Your land.
A plan to get there.

The presented arrangement starts with a 30% upfront contribution and a 70% balance, over up to 60 monthly instalments under the relevant agreement. It can be explored for selected parcels, selected homes or projects with participating construction companies, or a combination of both. This does not mean every property, model or buyer has automatically approved conditions. For land only, comparison uses its price and terms; for a home only, it uses that project's figures; for both, keep each component's price and conditions identifiable. Our practical recommendation requests a proposal explaining which part of the offer supports the arrangement, who contracts and what information is needed to assess the case. Interest varies by parcel or project and remains to be agreed: the 30/70 split does not itself describe financing cost. Before committing funds, confirm price, scope, upfront contribution, balance and the actual offered term. A simulation organises questions and comparisons, while the individual proposal should explain potentially applicable conditions and matters still pending for assessment.

Keep price and scope unchanged when changing the term so comparison answers a clear question. The tool offers 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 month scenarios within the advertised maximum of 60 monthly instalments. For example, a hypothetical COP 100 million price means COP 30 million upfront and a COP 70 million balance. Only if zero interest and no other incorporated charges are expressly agreed, dividing that balance gives approximately COP 5,833,333 per month over 12 months, COP 1,458,333 over 48 or COP 1,166,667 over 60; the final schedule must reconcile rounding. These figures illustrate an assumption rather than a zero interest offer: unknown interest must remain pending. With interest or charges, request the payment schedule before treating an instalment as final cost. When combining land and a home, review each balance with its corresponding rate and compare payments falling in the same month without assuming both contracts begin together. A longer term changes monthly effort and may change total cost under the agreed conditions. Compare upfront contribution, instalment, total paid and additional funds needed, then confirm which term is available for the particular selection.

A rate to be agreed means information is missing for a complete financial calculation. A zero rate is a particular condition that would need explicit offering and review within the agreement; it should not be inferred because advertising highlights the 30/70 split. Ask how the rate is expressed, which balance it applies to, how instalments are determined and which additional items are involved. If an annual rate is proposed, request its nature and translation into the monthly schedule rather than compare differently labelled rates as equivalent. Land and a home may have different rates, so one average can conceal relevant differences between contracts. Keep inputs identifiable and mark undefined information pending. Our suggestion requests a schedule showing payments, interest and other applicable charges alongside totals and assumptions. Do not use a zero assumption payment as a guarantee of the actual offer while its rate remains pending. The tool prepares that conversation and reveals missing inputs before assessing whether the commitment fits the budget available for the selected purchase or project.

Separate land price, home scope and expenditure needed to reach the intended use. Advisers may identify studies, procedures, site works, transport, unloading, assembly, connections, finishes and other items requiring quotations for the case. This list frames questions rather than declaring identical requirements for every project or inclusion of everything within the financed balance. Ask suppliers to mark included, excluded or pending and explain responsibility for each part. One home price may describe components while another includes assembly; compare an equivalent result before adding instalments. Site information must relate to the project as well: the word prefabricated cannot define foundations or interventions. When financing only land or only a home, retain a budget for other relevant needs instead of assuming they disappear. For a combined selection, review each offer's exclusions to prevent double counting works or leaving them without responsibility. Do not invent zero costs to complete the budget: an unknown item needs scope and a subsequent enquiry before financial commitment increases for the selected parcel, home or combined proposal.

Request a timetable for the actual offer covering upfront contribution, instalment start, documents, handover and relevant later actions. The 30/70 split does not itself determine when a deed occurs, which right transfers, when land can be used or when a home is delivered. These matters need agreements and legal review, alongside technical coordination where construction is involved. Separate payment, registration outcome and physical handover; one receipt does not automatically establish the others. A combined land and home selection may involve different counterparties and milestones: ask what depends on receiving land, project information or completion of a works stage. Have the lawyer explain changes, delays, pending results and relevant conditions before signing. Do not assume paying 30% permits every action or the last instalment necessarily coincides with all deliverables. The proposal should identify evidence preceding each commitment and who supplies it. Clear timing supports cash planning and decisions without turning illustrative calculator dates into obligations not yet agreed for the particular land, home or combined transaction under discussion.

Prepare one record per offer identifying the selection, each component's price, scope, upfront contribution, balance, term, pending or expressly proposed rate and additional costs. Ask who offers the land, which construction company participates where relevant and which contract needs review for each part rather than assume common conditions across all participants. Compare scenarios using the same programme: land only, home only and both may serve different needs. Record affordable payments and funds needed before use while retaining personal limits without turning them into an approval promise. Request evaluation requirements and relevant documents through an appropriate channel, avoiding unnecessary circulation of personal information. If interest or exclusions are absent, seek clarification before calling the proposal cheaper. Where an illustrative term appears suitable, confirm availability for the selection within the advertised maximum. The useful decision may be another enquiry, revised scope or a different alternative. Proceed through identified figures and conditions, understanding what remains to be agreed and which evidence is needed before signing or transferring money for the proposed purchase or project.