The Ministry of Housing announced that projects can begin construction without a final permit. The question no one is asking: what happens if something goes wrong?
A few days ago, while reviewing the MIVHED press release published in El Inmobiliario on December 20, 2025, regarding its new procedure for initiating construction work, I received a message from Diana Pimentel, a real estate lawyer at Echenique Group with extensive experience advising developers. Her question was direct:
“Reyna, who is responsible when this fails?”
He didn't say "if it fails." He said "when it fails.".
Because after 36 combined years advising on real estate transactions, we both know that in this sector, when responsibilities are diffuse, the one who pays is always the end buyer.
The new measure: speed vs. clarity
The MIVHED has just introduced a procedure that allows projects managed by Urban Managers and inspected by Private Technical Supervisors to begin construction before obtaining the final license, by simply notifying the ministry.
The stated objective: to reduce waiting times, streamline processes, and boost investment.
The objective achieved: to transfer the risk of the process to the buyer, without the buyer knowing it.
Because here's the uncomfortable truth that Diana and I discussed: to the buyer who's putting their dream aside, a project "in the licensing process" sounds exactly the same as a project "with an approved license." But legally, they're completely different worlds.
Where is the buyer in this equation?
During our conversation, Diana raised the scenario that every real estate lawyer dreads:
Project begins construction under this new scheme. Private Technical Supervisor gives approval. Urban Manager assumes responsibility. Developer sells apartments off-plan. Buyer hands over their 10 years' savings.
Something's wrong : an irregularity in the oversight, an error in the permits, an omission in the checks. The final license reveals problems that no one detected in time.
Simple question: Who is that buyer calling?
To the Urban Manager who “assumed responsibility”? To the Technical Supervisor who inspected? To the developer who sold? To the MIVHED that “oversees”? To the real estate agent who mediated the sale?
The answer: To everyone. And to no one. Because when responsibility is shared, no one answers clearly.
Legal certainty is not built at the end
Here is the principle that no professional in the sector can ignore: Legal certainty is built from the moment the buyer decides or thinks about buying, not with the last document signed.
When a project begins without a final permit, even with private oversight, the risk doesn't disappear. It simply shifts. And that shift always ends up in the same place: the wallet and peace of mind of the end buyer.
The problem of diffuse responsibilities
One of the most dangerous risks of this scheme is the dilution of responsibilities. The buyer doesn't understand Urban Managers or Private Technical Supervisors. For them, the project is either "government approved" or it isn't.
But the legal reality is more complex:
- The Urban Manager assumes responsibility during the management
- The Technical Supervisor is responsible for the inspection
- The developer guarantees the execution
- MIVHED subsequently conducts inspections
- The real estate agent brokered the sale
Do you see the problem? Five actors, five partial responsibilities, zero clarity for who puts up the money.
As Diana pointed out during our conversation (and between us we have 36 years of experience advising on transactions): “Experience shows us that many real estate disputes don't stem from bad faith, but from regulatory gaps and subsequent interpretations. When regularization is postponed, the risk doesn't disappear: it's transferred to the buyer .”
What real estate agents need to understand now
If you're selling a project under this new scheme, you're going to receive uncomfortable questions from informed buyers (remember: the naive buyer is extinct):
- "Who is responsible if the final license does not arrive on time?"
- "What guarantees do I have if the private supervisor made a mistake?"
- "Can my deed be registered without problems even though they started without a license?"
Can you answer clearly, or are you going to evade it with pretty phrases?
Because here's the truth: AI can create your marketing scripts, but when the customer asks about legal responsibilities, it's your brain that answers. And that can't be outsourced.
Legal support is no longer optional . In this new context, the message for end buyers is clear: preventative legal support is not a luxury, it's your only real protection.
The question "who is responsible?" must have a clear answer before signing a reservation, before handing over an advance payment, before committing to a project that started without a final license.
Because, as Diana and I agree, a project can start quickly, but only when responsibilities are clear from the beginning can everyone sleep soundly.
Accelerate, yes, but with crystal-clear rules
This measure could be an opportunity to revitalize the sector. But only if it is accompanied by clear mechanisms for:
- Specific assignment of responsibilities by stage
- Compensation protocols when supervision fails
- Mandatory guarantees for buyers in projects with pre-licenses
- Transparency regarding the actual status of each project
Without these elements, we are accelerating processes while leaving buyers more vulnerable than before.
Your decision as a professional
If you are a real estate agent, developer, or investor, this new procedure raises a fundamental question:
Are you going to use this measure to sell faster, or to build more responsibly?
Because in the real estate sector there is one truth that admits no shortcuts: you can close sales quickly today, but if responsibilities are not clear, problems will haunt you tomorrow.
Ask yourself right now: If a client asks you, "Who is responsible if something goes wrong with this project that started without a final license?", can you give them specific names, documents, and guarantees?
If your answer is vague, it's time to seek serious legal advice. Your professional credibility depends on clear answers, not elegant evasions .
Because remember: legal certainty is built from the moment the buyer decides or considers buying, not with the last document signed. And when it fails, it's always the end buyer who pays.
