ORS 100.705
Sale prohibited prior to issuance of disclosure statement

  • exception
  • distribution
  • use of disclosure statement


Except as provided in ORS 100.665 (Exemption to certain disclosure and notice requirements), a developer, or an agent of the developer may not enter into a unit sales agreement prior to the issuance of the disclosure statement for the condominium.


A copy of the disclosure statement for a condominium must be given to the prospective purchaser of a unit in the condominium by the developer or an agent of the developer, not later than the date the unit sales agreement is fully executed by all parties. The developer shall take a receipt from the prospective purchaser upon delivery of a copy of the disclosure statement, and such receipts must be kept on file within this state in the possession of the developer or the agent of the developer subject to inspection by the Real Estate Commissioner for a period of three years from the date the receipt is taken.


The disclosure statement may not be used for advertising purposes unless it is used in its entirety. No portion of the disclosure statement may be underscored, highlighted, italicized or printed in larger or heavier type than the balance of the statement unless the true copy of the statement so emphasizes such portion.


The commissioner may furnish at cost copies of the disclosure statement for the use of developers.


Violations of this section are subject to the provisions of ORS 336.184 (Oregon Student Information Protection Act) and 646.605 (Definitions for ORS 336.184 and 646.605 to 646.652) to 646.656 (Remedies supplementary to existing statutory or common law remedies), in addition to other sanctions provided by law. [Formerly 94.384; 2019 c.69 §30]
§§ 100.005 to 100.910

(formerly 94.004 to 94.480)

See also annotations under ORS 91.505 to 91.675 in permanent edition.

Notes of Decisions

Even if declarations filed for purpose of bringing development within condominium law were defective for failure to conform to statutory requirements, development was not vitiated but deficiencies would constitute mistake in transaction thus making instrument eligible for reformation in equity. Dickey v. Barnes, Mossberg, 268 Or 226, 519 P2d 1252 (1974)

Developers of planned unit developments which are not organized as condominiums cannot claim the tax advantages of the Unit Ownership Law. Brooks Resources v. Dept. of Rev., 276 Or 1177, 558 P2d 312 (1976)

Purchasers of condominium units are automatically members of the unit owners association and subject to its declaration and bylaws; where those declarations and bylaws provide discretion to the Board of Directors to assess for fees necessary to create a "unified plan for the development and operation" of the condominium, and the purchaser has alleged no abuse of discretion, the judgment of the Board of Directors is upheld. Assn. of Unit Owners of the Inn of the Seventh Mountain v. Gruenfeld, 277 Or 259, 560 P2d 641 (1977)

Acquisition of property by condominium association is not limited to property subject to annexation requirements. Gier's Liquor v. Association of Unit Owners, 124 Or App 365, 862 P2d 560 (1993)

Law Review Citations

16 WLR 253 (1979)

Chapter 100

Notes of Decisions

This chapter does not authorize regulation by the Real Estate Division of sales of "right to use" time share interests in condominiums. Royal Aloha Partners v. Real Estate Division, 59 Or App 564, 651 P2d 1350 (1982)

Law Review Citations

18 WLR 95 (1982)


Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021