Buying land in a "problematic parcel"

We are contemplating buying a piece of land that belongs to a "problematic parcel". It seems that this parcel is famously difficult to deal with, because it belongs to a very large family, and because of a history of murky transactions involving some parts of it. We have been told horror stories about people who fork over money (and obtain a "title"), thinking they are buying a piece of land, only to be visited by someone who claims to be a member of the family that owns the parcel and claims to have a right to the piece of land. Or, we hear about people who buy something only to be told that it didn't belong to the person who sold it.

Now, I understand that there's a proper process to purchasing real estate. Anybody who just pays money without following this process is an idiot. I understand that the deslinde is the key to legally identifying the piece of land. I've read through this forum and I've read Dr. Guzman's articles. But I'm still very unclear on whether or not we can reasonably expect to carry through a solid, correct transaction if we follow all the rules.

It seems to me that in our case we would need to make the sale of the land contingent on the issuance of a deslinde. We're dealing with a completely undeveloped piece of countryside, and a fisherman who lives in a hut with no phone and claims to be the owner. There is an attorney who promises to provide a copy of the title, but from what I've been told, such a piece of paper is not particularly reliable, even after it has been authenticated with the agency that registers these documents. Based on what I've heard, nothing is guaranteed until the deslinde is in order.

So is it possible to make a sale contingent on the deslinde? Wouldn't it be insane to do otherwise? And who would (normally) pay for that deslinde process?

Also: what sorts of complications could prevent the issuance of a deslinde? Are the stories true -- for instance, can relatives materialize out of nowhere (the adopted stepchild of the third wife of the great-grandson of the family patriarch, say), and hold up or even stop the process?

Moreover, is it possible to find an attorney who will agree on a fixed price to manage the entire transaction? We do not want to walk into an open-ended process, in which an attorney bills us by the hour, tells us that he/she's working on all kinds of complicated bureaucratic procedures, and at the end presents us with (1) a gigantic bill and (2) the news that, unfortunately, the deslinde cannot be obtained, or some other obstacle will prevent the safe completion of the transaction.

It's very hard to distinguish fact from horror stories & gossip in what we've been told. Many people seem to be suggesting that this is an impossibly complicated situation in which there's very little legal protection for a buyer. We'd like to get some clear guidance on this. Obviously we need an attorney, but not one who is going to try to attach a spigot to our piggy bank.

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

Just Because. (No, kidding.)

JDJones said:

I'm sorry I can't give you an answer, but I would like to ask... Why??
Why would you want to put yourself through what most certainly is going to be a major headache?

Click to expand...

In a way, part of the reason is that it might be a headache. Not that we're masochists, but rather that we might be able to do something that we'd otherwise be unable to afford, in exchange for putting up with a lot of annoyances. Those who want smooth sailing all the way and can just pour out the cash to "make it so" are more than welcome, of course. We ourselves don't mind putting up with additional grief if it makes it possible to do something desirable. What I'm trying to gauge, though, is whether what we're looking at is doable at all, or if simply (1) the legal system isn't set up to offer adequate protection no matter how many precautions you take, and/or (2) attorneys here don't want to operate on the basis of "getting the job done", but insist on open-ended, hourly billing arrangements.

That's funny -- I wonder if something in my original post made me sound "problematic" or "greedy", or if I'm just getting that sort of feedback from people who would tend toward such comments in any case. I can't imagine what's "problematic" about wanting to approach a decision with a full awareness of the facts and probabilities, and I can't see what's "greedy" about wanting to avoid losing hard-earned cash thanks to a failure to do "due diligence" (to use an overused phrase). Perhaps those of you who've made such comments just enjoy different economic circumstances than I: congratulations.

It will be great to get some feedback from anybody who has some actual perspective on the issues involved; I guess the other sorts of comments (like these last two) will just help me know who not to take seriously.

HOWMAR said:

Why don't you contact a title insurance company. This situation is what title insurance is for. Stewart Title is one on the island. In fact I just saw an advertisement on DR1.http://stewartdr.com/

Click to expand...

Thanks -- I will look into that more, but some other posts in this forum gave me the impression that title insurance will not necessarily help too much. If I recall correctly, and understood correctly, some comments by Dr. Guzman on this topic, the government-organized title insurance system has never raised enough funds to actually be effective, and (I get the impression) the private efforts are quite new and probably untested. I looked at the ad you linked, but I wonder how I can know that this firm is really able to live up to their promises.

Will title insurance really help?

Does anyone know of any cases where a title insurance claim in the DR has been paid?

Hey, I appreciate that detailed reply...seriously. :classic:

I don't have a gigantic amount of real estate experience, certainly nothing like your impressive resume. I also definitely don't have any expectations about the legal system here. I know that when it comes to legal matters, or anything else, that it is foolish to expect things to be the same in one country as in another. Things are wildly different in real estate between various parts of the US, for that matter. And nothing about the history of this country, or the volatility in just about every aspect of the "civic body", causes me to think that I am likely to find any solid institutions that will give me a "guarantee" of any value. This is the background of risk and uncertainty against which I'm simply trying to judge the relative risk of one particular possibility.

I have no conceptual problem with paying an attorney for real and necessary work. I don't expect someone else to underwrite these efforts by agreeing to a level of compensation that doesn't match their actual efforts. On the other hand, I do think it's silly that some attorneys want to charge prices that would be considered steep in, say, New York. And I do want to find someone who will help me form some reasonable expectations, not someone who will just start a tab and lead me down a path that likely ends at a brick wall. I don't want to get into a super-complicated process if it is highly likely to fail. That isn't just about paying attorney fees -- it's about putting money for the purchase at risk. I still have no idea whether it's possible to trust escrow agents here, for instance. In the US there have been a number of cases of attorneys stealing money from their clients' escrow accounts. Sure they get prosecuted, but recovering the stolen money is tough. Somehow I doubt the situation is more secure here.

If being "greedy" is about some kind of moral relationship to "market price", then I just have this to say: from my naive, purist, point of view, "market price" is just about the most arbitrary thing in the world. The prices that some people are asking for properties in some parts of the DR are absolutely nuts. I realize that there are enough people able & willing to pay ridiculous prices, and that some people have a vested interest in keeping prices at these crazy levels and continuing to push them into the stratosphere, but I also believe we all recognize that "market price" is nothing more than what people are willing to pay. Perhaps there's enough buying power and enough desire on the part of those with huge chunks of money to throw around to completely price everyone else out, but on the chance there isn't, we're trying to evaluate an opportunity that is within our pretty limited means. I don't see "greedy" as really fitting this situation. Either it will work, or not.