The puzzle of trapped buyers is not only a challenge for the executive and legislative branches but also for the banks themselves, which bear a significant share of the responsibility for the situation. The matter will be discussed once again today (16/10) before the relevant committee of the House of Representatives.

Moreover, as previously revealed by Brief in an earlier report, a potential solution seems to have been identified for one of the three categories of trapped buyers.

Specifically, discussions are underway to grant property titles to those buyers who were the first to mortgage their property to secure a mortgage loan, in case they settle their debt. This is because the responsibility for the property being mortgaged again by the developer lies entirely with the creditor who accepted it. Essentially, according to this proposal, the determining factor for issuing the property title will be who first mortgaged the property. If the property was first mortgaged by the buyer and later by the developer, then upon settling their mortgage loan, the buyer would be able to obtain the property title. In fact, according to the same sources, these cases affect approximately 20 to 30% of the 10,000 buyers, meaning around 2,000 to 3,000 borrowers. (Read the related report here).

It is worth mentioning that previous discussions took place in the House, as well as meetings involving President Nicos Christodoulides with the Central Banker and President Annita Demetriou with the Association of Banks and credit acquisition companies. However, the issue is considered extremely complex. As the party president noted after the meeting with the Association of Banks, DISY is working on a legislative proposal regarding the trapped property buyers, while both the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Interior are exploring ways to find a constitutional solution.

At this moment, the other two categories of trapped buyers remain unresolved—assuming a solution is finally advanced for one category—for whom constitutional tools must be found to help them acquire property titles.

Specifically, the three categories of trapped buyers are:

• The first category involves buyers who were trapped due to developers' debts, as the latter mortgaged the property to the bank, sold it, but did not fulfill their loan obligations. Thus, the property remains mortgaged, preventing a title from being issued to the owners. In many of these cases, the property had been mortgaged a second time by the buyers to secure a mortgage loan for the purchase.

• The second category pertains to buyers who were trapped due to zoning violations by the developers. This category is particularly challenging to resolve, as it involves serious violations of building coefficients and other zoning terms.

• The third category involves buyers who mortgaged their property to secure a loan; however, the developer later mortgaged the entire project to the bank. (This is the category for which the above solution is being promoted).

Although finding a solution for everyone is not easy, all parties recognize that the issue must be resolved, not only because the request of trapped buyers is simply just, but also due to the risk of new non-performing loans. These buyers are unlikely to repay their mortgage loans, as even if they settle their debts, the property will remain with the banks and will not pass into their hands.

This concern was echoed by the trapped buyers themselves, who spoke to Brief, expressing their intention not to continue making payments, with the risk of a new wave of non-performing loans looming, as the number of affected individuals reaches about 10,000.

These buyers are not only bearing the failures and broken promises of the developers who sold them their homes but also the poor practices of the banks. Specifically, the buyers of these properties remain trapped because, while they have repaid the developers, the land entrepreneurs have never settled their debts with the banks, where the properties remain mortgaged and at risk of being liquidated. It should be noted that the paradox of the entire situation is that banks accepted already mortgaged properties from developers as collateral to issue new mortgage loans—for the same loan to the currently trapped buyers.

It is recognized by all parties involved, from both legislative and executive branches, as well as from the banks' side, that property titles must be granted to the trapped buyers. However, no consensus has been reached on how this can be accomplished without being deemed unconstitutional in court.

From the discussions and the atmosphere surrounding them, it can be concluded that the feasible scenario is for the loss to be somehow absorbed by the banks and credit acquisition companies, which are estimated to hold about 80% of the loans of the land entrepreneurs who trapped the buyers of the properties.

In conclusion, various circles emphasize that banks, which receive interest from the serviced mortgage loans of the trapped buyers—thus also profits, as well as credit acquisition companies that purchased the vast majority of the land entrepreneurs’ loans at very low prices while taking on the risk—can absorb the resulting losses. This, on one hand, would not impact the financial sector and stability to a degree that poses risks, and at the same time, it would resolve the issue, as the trapped buyers, who have been compliant with their loan obligations over the years, will be able to obtain the property title that rightfully belongs to them.