it is for and which bank and all the details. IMPORTANT you must find out who owns the original Tapu. The M. Permission you must find out if this has been applied for and the relevant paperwork and numbers attached to it.
Forthly...A very very good Solicitor is required I cannot stress this enough to handle this for you, it is very complicated and will cost you money, please get independant advice not the Solicitor you are using, particularly if he/she is connected anyway to the builder.You need an International Solicitors who are trained in the UK and know Turkish Law and are registered in the UK and Turkey not just in Turkey.

These are the first steps to take. Do not throw any more money at the problem until you have the correct advice this is free, if the Lawyers are good they will advise you every step of the way forward. Sorry to Celtic, no offence intended. I am sure he will advocate other comments but we have found to our great loss the system in Turkey is not just, and fraught with problems for the foreigner.
Take care
Mary

 

[Darren]

PM me if you want an experienced independent professional legal adviser who can sort this out as described above.

 

[minesahauf]

Hi Folks
I would like to thank everybody for all the helpful info.To answer a couple of the questions asked I do have a copy of the tapu with the ipotek for the full value of the property and according to the lawyer i used she has said the sales contract does not have to be noterised. I've also had an e mail from the builder to explain his situation,not a lot of help,so i think i will take some of your advice and go for an independent lawyer to look in to things for me.

 

[Tess]

Best in the long run Minesahauf, always best to be ahead of the game and better to be safe than sorry. Good luck for a fab outcome.