In the Kharkiv region, the attention of public monitoring initiatives was drawn to the activities of the state registrar of the Solonytsivka settlement council, Igor Teslenko. According to sources and published materials, his registration actions were repeatedly accompanied by changes in the technical parameters of real estate objects, which significantly differ from the initial data specified in the owners' documents.
These are situations where the area of real estate indicated in the title documents does not match the area that appears in the state register after registration. Such cases are recorded against the backdrop of broader complaints by public organizations about the lack of transparency of certain procedures in the field of state registration.
Individual episodes have already become the subject of public discussion. In particular, in December 2024, the updated area of non-residential premises at 122 Heroes of Kharkiv Avenue appeared in the register: instead of 139.7 sq.m. — 237.5 sq.m. Open data does not contain information about the availability of permits for reconstruction or completed construction.
A similar situation was recorded at the entrance of Ostap Vyshny, 3, where the area of the object increased from 80.4 sq.m to 130.3 sq.m. The third case is a house on Chopina Street, 32, in which the area increased from 213.9 sq.m to 217.5 sq.m. In all the described episodes, the basis for the changes was only the technical passport, although the law requires the presence of documents confirming the reconstruction.
Public activists link such actions to the broader context of the work of the Eastern Interregional Department of the Ministry of Justice. According to them, a practice is being formed in the region that allows legalization of reconstructions without appropriate permits, which creates a "shadow" market for technical adjustment of real estate and actually stimulates unauthorized reconstructions.
This is not the first time that Kharkiv region has been in the spotlight due to similar cases. Due to atypical changes in parameters, property owners have been effectively bypassing formal procedures for years, relying on the decisions of individual registrars. Such episodes raise questions about control over access to registers and compliance of decisions with legislative norms.
The situation surrounding registrar Ihor Teslenko is only part of a broader problem that anti-corruption activists point to: loopholes remain in the state registration of real estate that allow manipulation of technical data of objects. This, they believe, creates serious risks for both the real estate market and the functioning of state registers in general.
