Is it true that Act 16 does not depend on the builder?
Only partly. The administration does have its own deadlines, but in many cases the delay is caused by a mismatch between what was built and the approved design — and fixing such a mismatch depends entirely on the builder.
What does it mean to be left with Act 15 only?
Act 15 certifies that the building is structurally complete, but it does not permit actual use of the home. Without Act 16 the unit cannot lawfully be lived in on a permanent basis and cannot be permanently connected to the utility networks.
Why does a penalty for delay in Act 16 matter?
Because while the builder is still waiting for payment, it has an incentive to finish. Once it has received the whole sum, that incentive disappears. A serious penalty keeps the leverage in the buyer’s hands until the building is really put into use.
For years the same problem has been seen across the market: developers do not write into the preliminary contract an obligation to have the building put into operation (so-called Act 16) by a specific date. Often there is no such clause at all. The construction reaches Act 15 and stops there, and the explanation to buyers is always the same — “Act 16 does not depend on us, it depends on the administration.” This page explains why that claim is misleading and why an obligation for Act 16, backed by a serious penalty, is among the most important clauses your contract should contain.
What stopping at Act 15 means
Act 15 certifies that the building is structurally complete and fit for acceptance. But it is not the document that permits actual use of the home. Until Act 16 is issued, the unit cannot lawfully be lived in on a permanent basis, cannot be permanently connected to the technical infrastructure networks and remains, in documentary terms, in an unfinished state.
For the buyer this means they may have paid all or almost all of the price, hold the key and a really built home — and still not have a full, legally completed unit. And worst of all: this state can last for years.
“Act 16 does not depend on us” — why this is not true
There is only an apparent truth in this claim. Yes, the administration has its own deadlines and procedure over which the builder has no direct control. But in many cases the reason Act 16 is delayed or not issued is not the administration itself — it is that the building was not constructed as approved.
When the building is built with deviations from the approved design and the building permit, the authority carrying out the inspection refuses to put the building into operation until the deviations are removed. And removing the non-conformities depends entirely on the builder — it made them, it bears responsibility for them, and it must correct them.
A telling example: if the lift shaft is built with a material deviation from the design, this will be found on inspection and Act 16 will not be issued. Repairing such a structural non-conformity is usually extremely expensive — it may require demolishing and rebuilding a part of the building already built. Facing that cost, especially after already receiving most of the money, the builder has an incentive to delay. The result is that buyers stay with Act 15 for years, and the only real way out is often for the owners themselves to raise funds and remove the problem at their own expense.
That is why “it does not depend on us” in many cases turns things upside down. When the delay is caused by construction deviations, it is the builder it depends on — because it is its own work that determines whether Act 16 will be issued.
So the contract must contain an obligation for Act 16 and a serious penalty
The main practical conclusion follows from the above. The preliminary contract should contain:
- An express obligation of the builder to secure Act 16 (commissioning) by a specific, calendar-fixed deadline — not “after completion of construction” or “within a reasonable time”, but an exact final date
- A serious penalty for delay — high enough to be a real incentive. A token penalty does not work; it has to be such that delaying is more expensive for the builder than removing the problem and putting the building into operation
- The buyer’s right to terminate the contract and get back what was paid together with the penalty if the delay exceeds a set period
- Tying the last payment (a reasonable percentage of the price) to actual delivery of Act 16 — not to the signing of Act 15. Withholding part of the price until Act 16 is the strongest lever the buyer has
The logic is simple: while the builder is still waiting for payment, it has a motive to finish. Once it has received everything, that motive disappears. So the contract must keep the leverage in the buyer’s hands until the moment of actual commissioning.
The notary and the date of the final contract
A second common and underestimated omission concerns the final completion of the transaction before a notary. Contracts usually say only something like “the final contract will be concluded within one month” — with no named notary, no specific date and time, and no clear mechanism for scheduling.
The problem appears when one of the parties starts to delay or becomes hard to reach. If it comes to court, the compliant party has the right to ask for the preliminary contract to be declared final by a court (Article 19(3) of the Obligations and Contracts Act) — the court judgment replaces the notarial deed. But for the claim to succeed the contract must be sufficiently specific, including as to the time and place of performance. Where such certainty is missing and a party relies only on a general invitation, proving that the other party was actually properly notified of a specific day and hour becomes extremely difficult — especially if it deliberately avoids contact.
That is why the contract must clearly regulate how signing is reached: a named notary or a clear mechanism for choosing one, a way of inviting the other party (for example a written notice through a notary with a minimum notice period), and the consequences of not turning up. The general wording “at a time convenient to the parties” is an invitation to disputes.
What else the contract should contain
Beyond the two key topics above, a well-drafted preliminary contract also regulates: the exact identification of the property and the common parts; what the price includes and the payment stages; the degree of completion in which the unit is handed over and the materials used; the deadlines and consequences of delay in construction, not only for Act 16; guarantee periods and liability for hidden defects; and what happens if the builder transfers its rights to another person.
Why a template or artificial intelligence is not enough
And here is perhaps the most important warning. A template downloaded from the internet or text generated by artificial intelligence will give you general, standard clauses — but it is precisely the general clauses that miss the specific risk of your transaction.
Every case is different. The stage of construction differs, as do the builder’s financial position, the specific arrangements on price and method of payment, whether you buy from the investor or from an intermediate purchaser, and whether there is a mortgage on the property or the land. The same omission in the Act 16 clause or in the notarial completion may be of no importance in one case and cost you years and thousands of euro in another.
A template does not know your transaction. Artificial intelligence does not bear responsibility for the result and cannot assess the hidden risks of the specific property and the specific builder. That is exactly why the preliminary contract — at the price a property usually has — is the document worth thinking about individually, rather than relying on a ready-made form.
About to sign a preliminary contract for an off-plan property, or is your builder already delaying commissioning?
+359 896 963 447Frequently asked questions
Nikolay Hristev, Plovdiv Bar Association