balinews
The story sounds Kafkaesque. Susi Johnston has lost everything; her beloved husband, their $3 million Bali home, the peaceful retirement she had planned.
Johnston, and her late husband, Bruno Piazza, had poured their dreams and life savings into a spectacular modernist villa near the coastal village of Canggu, a hub for artists and expats. But Johnston discovered, shortly after Piazza's death from cancer, that their land "ownership" had been documented illegally.
She says gangsters attacked her home, she faced two deportation attempts and drugs were planted in her car leading to her arrest and detention.
Read more:
A nightmare in paradise
ronb
Like other articles about Suzi there are claims that I wonder about like:
[quote]
There are hundreds of cases like this right now but I'm the only one who stood up because I didn't have anywhere else to go
[/quote] Are there really?
And Andrew Gageof Echo Beach Resort says
[quote]
"It's hard to feel upset about the nominee (crisis)," Gage says. "I've been here for 20 years and I've known it's never been legal since the beginning.
[/quote]
This oft repeated assertion that nominee agreements are illegal ar usually justified by saying the nominee deals are circumventing the intention of the law. As far as I know, no court ruling has ever said this. Certainly not in Suzi's case. And the Minister as quoted here is not saying that. Maybe some day some court may rule like that - but I doubt it.
Markit
Couldn't agree more - there's so many other things going on with this that it's almost impossible anymore to see what is actually being decided or done here. There are lots of inconsistencies in her story and they are never queried by Reporters or her courtiers that support and believe her.
I hope one day to hear the true story but doubt I will live that long (or if any of us will).
spicyayam
I believe she started the process to Hak Pakai. Wouldn't she have needed the nominees signature and approval for this? If she had that wouldn't that be proof enough that she is the 'owner' of the property?
davita
spicyayam wroteI believe she started the process to Hak Pakai. Wouldn't she have needed the nominees signature and approval for this? If she had that wouldn't that be proof enough that she is the 'owner' of the property?
Exactly right spicy...the nominee would need to sign to change the title from Hak Milik to Hak Pakai and thereupon give up 'ownership'. The 'owner' thus becomes the Indonesian Government who give the 'right to use' title to the foreigner. This title is for a period of years and guarantee of extension for a sum of money which, I understand, is not declared until after applying for the extension.
I've read lots of stuff about Susi, and went to her seminar a couple of months ago, and concluded she has a personal grudge with her nominee. I feel some sympathy for her dilemma but don't believe others in a nominee system should get agitated unless not trusting their nominee.
Markit
Some incredibly clever fella took her to task about all the OTT statements she's always making and had a real good run at her with, unfortunately, very little to show for it as she seems unable to stick to one topic or thread of logic. Sorry, as it says in the link it's really only for Faceboogers.
https://www.facebook.com/paul.hoffman.98229/posts/10152979262683365?comment_id=10152983044238365¬if_t=feed_comment_reply
DenpasarHouse
Eh? She comes off looking pretty good from this exchange. She's the only one in the thread who knows in detail what she's talking about.
Markit
House, old mate that's kinda like being the only one in the room that speaks Swahili. Everyone else that doesn't thinks you're the best thing since sliced bread but to anyone that knows Swahili you just might look like swill.
Mark
There's a very simple moral / reality to this story - nominee arrangements are illegal under Indonesian law. It's on you if you get caught up in a legal case with the nominee, which as we all know you will most likely lose. So, if you invest with a nominee structure, by all means intend to have a successful investment, but don't bet more on Bali than you can afford to lose and in the unlikely event that you do lose, don't bitch and moan that you've somehow been shafted...
tintin
One thing for sure is that it is a matter of record that Tety Carolina testified under oath that she had bought the house in Canggu. However, Susi, not Tety, brought ALL the bills connected to the building of the house, which were all in her or her husband's names. Lying in court, except in Indonesia, is called "Contempt of Court" and usually the culprit gets some serious time in jail, but again, not in Indonesia!
spicyayam
I don't doubt anything Susi says. Because of what she has been through she probably is one of the most knowledgeable people in Indonesia about property law.
I think most foreigners understand living in Indonesia there are no guarantees and you could be easily be forced to leave the country. Don't invest here more than you can afford to lose - good advice but not easy to follow the longer you stay here, raise a family, start a business etc.
I don't dispute using nominees is wrong, no prudent investor would enter into such a deal. It's still a fact though the government provides complicit support by allowing foreigners to buy land through nominees. Notaries carry out transactions knowing fully well the buyer is a foreigner and the BPN (government land register) registers the property. Of course, I am not saying that this makes it right.
If the government was serious about stopping foreigners from buying property, why haven't they done anything to stop it? It would just be a matter of enforcing the existing laws and could be done overnight. I guess the answer is because it is all about the money and there are plenty of people who benefit and don't want the system changed. The government can get foreign investment while saying no foreigner owns any land in Indonesia.
I mentioned some time ago about a house I knew as sold for 9 billion rupiah. I guess the person put about 2 billion into the project and they owned it for about 5 years. Yes it is high risk, but a tidy return. Again I am not saying this is right or wrong, but there will always be people prepared to take the risk, especially while the current loopholes and lack of enforcement exists.
Markit
I also don't doubt that Susi thinks everything she says is true, I just can't agree.
If you try to follow the paper chase she admits herself stretched over 10 years of ignoring the facts and pretending it would all be alright the picture becomes pretty clear of a woman in a man's world that is completely overburdened with the events and catastrophes of her own life.
Understandably this has swayed her view of cause and effect.
Hindsight is always 20/20 so I won't try and fill in the blanks. I just hope that her "exposure" won't upset the applecart for many others.
tintin
Since Markit brought up another problem about one of his friends being taken by some Balinese girl, there is an analogy with Susi's situation, and that of many Bali expats..
How often have you heard of a man, or a woman, being totally blind regarding his or her lover, although, deep inside, he/she should know better? That lover is a cheat, a two-faced liar, treat him/her like sh it. Many of this man/woman friends have told him/her so, but to no avail. The man/woman is madly in love: it's terminal! But, as time goes by, that lover's beauty starts fading away, as he/she becomes vulgar, and...old: he/she is not exciting anymore. With time now on his/her side, the man/woman starts seeing the reality of the relationship, and eventually brings it to its ending, if he/she is lucky, that is. If he/she is not lucky, and still persists stubbornly, alcohol is the usual solution (Man, could I give you many examples!). Well, isn't Bali that lover?:icon_rolleyes:
