6 Costly Mistakes Homebuyers Must Avoid — Even RERA Can’t Always Help

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, or RERA, was established to protect homebuyers from unethical practices by developers. While it has empowered many buyers to seek redressal for delays and other grievances, RERA isn’t a fail-safe solution. In several cases, buyers may not receive compensation due to mistakes on their part, limitations within the law, or specific project conditions.

Here are six common missteps that can weaken a buyer’s legal standing—even under RERA:

Signing Agreements with Unfair Terms

Developers sometimes insert one-sided clauses in sale agreements that grant them excessive authority—such as the ability to cancel allotments or modify project features without buyer approval.
According to real estate legal expert Advocate Pranav Gupta, buyers often sign affidavits, undertakings, or No-Objection Certificates (NOCs) without fully understanding the implications. These documents can later be used to block their claims. RERA authorities often base decisions on what’s already been agreed to in writing, making it crucial for buyers to scrutinize such documents before signing.

Making Cash Payments During Booking

Many buyers opt for under-the-table cash transactions at the time of booking to save on stamp duty. However, this can severely hurt their chances of legal recovery if the deal falls through.
Since such transactions lack formal recognition, they don’t hold up under RERA scrutiny. In the event of cancellation, the absence of official documentation makes it difficult for buyers to claim refunds or compensation.

Not Following the Payment Schedule

Delays in payment from the buyer’s side can shift the blame back to them. If a buyer misses payment deadlines, they could lose the right to seek compensation for delays in possession.
Mohit Adatiya of NPV Insolvency Professionals highlights a Gujarat High Court ruling that reaffirmed this principle: a buyer in default cannot claim relief for possession delays. Additionally, if a buyer delays taking possession after receiving an occupancy certificate, they may become liable for maintenance charges or holding costs.

Agreeing to New Deadlines Without Legal Advice

In some cases, buyers verbally or in writing accept revised possession dates. Doing so can be interpreted as waiving the right to penalties for delays.
Gupta warns that written communication or even informal acknowledgment of a new timeline can work against the buyer in RERA proceedings. Always seek legal counsel before accepting revised deadlines or entering out-of-court settlements, as these may restrict future claims.

Delaying Complaint Submission

Although RERA doesn’t set a strict time limit for filing complaints, legal bodies expect claims to be submitted within a reasonable period. Delays in filing can lead to dismissal of the case.
Adatiya explains that delayed complaints, especially those involving issues reported years after possession, may be considered time-barred. In such instances, RERA is unlikely to grant relief—even for valid concerns. Buyers should also avoid procedural errors, such as missing deadlines or filing incomplete applications.

Relying on Pre-EMI or Rental Return Schemes

Financing arrangements like pre-EMI plans or promises of rental returns from builders are often not covered under RERA. These are seen as private contracts rather than statutory obligations.
If a developer defaults on such schemes, RERA may refuse to intervene, leaving buyers to seek resolution through other legal channels. These financial offers, while attractive, should be evaluated carefully for legal protection.

Final Thoughts

While RERA has strengthened the position of homebuyers in India’s real estate market, it’s not an all-powerful tool. Buyers must remain vigilant, legally informed, and proactive to truly benefit from the protections the law offers. Due diligence at every stage—from signing agreements to filing complaints—can make all the difference.