PropTech in Nigeria: How Technology Is Changing Real Estate Investment

Nigeria’s real estate sector continues to attract interest, but rising property prices, increasing construction costs and the substantial capital required to purchase property have made direct ownership difficult for many people.

Property technology, commonly known as PropTech, is creating alternative ways to participate in the market. One example is fractional real estate investment, which allows multiple investors to contribute towards a property rather than having to purchase the entire asset individually.

Although this model can lower the financial barrier to entry, it also raises important legal questions. When does a property investment arrangement become a regulated financial product, and what responsibilities do the businesses operating these platforms have?

These questions are particularly important under Nigeria’s Investments and Securities Act, 2025 (ISA), which provides a framework for regulating investment activities and protecting investors.

What Is PropTech?

PropTech refers to the use of technology to improve how real estate is developed, marketed, financed, bought, sold, leased and managed.

It includes digital property marketplaces, online transaction platforms, property management software and technology-enabled investment services.

Fractional real estate investment is one of the models supported by these developments. It allows several people to participate financially in a single property or real estate project, with each investor holding an interest according to the legal structure of the arrangement.

Pooling resources to acquire property is not a new idea. Individuals have long combined their funds to purchase and manage real estate. Technology has changed how these arrangements can be organised, promoted and administered.

Previously, coordinating several property investors could involve extensive paperwork, significant administrative costs and difficulties monitoring contributions and investment performance.

Digital platforms can simplify these processes, improve record-keeping and make investment opportunities easier to distribute to potential participants.

However, fractional real estate arrangements do not all have the same legal structure. Depending on the arrangement, investors may own direct interests in a property, hold shares in a company established to acquire the asset, or participate through a trust or another recognised investment vehicle.

The distinction is important because the legal rights of investors and the regulatory obligations of the platform may differ according to the structure used.

Understanding the Regulatory Requirements

Making property investment more accessible does not remove the legal obligations associated with raising and managing money from investors.

Depending on how an arrangement is structured, several laws may apply, including the Investments and Securities Act, 2025, the Land Use Act, 1978, the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 2020, the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, and the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

These laws address different aspects of property ownership, corporate operations, investment regulation, personal data protection and financial crime prevention.

Consequently, PropTech operators must look beyond the technology used to offer their services. They also need to consider the legal nature of the investments they promote, the rights granted to participants and the obligations arising from their business models.

Investors, in turn, need to understand what they are purchasing and whether the relevant platform and investment arrangement meet applicable legal requirements.

SEC Oversight and the Investments and Securities Act

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulates Nigeria’s capital market and has responsibilities relating to investor protection and the maintenance of fair, efficient and transparent markets.

Under the ISA, the regulatory treatment of a PropTech investment depends significantly on the arrangement’s actual structure and activities.

For example, a platform that collects money from members of the public to invest in property and promises returns may raise different regulatory considerations from a straightforward arrangement in which two people jointly purchase a plot of land.

The label attached to an investment product does not, by itself, determine its legal status. The underlying rights, financial arrangements and manner in which funds are collected and managed are important factors.

For businesses developing digital property investment products, assessing these questions early can help identify the registrations, disclosures and other compliance measures that may be required.

When Does Fractional Property Investment Become a Collective Investment Scheme?

A collective investment scheme (CIS) is one of the regulatory categories relevant to fractional real estate.

The ISA addresses arrangements in which investors contribute money or other assets to participate in a portfolio, with those contributions pooled and managed collectively.

Where an arrangement meets the statutory definition of a CIS, it falls within the SEC’s regulatory framework.

However, not every fractional ownership arrangement automatically qualifies as a collective investment scheme.

For example, two individuals who directly purchase a plot of land together may simply be co-owners. If they each acquire a direct interest in the property and the arrangement does not involve the relevant features of a regulated collective investment scheme, the legal treatment may differ from a platform that pools public funds and professionally manages a portfolio of properties.

The distinction depends on the facts and legal structure of each arrangement. Businesses should not assume that every co-ownership model is regulated in the same way, nor should they assume that calling an investment fractional ownership exempts it from regulation.

Raising Money Through Shares and Other Securities

The ISA also provides frameworks for raising investment capital through securities connected to real estate and property development.

Depending on the structure, a company may issue shares or other permitted investment instruments that provide investors with financial rights associated with a property project or business.

Real estate investment trusts and other recognised structures can also enable multiple investors to participate in property-related investments and potentially benefit from rental income or changes in asset value.

These arrangements are legally distinct from one another. Buying shares in a company that owns property does not necessarily give a shareholder direct ownership of a specific property. The investor’s rights depend on the company’s structure, the relevant agreements and the securities acquired.

Where an investment product falls within the ISA’s provisions, the applicable registration, authorisation, disclosure and other regulatory requirements must be considered.

The law’s provisions concerning securities and property-related fundraising are therefore important for companies seeking to attract capital through digital platforms.

When Does an Investment Offer Become Public?

Another important consideration is whether a fundraising activity constitutes an invitation to the public.

The ISA establishes rules governing public offers of securities and the requirements that may apply, including prospectus-related obligations.

Offers distributed through mass media, websites or electronic channels may fall within the relevant provisions. The law also addresses offers circulated to particular groups and the distribution of application forms in connection with securities.

However, the statutory framework includes provisions concerning private arrangements that are not intended to make an investment available beyond the group originally approached.

The exact treatment depends on the circumstances and the applicable statutory conditions. Simply limiting access to a website or circulating an offer to a selected group does not necessarily establish that an arrangement is exempt.

PropTech operators planning to advertise investment opportunities online should therefore assess the legal implications of their marketing methods before inviting people to contribute money.

What PropTech Businesses Need to Consider

For developers, founders and operators of digital real estate platforms, regulatory compliance should be considered when designing an investment product, rather than postponed until after money has been raised.

Businesses should understand the legal structure of the product, the rights investors receive, how funds will be held and managed, and whether the activity requires regulatory registration or approval.

They should also establish appropriate documentation, disclosures and procedures for communicating investment risks.

These steps can help reduce the risk of disputes and regulatory problems as the business grows.

The specific requirements will depend on the business model and the laws applicable to its activities. Professional legal advice is therefore important before launching or expanding an investment platform.

What Investors Should Check Before Committing Funds

Digital platforms can make property opportunities easier to discover, but convenience should not replace due diligence.

Before investing, prospective participants should establish who legally owns the underlying property, what rights the investment provides and how the arrangement is structured.

They should also understand how returns are expected to be generated, what fees may apply, how and when funds can be withdrawn or an investment sold, and what risks could lead to losses.

Investors should verify relevant property documentation and investigate whether the platform and investment product comply with applicable regulatory requirements.

They should not assume that an advertised return is guaranteed or that a digital platform’s presence online establishes the legitimacy of its offering.

Careful examination of the investment documents, ownership arrangements and applicable regulatory status can help investors make better-informed decisions.

Conclusion

Fractional real estate investment has existed in different forms for generations. PropTech has changed how these arrangements can be organised, managed and offered to potential investors, creating opportunities for wider participation in the property market.

However, technology does not remove the legal principles governing property ownership, fundraising and investment regulation.

The legal and regulatory treatment of an investment depends on its substance, rather than the terminology used to describe it. An arrangement promoted as fractional property ownership may still fall within securities regulation if its actual features meet the relevant statutory requirements.

For PropTech businesses, sustainable growth requires more than developing an accessible digital platform. It also requires an appropriate legal structure, clear investor rights and compliance with applicable regulations from the outset.

For prospective investors, understanding the ownership model, expected returns, risks and regulatory position is essential before committing capital.

As Nigeria’s real estate sector becomes more technology-driven, sound due diligence and effective compliance will remain important to building trust and supporting responsible investment.

Disclaimer

This article is intended for general educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or other professional advice. The regulatory treatment of a particular investment depends on its specific circumstances and applicable law. Investors and businesses should seek qualified professional advice before making investment or compliance decisions.

Source: Nigeria Housing Market, PropTech in Nigeria: An Investor’s Introductory Guide.

The post PropTech in Nigeria: Opportunities and Investor Regulations appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

CFL Group Gives Lagos Land Registry Seven Days to Resolve Title Dispute

The Group Managing Director of CFL Group of Companies, Lai Omotola, has given the Lagos State Land Registry a seven-day ultimatum to address what he described as alleged falsification and manipulation of land documents, warning that affected property owners could seek N5 billion in damages through the courts.

Omotola issued the ultimatum during a press conference in Lagos on Thursday, where he raised concerns over what he described as a sophisticated form of land fraud known as “Land Title Laundry.”

According to him, the alleged practice involves cloning, manipulating and introducing fraudulent land documents into official records to create seemingly legitimate ownership titles over valuable properties.

He said the practice was particularly concerning in high-value areas such as Ikoyi and Victoria Island, where land and property prices are significantly higher.

Omotola alleged that the manipulation of land titles had continued in Lagos for years and that several financial institutions had allegedly accepted fraudulent Certificates of Occupancy as collateral for loans.

He said some banks only discovered the alleged irregularities after borrowers defaulted on the loans secured with the disputed properties.

The CFL Group boss recalled that during the administration of former Lagos State Governor Akinwunmi Ambode, the state government demolished a market opposite the Government House where, according to him, forged Certificates of Occupancy were allegedly being produced.

He, however, said the alleged practice had since become more sophisticated because of the financial interests involved and the alleged participation of individuals within and outside government.

How alleged land title manipulation works

Omotola alleged that the process typically begins with the identification of abandoned or disputed properties in prime locations such as Ikoyi and Victoria Island.

He said speculators could allegedly identify the name of a deceased prominent individual and use the identity to construct a fictitious chain of ownership for a property.

According to him, forged land certificates could then be produced, sometimes with dates going back several decades, before being introduced into the official land registry system.

Omotola alleged that once such documents were entered into the registry, they could appear to be genuine official records.

He further alleged that perpetrators could subsequently declare the supposed original document lost, obtain a police affidavit and use it to process a Governor’s Consent.

He said this could create the appearance that the property had been legitimately transferred to a new owner.

Omotola stressed that a Certificate of Occupancy and a Governor’s Consent are not the same document.

He explained that a Certificate of Occupancy represents the government’s grant of a title to land, while a Governor’s Consent is the approval given by the Governor for a transaction involving an existing interest in land.

He said obtaining a Governor’s Consent did not necessarily correct defects in the underlying title.

According to him, where an investigation subsequently establishes that the underlying documents were forged or obtained through misrepresentation, the consent could be cancelled.

Victoria Island property dispute

Omotola said his concerns were also based on a dispute involving a property at 24 Adeola Odeku Street, Victoria Island, which he said was purchased by his company.

He said CFL Group acquired the property and began construction before another company allegedly arrived with police officers and sealed the premises.

The other party allegedly claimed ownership based on a Governor’s Consent.

Omotola said the opposing party claimed that the original owner of the property was Samuel Oladele Ige, who allegedly sold it to the late Alhaji Ganiyu Amusan, the father of businessman Tayo Amusan.

He said CFL Group investigated the alleged ownership history and contacted members of Samuel Ige’s family.

According to Omotola, the family said Samuel Ige died in 2012, making it impossible for him to have personally sold the property in 2015.

He also said the family told the company that Ige’s will contained no indication that he owned the property at 24 Adeola Odeku Street.

Omotola said further investigations into the claim involving Alhaji Ganiyu Amusan also raised questions because Amusan died in 1994.

He argued that this meant Amusan could not have personally purchased the property in 2015, as allegedly stated in the disputed ownership history.

Disputed affidavit and registry records

Omotola said investigators also found a police affidavit allegedly sworn by Samuel Ige in 2015 declaring that his original land certificate had been lost.

He said Ige’s first son, Niyi, disputed the authenticity of the document, alleging that the photograph and signature appearing on the affidavit did not belong to his late father.

He further alleged that a letter of objection purportedly written by Samuel Ige before the Governor’s Consent was issued was received by the Land Registry on September 1, 2015.

Omotola said this raised further questions because Ige had died three years earlier.

According to him, the Ige family subsequently petitioned the Land Registry over the disputed documents.

He said the registry found sufficient merit in the complaint to invite beneficiaries of the disputed Governor’s Consent to proceedings that could result in the deregistration of the consent.

Omotola alleged that the beneficiaries failed to appear on two occasions.

He further alleged that construction continued on the property while the beneficiaries relied on security agencies.

Landowners demand correction of records

Omotola said the affected landowners were demanding that the disputed Governor’s Consent be deregistered and that the land records be corrected to reflect what they described as the legitimate ownership of the property.

He warned that if the Lagos State Land Registry failed to take action within seven days, the affected parties would approach the courts.

The proposed legal action, according to Omotola, would include a claim for N5 billion in damages.

He insisted that the affected landowners were not beneficiaries of any corruption within the land administration system.

Rather, he said they were seeking protection for properties they had legitimately acquired and accountability in the management of land records.

Omotola called on the Lagos State Government to investigate the alleged manipulation of land documents and strengthen the state’s land registry system.

He said stronger safeguards were needed to prevent fraudulent titles from being introduced into official records and subsequently used in property transactions and financial dealings.

The allegations made by Omotola concern specific property ownership and land documentation and remain matters for the relevant authorities and, if pursued, the courts to determine.

The post Lagos Land Title Dispute: CFL Group Gives Lagos Land Registry Seven Days to Resolve Title Dispute appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Teachers have been urged to consider real estate investment as a long-term strategy for building wealth and securing their financial future.

The call was made at a one-day conference themed “Teachers Must Become Landlords,” organised by Real Estate Synergy Support Associate (RESSA).

The conference focused on helping teachers understand property ownership and develop practical strategies for building assets beyond their salaries.

Speaking at the event, RESSA Executive Director and conference convener Festus Ibiam said the initiative seeks to change how teachers view their earnings.

He said teachers should not see their profession only as a source of income. Instead, they should explore opportunities to build wealth, own property and create lasting assets.

Ibiam encouraged teachers to use cooperative contributions and disciplined savings to acquire land gradually.

He said many teachers, particularly those with lower incomes, want to own homes but often consider property ownership financially out of reach.

According to him, RESSA created the initiative to provide practical pathways for teachers to become property owners.

“We deliberately chose teachers because of their strategic role in nation-building,” Ibiam said, noting their influence on children and society.

He added that financially secure teachers could approach retirement with greater confidence and provide stronger support for their families and communities.

Ibiam also urged the government to introduce policies that could help address Nigeria’s housing deficit and create an enabling environment for property ownership.

He said the Nigerian Union of Teachers (NUT), teachers’ cooperatives and financial institutions could also play important roles.

According to him, cooperatives can encourage collective participation, while financial institutions could develop financing options that make property ownership more affordable.

Ibiam described land as a long-term investment that can appreciate and provide a foundation for housing, income generation and inheritance.

He said property ownership could also provide greater stability for teachers approaching retirement.

Speaking on “Building Wealth on Teachers’ Salaries,” retired principal Folarin Sunkanmi Quadri urged teachers to focus on how they manage their earnings.

Quadri said earning a high income does not automatically create wealth, stressing the importance of saving and investing consistently.

He encouraged teachers to explore additional income opportunities using their professional skills.

These opportunities, he said, include home lessons, online tutoring, CBT training and writing or marking WAEC and NECO papers.

The speakers stressed that teachers can combine disciplined savings, cooperative contributions, property investment and additional income to strengthen their financial position.

The conference also reinforced the argument that teachers’ financial wellbeing can have wider implications for families, schools and communities.

RESSA said its broader goal is to help teachers become landlords, investors and financially empowered citizens.

For teachers, the central message from the conference was that property ownership does not necessarily require immediate large capital. With structured planning and gradual investment, land ownership can become a long-term financial objective.

The initiative also places responsibility on government and financial institutions to create more accessible pathways for lower-income workers to participate in the housing and property market.

The post Teachers Urged to Invest in Real Estate for Financial Security appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

The Taraba State Government has announced a ban on the sale, allocation, or transfer of government-owned land without prior approval from the appropriate authorities, in a move aimed at strengthening land administration, improving transparency, and curbing illegal land transactions.

According to the state government, the directive forms part of ongoing efforts to protect public assets, prevent unauthorized land allocations, and ensure that government land is managed in accordance with existing laws and administrative procedures.

Officials warned that no individual, agency, or institution has the authority to sell, allocate, lease, or transfer government land without obtaining formal approval from the state government. They cautioned that any transaction carried out outside the approved process would be considered invalid and could attract legal consequences.

The government explained that the policy is intended to eliminate irregularities in land administration, reduce land disputes, and safeguard public property from encroachment and fraudulent transactions. It also reaffirmed its commitment to improving accountability in the management of state-owned land.

Prospective land buyers, developers, and investors were advised to conduct proper due diligence before acquiring any property and to verify land titles and allocation documents through the relevant government agencies. Authorities stressed that compliance with official procedures would help protect investors from fraudulent land deals and ownership disputes.

Urban planning experts say effective land administration is essential for sustainable housing development, infrastructure planning, and investor confidence. They noted that transparent allocation processes and reliable land records contribute to orderly urban growth while reducing conflicts over land ownership.

Stakeholders have welcomed the directive, describing it as a step toward improving governance in the land sector. They urged the government to complement the policy with digitised land records, faster title processing, and stronger enforcement to create a more efficient and transparent land administration system across Taraba State.

The post Taraba Introduces New Approval Process for Government Land Transactions appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Kano State Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf has allocated more than 2,000 plots of land to beneficiaries over a two-day exercise, saying the initiative is aimed at expanding land ownership, reducing the housing deficit, and creating long-term wealth for residents across the state. The exercise forms part of the administration’s broader housing and land reform agenda.

According to the Kano State Government, the first phase of the allocation involved the presentation of land allocation documents to political appointees, including Senior Special Assistants, Special Assistants, Senior Special Reporters, Special Reporters, and Personal Assistants. The second phase saw polling unit agents, popularly known as Yan Akwatu, receive allocation documents, bringing the total number of allocated plots to over 2,000 within two days.

Governor Yusuf said the programme is intended to improve access to land ownership, empower families through property acquisition, and support efforts to address Kano State’s housing deficit. Represented by the Commissioner for Public Procurement, Project Monitoring and Evaluation, Nura Iro Ma’aji, the governor said his administration remains committed to implementing programmes that benefit residents while fulfilling promises made to supporters.

The Commissioner for Lands and Physical Planning, Abduljabbar Umar, described the initiative as a significant step towards improving access to land and encouraging housing development. He urged beneficiaries to retain the allocated plots for future development rather than selling them immediately, noting that property ownership can serve as a valuable long-term asset.

The land allocation programme has attracted public attention, with supporters describing it as a strategy to expand homeownership and stimulate housing development, while critics have questioned the timing and selection of beneficiaries. Governor Yusuf has defended the initiative, maintaining that it is designed to reduce the housing deficit and improve citizens’ welfare through wider access to land ownership.

Housing experts note that increasing access to serviced land can support residential development and economic growth when accompanied by transparent allocation processes, infrastructure provision, and effective land administration. They argue that land allocation programmes are most impactful when beneficiaries are able to develop the plots into habitable housing and related infrastructure.

The post Kano Governor Allocates Over 2,000 Plots of Land to Expand Homeownership appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

The demolition of 35 shops along Gasikiya College Road, Ijora-Badia, Lagos, has pitted displaced traders against the new landowner, Omopariola Adeleye, who insists the exercise was legal.

“I lawfully bought the land through a family representative, Kehinde Da-Costa Lawrence, who provided the deed of sale, letter of administration, and other supporting documents. Occupants were given ample notice to vacate, yet most ignored it,” Adeleye said, displaying his purchase documents to journalists.

Community leaders backed his claims. The Baale of Oridilu, Chief Lateef Olatunji, said the sale was acknowledged by the Lawrence family, adding: “Trouble only started when he moved to reclaim the shops built along the fence of his land.”

But Taiwo Alonge-Lawrence, a member of the family, alleged that the demolition was illegal and carried out with government support despite his lawyer submitting proof of ownership.

Traders say they are now struggling. “I bake outside now and borrow space when it rains. My drinks business has collapsed because I no longer have a place to keep my freezer,” said caterer Basirat Saidu.

Adeleye claims he offered dialogue and compensation. “He asked them for account numbers to compensate them, but they refused,” said a resident, Rilwan.

The post Ijora-Badia Demolition: Landowners Defend Action as Traders Lament Losses appeared first on Housing TV Africa.