Who can have a risky building detected, and who pays for its costs? Owner, legal representative, administration, and cost responsibility in case of ex officio detection in light of Law No. 6306.

One of the most frequently confused issues during the risky building detection process is who can have the detection made and who bears the costs. “Can I have the detection made by myself, do other owners need to approve, who pays for it?” questions are among the most common questions asked by rights holders. In this article, we explain who can make the detection request and the cost responsibility in light of the legislation.

Detection is Primarily Carried Out by the Owner or Legal Representative

Risky building detection is, as a rule, at the initiative of the building owner. According to the legislation, detection is primarily carried out by the building owners or their legal representatives, with the costs borne by them (Law No. 6306 art. 3/1; Implementation Regulation art. 7/2-a). The detection request is made via the electronic software system (Implementation Regulation art. 7/2-a). An important point is that the unanimity of all owners is not required for detection: Any one of the owners can individually request a risky building detection. In other words, even a single owner can initiate the building’s detection.

If There is No Floor Easement, Who Has the Detection Made?

If floor easement or condominium ownership has not been established in the land registry, and only a title deed with a land share exists, the determination of a risky building actually located on the land is carried out by the land share owner who owns the building (Implementation Regulation Art. 7/2-a). However, if the building on the land belongs to someone else and this situation is specified in the land registry, the determination of a risky building is carried out by the party in whose favor an annotation exists (Implementation Regulation Art. 7/2-a). Regarding the effect of annotations and rights in the land registry on the process, the article on the effect of a mortgaged or foreclosed apartment on urban transformation can also be reviewed.

Can the Administration Initiate a Determination Ex Officio?

Yes. The Presidency or the Administration can carry out the risky building determination ex officio, or it can request it from the owners or their legal representatives by setting a deadline (Law No. 6306 Art. 3/1; Implementation Regulation Art. 7/2-b). If the owners do not have the determination carried out within the given period, the determinations will be made or commissioned by the Presidency or the Administration (Implementation Regulation Art. 7/2-b). Furthermore, the Presidency may also request the Administration to determine risky buildings in designated areas by setting a deadline.

Who Pays the Cost of Ex Officio Determination?

Owners are responsible for the costs of risk assessment reports conducted or commissioned by the Presidency or the Administration, in proportion to their shares, if not commissioned by the owners themselves (Implementation Regulation Art. 7/2-b). These costs must be paid within one month following the notification made to the relevant party. Costs not paid on time, if the assessment was carried out/commissioned by the Presidency, are followed up and collected by the tax office upon notification from the Presidency; if carried out/commissioned by the Administration, they are followed up and collected by the Administration in accordance with the provisions of Law No. 6183 on the Procedures for the Collection of Public Receivables (Implementation Regulation Art. 7/2-b). Therefore, whether the assessment is commissioned by the owner or carried out ex officio by the administration, the cost ultimately rests with the owners; the difference is whether the payment will occur directly or through administrative enforcement. For the entire process, the general framework of the urban transformation process can be reviewed. For the current text of the legislation, the Legislation Information System should be followed.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Can I have the risk assessment report prepared by myself? Yes. The assessment is primarily commissioned by the owner or their legal representative, and any one of the owners can make a request individually; unanimity is not required (Law No. 6306 Art. 3/1; Implementation Regulation Art. 7/2-a).

Who pays for the assessment cost? If the assessment is commissioned by the owner, the cost belongs to the owner; if the administration commissions it ex officio, the owners are responsible for the cost in proportion to their shares (Law No. 6306 Art. 3/1; Implementation Regulation Art. 7/2-b).

If there is no floor easement, who commissions the determination? In a land share deed, by the owner of the land share who owns the building on the land; if the building belongs to another person and this is stated in the deed, by the party in whose favor an annotation is registered (Implementation Regulation art. 7/2-a).

What happens if the ex officio determination expense is not paid? Expenses not paid within one month are pursued and collected by the tax office or the Administration according to the provisions of Law No. 6183 (Implementation Regulation art. 7/2-b).

Why is Expert Legal Support Necessary?

Ensuring that the determination request is made by the correct person, using the correct procedure, and with the correct documents, ensures the smooth progression of the process from the outset. Situations such as land share deeds, buildings belonging to others, and cost liability in the case of ex officio determination, especially, require a technical evaluation. Urban transformation is a multi-layered process where administrative law, real estate law, and contract law intersect, and even a single procedural error can lead to significant loss of rights. For this reason, it is of great importance that the determination phase is managed by a lawyer specialized in the field.

2M Law Firm As 2M Law Firm, we provide services throughout Turkey, particularly in Istanbul where urban transformation is most intensive; including Istanbul’s priority transformation districts of Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, Ümraniye, Ataşehir, Kadıköy, Sancaktepe, and Küçükçekmece, as well as Kocaeli’s Gebze and Darıca regions. As Istanbul urban transformation lawyers and Tuzla urban transformation lawyers, we offer legal support to rights holders in risky building determination and objection processes.