Ten real barriers homebuyers face before HRERA hampering access to justice
Winning is not the end. Ten real barriers homebuyers face before HRERA.
A closer look at the procedural and structural gaps between a favourable HRERA order and actual justice — from the moment a homebuyer tries to file, to the moment they finally get paid.
For thousands of homebuyers, obtaining a favourable order from the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) is not the end of their struggle — it is the midpoint. What follows is often a second, largely invisible process: chasing compliance, restarting proceedings, and absorbing costs that never show up in any official disposal statistic.
Basis of this analysis
Drawn from the author's experience as a homebuyer and as an advocate appearing before HRERA, Gurugram, and from PRAN Foundation's ongoing public consultation on "HRERA Reform 2.0: A Consumer Justice Blueprint for Haryana."
The Core Issue
RERA was enacted because Parliament recognised that individual homebuyers were the weaker party in the real estate market. A regulatory framework built to protect that weaker party should progressively reduce the consumer's procedural burden as a dispute moves forward — not redistribute it across successive stages of filing, adjudication and enforcement.
In practice, the burden rarely moves away from the homebuyer. It shifts from the builder to the complaint, from the complaint to the order, and from the order to its enforcement — with the consumer carrying it at every stage. The ten issues below are the specific, recurring points where that burden lands.
A homebuyer approaches HRERA because the builder failed. The system should not require the consumer to suffer again because enforcement failed.
Ten Barriers Homebuyers Face Before HRERA
-
Procedural Complexity at the Filing Stage
The first challenge is rarely proving the builder's default — it's surviving the filing process itself: prescribed formats, paginated annexures, fee calculation, service of copies and proof of service, all before the matter is even listed.
-
A Digital Process That Still Ends in Paper
Filing begins online, creating an expectation of a paperless process. In practice, it's digitally initiated but physically completed — multiple hard copies and an electronic copy must still be submitted in person.
-
The Thirty-Day Filing Trap
Once Proforma B is generated, hard-copy filing is accepted only within a fixed thirty-day window — with no relaxation for weekends, holidays, or genuine cause. Miss it, and the complainant must generate an entirely new Proforma B with a fresh complaint number, revising the already-prepared complaint to match.
-
A Defunct Advocate-Registration Process
Advocates seeking to represent complainants on the HRERA portal must first complete an online registration — a process that is largely non-functional, leaving homebuyers unable to secure proper representation through no fault of their own.
-
Hidden Costs Beyond the Filing Fee
Printing, scanning, indexed annexures, courier service, repeated travel and professional assistance rarely appear in official statistics — but they are real, recurring costs stacked on top of a homebuyer already paying EMIs and rent simultaneously.
-
Adjournments Without Scheduling Discipline
Fair opportunity for both sides is essential, but unlimited adjournments are not the same thing. When procedural flexibility consistently benefits the party already in default, it reinforces the very imbalance the law was meant to correct.
-
The Compliance Gap After a Favourable Order
HRERA typically grants promoters around three months to comply. If that period lapses without payment, the process doesn't move automatically into enforcement — the consumer must notice the default and act on it themselves.
-
Execution Proceedings as a Second Battle
To enforce an order already passed in their favour, a consumer must obtain certified copies, prepare a fresh execution petition, pay another fee, and re-enter a process that looks, procedurally, like starting all over again.
-
One Wrong, Multiple Proceedings
A single builder default can require separate proceedings for refund, interest, compensation and execution — even though the parties, facts and evidence never change. Each additional proceeding is another filing, fee and wait.
-
No Transparency on Builder Compliance History
There is no public record of how often a promoter complies with HRERA orders on time, how many execution petitions are pending against them, or whether they are a repeat defaulter — information that would materially help a prospective buyer.
Why This Matters
- Every additional procedural step is a point at which a genuinely wronged consumer may simply give up.
- Delay currently carries little institutional cost for the promoter, but real, compounding cost — EMIs, rent, interest — for the consumer.
- A regulator's legitimacy rests as much on enforcement of its orders as on the orders themselves.
- Measuring success by cases disposed of, rather than relief actually delivered, hides exactly this pattern.
The Larger Structural Problem
Viewed individually, each requirement above may seem reasonable. Viewed together, they reveal a burden-transfer cycle: the builder defaults, the consumer prepares the complaint, pays the costs, serves the promoter, attends the hearings, wins the order, waits for compliance, and — when compliance doesn't come — becomes the one who has to chase it. At almost every stage, responsibility moves toward the person who was already wronged, not away from them.
Your Rights — and What You Can Do
- You are entitled to file a complaint without hiring a lawyer, though representation can help navigate the procedural steps above.
- Keep independent records of every compliance deadline HRERA sets — don't rely on the Authority to flag a default automatically.
- If you've faced any of the ten barriers above, PRAN Foundation is actively collecting homebuyer, advocate and developer experiences as part of its HRERA Reform 2.0 consultation — your account directly shapes what gets proposed to the government.
PRAN's Perspective
PRAN believes these are not isolated inconveniences but a consistent institutional pattern — one that HRERA can correct largely through administrative reform, without amending the parent Act. Three principles guide our recommendations:
A homebuyer should not need legal expertise merely to ask a regulator for protection.
A consumer who has already won should never have to initiate a second legal battle merely to obtain the benefit of the first.
The regulatory system should make compliance easier than non-compliance, and delay more costly than timely performance.
Conclusion
None of this diminishes what HRERA has achieved since 2017 — thousands of complaints decided, and a regulatory presence that simply didn't exist before. But the measure of a consumer protection regime isn't the number of orders it passes. It's how many homebuyers receive complete, timely relief without being drawn into a second, third or fourth procedural battle to get what was already theirs.
Add Your Experience to the Record
PRAN Foundation is finalising its HRERA Reform 2.0 Policy Brief before it goes to the Government of Haryana. If you've dealt with any of these ten barriers — or had a smoother experience — we want to know.
Want the complete legal reference? Read Real Estate Law in Haryana on Kindle.
हिंदी सार
हरियाणा रेरा (HRERA) के समक्ष शिकायत जीतना अक्सर संघर्ष का अंत नहीं, बल्कि आधा रास्ता होता है। शिकायत दर्ज करने की जटिल प्रक्रिया, तीस दिन की सख्त समय-सीमा, वकील पंजीकरण की अधूरी व्यवस्था, आदेश पारित होने के बाद पालन न होने पर उपभोक्ता को फिर से क्रियान्वयन (execution) की प्रक्रिया शुरू करनी पड़ना, और एक ही मामले के लिए कई अलग-अलग कार्यवाहियाँ — ये सभी उपभोक्ता पर बोझ डालते हैं, न कि नियामक संस्था पर। PRAN फाउंडेशन इन अनुभवों के आधार पर "HRERA सुधार 2.0" नीति दस्तावेज़ तैयार कर रहा है, और आम नागरिकों से अपने अनुभव साझा करने का आग्रह करता है।