More than 120 families say they were harmed in an alleged real estate scheme, with losses of millions of euros in deposits delivered to buy properties, in a case of fraud that involves a promoter who has since been declared insolvent and is under investigation by the Judiciary Police.
The public appeal comes from a group of creditors representing some of the families who contributed large amounts of money to purchase properties in Palmela, defending changes to legislation to prevent similar situations from recurring and to reinforce buyer protection.
At the center of the process is the company Diagramamotriz, associated with business brokered by real estate agencies, and a group of projects in the municipality of Palmela where the promissory contracts have not been fulfilled, leaving buyers without a home and without the money delivered.
What is at stake in Palmela’s developments
According to information provided by the Lusa agency, the process involves promissory contracts linked to several projects, including Palmela Dreams, Alcaide Villas, Urbanização de Santa Teresinha (lots 14/15/16), Aires Dreams Living and Ferra Cinta, all in the municipality of Palmela.
A report from the insolvency administrator cited in the press states that the company had raised more than 17 million euros in deposits from promising buyers, in a context in which acquisition expectations ended up being frustrated.
Among the accusations put forward by injured parties is the allegation that some properties have been “sold” more than once, which, if confirmed, would explain the scale of the impact of the fraud and the multiplication of victims in the same universe of properties.
According to the aforementioned investigation, the promoter signed promissory purchase and sale contracts, receiving deposit amounts and, in some cases, almost the entire price before the properties were completed, creating a high risk for buyers when the deal fails.
On November 20, 2025, the Judiciary Police arrested the owner associated with the company, accused of crimes of qualified fraud in the context of these real estate businesses in the district of Setúbal, subject to an identity and residence permit.
On the creditors’ side, the position is that the size of the case is not only the result of the promoter’s actions, but also of gaps in the current model, including the lack of blocking instruments and automatic safeguarding of the money handed over by buyers.
What they ask of the Government and the context of the RJUE
The creditors’ committee defends changes such as mandatory registration of promissory contracts and mandatory trust accounts for the amounts delivered, arguing that the absence of these mechanisms facilitates fraud and leaves families exposed.
The request comes at a time when the Government is preparing changes to the Urbanization and Building Legal Regime (RJUE), with legal analyzes pointing to changes with an impact on licensing and urban planning litigation.
Palmela City Council, for its part, has warned of the risks of models for simplifying licensing and urban planning control, arguing that the expansion of operations with less prior control could increase vulnerabilities, although it emphasizes that municipal procedures have limits when the dispute is between promoter and buyers.
How to reduce risks when buying a house
Without going into legal advice, there are basic precautions that can reduce risks in purchases with a down payment: confirm who the promoter is, check the property’s registration status and ask for professional support in reading the promissory contract, especially when the values delivered are high and the work is not yet completed.
If there is real estate mediation, it is worth confirming whether the company is licensed, IMPIC provides an official service to search for real estate mediation licenses.
And there is also an often forgotten tool: in certain situations, it may be possible to reinforce buyer protection with acts of registration (for example, provisional registration associated with a promissory contract), a topic addressed by law firms and experts in land registration.
According to , Palmela’s case once again puts the focus on the same dilemma: the rush to “secure the house” with high signals can leave families vulnerable when there is a lack of legal brakes and effective supervision, and that is why the injured parties insist that, in addition to compensation, it is necessary to change rules to prevent history from repeating itself.
Also read:
