Page 1 of 2


Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 9:47 am
by rfinmdusa
Hi All,

I've been on this forum previously but my account seems to have been removed some time ago. I got a new account so here goes.

My wife and I have been looking for oceanfront property in Chile for several years now. We live in the US and want to spend Jan-March in Chile when we retire. We are looking for oceanfront property from approximately Valdivia south. I have made 3 trips in the past 3 years driving along the coast scouting areas and we are considering several properties at the moment.

The issues that have come up that we are not sure about have to do with does anyone actually own the land up to the ocean. We have been told that there is a 50 meter strip in front of all properties from the mean high tide that no one can own. Also if a new title is issued for the property the 50 meters changes to 300 meters in case the Navy needs to build on the land for national defense. We don't think the Navy will need any of the properties we are considering but the 50-300 meter issue brings up another potential issue with people putting sheds on the beach areas to keep there seaweed harvesting equipment on. The term "Alguleros" is what we have herd as to the people that harvest seaweeds/kelp/? So our questions are;
1. Does anyone know about the new title 300 meter vs 50 meter?
2. Do the Alguleros have a right to put their sheds on the 50 meter strip?
3. Can they live in the sheds or make the shed more of a house than a shed?
4. Are there squatters rights in Chile? We were told a long time ago that there is no squatters rights in Chile but don't know how the Algulero sheds fit into this.

Not the average where can I find... type question but any help on this would be appreciated.




Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:48 am
by admin
It is 8 meters from the highest tide. You must in theory provide for public access, if there is not already a natural access. You can be forced to open access, but it is a rather lengthy process that generally only occures with prime public tourist spots.

As for squaters, there are no squater rights in chile.

The fishermen you are refering to building shacks are squatting, but on public property.
It is up to the goverment to boot them.

The closest thing to squater rights is there
is a system by which title can be cleared if some one sits on a property for many years, but that is very specialized set of laws that has been overturned by the courts a lot recently when it has been abused for squating in the sense that you think about squatting.


Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:55 am
by rfinmdusa
Thanks for clarifying the issues. Big difference between 8 and 50 meters in our opinion.


Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 4:24 pm
by nwdiver
I have looked at water front properties that would entirely be within the 50m distance of high water, that are privately owned.

It is interesting that Chile has taken a piece of British Common Law on riparian right of access to the beach, but not so strange I guess when you look at Chiles maritime tradition and its connection with England on maritime matters.


Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:09 pm
by otravers
Between the risk of tsunamis and regular storms, we're happy to *not* be directly on the beach, but rather on the other side of the road, behind and above another house. We're still just 50 meters from the ocean, but more importantly about 20 meters above it. I'd think long and hard before buying anything less than 10 meters above sea level. We had waves of 5-6 meters a few weeks ago in Concon.


Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 9:54 pm
by admin
The last Tsunami, reached heights of 30 meters in some parts of the Chilean coast and went km in land.


Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:17 pm
by eeuunikkeiexpat
Better to be on a hill around a kilo from the beach that also happens to be an official tsunami evacuation route...

The recent freak multi-day wave event caused more damage just south of here than the tsunami. The lower part of the beach of Santo Domingo has been completely eroded away. A three foot drop separates the still sandy upper beach and the rocky lower beach. The waves covered the upper beach and reached the sidewalk and evidently began undermining the foundation.


Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:05 pm
by zer0nz
patagoniax wrote:.
It seems as though there may be some additional considerations in the "oceanfront title restrictions" topic.

Apparently the Bachelet administration made some sort of deal or promise to a deal with indigenous groups to rights to a considerable portion of the Los Ríos (XIV región) coast. The Mapuche coalition is now demanding rights to about 75 percent of the coastline in that region, much of which is already privately owned (above the high tide line). One of the effects of the pending resolution has been a virtual halt to commercial concessions and similar development along that coastline. In theory, a foreigner who sought to acquire coastline property in this region, unaware of this issue and the ongoing deliberations, could be caught up in the evolving conflict (ergo, the Mapuche are known to use Real Bullets when such redistribution programmes don't work in their favour). Right now the discussions on implementation are said to be seeking to not displace those with current businesses such as fisheries in this coastal area. However, a vacant property not involved in such commercial use could be subject to what may ultimately become a sort of expropriation. The programme would allow the Mapuches to "administer" up to about 75 percent of that region's coastal area. In addition, the success of the Mapuches in obtaining rights to the coastal strip has had the effect of magnifying their parallel efforts to obtain additional lands already in private cultivation elsewhere in the region.

Recent article, in the language of the realm: ... 48029e.htm
thought i was reading an article about the maori in new zealand for a bit there!!!


Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:12 pm
by admin
One of the effects of Bachelet administration was to make a mess out of a mess, by promising all kinds of stuff to shut groups up in Chile, and then not following through.


Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:13 pm
by admin
By the way, she did that to the students and the mapuche. Guess what has happened?


Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:19 pm
by zer0nz
admin wrote:By the way, she did that to the students and the mapuche. Guess what has happened?

now we just need to find a way to get the students to fight with the mapuche and leave them all to it :)


Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 8:49 pm
by oregon woodsmoke
What? Wait a minute. Fishermen squatting at high tide?

I'm on it. Itty bitty travel trailer, a fishing pole, and all of a sudden I have beach front property. Pull it down the road to the next beach if the government comes to move me out.

And to think, I was planning on paying money for beach property. I've got a new plan now.