Meta Description: Who pays the evacuation and demolition costs of a risky structure? The owner’s responsibility in proportion to their shares, a one-month payment period, and collection according to Law No. 6183.

One of the most frequently wondered topics by owners during the risky building process is who bears the evacuation and demolition costs. Especially when the demolition is carried out by the administration, the question of from whom and how these costs will be collected is an issue that leads to serious financial consequences. In this article, we address who is responsible for the evacuation and demolition costs and the collection procedure.

Costs are Borne by the Owners

The rule is clear: evacuation and demolition costs are borne by the owners. Owners are responsible for the costs of evacuation and demolition carried out or commissioned by the Presidency or the Administration, in proportion to their shares, if the demolition is not done by the owners (Implementation Regulation Art. 8/8). Similarly, the Law stipulates that the costs of risky structure identification, evacuation, and demolition carried out/commissioned by the Presidency or the Administration shall be collected from the owners, in proportion to their shares, according to Law No. 6183 (Law No. 6306 Art. 5/4). As can be seen, the burden of cost remains with the owners who leave the demolition to the administration.

Payment Period: One Month

A specific period is granted for the payment of costs. Evacuation and demolition costs shall be paid within a one-month period following the notification to be made to the owners by the Presidency or the Administration (Implementation Regulation Art. 8/8). This one-month period begins to run after the cost is notified to the owner. Timely payment prevents additional follow-up and collection procedures.

If Not Paid on Time: Law No. 6183

An administrative collection process is initiated for expenses not paid on time. Expenses not paid within a one-month period; if eviction and demolition have been carried out/commissioned by the Presidency, they are pursued and collected by the tax office upon notification by the Presidency to the relevant tax office; if carried out/commissioned by the Administration, they are pursued and collected by the Administration, in accordance with the provisions of Law No. 6183 on the Procedure for the Collection of Public Receivables (Implementation Regulation Art. 8/8). This means that the expense will be pursued as a public receivable and may incur additional burdens if delayed. For general information on the payment and tax aspects of the urban transformation process, the article on taxes not to be paid in urban transformation can also be reviewed.

In Practice, Demolition Costs Are Generally Transferred to the Contractor

Although this responsibility belongs to the property owners according to legislation, in practice, the situation often unfolds differently. In flat-for-land (land share for construction) contracts; it is explicitly agreed that items such as demolition expenses and rubble income exclusively belong to the contractor, that the entire process from obtaining the demolition permit to the actual demolition of the building will be carried out by the contracted contractor, and that the demolition is the responsibility of the contractor. Thus, ensuring that demolition costs do not come out of the owners’ pockets is a common arrangement in flat-for-land construction contracts.

The implementation of this process is mostly ensured by a power of attorney given to the contractor. In practice, land owners, by giving the contractor a notarized power of attorney for the period from the signing of the contract until the acquisition of the occupancy permit, authorize them to follow up on risky building detection procedures, make contracts with demolition companies, obtain demolition permits, sign minutes related to demolition, and carry out annotation procedures in the land registry. Thus, administrative applications and procedures related to demolition can be carried out by the contractor instead of the owner.

However, it is necessary to emphasize an important legal distinction: The transfer of demolition costs to the contractor only produces consequences in the internal relationship between the parties (contractually); it does not eliminate the owner’s public responsibility towards the administration. This is because legislation holds owners responsible for evacuation and demolition costs incurred or caused by the administration, in proportion to their shares (Implementation Regulation art. 8/8; Law No. 6306 art. 5/4). Therefore, if the contractor does not carry out the demolition and does not pay the cost, the administration will still collect this cost from the owner; and the owner who paid the cost will recourse to the contractor for the amount paid, based on the contract. For this reason, clearly stating in the contract that the demolition cost belongs to the contractor is of great importance for the owner’s right of recourse.

It is in the land owner’s interest that the power of attorney given to the contractor is not unlimited, but structured in a limited way regarding its subject, duration, and scope. In the event that the contractor fails to fulfill their performance, the given power of attorney can be revoked with a notice of revocation, and the termination of the contract may come into question. Regarding the termination of the contract signed with the contractor and related processes, the article on administrative termination of contractor agreements in urban transformation can be reviewed.

How to Avoid Expenses: Acting on Time

The most effective measure to prevent these expenses from arising is to manage the process without leaving it to the administration. If owners personally carry out the evacuation and demolition within the ninety-day period granted to them, or implement an alternative such as reinforcement, ex officio demolition and the associated cost burden will not arise. Passively waiting for the process, however, brings both ex officio demolition and cost responsibility. For the current text of the legislation, Legislation Information System should be followed.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Who pays the evacuation and demolition costs? Owners are responsible for the costs of evacuation and demolition carried out/commissioned by the administration, in proportion to their shares (Implementation Regulation Art. 8/8; Law No. 6306 Art. 5/4).

Within what period should the cost be paid? It is paid within one month following the notification to be made to the owners (Implementation Regulation Art. 8/8).

What happens if I don’t pay on time? Unpaid expenses are pursued and collected by the tax office or the Administration in accordance with the provisions of Law No. 6183 (Implementation Regulation Art. 8/8).

How can I avoid the cost burden? Carrying out the evacuation and demolition personally within the given period or opting for reinforcement prevents ex officio demolition and the associated cost burden.

Can the demolition cost be transferred to the contractor? Yes. In practice, in floor-for-share construction contracts, the demolition cost and the entire demolition process are transferred to the contractor; however, this transfer is valid between the parties, and the owner remains responsible to the administration in proportion to their shares and has recourse to the contractor if they make the payment (Implementation Regulation art. 8/8; Law No. 6306 art. 5/4).

Why Is Expert Lawyer Support Necessary?

The accurate calculation of eviction and demolition costs, their distribution in proportion to shares, and the follow-up of the collection process prevent owners from incurring unnecessary financial burdens. Furthermore, it is important to audit the procedural compliance of the transactions underlying these costs. 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 cost and collection processes are managed by a specialized lawyer in the field.

2M Law Office  provides services across Turkey, especially in Istanbul, where urban transformation is most intense. We operate in Istanbul’s priority transformation districts including Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, Ümraniye, Ataşehir, Kadıköy, Sancaktepe, and Küçükçekmece, as well as in Kocaeli’s Gebze and Darıca regions. As Istanbul urban transformation lawyers and Tuzla urban transformation lawyers, we offer legal support to right holders during eviction and demolition processes.