

What happens if property purchased for Turkish citizenship is overvalued or incorrectly valued? Learn the risks of inflated appraisals, citizenship rejection, seller and consultant liability, valuation disputes, refund claims and legal remedies for foreign investors in Turkey in 2026.
Foreign investors purchasing real estate for Turkish citizenship often focus on one figure: USD 400,000. However, paying USD 400,000 or more for a property does not by itself guarantee that the real estate will satisfy the investment requirement for Turkish citizenship.
Under the Turkish citizenship-by-investment framework applicable in 2026, the property transaction must satisfy multiple requirements concerning the qualifying property, transaction value, official documentation, payment and applicable land-registry procedures. A major problem can arise when a foreign investor pays an artificially inflated price for a property that is actually worth substantially less, when the valuation documentation contains errors, or when a seller, developer, intermediary or consultant falsely represents that a property will qualify for citizenship.
The consequences can be serious. Depending on the circumstances, the foreign investor may face failure to obtain the required eligibility documentation, rejection or interruption of the citizenship process, administrative scrutiny, loss of a substantial part of the investment and litigation against the seller, developer, consultant or other responsible parties.
The most important principle is simple:
Paying USD 400,000 does not automatically mean the property legally qualifies as a USD 400,000 citizenship investment.
Under the current exceptional citizenship framework, a foreign national may potentially qualify through the acquisition of eligible real estate worth at least:
USD 400,000 or the equivalent in foreign currency.
The relevant land-registry commitment generally requires that the property not be sold for three years.
However, satisfying the monetary threshold is only one part of the process.
The property and transaction must also satisfy the other applicable citizenship and land-registry requirements.
No.
A seller may advertise an apartment for:
USD 450,000
but that does not establish that the property has a qualifying value of USD 450,000 for citizenship purposes.
The seller’s asking price is a commercial proposal.
Citizenship eligibility is determined according to the applicable official regulatory framework.
Overvaluation generally means that the property is represented as being worth significantly more than its genuine market or qualifying value.
For example:
Actual Market Value: USD 260,000
Price Presented to Foreign Investor: USD 420,000
The investor may have been told:
“You need to pay this amount because the apartment is suitable for Turkish citizenship.”
If the higher figure does not reflect a genuine transaction value and the citizenship requirements are not actually satisfied, the foreign buyer can face serious legal and financial consequences.
Foreign investors may not know:
Local Property Prices
Comparable Sales
Construction Quality
Neighborhood Values
Land Registry Procedures
Citizenship Regulations
or the difference between a seller’s commercial price and the value relevant to the citizenship process.
This creates opportunities for dishonest sellers and intermediaries to inflate prices.
This distinction is important.
A buyer and seller are generally capable of agreeing on a price that differs from an appraised market value.
A foreign buyer might knowingly pay a premium because of:
Location
Furniture
Payment Terms
Commercial Expectations
View
Urgency
or other legitimate reasons.
Therefore:
High Purchase Price ≠ Automatically Fraud.
The legal problem becomes much more serious where the inflated price is combined with false statements, manipulated documentation, artificial payment structures, hidden refunds or false citizenship guarantees.
For citizenship-related property acquisition, the relevant official values and transaction/payment documentation must satisfy the applicable requirements.
Foreign investors should not assume that one document showing USD 400,000 is sufficient if the remaining transaction records contradict it.
The entire transaction should be consistent.
Three concepts are often confused:
Contractual Purchase Price
Property Valuation
and
Amount Actually Paid.
They are not necessarily identical.
For citizenship purposes, the authorities examine the transaction under the applicable regulatory framework rather than relying exclusively on what the seller wrote in a sales brochure.
This can create a significant citizenship problem.
Suppose the buyer agrees to pay:
USD 420,000.
But the relevant official valuation/value determination results in:
USD 360,000.
The buyer should not automatically assume that the citizenship requirement has been satisfied merely because USD 420,000 was transferred.
The applicable value determination and transaction documentation must be reviewed before completing the purchase.
Turkey has developed increasingly centralized procedures for citizenship-related real estate value determination.
Foreign investors should therefore be particularly suspicious when a seller or consultant says:
“Do not worry about the real value. We know someone who can make the report USD 400,000.”
This is a major red flag.
The current system uses regulated valuation/value-determination processes connected with official land-registry infrastructure.
Foreign investors should not assume that a privately arranged informal valuation will determine citizenship eligibility.
The relevant document must comply with the official procedure applicable to the transaction.
A significant legislative development entered into force in 2026 concerning the electronic transmission of certain real estate valuation reports.
Under legislation published in May 2026, valuation organizations authorized by the Capital Markets Board or Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency must electronically transmit specified valuation reports prepared under housing-finance and capital-markets legislation to the General Directorate of Land Registry and Cadastre where the relevant statutory conditions apply.
This reflects Turkey’s broader movement toward centralized electronic valuation information and stronger institutional access to property-value data.
Foreign investors should therefore avoid any transaction based on artificial valuation assumptions.
The citizenship-related system has evolved beyond older practices that foreign investors may still encounter in outdated internet articles.
Current procedures use official value-determination documentation within the applicable land-registry framework.
Foreign investors should ensure that the document used for their transaction is the correct current document rather than relying on an old report, screenshot or unofficial PDF provided by the seller.
Under current Land Registry and Cadastre guidance, value determination documents issued after the relevant December 2024 procedural change generally have a six-month validity period.
This is important because older information online may refer to a three-month valuation-report period.
Foreign investors should use current procedural information when planning the transaction.
Whether an earlier report remains usable depends on:
Date of Report
Type of Document
Date of Transaction
and the applicable transitional procedure.
Do not assume that a valuation obtained months earlier remains valid.
This should immediately trigger caution.
A seller can negotiate a sales price.
A seller should not be treated as having the power to dictate an independent official valuation outcome.
Statements such as:
“We guarantee the expert will value it above USD 400,000.”
should be investigated carefully.
A property seller, developer or consultant may advertise:
“Guaranteed Turkish Passport.”
This wording can be legally misleading.
Purchasing qualifying property can create a basis for an exceptional citizenship application, but citizenship acquisition remains subject to the applicable legal and administrative evaluation.
No ordinary seller should represent citizenship as though purchasing an apartment automatically creates a passport.
The real estate stage and final citizenship determination should be distinguished.
The relevant authorities assess whether the investment conditions have been satisfied.
The citizenship process then continues through the competent authorities.
Foreign investors should therefore reject marketing statements suggesting that a developer personally has authority to grant Turkish citizenship.
One common structure can involve a property worth below the required threshold combined with an inflated furniture package.
For example:
Apartment: USD 330,000
Furniture Package: USD 90,000
Total Advertised Citizenship Package: USD 420,000
This does not mean the real estate itself automatically satisfies the citizenship investment requirement.
Movable items should not be casually treated as part of the qualifying real estate value.
Another possible structure is:
Property: USD 340,000
“Citizenship Consultancy”: USD 80,000
Total Payment: USD 420,000
Again, paying USD 420,000 in total does not automatically mean USD 420,000 was invested in qualifying real estate.
Citizenship consultancy fees and the qualifying property investment should not be confused.
Suppose a foreign buyer pays USD 450,000.
Later, the buyer discovers:
Seller Received USD 350,000
and
Agent Retained USD 100,000.
This can create serious questions concerning what amount actually constituted payment for the real estate.
The transaction should be traced through banking documentation.
Citizenship-related property transactions require careful payment documentation.
Foreign buyers should preserve:
Bank Transfer Records
Foreign Currency Purchase Documentation
Seller Receipts
Contract
Land Registry Documents
and other required financial records.
Cash payments create significantly greater evidentiary risk.
Foreign natural persons purchasing real estate in Turkey are subject to specific foreign-currency procedures.
The required Foreign Currency Purchase Certificate should be coordinated with the transaction before title transfer.
For citizenship-related transactions, bank documentation concerning payment from buyer to seller is also particularly important.
This is an extremely dangerous arrangement.
Example:
Buyer transfers:
USD 420,000
Seller secretly returns:
USD 100,000
Actual economic transaction:
USD 320,000.
A seller or consultant may describe this as:
“Cashback.”
“Guaranteed return.”
or
“Special citizenship discount.”
Such arrangements can undermine the authenticity of the qualifying investment and create serious legal risks.
A genuine commercial incentive should be distinguished from a scheme designed to make a lower-value transaction appear to satisfy the citizenship threshold.
If the true economic investment is below the required amount, artificial circular payments can create severe consequences.
Foreign investors should not participate in transactions designed to manufacture an investment figure.
Intentional manipulation can produce multiple layers of risk.
Depending on the participants and facts, the matter can involve:
Citizenship Eligibility Problems
Administrative Investigation
Civil Liability
Professional Liability
Contractual Claims
and potentially
Criminal Investigation.
The buyer’s own knowledge and participation will be important.
This distinction can be decisive.
The foreign investor was told by the seller, developer or consultant that the property genuinely had the represented value and relied on false information.
The investor knew the property was worth far less and knowingly participated in artificial documentation designed to obtain citizenship.
The legal position of these two investors can be very different.
A foreign buyer may have a strong claim where the seller intentionally misrepresented:
Property Value
Citizenship Eligibility
Official Valuation
Payment Requirements
or other material facts.
The precise remedies depend on the contract, representations, evidence and transaction status.
Potentially, depending on the circumstances.
If the buyer can establish legally relevant:
Fraud
Fundamental Mistake
Material Misrepresentation
Contractual Breach
or another recognized ground, cancellation or restitution remedies may be available.
However, purchasing property for more than its market value does not automatically create a right to cancel.
This is extremely important.
Compare:
Contract A: “Buyer purchases Apartment 12 for USD 420,000.”
with:
Contract B: “The parties acknowledge that the buyer acquires the property for the purpose of applying for Turkish citizenship through qualifying real estate investment, and the seller has represented that the transaction/property satisfies the stated agreed eligibility conditions.”
The second structure can provide significantly stronger evidence concerning the purpose and representations underlying the transaction.
Many disputes begin with statements made through:
Telegram
Video Call
or face-to-face meetings.
The buyer should preserve all written communications.
Messages such as:
“This apartment is guaranteed for citizenship.”
can become important evidence.
Foreign investors should preserve the property advertisement before it disappears.
Useful evidence can include:
Screenshots
PDF Brochure
Social Media Advertisement
Website Listing
Price List
and promotional messages.
The advertisement may prove what was represented before the purchase.
This phrase should be treated cautiously.
A private apartment is not necessarily a government-guaranteed citizenship product merely because it can potentially be used in a qualifying transaction.
Foreign buyers should verify the actual legal conditions independently.
The buyer should ask:
Approved for What?
A project may have:
Construction Approval
Building Permit
or another regulatory status.
That does not necessarily mean every apartment automatically satisfies citizenship investment conditions.
Not every incorrect valuation involves fraud.
An appraisal/value determination can potentially contain errors concerning:
Area
Floor
Property Type
Location
Construction Status
Comparable Properties
or physical characteristics.
The response should depend on whether the problem is an honest technical error or deliberate manipulation.
A serious problem can arise where the valuation documentation concerns:
Unit 12
but the foreign buyer purchases:
Unit 21.
The legal property identity must match the transaction.
Foreign investors should compare:
Block
Parcel
Independent Unit Number
Floor
and other title details.
Suppose the property is marketed as:
180 m²
but the legally relevant property and approved plans show substantially less.
An inflated area can materially affect valuation.
The buyer should compare physical measurements with legal and project documentation.
A premium apartment may be valued based on:
High Floor
Sea View
or a particular orientation.
If the purchased legal unit is actually on another floor or lacks the represented view, the valuation and purchase decision may be affected.
Properties under construction require particularly careful review.
The investor should verify:
Construction Status
Title Type
Project Documentation
Developer Rights
and whether the property satisfies the current citizenship rules applicable to the transaction.
Current citizenship regulations contain specific requirements concerning the type of real estate that can be used.
Foreign investors should not assume that purchasing any vacant land for USD 400,000 automatically qualifies.
The legal nature and development status of the property should be checked before payment.
Potentially, qualifying real estate acquisitions can in appropriate circumstances be evaluated together where the applicable requirements are satisfied.
However, each property and transaction should be checked carefully.
Buying several overpriced properties does not cure an underlying eligibility defect.
A foreign investor purchases:
Apartment A: USD 150,000
Apartment B: USD 140,000
Apartment C: USD 130,000.
The combined transaction may potentially satisfy the monetary threshold if all applicable requirements are properly met.
But the investor should verify the relevant official values, payments and legal eligibility of all properties.
This is the best time to discover the problem.
The buyer should generally stop the citizenship-based transaction and reassess rather than proceeding based on verbal assurances.
Possible options can include:
Negotiating Another Property
Adding Another Eligible Property
Changing the Investment Structure
or
Abandoning the Transaction.
If a seller says:
“The valuation came low. Send another USD 70,000 to my personal account and we will fix citizenship.”
the buyer should not automatically comply.
The legal effect of additional payment must be determined before transferring more money.
The buyer may still have significant leverage.
Depending on the contract, the buyer may consider:
Suspending Further Payment
Demanding Cure
Terminating Where Legally Available
Requesting Refund
or renegotiating the transaction.
The contract should be reviewed immediately.
The situation becomes more complicated, but legal remedies may still exist.
The foreigner may already own the property while the citizenship objective has failed.
The buyer must then decide whether to pursue:
Contractual Damages
Price Difference
Cancellation
Restitution
or another appropriate remedy.
This distinction is essential.
A foreigner may legally become the owner of a property but still fail to satisfy the citizenship investment conditions.
Therefore:
Valid Property Ownership ≠ Guaranteed Citizenship Eligibility.
The title deed can remain legally valid even where the citizenship objective fails.
Potentially, depending on the legal basis.
Suppose the buyer paid USD 450,000 for a property worth approximately USD 280,000 because of fraudulent citizenship representations.
The buyer may seek compensation based on:
Fraud
Misrepresentation
Contractual Breach
or other applicable grounds.
The buyer must prove the relevant loss and causation.
Property prices are negotiable.
Courts do not automatically refund money merely because a buyer made a bad investment.
The buyer should establish why the excessive price creates legal liability.
Evidence of deliberate citizenship-related deception can therefore be critical.
Yes, potentially.
The seller can be a defendant where the seller personally made false representations or breached contractual obligations.
The exact claim depends on whether the seller is:
Individual Owner
Developer
Construction Company
or another entity.
Potentially yes.
A developer may face liability where its marketing, sales staff or contractual documents falsely represented that the property satisfied citizenship conditions.
Corporate structure and contractual relationships should be examined before filing suit.
Potentially.
An agent who knowingly provides false information concerning:
Value
Citizenship Eligibility
Official Valuation
or the true purchase price may face civil and, in sufficiently serious cases, potentially criminal consequences.
The agent’s exact role should be documented.
Potentially yes.
A consultant who accepts payment for professional services and makes false or negligent representations may face contractual or tort-based liability depending on the circumstances.
The investor should preserve:
Consultancy Agreement
Invoices
Bank Transfers
Messages
Advertisements
and promises concerning citizenship.
Potentially, where legally actionable professional misconduct, negligence or intentional manipulation can be established.
However, dissatisfaction with the valuation figure alone does not prove misconduct.
The technical methodology and applicable professional standards should be reviewed.
In litigation, an independent valuation can help establish:
Actual Historical Market Value
Property Characteristics
Comparable Transactions
and the extent of alleged overvaluation.
The relevant date is important.
A property worth USD 500,000 today may have been worth USD 280,000 when purchased several years earlier.
A lawsuit should not simply compare:
Purchase Price in 2024
with
Market Value in 2026.
The relevant valuation may need to determine the property’s value at the transaction date.
Market appreciation and inflation should be separated from the alleged original overvaluation.
Potentially.
Where a seller, consultant or intermediary intentionally deceives the foreign investor through false representations designed to obtain money, criminal fraud issues may arise depending on the facts.
But:
Failed Citizenship Application ≠ Automatically Criminal Fraud.
Intentional deception must be distinguished from negligence, contractual breach and genuine legal disagreement.
A fabricated valuation document is particularly serious.
If the buyer received a document purporting to be an official valuation that was never genuinely issued, immediate legal investigation is appropriate.
The document’s authenticity should be verified through the relevant official system.
Another possibility is that a genuine document has been digitally modified.
For example:
Original value:
USD 290,000
Document shown to investor:
USD 490,000.
The buyer should preserve the electronic file and communication through which it was received.
A fraudulent report may contain:
Fake Signature
Fake QR Code
Fake Company Logo
or fabricated authorization information.
Do not rely on visual appearance alone.
Official verification is important.
This distinction should be emphasized.
A criminal investigation can address alleged fraudulent conduct.
However, recovery of the investor’s financial loss may also require:
Civil Litigation
Restitution Claim
Compensation Claim
Precautionary Attachment
or other private-law remedies.
Do not rely exclusively on the prosecutor to recover the investment.
Potentially.
If the foreign buyer seeks cancellation or another property-related remedy, an interim injunction may be considered where the legal conditions are satisfied.
This can be particularly important if there is a risk that the seller or another party will transfer the disputed property.
However, an injunction is not automatic.
For monetary claims, a precautionary attachment may be more relevant than a property injunction where the statutory requirements are satisfied.
This distinction matters:
Interim Injunction → Protects the disputed right/property.
Precautionary Attachment → Protects recovery of a monetary claim.
The correct measure depends on the lawsuit.
If evidence indicates that the seller or consultant is rapidly transferring assets, delaying legal action can significantly reduce the practical value of a later judgment.
Asset preservation should therefore be considered at the beginning of the dispute.
Foreign investors should investigate:
Company Assets
Existing Enforcement Proceedings
Mortgages
Attachments
Concordat
and other insolvency indicators.
Winning a lawsuit against an empty company can provide little practical recovery.
Not automatically.
A company debt does not automatically become the personal debt of every director or shareholder.
Personal liability requires a separate legal basis.
However, direct fraudulent conduct by individuals can change the analysis.
Potentially, depending on their roles and legal responsibility.
A citizenship-property dispute can involve:
Seller
Developer
Agent
Consultant
and potentially other participants.
The investor should identify who made each representation and who received each payment.
This is one of the most important steps in fraud-related cases.
Determine:
Who Received the Purchase Price?
Who Received Commission?
Who Received Consultancy Fee?
Was Money Sent to a Personal Account?
Was Any Money Returned?
Was Money Transferred to a Related Company?
The bank trail can reveal the true transaction structure.
If payment was sent to:
Agent
Developer Director
Consultant
Seller’s Relative
or another third party, the legal basis of the payment should be established.
The seller may later deny receiving the purchase price.
Written payment instructions become crucial.
This is a particularly sensitive situation.
If citizenship was obtained based on a property transaction that authorities later determine did not genuinely satisfy the legal requirements, the consequences can be substantially more serious than a pending application.
The investor should obtain individualized legal advice immediately.
Do not attempt to conceal the irregularity or create retrospective documents.
Citizenship obtained through an investment transaction depends on satisfaction of the applicable legal conditions and administrative evaluation.
Where serious irregularities, false statements or manipulated investment documentation are discovered, the authorities may examine the underlying transaction and the legal consequences.
The investor’s knowledge and conduct can become highly relevant.
An investor who genuinely relied on professionals should immediately preserve evidence showing:
What the Investor Was Told
What the Investor Paid
What Documents Were Provided
Who Prepared the Transaction
and
Whether the Investor Knew of Any Artificial Arrangement.
This evidence can be essential if authorities later question the transaction.
A foreign investor discovering a problem may be told:
“We will prepare another contract dated before the sale.”
This can create even greater risk.
Do not sign fabricated or backdated documentation to repair a defective citizenship transaction.
Likewise, a false invoice for:
Furniture
Consultancy
Renovation
or another service should not be used to disguise the true flow of funds.
The transaction should be corrected lawfully.
A citizenship-based real estate purchase should undergo independent review before any substantial payment.
The review should cover:
Seller
Title
Property Type
Mortgages
Attachments
Restrictions
Citizenship Eligibility
Official Value Determination
Purchase Price
Payment Structure
Foreign Currency Documentation
Three-Year Commitment
and the complete citizenship plan.
A person introduced and paid by the seller may have commercial incentives aligned with completing the sale.
Foreign investors should consider obtaining advice from a lawyer who is independent of:
Seller
Developer
Real Estate Agent
and
Citizenship Marketing Company.
Independent review is particularly important where the investment is being made primarily to obtain citizenship.
Foreign buyers should be cautious where they hear:
“Guaranteed Citizenship.”
“Guaranteed USD 400,000 Valuation.”
“Actual Property Price Does Not Matter.”
“Send the Difference to Another Account.”
“We Will Refund Part of the Money After Citizenship.”
“Furniture Counts Toward Everything.”
“Consultancy Fee Will Complete the USD 400,000.”
“Do Not Show This Agreement to the Authorities.”
“The Official Valuer Works With Us.”
“Sign This Backdated Document.”
“Cash Is Better.”
“You Do Not Need Your Own Lawyer.”
These statements justify immediate independent legal review.
If a valuation dispute has already occurred, preserve: Purchase Contract → Preliminary Sale Agreement → Title Deed → Official Value Determination Document → Earlier Valuation Reports → Bank Transfers → SWIFT Records → Foreign Currency Purchase Certificate → Seller Receipts → Citizenship Application Documents → Eligibility Documentation → Property Advertisement → Brochures → WhatsApp Messages → Emails → Consultant Agreement → Agent Agreement → Commission Invoice → Furniture Invoice → Developer Price List → Comparable Property Advertisements → Independent Valuation → Audio or Video Evidence Where Lawfully Obtained → Evidence of Cashback → Refund Transfers → Seller’s Written Citizenship Guarantees → Copies of Allegedly Fake or Altered Reports.
A foreign investor who discovers a valuation problem should generally consider the following sequence: Stop Further Payments Where Legally Appropriate → Obtain the Official Current Value Documentation → Verify the Authenticity of Every Valuation Document → Compare the Property’s Exact Title Information With the Report → Obtain Independent Legal Review → Obtain Independent Technical Valuation Where Appropriate → Trace All Payments → Identify Seller, Developer, Agent and Consultant Roles → Preserve Citizenship Representations → Determine Whether the USD 400,000 Requirement Is Actually Satisfied → Determine Whether Another Eligible Property Can Lawfully Cure the Investment Position → Avoid Artificial Cashback or Circular Payments → Evaluate Contract Termination → Evaluate Refund and Compensation Claims → Consider Interim Injunction or Precautionary Attachment Where Appropriate → Investigate Seller Assets → Consider Criminal Complaint Where Intentional Fraud Is Supported by Evidence → Coordinate the Property Dispute With the Citizenship File → Avoid Backdated or False Documents → Act Before Limitation and procedural periods create additional problems.
No. Payment of USD 400,000 alone does not guarantee eligibility. The property, transaction value, payment documentation and other applicable citizenship conditions must satisfy the legal framework.
The citizenship investment requirement may not be satisfied through that property alone. The exact value determination, payment and transaction structure should be reviewed before proceeding.
A contractual price can be negotiated, but merely writing a higher number in a contract does not automatically establish citizenship eligibility. Artificial pricing or documentation can create serious legal risks.
They should not automatically be treated as qualifying real estate investment. The investment threshold concerns the eligible real estate transaction under the applicable citizenship rules.
Potentially yes. If the representation was false and materially induced the purchase, contractual, misrepresentation, fraud or compensation claims may arise depending on the evidence.
Potentially, but the difference in market value alone does not automatically create a claim. You would normally need to establish an applicable legal basis such as fraud, misrepresentation or breach of contractual obligations.
A fake or altered valuation document can create serious civil and potentially criminal consequences. The document should be verified immediately and preserved as evidence.
Potentially, where the problem involves a genuine technical or administrative error. The appropriate procedure depends on the type of value document, stage of the transaction and nature of the mistake.
The matter should be treated seriously. If authorities later determine that the qualifying investment conditions were not genuinely satisfied or false documentation was used, the transaction and citizenship position can face administrative scrutiny. Individual legal advice should be obtained immediately.
Yes. Independent review before payment can identify problems involving title, valuation, seller representations, payment structure, citizenship eligibility, foreign-currency documentation and the three-year restriction before the buyer becomes financially committed.
Citizenship-based property disputes are particularly dangerous because they involve two separate but connected risks.
The first is the real estate risk: the foreign investor may have paid substantially more than the property’s genuine value.
The second is the citizenship risk: despite paying a large amount, the transaction may fail to satisfy the legal investment requirements.
Foreign investors should therefore never evaluate the transaction only by asking:
“Did I pay at least USD 400,000?”
The correct questions are:
What property did I actually acquire? What is the applicable official value? Who received the money? Does the payment documentation correspond to the title transaction? Is the property legally eligible? Was any money secretly returned? Were furniture, commission or consultancy charges artificially included? Did the seller guarantee citizenship? Was the valuation genuine? Did the consultant know that the transaction would not qualify?
Firat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign investors with Turkish citizenship-related property disputes, overvalued real estate, misleading citizenship representations, developer and seller disputes, fraudulent property transactions, refund and compensation claims and disputes concerning investment documentation. Firat Fesih Kaya can also assist foreign buyers in coordinating the real estate dispute with the citizenship process and determining whether civil, administrative or criminal remedies should be pursued.
Where a foreign investor suspects that a property was deliberately overvalued, legal review should begin before additional money is paid or new documents are signed. Attempts by a seller or consultant to “repair” an irregular transaction through artificial payments, cashback arrangements or backdated documents can make the investor’s position substantially worse.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile Phone: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No: 221, Yildirim Tower, Balgat, Cankaya / Ankara, Turkey