Guests //

Please can you advise if I need to go for an IQ check up to (confirm my stupidity) OR is there any merit in my thoughts !!!

With all the bulldust and (land claims) in SA starting to ferment discussion both negative and positive I was just thinking out aloud ( you can proberbly see the smoke rising already )

BUT

What is stopping say a game rancher from getting paid out for his (farm land claim) at the governemnt payout figure, and once the title deeds are formally transfered over to the claiments, what is then actually stopping the rancher from (purchasing the ranch back again) from the claimants, at say he same rate or close to the going pay out rate ... the farmer would then get the ranch back ( if he actually wanted it back) as it has legally gone through the claims process.

I would (hazard a guess) many of the black chap claimants might (jump at the idea) of a CASH IN HAND payout as opposed to owing the land and then possibly not being able to run it

All constructive thoughts welcome from both local South Africans in the know how, and others worldwide with an opinion on it

Peter

I would suspect that many of these folks already "bought the ranch" once and what's to stop the government from taking it again...after all isn't the idea really to lessen white ownership?

That question would be better answered by a South African lawyer/barrister/solicitor dealing in land and property. Someone who knows the exact laws and statutes and who also has a "feel" for the direction that the government is going on land claims, even in spite of what the law says and means. After all, it is South Africa not the United States. When I discuss this issue with white ranchers and farmers that I know in South Africa there does not seem to be a sense of urgency or alarm--yet. Your proposition would be legally acceptable and valid here in the United States, if the actual intent of the statute was the payment of just compensation, since the original buyer could then resell the land to someone else, after first obtaining it legally and lawfully. But there are other motives afoot across the pond that might negate anything that could be considered legal and lawful, and the major motive is black ownership of the land, whether they can or cannot farm it or operate it.

Things change daily down this end of the world. People need to realize that we have an Ultra Liberal / Communist based government.

The only way to buy land here is to do a lot of homework with an extemely good attorney or advocate that is able to communicate with all parties involved, especially high ranking government officials

Brad

Peter

That is way too logical and everyone would be happy so let's no even consider that it could happen.

Mark

I don't think that buy-back is an option but I do know of cases where the white farmer enters into a longterm lease agreement with the new black owner.This way the farmer has cash in his pocket and nothing changes regards his farming operations.

Jan

and then they decide to change the laws again. ZIM all over again