Carefully read the contract you may find that his other point already provided a different definition – "a term transfer of the property for seven months from the date of the proposed transfer of the facility in operation. Thus, the timing of the already moved away for 7 months and it's not all. If you look at the article, which deals with penalties and liabilities of the parties, the developer provides the responsibility for delayed transfer of the property for seven months from the date of the proposed transfer of the facility into operation only if the delay exceeds 90 days, otherwise the penalty is not an investor paid. Thus, the developer of "stored" for a period equal to an additional 3 more months. Do not over here will remember that we are dealing with trust bonds, issuance of which provides its maturity. Actual transfer of the property, which is preceded by the target maturity bonds may be made only after completion of construction of the facility is put into operation and conduct of measurement of the property bti. Who establishes the procedure for redemption? As a rule, self-seller.
Sometimes investors are encouraged to sign a service contract with the housing and operational now, otherwise the bond is not redeemed. It should be noted that no legislation on securities or their redemption procedure does not provide for conditions other than those prescribed by law. It was found that it was developer on the order of the investor is obliged to transfer the newly erected building for its further operation on the balance of the operating organization. The final cost of the property, as well as its area, the parties may determine after the procedure control measurements bti and registration of ownership of immovable property. Can you call the current robust investment scheme? No definite answer. In having even a documentary form. Given the increased cost per square meter of real estate is likely, investors use the services of credit institutions. Rhetorical question – what to do with interest paid on bank credit, inflation indices, moral hazard? All these "losses" have to prove in court.
The positive qualities is the fact that investors, in contrast to the pre-existing system, it seemed right to conduct some informational monitoring of the issuer that is eligible to receive specific information about the issuer – the changes that have taken place in its economic activities and which may affect the value of securities or the amount of income for them. (As opposed to Bryant Estate). On the other hand, remains a mystery why the legislator has not provided a more rigid and reliable form of protection for the investor. After all, for example, if it was about Bonds seems perfectly reasonable to introduce an additional secured bonds, which in the case of non-repayment of principal by the Issuer of its obligations in full or in part, be provided with insurance company or surety. Or use the mortgage bonds, which in case of default by the Issuer of its obligations, provided their owners the right to meet their requirement at the expense of mortgage cover. However, this question unlikely to find the answer, so it is hoped that the current system take root, and not give any reason nor disappointed investors in the Ukrainian legislators, nor the developer.