The checklist records your preparation; proceeding requires evidence and competent review of the relevant property conditions.
Plan your review
Check what you have prepared and download your working copy.
0 / 6 steps prepared
Dates use sequential stages and calendar days, including weekends. The initial seven days are an editable example, not an authority deadline. A checked box is your own note. It does not verify documents or complete a procedure. Timelines depend on the file and the relevant authority.
Define the property and decision before scheduling
Start by recording the municipality, property identification, seller or lessor and the actual project being assessed. Buying to retain a rural holding, building a home and leasing for an economic activity raise different questions. Avoid a generic review that gathers documents without relating them to a decision. The first checkbox records that you have prepared this identification; it does not query official databases or validate the person offering the land. The start date is your chosen review date and does not open an administrative file. In Medellín, POT materials can guide territorial enquiries; land near the city may belong to another municipality and require different sources. Define the next commitment, the evidence needed beforehand and any condition that would prevent progress. That short brief helps lawyers and technical specialists understand their assignment. Keep a separate candidate record with identifiers and location, taking care not to confuse a parent holding with the physical portion being offered. This makes subsequent checks refer to the same property.
Gather documents with dates, issuers and purposes
The second checkbox concerns gathering documents and recording who issued them and when. Prepare an index containing the registry certificate, earlier titles requested by the lawyer, cadastral information, plans and representation evidence where another person acts. Filing a certificate is not enough: someone must interpret the entries, holder and acts relevant to the transaction. Law 1579 describes registration as a system for publicity and transfer of real property rights; legal review must connect that material with what is actually offered. The panel does not read certificates, identify encumbrances or decide whether a restriction remains effective. It also imposes no supposed universal expiry period on every document. Ask the professional which information should be refreshed before commitment or closing and why. When an earlier document is missing, record who will obtain it and which conclusion remains outstanding. Keep document received, authenticity unchecked, review performed and question resolved as distinct states; marking preparation does not automatically turn them into the same outcome.
Connect documents with boundaries and actual access
Arrange a technical review connecting the described property with the land visited. Ask the professional to explain survey scope, boundary identification, area differences and what remains to investigate. A visible fence or an existing track does not by itself establish that the legal description matches or that the access right needed for your project exists. Record exactly which sources disagree and consult the relevant route with the cadastral manager and legal reviewer. IGAC publishes a handbook on cadastral procedures with registration effects; it helps frame questions but does not automatically choose the procedure for a property. The checklist does not calculate tolerances, resolve disputes or change official records. Connect access investigations with actual needs: vehicles, equipment, rainy conditions and planned maintenance. A useful visit produces located photographs, observations and assigned questions as well as impressions of the landscape. Decide which finding needs an answer before spending on design or negotiating further terms, and retain that condition beside the preparation checklist.
Investigate use, risk, building and utilities
Turn the project into specific questions about use compatibility, territorial conditions, proposed works and required services. For Medellín, the POT brings together planning rules and mapping; locate the property correctly and obtain specialist interpretation where needed. If a licence exists, have its scope, validity and correspondence with the works and property reviewed; a budget or commercial image does not replace that act. Minvivienda explains that a building licence defines authorised project aspects within the applicable framework. For water and sanitation, identify the provider and request the relevant response: EPM describes a path from feasibility to connection within its service area. A network shown on a map establishes neither capacity, contractual availability nor final connection cost. The panel does not match coordinates against hazard layers or obtain opinions and permits. Record which document would answer each question and who will request it. Put a potentially decisive condition before activities that would have value only once that condition is resolved. This establishes a useful dependency sequence for the review.
Assign questions and working dates outside the panel
The checkboxes about written answers, cost review and assigned owners describe preparation. Making them operational requires a separate table: question, required evidence, owner, dependency, status and acceptance criterion. Distinguish a pending answer from a received answer that leaves the problem unresolved. The panel lets you estimate calendar days for each of six stages and calculates planned finishes sequentially from your start date. Each stage accepts a whole-number duration from zero to 365 days; the initial seven days are an editable example unrelated to registration, licensing or utility deadlines. Weekends are included, while parallel work, holidays and suspensions are not modelled. Use the competent authority information for the requirements and timelines of the actual procedure. Requesting a quotation does not establish an executable scope, and a filing number is not a favourable decision. Update durations and dependencies when one answer affects another task. A planned date organises your follow-up; it does not require an authority or supplier to respond then.
Interpret the six checkboxes as preparation
The panel contains six steps: identify property and project, gather documents, request written answers, check costs and exclusions, assign an owner and deadline, and resolve critical conditions before commitment. The bar follows the number of checked boxes, with equal weight for each. Four checked boxes show four of six prepared steps; they do not mean that the property is two-thirds reviewed or has a particular approval probability. One critical condition can prevent progress even when the other five are checked. Planned dates depend on the start and cumulative durations, not checkbox states; checking a step does not automatically bring the schedule forward. Downloading includes the start date, preparation state, estimated duration and planned finish for each task, but no documents or validations. Without a start date, no finish dates are calculated. This version has no browser save and restore function: download to retain the work. Reset unchecks the boxes, clears the start date and restores the seven-day example duration for every stage.
Organise a hypothetical example without promising dates
Imagine starting on 14 October 2026 to assess a property for a home. Change the six durations to two, three, five, two, one and four calendar days respectively. The panel adds the sequential stages, giving planned finishes of 16, 19, 24, 26, 27 and 31 October. Saturday the twenty-fourth counts as a calendar day; the tool does not move the date to a working day. These are invented internal targets, not registration, cadastral, licensing or connection timelines. Suppose that by the twenty-fourth documents, questions and owners are prepared, but access still needs clarification. Check only the preparation you can support and keep the critical condition open. A planned finish on the thirty-first does not establish that an answer will arrive or that you can contract that day. You can revise the outstanding duration or postpone the decision without turning silence into approval. Download this version and record the required evidence, responsible person and blocking dependency outside the panel so another reader understands what remains unresolved.
Close with a decision and retain the evidence
At the end of a review round, assemble written conclusions, professional exclusions, documents used and conditions still outstanding. Decide whether to proceed to the next investigation, adjust the project, request a specific contractual condition, postpone or reject the candidate. There is no need to check everything if a sufficient finding establishes that the property cannot serve your purpose. When proceeding, ask the reviewers which information should be refreshed before the next commitment and which changes would require their conclusion to be reconsidered. Retain dated plan versions and an evidence index, sharing personal documents only with people who need to participate. The checklist file does not replace a legal report, technical study or response from the competent authority. Official sources help frame enquiries and understand the scope of each review, while property-specific answers support the actual decision. Used well, the plan distinguishes what is prepared, what is demonstrated and what remains unresolved, without presenting a checkbox as a guarantee about the land.
Task dependencies, owners and evidence
The tool calculates sequential stages using your calendar-day estimates. Use this separate worksheet to identify parallel tasks and progress conditions. Marking preparation neither verifies documents nor satisfies an official deadline.
| Item or decision | Information and evidence for your copy | Next check |
|---|---|---|
| Property identity as the starting point | Folio, reference, plan, offered object and person responsible for clarifying differences. | Connect every enquiry with the same identity; avoid mistakenly commissioning reviews of different properties. |
| Parallel title and territorial review | Instructions, professionals or authorities, input records and specific questions for each area. | Record which tasks can start together and which await a document; the automatic schedule remains sequential. |
| Visits and studies depending on the project | Project-brief version, access, technical owners, visit scope and outputs from necessary studies. | Assign an owner and expected evidence; a completed visit does not establish completion of every study. |
| Internal dates and external dependencies | Own estimate, requested date, actual response and document required by the following task. | Reschedule using evidence and distinguish internal targets from authority deadlines; this sheet does not establish statutory due dates. |
| Condition for signature or payment | Critical outstanding item, required outcome, owner, received review and decision to proceed, adjust or wait. | Keep the condition open until sufficient evidence exists; completing boxes does not authorise the transaction. |
Sources & bibliography
Read the full document, its date, amendments and scope. The editorial review date describes this page; it does not establish an authorisation or a specific answer about your plot or financing.
- 01Función Pública · Ley 1579 de 2012, Estatuto de Registrowww1.funcionpublica.gov.co · Colombia
- 02IGAC · Cartilla de procedimientos catastrales con efectos registrales, 2025www.igac.gov.co · Colombia; confirm the competent cadastral manager
- 03Alcaldía de Medellín · Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial y cartografíawww.medellin.gov.co · Medellín
- 04Minvivienda · En qué consiste una licencia de construcciónventanilla.minvivienda.gov.co · Colombia
- 05EPM · Servicio de aguas para constructores y urbanizadoreswww.epm.com.co · EPM service area