13 Feb 2008 5:24 PM:
I think you're missing the point. These properties were NOT sold as long term investment vehicles. They were sold on the basis that you could 'spin the contract' to use their terms, and sell for a profit BEFORE you completed. This is what many of us were told, and it was on this basis that we went ahead. For this reason many people signed up for five or more!
The alternative was to keep the property and '12 weeks rental would cover the mortgage' HA HAHA what 12 weeks rental? I can't even get my furniture and air con installed, let alone have an apartment in the 'select development' we were promised. For two years all I've done is pay out on mortgage payments, insurance etc etc and guess what? the value has gone down so far, that I don't think I could sell mine for 65% of what I paid for it. My last reporter saw dogs in the pools, satellite dishes ever where, burger vans parked up at night using OUR electricity, wire fences creating that oh so desirable Colditz effect. So who on earth would want to book a holiday there? Are they taking bookings for this summer? How many years must I pay out before I see any return or even cover my costs?
I don't think anyone who bought on Manilva Beach is naive or gullible. the deposits were substantial and all the people I met on tours (I've been on four) were genuine, ordinairy people, and we are sensible enough to know that there is a risk to any investment. You win some, you lose some......
But, this isn't a case of an investment going sour. I feel like I've dealt with a company who have systematically conned me, right from the start, and that is something that I do not accept. I am not IFA bashing, but by using IFA's 'They who cannot be named' were creating a regulated environment to sell unregulated products. This is wrong. Many people believed they were getting authorised investment advice, when they weren't, and unregulated means no redress.
Community thread:
flax horse bedding
--------------------------------------