Audit Trail Reconstruction — Independent Unit Number
An audit trail becomes necessary when the current file cannot explain how a unit reached its present identity. Perhaps an old reservation uses one code, the current title record uses another number, a valuation describes a different floor, or the developer says that units were renumbered after a project amendment. The purpose of reconstruction is not to create a persuasive narrative after the fact. It is to rebuild a chronology from primary evidence so another reviewer can see which identifier was valid at each stage, what changed, who or which authority made the change, and how later documents were connected to the same legal unit.
Start with the earliest authoritative identity
Locate the earliest reliable project or registry document that identifies the independent unit. Depending on the building’s history, that may be the approved architectural project used for construction servitude, the initial kat irtifakı registration, the conversion to kat mülkiyeti, or a later official project amendment. Record the main property identifiers, the independent-unit number, block, floor, registered nature/use, land share and annexes exactly as shown. Do not modernize terminology or substitute a marketing code while transcribing the source.
TKGM’s condominium guidance treats the independent unit as a separately registered part connected to the approved project, and the 2021/4 circular is an important source for how condominium and construction-servitude records are structured. The amendment published on 2 July 2026 should be checked when applying that guidance to a current transaction. The legal framework in Law No. 634 also matters because the registered unit, its land share and related common-property structure are not merely administrative labels.
Create a dated event ledger
The core of reconstruction is a timeline, not a summary paragraph. Each row should contain: date; event; source; unit identifier before the event; unit identifier after the event; linked block/floor/use/land-share data; affected documents; and confidence level. Typical events include establishment of construction servitude, establishment or conversion to condominium ownership, approved project amendment, subdivision or merger, correction of a registry entry, change in registered use, sale, mortgage, valuation, reservation, handover, municipal renumbering and significant management-record changes.
Do not invent a date when only a document year is known. Record the precision honestly. If a copy is undated, label it undated and identify the earliest external evidence that proves it existed. The objective is an auditable chronology, not artificial completeness.
Separate legal identifiers from operational identifiers
Every event ledger should distinguish the registered independent-unit number from physical door number, site-management number and developer sales code. A door or management number may help link the physical apartment to historical documents, but it is not a substitute for the registered identity. Where an old sales contract uses a commercial code, find the project schedule, signed allocation list, valuation or other reliable bridge that connects that code to a legal unit. If no bridge can be found, the historical payment may be authentic but its property allocation remains unproven.
This distinction is especially important when a building was renumbered. A municipal address change can explain why utilities or tenancy records changed while title remained constant. A project amendment can produce the opposite pattern: the physical apartment appears unchanged but the legal project and registry data were altered. Reconstruction should show which type of change occurred.
Reconcile contradictions instead of averaging them
If two documents disagree, do not choose the version that appears most often. Rank sources by competence for the specific fact. Current land-registry records control registered ownership and registered unit identity; the approved project is central to the unit’s project position; a valuation is evidence of what the valuer inspected and relied upon, not an authority to amend title; a sales sheet shows commercial allocation but cannot override registry data; a utility bill is useful for physical address history but not for ownership. Write the conflict explicitly and identify the source that can resolve it.
Where the official source itself changed over time, preserve both stages. For example, a valid old unit number may later be replaced through a legitimate project/registry procedure. The old document is not “wrong” simply because it is superseded. It remains evidence of the state at that time and may explain older payments or contracts.
Trace money and obligations through the identifier history
Payments are a critical test of a reconstructed trail. For each material payment, identify the payer, payee, date, amount, payment description, contract reference and unit identifier used at that time. If the identifier later changed, document the bridge. Do the same for deposits, refunds, invoices and bank disbursements. A bank receipt proves a payment; it does not prove which unit the payment belongs to unless the transaction context makes that connection.
Contracts and amendments should be placed on the same timeline. If an addendum changes the unit number, determine whether it records an official prior change or attempts to create a new commercial allocation. The distinction may affect whether the buyer received the same legal asset originally agreed.
Reconstruct annexes and land share as part of identity
Do not rebuild only the unit number. A unit’s history may also involve arsa payı, parking, storage or other annex rights. If the unit number changes while the land share or annex list changes too, that is a more substantive event and should not be described as simple renumbering. The reconstruction should show the old and new configuration and point to the competent document supporting the transition.
Minimum evidence package for a defensible reconstruction
A strong package normally contains the current registry evidence; earlier registry evidence where obtainable; the relevant approved project/version; documents establishing construction servitude or condominium status where material; official amendments or corrections; transaction contracts and addenda; valuation reports; material payment records; and a cross-reference to physical door/management numbering where it explains the history. Screenshots or oral statements can be leads, but they should not be the controlling evidence for a disputed unit identity.
Closing the reconstruction
Close the record only when the chronology answers five questions: what was the unit called at each stage; which legal unit did that identifier represent; what event changed the identifier or related data; which authority or document supports the change; and how earlier contracts/payments connect to the current unit. Mark unresolved gaps separately. If a missing link could mean that a payment, contract or valuation belongs to a different legal unit, the gap remains material and should not be hidden by narrative confidence.
Official sources
- TKGM — 2021/4 Kat İrtifakı ve Kat Mülkiyeti guidance and the 2 July 2026 amendment.
- Law No. 634 on Condominium Ownership through the Ministry of Justice official legislation system.
- TKGM Web Tapu / land-registry services for current registered information within official scope.
- Approved architectural project and official project-amendment records from the competent authority.