Contractor Gave Me a Different Apartment After Urban Transformation: Legal Remedies (2026 Updated Guide)

Did your contractor deliver a different apartment after urban transformation in Turkey? Learn your rights if the floor, location, size, orientation, layout, parking, storage or other promised features were changed.

A property owner may enter an urban transformation project believing that the replacement apartment has already been clearly determined. The agreement may identify a particular floor, apartment position, size, orientation, room configuration, parking space or storage area. Years later, when construction approaches completion, the owner may discover that the contractor intends to deliver an entirely different unit.

The new apartment may be on a lower floor. It may face a different direction. It may be smaller. A front-facing apartment may have become a rear-facing apartment. A corner unit may have become an interior unit. The room configuration may have changed, or parking and storage rights may have disappeared.

For a foreign property owner, discovering this after returning to Turkey—or shortly before final delivery—can be particularly alarming.

The key legal question is not whether the contractor considers the replacement apartment “similar.”

The central question is:

What apartment was the contractor legally obligated to deliver under the binding redevelopment documents?

The reconstruction agreement, annexes, allocation schedule, approved architectural plans, subsequent amendments, owner decisions, title records and actual completed property should be compared before determining the appropriate remedy.

Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya assists foreign property owners with replacement-unit disputes, unauthorized apartment changes, construction-agreement breaches, title issues and compensation claims arising from urban transformation projects.

Start With the Signed Reconstruction Agreement

The first document to examine is the agreement between the owners and contractor.

A properly drafted reconstruction agreement should identify the owner’s replacement property as precisely as possible.

Depending on the project, this can include the floor, unit number or project designation, position within the building, net and gross area, orientation, room configuration, balcony, terrace, parking space, storage area and ownership share.

If these characteristics were contractually guaranteed, the contractor cannot necessarily substitute another apartment merely because the alternative unit has approximately the same nominal area.

The entire contractual promise matters.

Apartment Number Alone May Not Be Enough

Apartment numbers can change during the permit and construction process.

For this reason, an agreement stating only that the owner will receive “Apartment 12” may create uncertainty if the numbering changes in the final approved project.

The stronger documentation usually identifies the unit through several characteristics.

For example, the agreement may specify the floor, location on the floor plan, orientation, approximate or minimum area and other distinguishing characteristics.

The allocation plan attached to the agreement can therefore be particularly important.

Check the Allocation Schedule and Architectural Annexes

The promised apartment may be identified outside the main contract.

Owners should obtain every annex signed together with the reconstruction agreement.

These can include apartment-allocation schedules, floor plans, preliminary architectural drawings, technical specifications and owner-contractor distribution tables.

If an annex forms part of the agreement and clearly assigns a particular apartment to the owner, it can be important evidence of the contractor’s obligation.

Foreign owners should therefore request the complete contractual package rather than reviewing only the signature pages.

Compare the Contract With the Approved Architectural Project

The approved project should then be examined.

There are several possible scenarios.

The apartment promised in the contract may also appear in the approved project but may have been allocated to somebody else.

The approved project may have changed the building configuration so that the originally promised apartment no longer exists in exactly the same form.

The contractor may have changed unit allocations after approval.

Or the physical construction may differ from the approved plans.

Each situation can create a different legal problem.

The approved project should therefore be compared both with the contract and with the building actually constructed.

Can the Contractor Change the Apartment Because the Project Changed?

Not automatically.

Construction projects can change during planning and permit procedures. Technical requirements may also require modifications.

However, the existence of a revised approved project does not by itself determine whether the contractor was contractually entitled to impose a different replacement apartment on an owner.

The agreement should be examined for project-change provisions.

Did the owner authorize reasonable technical modifications?

Did the contract allow the contractor to change apartment allocation unilaterally?

Was the contractor required to obtain owner approval for material changes?

Was a minimum floor, area or orientation guaranteed?

Did the contract provide compensation if the promised apartment became impossible to deliver?

These questions are critical.

A Contractor Cannot Rely Only on “Technical Necessity”

Contractors sometimes explain an apartment change by saying that it was technically necessary.

That explanation should be investigated rather than automatically accepted.

The owner should determine what technical change occurred, when it occurred and whether the contractor could reasonably have anticipated it before signing the agreement.

The approved project history may help.

Even where a genuine technical necessity existed, the agreement must still be examined to determine how the resulting contractual imbalance should be addressed.

A necessary design change does not automatically mean that the owner must bear the entire economic loss.

Floor Changes Can Significantly Affect Property Value

An apartment on a high floor may have materially different market value from an apartment on a low floor.

Views, privacy, natural light, noise and market demand can all differ.

Suppose the contractor promised an apartment on the eighth floor but attempts to deliver one on the third floor.

Even if both apartments have exactly the same square-meter measurement, they may not have the same economic value.

The dispute should therefore not be reduced to apartment size.

A professional valuation may be required to establish the economic consequences of the change.

Orientation Can Be Just as Important

Orientation can materially affect the value and usability of a residential property.

An apartment facing an open view may not be economically equivalent to a rear-facing apartment overlooking another building.

Sun exposure, daylight and privacy can also differ.

If the reconstruction agreement or binding allocation plan promised a particular orientation, a unilateral change may be legally significant.

Owners should preserve the original floor plan showing the promised position.

Front-Facing and Rear-Facing Apartments May Not Be Equivalent

This issue becomes especially important where the building is located on a commercially valuable street or where one side has a materially better view.

A contractor may argue that two apartments are identical because their areas are similar.

But market value can differ substantially.

The relevant comparison should therefore include location within the building.

Where necessary, an independent valuation can compare the market value of the promised unit with the value of the unit actually offered.

What If the New Apartment Is Smaller?

A different apartment may also be smaller.

In that case, two disputes may exist simultaneously: unauthorized substitution and area deficiency.

The owner should determine whether the contractual area was expressed as net area, gross area or another measurement.

The replacement apartment should then be measured professionally.

A contractor should not be allowed to defeat the comparison by using a gross measurement for one apartment and a net measurement for another.

The same measurement methodology should be used.

What If the Room Layout Is Different?

A two-bedroom apartment is not necessarily equivalent to a three-bedroom apartment simply because their total areas are similar.

Room configuration can materially affect use and value.

The same applies to balconies, terraces, kitchens, bathrooms and circulation areas.

If the agreement incorporated a floor plan or specifically promised a room configuration, the actual unit should be compared against that obligation.

Owners should document significant layout changes before accepting delivery.

Parking and Storage Rights Should Also Be Checked

The replacement property may include more than the apartment itself.

The original agreement may promise a particular parking space, enclosed parking, storage area or another accessory right.

A contractor that delivers the apartment but removes these promised elements may still have failed to perform the entire contractual obligation.

The approved plans, technical specifications and allocation documents should therefore be reviewed together.

Parking can be particularly important where the replacement apartment’s market value depends significantly on dedicated parking.

Commercial Property Owners Face Even Greater Risks

For commercial units, location can be more important than total floor area.

A street-facing shop with substantial frontage is not necessarily equivalent to an internal commercial unit of the same size.

Entrance location, visibility, pedestrian access, frontage width, ceiling height and permitted use can directly affect commercial value.

If a contractor substitutes a different commercial unit, a simple square-meter comparison may substantially underestimate the owner’s loss.

The contractual allocation and market-value impact should therefore be examined carefully.

What If the Contractor Gave My Promised Apartment to Another Owner?

This requires immediate investigation.

The owner should establish whether the other person merely received a contractual allocation or whether title registration has already occurred.

The current title record and project documents should be obtained.

The contractor’s explanation should also be documented.

If competing contractual claims exist over the same unit, the sequence and content of the agreements may become important.

Once title has been registered or third-party rights have arisen, the legal analysis can become more complicated.

Delay should therefore be avoided.

What If the Contractor Sold My Promised Apartment to a Third Party?

This can create an even more serious dispute.

The first question is whether the apartment was legally reserved or contractually allocated to the owner.

The next question is what transaction occurred with the third party and whether title was transferred.

The owner’s remedies may depend on the contractual structure, title status, timing of transactions and legal position of the third party.

The owner should obtain current and historical title information promptly rather than relying solely on statements from the contractor.

Does a Majority Decision Allow the Contractor to Change My Apartment?

The urban transformation decision-making framework and the contractor’s individual performance obligations should be distinguished.

Current official guidance provides that, where unanimity cannot be achieved regarding new applications after a risky-building determination, the relevant redevelopment decision may be taken by the required simple majority calculated according to registered ownership shares. The current framework also provides a formal notification and share-sale process for owners who do not join the majority decision.

However, the existence of a valid majority decision does not automatically answer whether the contractor has complied with a specific replacement-unit obligation contained in the executed redevelopment agreement.

A majority decision should not simply be treated as unlimited authority to rewrite every owner’s contractual entitlement after the agreement has been concluded.

The 2026 Meeting Rules Make Documentation Even More Important

The current urban transformation procedure places significant importance on formal owner meetings and documentation. Amendments published in February 2026 introduced additional meeting-related documentation, including a Meeting Notification Form, a meeting-notification record and a Meeting Information Note.

For an owner facing a disputed apartment change, these documents can help establish what redevelopment proposal was presented and what decisions were actually made.

The owner should obtain the meeting records rather than accepting a statement that “the owners approved everything.”

Approval of a redevelopment project does not necessarily prove approval of a later individual apartment substitution.

What If I Signed a Revised Allocation Without Understanding It?

This can be a difficult situation.

Owners sometimes sign numerous documents during a multi-year urban transformation project.

A revised allocation plan may have been included among them.

The exact document should be reviewed.

When was it signed?

What did it change?

Was the change clearly identifiable?

Was it signed by the owner personally or through a representative?

Did it expressly replace the earlier apartment allocation?

The legal effect cannot be determined merely from the contractor’s statement that “you already accepted the change.”

What If My Representative Accepted the Different Apartment?

Foreign owners frequently participate through powers of attorney.

If the contractor claims that a representative approved a different apartment, both the signed document and the power of attorney should be examined.

Authority to attend meetings or communicate with the contractor is not automatically identical to authority to modify important contractual rights.

Similarly, authority to sign certain redevelopment documents may need to be distinguished from authority to accept a materially less valuable replacement property.

The exact scope of representation can therefore become central to the dispute.

What If I Never Approved the Change?

The owner should create a documentary record immediately.

Written correspondence can state that the different apartment has not been accepted and request the contractual and technical basis for the substitution.

The owner should also obtain the agreement, annexes, revised plans, meeting records and current title information.

Silence can create unnecessary factual disputes later.

The objective is to preserve evidence that the owner identified and challenged the discrepancy when it became known.

Do Not Sign an Unconditional Handover Document Too Quickly

The handover stage is one of the most important moments in the dispute.

The contractor may present a document stating that the owner has received the apartment completely and in accordance with the agreement and has no further claims.

An owner who believes the apartment is different from the promised unit should understand the consequences before signing broad acceptance or release language.

The proposed unit should first be inspected and compared with the contractual allocation.

Where appropriate, reservations concerning the disputed characteristics should be documented rather than ignored.

What If I Already Accepted the Keys?

Receiving keys does not by itself answer every legal question.

The handover documents and surrounding circumstances should be reviewed.

Did the owner sign a complete release?

Were objections recorded?

Was the substitution known at the time?

Was the owner told that acceptance was temporary or subject to later resolution?

Was the apartment occupied because the owner had no practical alternative?

The specific facts matter.

Owners should therefore not assume either that accepting keys destroys every right or that acceptance has no legal significance.

Can I Demand the Apartment Originally Promised?

Depending on the legal and physical circumstances, performance of the original obligation may be one possible issue to examine.

However, the promised apartment may already have been registered to another person, physically altered or otherwise become difficult to deliver.

The legal feasibility of demanding the original unit therefore depends on the project’s current status.

Owners should investigate quickly.

The longer the dispute remains unresolved, the greater the possibility that additional third-party rights or transactions complicate the situation.

Can I Demand an Equivalent Apartment?

An equivalent replacement may sometimes provide a practical solution.

But “equivalent” should not mean simply similar square meters.

Floor, orientation, view, net usable area, room configuration, parking, storage and market value should all be considered.

If the contractor proposes a substitute unit, owners should compare it objectively with the promised apartment before accepting.

An independent valuation can be particularly useful where the units are physically different.

Can I Request Compensation?

Depending on the contract and circumstances, compensation or another financial remedy may become relevant where the contractor cannot or does not provide the promised property.

The economic difference should be established properly.

A simplistic calculation based only on missing square meters may not capture the actual loss.

For example, the difference between a high-floor sea-facing unit and a low-floor rear unit can substantially exceed the value represented by a small area difference.

Expert valuation may therefore become central.

Can I Ask for a Reduction in Additional Payments?

Some redevelopment projects require owners to make additional payments to the contractor.

Where the contractor delivers a materially less valuable property than contractually required, the relationship between that deficiency and outstanding payment obligations should be examined.

Owners should not unilaterally stop contractual payments without first understanding the legal consequences.

However, they should equally avoid making disputed final payments merely because the contractor threatens to withhold keys.

The contract and performance status should be reviewed together.

Can the Contractor Offer Money Instead of the Promised Apartment?

A contractor may propose a settlement payment.

Whether it should be accepted is a commercial and legal decision.

Before agreeing, the owner should know the approximate market-value difference between the promised and substitute properties.

The settlement should also clearly define what claims are being resolved.

Foreign owners should be particularly cautious about signing broad release documents in exchange for a relatively small payment before the true value difference has been assessed.

What If the Different Apartment Is More Valuable?

Not every substitution necessarily causes a financial loss.

The replacement unit could theoretically have a higher market value.

Even then, the owner should determine whether accepting the change is desirable.

A contractual right to a specific property is not necessarily measured only by market value.

The owner may have selected the original apartment because of accessibility, orientation, family requirements or another legitimate reason.

If the owner voluntarily accepts the alternative, the revised arrangement should be documented clearly to prevent future allocation disputes.

What If the New Apartment Is Not Suitable for My Needs?

Usability can matter.

An owner may have selected a lower floor because of mobility requirements.

A family may have required a specific room configuration.

A commercial owner may need direct street access.

A substitute property that appears financially similar may still be functionally unsuitable.

The original contractual specifications and purpose of the allocation can therefore be relevant when evaluating the proposed remedy.

Obtain an Independent Valuation Before Settling

Where the promised and delivered units differ materially, professional valuation can help quantify the dispute.

The expert should compare the properties using relevant characteristics rather than area alone.

These may include floor, orientation, view, frontage, internal layout, net area, parking, storage and location within the building.

For commercial units, visibility, access and frontage may be particularly important.

The valuation can provide an objective basis for negotiation or litigation.

Obtain an Independent Technical Report

A valuation report measures economic consequences.

A technical report addresses physical and project differences.

Both may be necessary.

The technical professional can compare the delivered unit with the approved architectural plans, contractual drawings and specifications.

This can help determine whether the dispute involves allocation, unauthorized construction changes, area differences or a combination of problems.

Check the New Title Before Signing a Settlement

The title record should correspond with the property the owner believes they are receiving.

Owners should check the independent-unit designation, ownership share and relevant annotations.

A settlement based on an incorrect understanding of the title position can create further problems.

If the promised unit has already been registered to another person, that fact should be identified before the owner agrees to a financial settlement.

Preserve Evidence of the Original Promise

The most useful evidence can include the signed contractor agreement, allocation table, architectural annexes, technical specifications and subsequent amendments.

Owners should also preserve written communications in which the contractor specifically identified the replacement apartment.

Emails, messages and formal correspondence may help explain the contractual history.

Marketing material can also be relevant, although its legal weight should be assessed together with the signed agreement.

The goal is to reconstruct exactly what the owner was promised.

Preserve Evidence of the Apartment Actually Delivered

The new apartment should also be documented.

Take photographs and video before major alterations.

Obtain professional measurements where area is disputed.

Record floor, orientation, view, room configuration, balcony, terrace, parking and storage conditions.

Obtain the approved plans and current title documentation.

The claim becomes easier to evaluate when the promised property and delivered property can be compared side by side.

Do Not Wait Until the Building Is Fully Occupied

Early action can be important.

If the contractor has merely proposed the substitution and title transfers have not occurred, more practical solutions may remain available.

If the owner waits until units have been transferred to multiple third parties, the dispute can become more complicated.

A foreign owner who discovers the problem from abroad should therefore obtain the project documents promptly rather than waiting for the next visit.

2026 Practical Legal Strategy

The first priority is identify the exact apartment originally promised. Review the reconstruction agreement, allocation schedule, architectural annexes and technical specifications.

The second priority is identify the apartment now being offered or delivered. Compare floor, position, orientation, net and gross area, layout, parking, storage and ownership share.

The third priority is obtain the approved architectural project. Determine whether the originally promised unit still exists and whether the project’s configuration was formally changed.

The fourth priority is check for subsequent amendments. Establish whether the owner or an authorized representative validly accepted a revised allocation.

The fifth priority is obtain the current title record. Determine whether the promised apartment has been allocated or transferred to another person.

The sixth priority is avoid signing an unconditional handover or release before the discrepancy is evaluated.

The seventh priority is obtain independent technical and valuation evidence where the difference is substantial.

The eighth priority is separate the collective urban transformation process from the individual contractual dispute. Current official guidance confirms that new redevelopment decisions can proceed through the applicable simple-majority mechanism based on registered ownership shares when unanimity is unavailable, but this does not by itself resolve whether the contractor has fulfilled the particular replacement-unit promise made to an individual owner.

The ninth priority is identify the appropriate remedy based on the current project stage. Depending on the circumstances, the dispute may involve performance of the original obligation, acceptance of a genuinely equivalent unit, correction of documents, financial adjustment, compensation or another contractual remedy.

The tenth priority is act before further third-party transactions occur.

The central principle is clear: a contractor should not be assumed to have fulfilled its obligation merely because it delivered an apartment somewhere in the new building. The legally relevant question is whether the property delivered corresponds with the replacement property the owner was contractually entitled to receive.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can a contractor give me a different apartment after urban transformation?

Not simply because the contractor prefers a different allocation. The reconstruction agreement, binding annexes, approved project and any valid later amendments must be examined to determine whether the substitution was authorized.

2. What if the substitute apartment has the same square meters?

Equal area does not necessarily mean equal performance. Floor, orientation, view, layout, parking, storage and market value may differ substantially.

3. Can the contractor move me to a lower floor?

Whether the contractor can change the floor depends on the contractual documents and any validly agreed project modifications. If a particular floor was guaranteed, a unilateral change can be legally significant.

4. What if my promised apartment was given to another owner?

Obtain the allocation documents and current title record immediately. The legal strategy depends partly on whether the issue remains contractual or title registration has already occurred.

5. What if my apartment was sold to a third party?

The transaction, title status, contractual allocation and timing must be investigated urgently. Third-party rights can make the dispute more complicated.

6. Can I demand compensation for receiving a less valuable apartment?

Potentially, depending on the contractual breach and circumstances. An independent valuation may be necessary to establish the difference between the promised and delivered properties.

7. Does the owners’ majority have the right to change my apartment?

The statutory majority mechanism governs important redevelopment decisions, but it does not automatically establish that every later change to an individual owner’s contractual replacement-unit entitlement is valid. Current official guidance confirms that the relevant majority is calculated according to registered ownership shares.

8. What if my representative agreed to the new apartment while I was abroad?

The document allegedly approving the change and the representative’s authority should be reviewed. The scope of the power of attorney can be important.

9. Should I accept the keys if the apartment is different?

Before signing broad acceptance or release documentation, the discrepancy should be documented and the legal consequences of the proposed handover documents should be understood.

10. What documents do I need for an apartment-allocation dispute?

The reconstruction agreement, all annexes, allocation schedules, architectural plans, technical specifications, owner-meeting records, subsequent amendments, power of attorney where relevant, old and new title records, handover documents, photographs and independent technical or valuation reports can all be important.

Legal Assistance for Different Apartment Disputes After Urban Transformation

Receiving a different apartment after an urban transformation project is not merely a matter of dissatisfaction with the new building.

The difference can affect the owner’s property value, living conditions and contractual rights.

A dispute should therefore begin with a detailed comparison between the property promised and the property actually offered or delivered.

The reconstruction agreement, allocation plan, approved architectural project, subsequent amendments, title position and actual apartment should be examined together.

Where the difference is substantial, independent technical measurement and market valuation can help determine the appropriate remedy.

Foreign owners should act particularly quickly where the promised apartment may have been allocated or transferred to another person.

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign property owners and investors facing replacement-apartment disputes arising from urban transformation projects.

Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya assists property owners with apartment-allocation disputes, unauthorized unit changes, floor and orientation changes, smaller replacement apartments, title-record analysis, reconstruction-agreement breaches, technical evidence, property valuation, compensation claims and disputes involving apartments transferred to other owners or third parties.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
WhatsApp: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr