When I talk about provisional registrations of purchase agreements with developers, the reaction is predictable: skepticism and fear. “What if the buyer defaults?” “Do I have to go to court to cancel?” But the real risk isn’t in using this tool. It’s in not using it while the world is watching.
The question everyone is asking
I remember a conversation I had with a developer a few days ago. I explained the provisional registrations that will take effect on December 2nd. He crossed his arms, frowned, and asked me the question every pragmatic entrepreneur asks: “And how does THAT benefit me, Doctor?”
Then he added, without waiting for a response: “It sounds like more bureaucracy. And what happens if the buyer defaults? Do I have to go to court to cancel the agreement? Now everything will be public, right?” Does that registration constitute a registered right?
They were valid questions. A legitimate fear. But I was asking the wrong question.
The question isn't "What are the benefits of registering my pledges?" The correct question is: "What will it cost me NOT to do so?"
Real fears
Let's be honest. Developers have reasons to doubt:
“If I register the promise and the buyer defaults, how do I cancel it?” “If I apply price indexation, does registration complicate the process?” “Now my commitments will be public.” “It’s more work, more paperwork, more costs.”.
I understand each of these fears. As a real estate attorney, I've heard them with every regulatory change the sector has faced, including when Law 108-05 on Real Estate Registration came into effect.
But the truth is that these fears are precisely the reason why we NEED provisional registrations.
“But what if I have to cancel the promise?”
This is the question I've heard most often. The specific fear: "Do I have to go to court to cancel it?"
The answer is no.
Article 16 of Technical Provision DNRT-DT-2025-001 establishes four ways to cancel provisional registrations. Two of them are entirely administrative, directly through the Registry of Titles, without a court:
First option: Agreement between the parties. If the buyer defaulted and both parties agree to cancel, they sign a cancellation document, file it with the Registry of Titles, and the deed is cancelled. No court involvement is required.
Second option: Beneficiary's action. If the buyer accepts the cancellation, they sign a document waiving their rights. It is deposited and the cancellation is processed. No court is required.
Third option: Expiration of the deadline. Provisional registrations have a limited validity. Upon expiration, cancellation is requested. No court intervention is required.
Fourth option: Court order. This is the ONLY option that requires a court, and it only applies when there is a real conflict: the buyer does not accept the cancellation, claims that they paid, and asserts their rights.
Here's the irony: developers are afraid to register their properties because they think, "What if I have to cancel?" But not registering is precisely what GUARANTEES you'll end up in court. Because when the buyer feels vulnerable due to the lack of transparency, that's when the problems can begin.
Provisional registration doesn't complicate cancellation. It makes it easier. Because there's a clear record of what was agreed upon, when, and under what terms.
The invisible cost of mistrust
While we debate whether or not to register our pledges, the world is watching. International investors. Sophisticated buyers. Financial institutions.
And what they see is this: a country that created modern registration tools but whose actors resist using them.
The real cost isn't the RD$180 fee for registering a promise. The real cost is the growing distrust in our sector. It's that the Dominican Republic is seen as a country of legal uncertainty because its own professionals don't use the available regulations.
It is the credibility we lose as a real estate sector every time we choose the invisible over the transparent.
I'm not talking about abstract ethics. I'm talking about money. About the risk premium investors pay when they perceive opacity.
Turning the perspective
Let's return to the developer's fears from another perspective.
“Everyone will see what I’ve sold.” Exactly. And that’s precisely what banks, institutional investors, and serious buyers WANT to see. Projects with public transparency sell more and better than projects with invisible promises.
“It’s more work.” You know what’s more work? Litigation. Buyers suing because “they didn’t know there was a mortgage on the title deed.” Banks rejecting loans because they can’t verify actual commitments. Losing reputation because someone accuses you of double-selling.
Developers who adopt provisional registrations from December 2nd onward aren't adding red tape. They're building a competitive advantage. They're telling the market, "My project is so solid that every commitment is public."
The moment of choosing
The Dominican real estate sector is at a crossroads. We can be the country that modernized its property registry and whose stakeholders use it with pride. Or we can be the country that created transparency tools that no one adopted.
The first option positions us as a serious investment destination. The second condemns us to continue paying a risk premium.
On December 2, provisional registrations cease to be a possibility and become a regulatory reality.
When the sophisticated buyer asks, “Can I see the record of commitments for this project?”, what will you answer?
The tool already exists. The question is: who will use it to gain credibility while others continue to lose trust?
The Dominican real estate sector doesn't need more skepticism. It needs pioneers. It needs developers who understand that transparency is not a burden. It is the most valuable asset in a market tired of unfulfilled promises.
