Preventa: what a developer must legally show you before you pay
Mexican consumer law gives pre-construction buyers a thirteen-point disclosure list, a searchable contract registry, and a five-year structural warranty. Almost nobody asks for any of it.
General education, not legal or tax advice. Requirements vary by state, municipality, notario, SAT office, and year — confirm current specifics with your Notario Público, an attorney, and a cross-border accountant before acting.
Why buyers ask
Preventa is how most new inventory on this bay is sold, and the transaction runs backwards from everything a foreign buyer knows: you wire real money against a render, a floorplan and a delivery date, years before there is anything to inspect. The reasonable assumption is that you are trusting the developer's reputation and little else. That assumption is wrong, and the gap between what buyers think they can demand and what federal law already entitles them to is enormous.
What actually protects me when I'm buying a unit that doesn't exist yet?
You are protected by federal statute, not goodwill. Under the *Ley Federal de Protección al Consumidor*, developers selling residential property must register their contract with PROFECO (Art. 73), must put a specific thirteen-point disclosure package in front of you before you sign (Art. 73 BIS), and owe a minimum five-year structural warranty running from actual delivery (Art. 73 QUÁTER). And the sleeper: a contract that was required to be registered but wasn't "no producirá efectos contra el consumidor" — it produces no effects against you (Art. 87).
## The registry you can search yourself
Article 73 brings *fraccionadores, constructores, promotores* and anyone advising on or selling homes to the public under consumer law, and requires their contracts to be registered with PROFECO.
That registry — the *Registro Público de Contratos de Adhesión* — is public and searchable at rpca.profeco.gob.mx, by company name, trade name, registration number or contract type. It takes about two minutes and tells you whether a developer asking for your deposit has done the one piece of compliance that is not optional.
## The thirteen things they must show you
Article 73 BIS lists what the developer must make available *before* you commit. The whole list is worth reading, but these carry the most weight in preventa:
- **I — the complete *proyecto ejecutivo de construcción***, the scale model, and the show unit where one exists. Not a brochure. The executive project.
- II — documents proving ownership of the land, plus disclosure of any liens, *which must be cancelled by the time the deed is signed*.
- III — the seller's legal standing and their authorisation to market the project.
- IV — the status of taxes and public services on the property.
- V — the permits. Construction authorisations and licences covering technical specifications, safety, uso de suelo, and materials. For a project that has not broken ground, this is the fraction that separates a development from an aspiration.
- VI — structural, architectural and installation plans, or failing that a formal opinion on structural condition, with the reasons they are missing and a date they will exist.
- XI — the escrituración terms and every cost that isn't the price: closing costs, taxes, appraisal, administration, credit and investigation fees.
- XII — the conditions under which you can cancel.
- XIII — any mortgage, trust or other guarantee over the property, and how it is instrumented.
Ask for these in writing, as a list, in one request. A developer with permits produces them quickly. The response time is itself information.
## The warranty nobody claims
Article 73 QUÁTER sets warranty floors that cannot be bargained below: five years on structural matters, three years on waterproofing, one year on everything else, all running from *entrega real* — actual delivery, not signature, not completion. During that period the developer must repair defects at no cost, and time spent under repair does not count against the warranty clock.
Article 73 QUINTUS handles a developer who cannot make it right. If defects persist after the warranty was invoked, they owe a further remedy: 5% of the repair value for minor defects, and 20% of the contract price of the property for serious ones — serious meaning defects that compromise the structure or installations, or that stop you using the property as intended.
On a US$600,000 unit, that second figure is US$120,000. It is written into federal law and it is routinely absent from the conversation.
## Article 87, quietly the strongest card
If a contract was required to be registered and was not — or PROFECO refused it — the statute says such contracts *"no producirán efectos contra el consumidor."* They produce no effects against the consumer.
Read that as the leverage it is. The obligation to register sits with the developer. The consequence of skipping it falls on the developer too. A registered contract must also be used faithfully in all operations and match the registered model, so a document that differs from what PROFECO approved is its own problem.
## Two details that decide arguments later
Article 73 TER requires the contract to be written in Spanish, and where a translated version differs, the Spanish text governs. Read the Spanish, or have someone independent read it for you. It also requires amounts to be stated in pesos, alongside any other currency.
## Where this protection stops
This is consumer law for residential property sold by developers to the public. It does not reach a private resale between two individuals, and it is not the framework for commercial or purely investment vehicles. Preventa from a developer is squarely inside it.
- "Preventa contracts are take-it-or-leave-it." They are *contratos de adhesión* — which is exactly why the statute regulates them, requires registration, and voids unregistered ones against the buyer.
- "The warranty is whatever the developer offers." The five/three/one-year floors in Art. 73 QUÁTER are statutory minimums measured from actual delivery. A contract offering less does not lower them.
- "I signed it, so I'm bound by it." Not if it required registration and wasn't registered — Art. 87 is explicit that it produces no effects against you.
- "PROFECO is for appliances and airlines." Article 73 puts developers and home sales squarely inside its remit, with a dedicated public contract registry.
- "An English translation is what I'm signing." Art. 73 TER requires Spanish, and where versions differ the Spanish governs.
- "They'll show me the permits at closing." Art. 73 BIS V requires them *available before* you commit. Closing is far too late for that information to be useful.
Practical implications
- Search the developer at rpca.profeco.gob.mx before any money moves. Company name or RFC. Two minutes.
- Request the Art. 73 BIS package in writing as a numbered list. Fractions V (permits, uso de suelo) and VI (structural plans) are where an underprepared project shows itself.
- Get the lien position in writing and confirm in the contract that encumbrances are cancelled at deed, per Art. 73 BIS II.
- **Pin down *entrega real* in the contract** — the warranty clock starts there, so a vague delivery definition shortens your protection.
- Compare the contract you are handed against the model registered with PROFECO. They are required to match.
- Read the Spanish version. It governs.
- Keep every payment receipt tied to the contract — remedies under Art. 73 QUINTUS are calculated against the contract price.
Reality Check
Puerto Vallarta · Riviera NayaritFederal law
The *Ley Federal de Protección al Consumidor*, the PROFECO contract registry, the Art. 73 BIS disclosure list and the Art. 73 QUÁTER warranty floors are federal and apply identically in Jalisco and Nayarit.
Jalisco considerations
The permits under Art. 73 BIS V are issued municipally. For Puerto Vallarta-side projects that means the Municipality of Puerto Vallarta for construction licence and *uso de suelo*, and the Jalisco Public Registry for the title history behind fraction II.
Nayarit considerations
North-shore projects — Nuevo Vallarta, Bucerías, La Cruz, Punta de Mita — are permitted through Bahía de Banderas (or the relevant Nayarit municipality), and title records in the Nayarit Public Registry. Because much of this land was originally ejido, fraction II reading (ownership documents) deserves particular attention here.
Puerto Vallarta / Riviera Nayarit reality check
Preventa is the dominant sales model on this bay — most new towers sell out substantially before completion, which is why so much of the inventory a buyer sees is a render. That makes the Art. 73 BIS package the single most useful document request available to a buyer here, and the one least often made. For beachfront projects, ask additionally how any federal-zone (ZOFEMAT) area is treated, since concession area is not private property and cannot be sold as if it were.
Practical local implications
None of this is adversarial, and a well-run developer will not treat it that way — a project with permits, clean title and a registered contract can satisfy the entire Art. 73 BIS list from an existing folder. That is exactly what makes it a useful filter early in a conversation, while a deposit is still a decision rather than a sunk cost.
Related
Who actually makes a Mexican property purchase legally safe — and is the notary just witnessing signatures like back home?
Not a signature witness — a state-appointed attorney who performs the legal due diligence behind your purchase.
Once my offer is accepted, what actually happens between then and holding a registered deed — and how long does it take?
The promissory agreement, the deposit, the due-diligence weeks, and why 'escrow' isn't the default it is back home.
Questions about your situation? Speak with an advisor.