OASIS projects

[Lyndhurst Park]

Hi,

I have now received a flurry of private e mails from purchasers of Oasis apartments, all with similar concerns over the alterations post purchase and the current indifferent attitude being employed by the Airada.

I will naturally keep those fellow buyers and the forum informed

[Peter Mitry]

May be before escalating too far it may be worth an appeal to Mr. Ihab Abdelazeim Shahwan; I am sure that he would realise that bad publicity should be avoided in his position. Public life and business do not mix well unless you can be shown to be squeaky clean...

[Lyndhurst Park]

That was one route on my agenda. I am awaiting a response from the UK agent before making any moves. I am also expecting a reply from the solicitors in Cairo today/tomorrow re: Araida's interpretation of the contract and graphics in relation to Egyptian Law

[Peter Mitry]

It seems that you have the matter well in hand; it will be interesting to hear what happens next.

[philthecar]

good luck with your enquiries and we look forward to hearing from you with more news

[Lyndhurst Park]

To all Interested Parties.

I received a reply from the Cairo Solicitors re: the Araida Contract - Oasis Resort.

With regard to the actual altering of the building's structure ie an additional floor after construction had augmented. I was advised that building legislation in regional parts of Egypt is not as robust as in the UK. That is why the narrative within the contract is so important. (back to the old advice of commissioning a local solicitor to peruse the contract before signing).

With regard to the Contract not being legal until construction has finished. The legal advice was that this was a false statement. In the opening paragraph it states “This contract is made and entered into effect on 14/12/2006”. There is no further entry describing otherwise. The solicitor stated that this date is when the contract started. (This will be of some consolation to those who have privately e mailed me with this specific concern).

With regard to the initial architect’s picture of the resort showing 3 floors. This picture was presented for First and Second party signing. The picture was presented on its own page within the contract was signed by both parties. Nowhere within the contract narrative did it state or advise the purchaser that the picture was an ‘artist’s impression only’ and should not be taken as factual and was subject to alterations at any time. For Iraida to now alter the construction shown in the architect’s drawing by such a margin after both parties have signed is “Misrepresentation”, and "fraudulent". The solicitors have advised that this is an indefensible breach of contract.

Now, in saying that they have asked what outcome do I want????? Quantification of loss re: compensation is not an easy formulation (in either the UK or Egypt). In court I would easily expect get my original investment, plus bank charges, plus loss of bank interest that would have accrued over the period. The solicitors felt that they did not see why I should not apply for the total price should I have bought it on completion. The fact that I may not want to hold onto the accommodation until then and resell can be easily explained that I have lost total trust in the Agent given the breaches already displayed. To purchase another off plan apartment would mean a further 12-16 month delay when prices are forecasted to have risen by ‘X’ percent, so compensation for this disruption and cost differential could be argued as justifiable.

The solicitor’s final advice was that it would be prudent for both parties to sort this out of court. From Araida perspective, any court appearance and loss will damage reputation in a fast developing tourist area, and given they have such a prominent tourist official as Chairperson of their group, neither would like to be associated with a negative legal outcome. A legal loss for Airada may prompt other dissatisfied buyers into employing the same legal route. I was advised that like any court anywhere in the world, claiming for damages and loss is an uncertain science with no guarantees, but the case was strong. So, to resolve this dispute amicably would favour both parties.

So, there you have it!

[Peter Mitry]

So far so good; you now have to decide what you do want and that may be more difficult. I am sure that you can get your mone back plus interest but you have to weigh this against the anticipated capital growth since you first reserved the apartment. You may be better to see it through and then sell if you are not happy with the final outcome.

[philthecar]

great stuff and very quickly answered as well. Lets hope iriada take on board what you have been advised and the situation is resolved swiftly. Good luck and keep us posted of progress and thanks for letting us know the position

[Lyndhurst Park]

Originally Posted by Peter Mitry

So far so good; you now have to decide what you do want and that may be more difficult. I am sure that you can get your mone back plus interest but you have to weigh this against the anticipated capital growth since you first reserved the apartment. You may be better to see it through and then sell if you are not happy with the final outcome.

You are correct in stating that its not a black and white choice. It will decide on Iraida's response as to which route I will employ. I'm still hopeful that it can be resolved...no one party gets enjoyment out of going to court.

[awahee123]

I'm sure it will be resolved to the satisfaction of all involved.It's good to know we all have some protection within the contracts we have signed.