Planning infringements in the Valencian Community: unlawful works, fines and buyer risks

Why an irregular building can change a purchase

Buying a home in the Valencian Community requires looking beyond its appearance, the Land Registry entry and the cadastral reference. A pool, extension, enclosed porch or second dwelling may exist and appear in the Cadastre without having planning authorisation. Conversely, a floor-area mismatch may merely be a descriptive error, not proof of an infringement. The material questions are what was built, what was approved, which rules applied and what the authorities can still do.

Valencian law treats an act or omission as a planning infringement when it is expressly defined and punishable. A planning problem can trigger two different procedures: one to restore the lawful position and another to penalise those responsible. Restoration concerns the land, works or use; a penalty requires an identifiable person and conduct. Payment of a fine does not buy the right to keep prohibited works: demolition or an order to stop a use may also follow.

This guide discusses the Valencian Land Planning, Urban Development and Landscape Act —TRLOTUP— in its consolidated version published on 10 August 2026. Every assessment also needs the municipal plan, the date of the works and the specific sectoral restrictions. General information and an automated assessment cannot replace the underlying file or individual legal and technical review.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, texto consolidado con actualización publicada el 10/08/2026 ↗

Planning terms worth understanding

A planning licence permits the works described in it and in the approved plans, subject to its conditions. A responsible declaration is the procedural instrument for certain works, but filing one does not make works contrary to the plan lawful or prevent municipal inspection. Read what each instrument actually covers: the original house licence may omit a later pool, and a declaration for interior refurbishment may not permit an extension.

“Capable of legalisation” means that the necessary permission might be obtainable because the works satisfy the applicable rules and complete the required procedure. It does not mean “legalised”. Also distinguish works unlawful from the outset from a building lawfully authorised but made inconsistent by a later planning change. The Valencian “fuera de ordenación” or out-of-planning regime may apply to the latter and has its own limits; it does not automatically validate originally unauthorised building.

“Age” describes when the works were completed, which is different from compliance. A notarial declaration and registration of old works can evidence certain matters under registration law, but neither is a building licence nor a municipal legalisation decision. Appearance in the Cadastre or connection to utilities does not, by itself, prove authorisation either.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, títulos habilitantes y declaración responsable, arts. 232–233 y 241 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, régimen de fuera de ordenación, art. 206 ↗ · BOE — Ley estatal de suelo, inscripción de edificaciones antiguas, art. 28.4 ↗

Minor, serious and very serious: what rule was breached?

Article 265 of the TRLOTUP divides infringements into minor, serious and very serious according to the rules breached, not the visual size of a structure. Works done without a required licence or works order are classified as minor if they are capable of legalisation because they comply with the planning rules. Missing paperwork matters, but does not automatically make the building a serious infringement; compliance with the actual plan must be tested first.

Serious infringements include defined breaches of rules on subdivision, building capacity, use, height, volume, position or plot coverage. An extension that crosses the required setback or exceeds permissible floor area may fall here, depending on the file. Very serious infringements include relevant breaches affecting public green areas, open spaces, public facilities or protected non-developable land, as well as certain unlawful urban subdivisions.

The category depends on the exact parcel, plan and proven facts. “Non-developable land” does not always mean “protected non-developable land” for classification purposes, even though both matter when calculating the restoration period. Nor does every pool or outbuilding have a universal label: what was permitted and which planning parameters were breached are decisive.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, clasificación de infracciones, art. 265 ↗

If the works are still under way

Authorities can order work suspended when it proceeds without the required authorisation or departs from its conditions. A responsible declaration does not shield works that diverge from submitted plans or breach the planning rules. Suspension alone is not the final answer on whether the works can remain, but it requires work to stop and notices to be addressed. Continuing despite an order may invite enforcement measures and increase the difficulty.

In the cases covered by the Act, suspension is followed by a request that the interested party apply for the licence or authorisation, establish lawfulness through the appropriate responsible declaration, or adjust the works to an existing permission within two months of notification. Submitting an application does not mean it will be granted. If the works cannot be legalised or the required steps are not completed, restoration proceedings may follow.

For a buyer, even seemingly minor ongoing work merits a pause before paying an unconditional deposit. Request the decision, plans and current procedural status. If the pool or extension accounts for a material part of the price, its legal position should not depend on the seller’s assurance that permission can be sought later.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, suspensión y legalización, arts. 252–255 ↗

Completed works: legalisation, restoration and demolition

Physical completion does not end planning control. Within the applicable action period, the municipality or, in certain cases, the Valencian Territory Protection Agency may require the owner to seek authorisation or bring the works into line with an existing permission. Where illegality is manifest and cannot be remedied, the Act allows the restoration case to proceed directly to a hearing. Legalisation must be established for the specific works under the relevant plan; similar nearby houses do not prove it.

A restoration decision can require demolition of works that cannot be legalised, or works capable of legalisation that were not duly legalised; reconstruction of a building wrongly demolished; reunification of unlawfully divided plots; or permanent cessation of a use. It may require further steps to return land to its previous condition. Subject to the applicable procedure, the Act also provides for utility suspension and a Land Registry notice.

Failure to comply with the order can lead to periodic coercive payments and execution by the authorities at the interested person’s expense. These compliance measures are different from the original infringement fine. The real exposure is therefore not just the amount of “a fine”: it may include removal cost, loss of built area, time, damage to the rest of the home and whether regularisation is legally possible.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, suspensión y legalización, arts. 252–255 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, restauración y medidas de ejecución, arts. 257–260 ↗

Fines: the general bands do not cover every type of work

Article 267 gives general bands for “other planning infringements”: €300–€3,000 for minor, €3,001–€30,000 for serious and €30,001–€1.5 million for very serious cases. It would be wrong to apply those figures automatically to every unlicensed building. Many works and installations have special scales based on the value of the works. Certain subdivisions, changes of use and other conduct have their own provisions as well.

For example, article 285.1 sets a fine of 2%–6% of the value of unlicensed works that are legalisable because they comply with planning law, subject to a €300 minimum. Article 282.1 provides 25%–50% of the value of unlawful building works that breach use, plot coverage, height, floor area, volume or setbacks, with a €600 minimum, where the infringement is not very serious. Works on specified protected land and public spaces under article 280 attract 100%–200% of their value, with a €3,000 minimum.

These figures are neither quotations nor a universal fine calculator. A sound estimate requires the correct legal classification, valuation of the works, assessment of circumstances and identification of those liable. A fine does not, by itself, discharge the duty to restore the land or make a use inconsistent with the plan lawful.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, cuantías generales de las multas, art. 267 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, infracciones de edificación, art. 282 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, obras en suelos protegidos, art. 280 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, obras sin licencia legalizables, art. 285 ↗

Penalty limitation and restoration: two different clocks

The period for pursuing an infringement is not the same as the period for ordering restoration. Under the TRLOTUP, serious and very serious infringements are time-barred after four years and minor ones after one year. Calculating the period depends on when the conduct occurred, when external signs made it discoverable, whether it was continuing, and any statutory interruption. An old photograph alone does not establish that a penalty is time-barred.

For completed works, article 255 generally gives the administration fifteen years to order restoration, counting from full completion or cessation of the relevant use. But that period does NOT apply to actions on any non-developable land, even if not specially protected. Nor does it apply to public green areas, roads, open spaces, public facilities, public domain or properties in the Valencian Cultural Heritage General Inventory. For those cases the restoration action does not expire under the fifteen-year rule.

Article 255.6 also points to the restoration period in force under the law when the works were completed. Older works therefore require review of the historical legislation and the file. Even where the restoration action has expired, article 256 expressly says that time does not legalise the works: unlawful parts cannot be refurbished, enlarged or consolidated while the planning breach persists. Penalty limitation, restoration time limits and legalisation are three different legal answers.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, prescripción de infracciones, art. 270 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, plazo de restauración y efectos de su transcurso, arts. 255–256 ↗

Land Registry and Cadastre are not planning permissions

The Cadastre records location, areas and buildings for its own purposes but does not issue planning permission. The Land Registry records registered rights and legal situations; a building’s appearance in its description does not prove that every extension was licensed. National law provides a route to register certain old buildings when specified conditions are met and restoration measures involving demolition no longer proceed. Registration through that route is not a municipal building authorisation.

A proper check compares three layers: the physical site and aerial imagery, the Registry and cadastral descriptions, and the municipal file of permits, plans and enforcement. If a pool appears in the Cadastre but not in the approved drawings, record a discrepancy for investigation rather than a proven infringement or proven lawful structure. If the seller offers a deed declaring old works, request its technical support and the municipality’s position on both the works and their use.

A technician can measure volumes and find omitted basements, enclosed terraces or annexes. The legal review then links each difference to the permission that was required, the applicable rule and any open or resolved enforcement case. This sequence produces a meaningful explanation of the buyer’s exposure.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — Ley estatal de suelo, inscripción de edificaciones antiguas, art. 28.4 ↗ · BOE — Ley del Catastro Inmobiliario, descripción catastral, art. 3 ↗ · BOE — Ley estatal de suelo, transmisión de fincas y deberes, art. 27 ↗

A buyer can inherit the restoration risk

Restoration powers have a real-property character: article 250.2 of the TRLOTUP provides that restoration measures bind third-party purchasers of the affected property, without prejudice to civil claims against the seller. A new owner may therefore face an obligation to restore even if they did not personally build the unlawful structure. A sale clause allocating cost to the seller can govern their private relationship, but cannot by itself prevent action by the authority.

An infringement fine is different. Article 269 identifies the persons responsible for the conduct, including promoter, builder and works director in the relevant cases. Buying later does not automatically make a purchaser culpable for the seller’s earlier works. The buyer can incur separate liability by carrying out new unlawful works or disobeying an order addressed to them. Dates, participants and the precise administrative decisions matter.

This distinction affects price, finance and use. An annex that may have to be demolished is worth less than an authorised one. A home without a provable residential use may frustrate planned letting or refurbishment. Useful due diligence translates each uncertainty into a missing document, cost, time frame and contractual condition rather than the generic label “planning risk”.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, carácter real de las medidas de restauración, art. 250.2 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, personas responsables, art. 269 ↗

Rural land, the coast and other restrictions

A house on non-developable land deserves particular care. The ordinary fifteen-year restoration period does not apply to any action on that class of land, not merely specially protected non-developable land. Classifying an infringement as very serious, however, requires the specific conditions in article 265, including impact on protected non-developable land. These are separate legal questions; the word “rural” answers neither of them.

Alongside the municipal plan, coastal law, public-domain rules, waterways and flood risk, roads, natural areas, cultural heritage and easements may limit the property. A municipal licence cannot replace a separate sectoral authorisation when one was required. The Valencian Territory Protection Agency may be involved in certain non-developable-land cases. All competent authorities and existing proceedings should be identified before anyone promises regularisation.

Valencian law provides territorial-impact minimisation routes for certain groups of houses on non-developable land and, in article 230, an individual route for some isolated buildings. Each has its own conditions and procedure: the individual route requires a declaration of individualised status and the relevant licence, rather than automatic regularisation. The plan, dates, environmental conditions and administrative position of the particular plot must be checked before relying on either possibility.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, clasificación de infracciones, art. 265 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, plazo de restauración y efectos de su transcurso, arts. 255–256 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, minimización de impacto territorial, arts. 228–230 ↗

Documents to obtain before paying a deposit

Identify the registered property, cadastral reference and physical plot. Inventory the principal house, pool, garage, pergolas, stores, annexes, enclosures and changes of use. Compare site inspection and historic aerial images with the Land Registry, Cadastre, approved plans and later amendments. An architect or technical architect can measure floor areas, heights and setbacks; a lawyer should connect those observations with permissions and enforcement files.

Ask for licences or responsible declarations together with proof of submission and attachments, approved plans, amendments, completion certificates and relevant occupancy documents. Ask the municipality for written information on the land’s zoning, classification and planning schedule. Separately, seek copies or status reports for identified enforcement cases and ask about permissions for the specific works. Article 246.4 grants the right to that written planning information, but does not certify the legality of every structure. A planning guarantee certificate serves a different purpose and does not, by itself, certify the legality of an existing building.

Ask precise questions: was the pool authorised; does the annex match approved plans; is there a legalisation or restoration order; may the proposed use continue? If the municipality has not yet replied, reflect the uncertainty in the negotiation. Absence of a known case should not be represented as affirmative certification of compliance.

• Request permission and plans for each material feature, not only the original house.
• Obtain a written municipal response and commission a technical comparison with the physical property.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, títulos habilitantes y declaración responsable, arts. 232–233 y 241 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, información urbanística escrita, art. 246.4 ↗ · BOE — Ley del Catastro Inmobiliario, descripción catastral, art. 3 ↗

How to negotiate without buying a promise

When a mismatch is found, obtain a diagnosis that distinguishes descriptive error, compliant works lacking paperwork, works that can be altered, and works inconsistent with the plan. If legalisation is achievable, the seller can be required to obtain the decision and provide corrected plans before completion. If removal is necessary, specify who commissions and pays for it, what evidence proves completion and what happens if the authority requires more.

A deposit contract can be conditional on defined documents and planning checks, with clear consequences if a condition fails. Holding back part of the price makes sense only where a lawful solution exists, its cost and timing can be estimated, and release of the money is properly drafted. A holdback cannot make prohibited works legalisable or guarantee that it covers an unknown restoration obligation.

If the irregularity concerns an essential part of the planned use —an advertised self-contained second home, a bedroom extension or the pool reflected in the price— postponing the purchase may be the sensible course until sufficient evidence exists. Negotiation is not always about reducing the price; sometimes it is about avoiding an unquantified obligation.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, suspensión y legalización, arts. 252–255 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, restauración y medidas de ejecución, arts. 257–260 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, carácter real de las medidas de restauración, art. 250.2 ↗

Example: house, pool and studio in Marina Alta

Consider a house marketed with a pool and independent studio in Marina Alta. The Land Registry describes the original home; the Cadastre also depicts a pool and larger area. The seller produces the house licence but no approved plans for later works. The listing, an aerial photo and property-tax bills prove different things; none alone establishes that the pool or studio was authorised.

The review must locate the municipal file, compare approved and actual building, and determine land classification, setbacks, permitted use and the completion date of each feature. If the studio exceeds plot coverage or introduces a prohibited use, the infringement could be serious and removal may be required even though the main house is lawful. If the plot is non-developable land, fifteen years cannot simply be assumed to close the restoration action. If the works are compliant and only the permission was missing, the route and penalty may differ.

A useful report would not assign a single green or red signal to the whole plot. It would separate the house, pool and studio, explain what is evidenced, what remains open and which document could resolve each question. The buyer can then require regularisation before completion, make the deposit conditional, or withdraw if the studio was central to the decision. The example is hypothetical: a real classification needs the file, plan and technical evidence.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, clasificación de infracciones, art. 265 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, infracciones de edificación, art. 282 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, plazo de restauración y efectos de su transcurso, arts. 255–256 ↗ · BOE — Ley del Catastro Inmobiliario, descripción catastral, art. 3 ↗

If you have bought already or receive a notice

Do not ignore a suspension, legalisation, restoration or penalty notice: these are distinct procedures with their own deadlines and rights to be heard. Keep the receipt, full decision, case file and purchase documents. Stop new works that might complicate the facts and obtain a reliable measured survey. A lawyer can examine competence, dates, evidence, legalisation options, representations and possible claims against the seller.

If there is no case yet, avoid filing an improvised regularisation application without knowing precisely which works and use it should cover. A town-hall enquiry should accurately identify the parcel, act and dates. The purpose is not to conceal an irregularity, but to determine whether a lawful solution exists and protect the property’s real use and value. This guide is general information; a specific case needs individual professional review before action is taken or an order answered.

Legal framework and sources: BOE — TRLOTUP, suspensión y legalización, arts. 252–255 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, restauración y medidas de ejecución, arts. 257–260 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, plazo de restauración y efectos de su transcurso, arts. 255–256 ↗ · BOE — TRLOTUP, carácter real de las medidas de restauración, art. 250.2 ↗