I built without a permit: the penalty, and how it gets regularised

This is one of those things people look up at night and ask nobody about. You extended the house years ago, you added a storey, you enclosed the terrace. Nobody said anything. And now you want to sell, or to mortgage, or a letter has arrived from the town hall.

First, without dramatics: it is far more common than it looks and there is almost always a way out. Second, without naivety: the risk is real, and it grows with time rather than fading.

What the law says

The planning penalties sit in Ley 388 de 1997, the territorial development statute, and they come in three kinds that can be applied together:

• —A fine. For anyone who parcels, urbanises or builds without a permit, between 100 and 500 monthly statutory minimum wages, graduated according to the gravity of the breach and the area involved.
• —An order to demolish whatever was built without a permit or in breach of one.
• —Cutting off the utilities, which is the one that changes the conversation fastest.

On top of that, the earthquake-resistant construction statute carries its own penalty for anyone who builds without keeping to it, and empowers town halls to order the demolition of whatever breaches it.

The risk almost nobody counts

The fine is usually not the worst of it. What really weighs is that a building that has never been regularised drains the liquidity out of the property:

• —It cannot be sold well. An informed buyer discounts the cost of regularising it, or walks away.
• —It is no use as security. Banks lend against the legally recognised area, not against the built one.
• —The valuation does not recognise it. Square metres that are not in the permit do not exist for commercial purposes.
• —The insurer may object. If the claim touches an area with no permit behind it, there is an argument to be had.
• —And in an estate, the problem is inherited, usually at the worst possible moment.

Put another way: building without a permit did not save money, it froze it.

The way through: the act of recognition

For buildings that already exist, the rules provide a figure distinct from the permit: the act of recognition of the existence of buildings. It is issued by the curador urbano (a private office licensed by the state to issue permits) or by the municipal authority, and its effect is to bring into legal life something that was built without permission.

What it almost always calls for, and what is worth knowing in advance:

• —That what was built complies with the planning rules in force, or is at least compatible with them. If it took up the rear setback or went over the permitted height, that is where the real problem lies.
• —A technical expert report on the existing structure, signed by a civil engineer. It is the most expensive requirement and the most important one: somebody has to answer for the thing standing up.
• —A measured architectural survey of what is really there, not of what was imagined.
• —Payment of the applicable fees and of the delineation tax, the municipal levy on building work.

The three scenarios

Where to start

1. 1Ask for the written ruling on the planning rules for your plot. The verbal enquiry is free by law; the written ruling, which is the one you can rely on, costs 8.34 UVT wherever there is a curaduría. It tells you what the rules allow today. Without that, there is no knowing whether your case belongs to the first scenario or to the second.
2. 2Get the certificado de tradición, the land registry extract, and check it for entries, encumbrances or proceedings.
3. 3Have what actually exists surveyed, with real measurements.
4. 4Commission the structural expert report only once you know the case is viable. Doing it the other way round spends money on a report nobody will use.
5. 5And do not wait for the letter. A procedure begun of your own accord is handled very differently from one that starts with an administrative action already on top of you.

A closing note that is not legal but practical: what was built without a permit was also built, almost always, without a structural design and without a soil survey. Regularising it on paper does not make it safe. The expert report is not a bureaucratic requirement: it is the part of the process that genuinely matters.