Can Urban Transformation Proceed Without Notifying a Foreign Property Owner? (2026 Updated Guide)

Can urban transformation proceed if a foreign property owner was not personally notified? Learn the 2026 rules on risky building notices, owner meetings, e-government notifications, 15-day deadlines, demolition and dissenting-share sales.

A foreign property owner cannot simply be excluded from the legally required notification procedures because the owner is a foreign citizen or lives outside the country. However, this does not mean that every stage of urban transformation requires a conventional letter to be personally delivered to the owner’s foreign residential address.

This distinction is extremely important.

Under the current framework, several important notices are legally completed through specific statutory mechanisms. For a risky-building determination, for example, the relevant record is posted at the building, owners are informed through the electronic government system, and the matter is announced at the relevant local administrative office for fifteen days. The risky-building determination is deemed notified on the last day of that local announcement. The building is also announced through the competent authority’s official publication system for fifteen days.

Therefore, a foreign owner may say:

“Nobody personally handed me a notice while I was abroad.”

Yet the statutory notification may still have been legally completed.

On the other hand, if the notification method required by law was not followed, that can raise a materially different legal issue.

For foreign property owners, Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya recommends examining the official notification records before concluding either that the procedure is valid or that it is invalid.

Foreign Nationality Does Not Eliminate Notification Rights

A foreign property owner should not receive less procedural protection merely because the owner is not a citizen.

The relevant issue is the registered property right and the procedural stage under the urban transformation framework.

Where the law requires notification to owners or holders of relevant rights, the applicable statutory procedure must be followed.

At the same time, foreign owners should understand that the system increasingly uses public, electronic and local-announcement mechanisms. Current official information specifically confirms that notices concerning risky-building determinations, evacuation and demolition are communicated through the electronic government system and the competent authority’s publication mechanisms.

Consequently, living abroad does not automatically require the authorities to wait until the owner personally returns to the country.

Does a Risky-Building Assessment Require Advance Permission From Every Owner?

No.

This is the first important distinction between consent and notification.

The fact that a foreign owner was not asked for permission before the technical process began does not automatically make the process unlawful.

A risky-building assessment can be initiated without obtaining unanimous approval from all owners. The subsequent determination is then processed through the statutory framework, including the applicable notification and objection procedures.

Therefore, a foreign owner who says, “Nobody asked me before the building was tested,” should first determine whether the complaint concerns the initiation of the assessment or a later stage where statutory notification was required.

How Must a Risky-Building Determination Be Notified?

The current official procedure is particularly important for foreign owners.

Once the building has been determined to be risky and the relevant administrative process has been completed, the prescribed record containing information about that determination is:

posted at the building,

communicated to owners through the electronic government system,

announced at the relevant local administrative office for fifteen days,

and additionally announced through the competent authority’s official publication system for fifteen days.

The risky-building determination is deemed notified on the last day of the local announcement.

This means personal delivery at a foreign address is not the sole measure of legally effective notification.

What If the Foreign Owner Never Received a Letter Abroad?

That fact alone does not establish that notification was invalid.

A foreign owner may live permanently abroad and may expect every important property document to arrive through international post. The urban transformation notification framework does not necessarily operate that way.

The legally relevant questions are:

Was the required record prepared?

Was it posted at the building?

Was the electronic notification required by the applicable procedure made?

Was the relevant local announcement made for the prescribed period?

When was the notice legally deemed completed?

These questions are more important than whether a conventional letter physically arrived at the owner’s overseas residence.

Why Is the Legally Effective Notification Date So Important?

Because important deadlines can begin from statutory notification rather than from the date on which the foreign owner personally discovers what happened.

One of the clearest examples concerns an objection against a risky-building determination.

Current official guidance provides that owners or their legal representatives may object within 15 days from the final day of the relevant local announcement.

Imagine that a foreign owner learns about the risky-building decision from a tenant three weeks after the relevant announcement process.

The owner should not automatically calculate another fifteen days from the date of the tenant’s message.

The official notification timeline must be established immediately.

Can a Foreign Owner Object to a Risky-Building Determination?

Yes.

The right is available to property owners and their legal representatives.

The objection is submitted to the competent authority within the applicable 15-day period, and the technical committee examines the risky-building assessment.

For an owner living abroad, speed is particularly important.

If there is a genuine technical basis for challenging the determination, waiting until the next physical visit can result in the objection period expiring.

What If the Owner Says the Notification Procedure Was Defective?

The official file should be obtained.

It is not enough to say:

“I did not know about it.”

But it is equally inappropriate to assume:

“The authority says notification occurred, so there can be no problem.”

The actual statutory steps should be verified.

The documents should show when the notice was posted, when the local announcement began and ended, what electronic communication occurred and when notification was legally deemed completed.

If one or more legally required elements were omitted, the effect of that defect should be assessed according to the particular proceeding and procedural stage.

Can Evacuation and Demolition Proceed Without Personal Notice Abroad?

Again, personal delivery abroad is not the only notification mechanism.

Once the risky-building determination becomes final, the current official framework provides a separate procedure for evacuation and demolition. The relevant record is posted at the building, owners are informed through the electronic government system, and the notice is announced at the relevant local administrative office for fifteen days. The property is also announced through the competent authority’s official publication system.

The evacuation and demolition measure is deemed notified on the final day of the prescribed local announcement.

Therefore, the building can potentially progress toward evacuation and demolition even though the foreign owner never personally signed for a letter overseas.

How Much Time Can Be Given for Evacuation and Demolition?

Current official guidance states that owners and persons occupying a risky building are given a period of up to 90 days for evacuation and demolition. If the building is not evacuated and demolished within the applicable period, administrative demolition mechanisms can follow.

This is why a foreign owner should investigate immediately after learning that the building has been declared risky.

By the time the owner hears about the matter informally, the case may already have moved beyond the initial risky-building determination.

Can the Authorities Demolish the Building If the Foreign Owner Does Not Respond?

Potentially, yes, after the statutory requirements are satisfied.

The absence or silence of one foreign owner does not create an indefinite prohibition against demolition.

Current official guidance provides for administrative evacuation and demolition if the risky building is not dealt with within the applicable period. Where evacuation is obstructed, law-enforcement assistance may also be used under the prescribed authorization procedure.

Accordingly, simply refusing to respond from abroad is not a reliable strategy for stopping demolition.

Is Notification of the Risky-Building Decision the Same as Notification of the Reconstruction Agreement?

No.

This distinction is crucial.

Urban transformation can involve several legally separate notifications.

One may concern the risky-building determination.

Another may concern evacuation and demolition.

Another may concern the majority decision and reconstruction agreement.

Another may concern a statutory auction of a dissenting owner’s share.

A foreign owner should therefore never ask only:

“Was I notified?”

The correct question is:

“Was I properly notified at each stage where notification was legally required?”

Must a Foreign Owner Be Informed About the Majority-Approved Reconstruction Decision?

Yes, where the owner did not join the majority decision, the current framework provides a specific notification mechanism.

Where unanimity cannot be achieved, the relevant new-development decision may be made by the simple majority according to ownership shares. The decision and the offer containing the agreement conditions, or information identifying where the offer can be examined, must then be communicated to owners who did not join that decision.

Current official guidance provides that this can be done through a notary or by announcement at the relevant local administrative office for fifteen days. Owners who have provided an electronic mail address to the title system are also informed electronically.

The majority therefore cannot simply keep the reconstruction agreement secret and immediately proceed against the dissenting owner.

Is There a 15-Day Period After the Majority Decision?

Yes, and it can have serious consequences.

Current official guidance provides that if the dissenting owner does not examine or accept the offer within the applicable period after the majority decision and agreement conditions have been notified or deemed notified, the owner’s land share can proceed toward the statutory sale procedure.

This makes notification particularly important.

The statutory sale of a dissenting owner’s share should not begin merely because the contractor says:

“We sent you a message and you did not answer.”

The legally required notification procedure must be examined.

Can a Foreign Owner’s Share Be Sold Without the Owner Personally Receiving the Agreement Abroad?

Potentially, if the statutory notification procedure was validly completed.

This is one of the most important points for foreign owners.

The law does not necessarily require the majority-approved offer to be physically delivered to the owner’s overseas residence before the statutory process can continue.

Current official guidance permits notification through the prescribed notarial or local-announcement mechanisms, together with electronic communication where applicable.

Accordingly, the owner’s personal lack of awareness and the legal effectiveness of notification are not always the same thing.

What Happens If the Required Notification of the Majority Agreement Never Occurred?

That is a substantially different situation.

The notification of the majority decision and agreement conditions is an important component of the dissenting-owner procedure.

Current official guidance expressly requires the majority-approved decision and offer, or information about where the offer can be reviewed, to be communicated to owners who did not join the decision before their shares proceed toward statutory sale.

If this legally required stage was completely omitted or materially defective, the subsequent sale procedure may require careful legal review.

The complete administrative file should be obtained immediately.

Can an Owner Meeting Take Place While the Foreign Owner Is Abroad?

Physical absence does not automatically prevent the owners from holding a meeting.

A foreign owner should therefore not assume that every owner must be physically present before a redevelopment decision can be considered.

This became especially important after the 2026 procedural amendments. On February 4, 2026, amendments to the implementing regulation introduced formal documentation including a Meeting Notification Form, the related meeting-notification record, a Meeting Information Note and a Resale Notification Form.

If a foreign owner later discovers that an owner meeting took place during an extended period abroad, the meeting-notification documents should be obtained and examined.

Can the Majority Simply Ignore the Foreign Owner’s Vote?

No merely because the owner is foreign.

The registered ownership share must be taken into account under the applicable decision-making framework.

Where unanimity cannot be achieved, current official guidance provides that the relevant new-development decision can be made by the simple majority according to ownership shares.

This means the foreign owner’s share remains relevant even if the owner opposes the project.

However, a minority owner does not necessarily possess an absolute veto.

If the required majority exists and the subsequent statutory procedure is properly followed, the project can continue despite that owner’s opposition.

Can a Foreign Owner Be Treated as Having Agreed Merely Because They Did Not Respond?

Silence should not casually be described as a voluntary contractual signature.

The owner may remain outside the majority-approved arrangement.

However, silence after legally effective notification can have serious statutory consequences.

Current official guidance provides that an owner wishing to demonstrate agreement must sign the majority-approved contract and related documents without conditions or reservations within the applicable process. If the owner does not join the agreement, the dissenting-share mechanism may ultimately become relevant.

Therefore, silence may not equal voluntary consent, but it can still expose the owner to the consequences applicable to a dissenting owner.

How Is a Foreign Owner Notified About a Dissenting-Share Auction?

The auction stage has a specific notification framework.

Current official guidance provides that the competent authority notifies the relevant owners of the place and time of sale either through an electronic notification address registered with the title system or through announcement at the relevant local administrative office for fifteen days together with notification through the electronic government system.

Where electronic notification is used, it is deemed completed at the end of the fifth day following delivery to the electronic address. Where the local-announcement and electronic-government method is used, notification is deemed completed on the final day of the local announcement.

These rules are particularly important for foreign owners because the auction can be one of the final stages before ownership changes.

Can the Auction Continue If the Foreign Owner Is Outside the Country?

Potentially, yes.

Physical presence is not itself required for the statutory sale procedure to continue once all applicable requirements have been satisfied.

Therefore, a foreign owner who receives information that an auction may be scheduled should not wait until returning.

The owner should immediately obtain the sale application, valuation records, auction notification and current title record.

Can the Contractor Say That a WhatsApp Message Was Sufficient Notice?

A private message may be useful evidence that an owner knew about a dispute, but it should not automatically be treated as a substitute for a statutory notification method where the legislation requires a particular procedure.

The same applies to an ordinary email from the contractor, telephone call from another owner or message from the building manager.

The relevant question is whether the legally prescribed notification method for that particular stage was followed.

This distinction can become extremely important where a later share sale is based on the claim that the foreign owner failed to respond.

What If the Notice Was Sent to the Wrong Person?

The title and representation records should be checked.

If ownership changed through purchase or inheritance, the administrative records may not always reflect what the parties assume.

Similarly, where a representative supposedly received or acted upon a notice, the power of attorney should be examined to determine the representative’s actual authority.

A foreign owner should obtain the complete notification record rather than relying on statements such as:

“We informed your relative.”

Informing a family member informally is not automatically equivalent to completing the statutory notification procedure.

What If the Foreign Owner Changed Their Address?

Foreign owners should keep property-related records and communication information current where applicable.

However, a changed overseas residential address does not necessarily determine the validity of every notification because the urban transformation framework uses statutory mechanisms including building postings, local announcements and electronic communications.

If a dispute arises, the actual notification method used should be identified.

The case should not be analyzed solely by asking whether an old foreign postal address appeared in a document.

What If I Discovered the Process Only After Demolition?

Act immediately, but first determine what actually happened.

Obtain the risky-building report and notification records.

Determine whether the objection period expired.

Obtain the evacuation and demolition documentation.

Check the title record.

Determine whether an owner meeting took place.

Obtain the majority decision and reconstruction agreement.

Establish whether you joined the agreement or are being treated as a dissenting owner.

Finally, determine whether a statutory sale proceeding has begun against your land share.

Demolition of the physical apartment does not itself answer whether you still own the registered land share.

What If I Discover the Process Only After My Share Was Put Up for Auction?

At that stage, the matter becomes particularly urgent.

Obtain the complete administrative sale file.

The review should include the underlying majority decision, ownership-share calculation, meeting documents, notification of the majority-approved offer, statutory response period, sale request, official valuation and auction notification.

The analysis should then focus on whether a concrete procedural defect exists.

General statements that the owner did not know about the redevelopment may not be sufficient if the statutory notification procedures were legally completed.

What If My Share Has Already Been Sold?

Immediately obtain the auction records and current title record.

Determine whether the sale price has been paid and whether title registration has already been completed.

The available legal position can change significantly depending on whether the process is still at auction, payment or registration stage.

Delay is especially dangerous after a purchaser has acquired the share and further redevelopment transactions begin.

Does Filing a Lawsuit Automatically Stop Demolition or Share Sale?

A foreign owner should not assume so.

The existence of a pending legal proceeding and the existence of an effective judicial measure preventing implementation are not necessarily the same thing.

If demolition, auction or title registration is imminent, the availability of interim judicial protection should be evaluated separately.

This is one reason notification disputes should be identified early rather than after the project has reached an advanced stage.

What Evidence Should a Foreign Owner Collect?

The owner should preserve the current title record, risky-building report, all statutory notification documents, screenshots of electronic notices where available, local-announcement records, owner-meeting notifications, meeting minutes, majority decision, reconstruction agreement and correspondence with the contractor or other owners.

If a dissenting-share sale has begun, the owner should also obtain the sale application, valuation documents, auction notification and auction records.

The objective is to create a chronological timeline showing:

what happened,

when it happened,

which notification method was used,

when each notice became legally effective,

and what deadline followed.

That timeline is often far more useful than a general statement that the owner “was never informed.”

2026 Practical Legal Strategy

The first priority is identify which notification you are investigating. Risky-building notification, evacuation and demolition notification, owner-meeting notification, notification of the majority-approved agreement and auction notification are different procedural stages.

The second priority is do not equate lack of international postal delivery with lack of legal notification. Current rules use building postings, the electronic government system, local announcements and official publication mechanisms for important stages.

The third priority is determine the legally effective notification date. This can control important objection and response periods.

The fourth priority is check the 15-day risky-building objection deadline if the technical determination has recently been made.

The fifth priority is obtain the 2026 owner-meeting notification documents if a meeting occurred while you were abroad. The current framework includes specific Meeting Notification and Meeting Information documentation.

The sixth priority is verify the majority calculation. The relevant new-development decision is based on the simple majority according to ownership shares where unanimity cannot be achieved.

The seventh priority is separately investigate notification of the majority-approved agreement. A dissenting owner must be placed into the prescribed notification process before the land share can proceed toward statutory sale.

The eighth priority is check auction notification independently if a share-sale procedure has begun. The auction has its own statutory notification rules.

The ninth priority is do not rely solely on informal communications from the contractor, building manager, tenant or neighbors when calculating legal deadlines.

The tenth priority is act before demolition, auction or title registration whenever a genuine notification defect is identified.

The central principle is:

Urban transformation cannot simply disregard the notification procedures applicable to a foreign property owner. However, the law does not necessarily require every notice to be personally delivered to the owner’s overseas residence. Statutory notification can be completed through prescribed posting, local-announcement and electronic mechanisms. Therefore, the decisive question is not merely whether the foreign owner personally knew about the process, but whether the legally required notification procedure for each particular stage was properly completed.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can urban transformation start without personally calling a foreign property owner?

Potentially, yes. Personal telephone contact is not the legal test. Different stages of the process have specific statutory notification requirements.

2. Is the process invalid if I never received a letter at my foreign address?

Not automatically. Current risky-building notification procedures include posting at the building, electronic government notification and a fifteen-day local announcement.

3. How is a risky-building determination legally notified?

The prescribed record is posted at the building, owners are informed through the electronic government system, and the matter is announced at the relevant local administrative office for fifteen days. The building is also announced through the competent authority’s official system.

4. How long do I have to object to a risky-building determination?

Current official guidance provides a 15-day objection period beginning from the final day of the relevant local announcement.

5. Can demolition proceed even if I am abroad?

Potentially, yes, once the risky-building determination becomes final and the applicable evacuation, demolition and notification procedures have been completed.

6. Must I be informed of the majority-approved reconstruction agreement?

If you did not join the majority decision, the decision and agreement terms, or information concerning where the offer can be examined, must be communicated through the prescribed procedure.

7. Can my share be sold if I never personally received the contractor agreement abroad?

Potentially, if the legally required notification procedure was properly completed and the other statutory conditions are satisfied. Personal overseas delivery is not necessarily the only valid notification method.

8. Is a message from the contractor sufficient statutory notification?

Not automatically. Where the law requires a particular notification method, compliance with that statutory method should be verified.

9. How will I be notified if my share is going to auction?

Current official guidance provides electronic notification where the relevant electronic address is registered, or a local announcement for fifteen days together with electronic government notification.

10. What should I do if I believe I was never properly notified?

Obtain the complete administrative file immediately and identify each notification separately. Check the risky-building notice, evacuation and demolition notice, meeting documents, majority-approved offer, statutory response period and any auction notification before determining whether a procedural defect exists.

Protecting Foreign Owners Against Notification Problems

Notification disputes are particularly important for foreign property owners because a person living abroad may not physically see a notice posted at the building or learn immediately that an official local announcement has been made.

The solution is not to assume that every process conducted in the owner’s absence is automatically invalid. Nor should an owner assume that every notification claimed by the contractor or other owners is automatically sufficient.

The actual statutory records must be examined.

A foreign owner should determine exactly how the risky-building determination was notified, whether the objection deadline expired, whether evacuation and demolition notices were properly completed, whether the owner was invited to the relevant owner meeting, whether the majority-approved reconstruction agreement was properly communicated and whether any later statutory auction notice complied with the applicable procedure.

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign property owners and investors facing notification disputes during urban transformation proceedings.

Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya assists foreign property owners with reviewing risky-building notifications, objection deadlines, evacuation and demolition notices, owner-meeting notifications, majority decisions, reconstruction agreements, electronic and local-announcement records, dissenting-owner procedures, statutory share-sale notices, auction proceedings and available remedies where legally required notification is alleged to be defective.

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