Contract4Deed Wiki

Colorado

21 min read

Colorado — Contract for Deed / Land Contract

Legal information, not legal advice. Verify against the cited primary sources before acting. Statutes in this area are frequently amended. Last verified: 2026-06-08.

Colorado is a hybrid jurisdiction. It has no statutory forfeiture-cancellation code for contracts for deed (unlike minnesota or texas). Instead, on a buyer’s default a vendor may pursue forfeiture and recover possession through a forcible entry and detainer (FED) action — but the trial court has equitable discretion to refuse forfeiture and require the vendor to foreclose the contract as an equitable mortgage when the buyer has built substantial equity. That discretion is the holding of paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray-1999, applying the equitable-factors test of grombone-v-krekel-1988. Colorado’s one CFD-specific statute, C.R.S. § 38-35-126, is a property-tax-escrow and notice regime: it forces tax payments through the public trustee and lets the buyer void the contract (recovering all payments, statutory interest, and fees) if the seller skips the escrow designation or the county-treasurer notice.

0. Identity & Terminology

  • In-state name(s): “contract for deed” and “installment land contract” are both used and are treated as the same instrument. C.R.S. § 38-35-126(1)(b) defines a “contract for deed to real property” and expressly states it “includes installment land contracts.” The buyer is the vendee/purchaser; the seller is the vendor/seller. — C.R.S. § 38-35-126(1)(b), https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126
  • Recognition: statutory and common law. The instrument is defined and partly regulated by statute (§ 38-35-126; § 38-38-305) but the core default-remedy law (forfeiture vs. foreclosure) is decisional/common law (Grombone; Paraguay). — C.R.S. § 38-38-305, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-38-305
  • Statutory home: No single CFD code. The relevant provisions are scattered: C.R.S. § 38-35-126 (Contract for deed — escrow of tax moneys — written notice; Title 38, Art. 35, conveyancing); C.R.S. § 38-38-305 (within Title 38, Art. 38, Foreclosure Sales — installment land contract vendee considered an owner, vendor considered a lienor for redemption purposes); usury at C.R.S. §§ 5-12-101, 5-12-103; statute of frauds at C.R.S. § 38-10-108; documentary fee at C.R.S. § 39-13-102. — https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126
  • Remedy regime: hybrid. Not strict forfeiture, not pure statutory cancellation, not categorical treat-as-mortgage. On default a vendor may seek forfeiture/possession by FED, but the court may require foreclosure as an equitable mortgage where the equities (substantial vendee equity, improvements, short/non-willful default, adequate maintenance) so demand. — paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray-1999, 981 P.2d 681 (Colo. App. 1999), https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1160933/paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray/; grombone-v-krekel-1988, 754 P.2d 777 (Colo. App. 1988), https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1172101/grombone-v-krekel/; see forfeiture-vs-foreclosure.

1. Formation & Mandatory Disclosures

  • Statute of frauds: Writing required. “Every contract for the leasing for a longer period than one year or for the sale of any lands or any interest in lands is void unless the contract or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration is in writing and subscribed by the party by whom the lease or sale is to be made.” — C.R.S. § 38-10-108, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-10-108
  • Mandatory disclosures: No Texas-style affirmative CFD disclosure schedule (no statutory tax-delinquency / lien / condition / annual-accounting / payoff disclosure code specific to contracts for deed). Colorado’s one CFD-specific formation mandate is the tax-escrow + written-notice regime of § 38-35-126 (below). General residential transactions are subject to the usual seller’s-property-disclosure and Colorado Real Estate Commission contract/disclosure practice, but there is no CFD-specific mandatory-disclosure statute with a per-day or rescission penalty schedule of the post-2005 reform type. (See needs_verification re: whether any CREC rule imposes CFD-specific disclosures.) — C.R.S. § 38-35-126, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126
    • The § 38-35-126 tax-escrow + notice duties (the closest thing to a mandatory disclosure): A contract for deed is one where the purchaser takes possession and “the rights and responsibilities of ownership” but the deed is not delivered for at least 180 days after the latest execution date and not until stated conditions (e.g. full or partial payment) are met (§ 38-35-126(1)(b)). For such contracts the parties must designate the county public trustee as escrow agent for the buyer’s monthly property-tax payments (§ 38-35-126(1)(a)), and within 90 days of execution/delivery the seller must file with the county treasurer a written notice of transfer by contract for deed (name and legal address of seller and purchaser, legal description, execution/delivery date, and the date/conditions of deed delivery) and file a real-estate transfer declaration with the county assessor (§ 38-35-126(2)). — https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126
    • Penalty for omission: The buyer may VOID any contract for deed that fails to designate the public trustee as tax-escrow agent or for which no written notice is filed with the treasurer or assessor. On voidance the buyer is entitled to the return of all payments made, with statutory interest (per C.R.S. § 5-12-102) and reasonable attorney fees and costs. This avoidance right expires seven years after the latest execution date unless exercised before then. — C.R.S. § 38-35-126(3), https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126
    • Escrow/voiding carve-out: The escrow-designation and voiding provisions (subsecs. (1) and (3)) do not apply if the seller complies with the notice duty in subsec. (2), the property is not subdivided into sub-one-acre parcels, and the seller pays the annual property taxes (or posts a bond / letter of credit) — i.e., a compliant seller who keeps taxes current can avoid the public-trustee escrow but not the notice-filing duty. — C.R.S. § 38-35-126(4), https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126
  • Recording requirement: No general statutory deadline to record the contract itself, but § 38-35-126(2) imposes a 90-day deadline on the seller to file the notice of transfer with the county treasurer and a transfer declaration with the assessor — backed by the buyer’s voiding remedy. Recording the contract (or a memorandum) is permitted under Colorado’s race-notice recording act and is strongly advisable to perfect the vendee’s interest. — C.R.S. § 38-35-126(2), https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126; recording act, C.R.S. § 38-35-109, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-109
  • Annual accounting statement: No CFD-specific statutory annual-accounting mandate located. (See needs_verification.)
  • Prepayment: No CFD-specific statutory prepayment-penalty prohibition located; contract terms govern, subject to the usury ceiling. (See needs_verification.)
  • Usury / interest cap: Colorado’s legal rate is 8% per annum where no rate is agreed (C.R.S. § 5-12-101), but parties may stipulate a higher rate “not exceeding forty-five percent per annum” (C.R.S. § 5-12-103). A rate above 45% is criminal usury, a class 6 felony (C.R.S. § 18-15-104). A seller-carry CFD is an “instrument of writing” within § 5-12-103, so the 45% ceiling is the operative cap. — C.R.S. § 5-12-103, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_5-12-103; C.R.S. § 18-15-104, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_18-15-104

2. Buyer’s Equitable Interest

  • Equitable title passes / equitable conversion recognized: Yes. A contract for deed gives the vendee possession and “the rights and responsibilities of ownership” pending deed delivery (§ 38-35-126(1)(b)), and for foreclosure/redemption purposes the statute treats the vendee “as an owner” and the vendor as a lienor “for the unpaid portion of the purchase price.” Colorado recognizes equitable conversion; the vendor holds legal title as security. — C.R.S. § 38-38-305(2)–(3), https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-38-305; see equitable-conversion.
  • Buyer’s interest recordable: Yes. The contract or a memorandum may be recorded under the recording act (C.R.S. § 38-35-109); the seller’s § 38-35-126(2) notice-of-transfer is also filed with the treasurer. Recording protects the vendee against subsequent claims through the vendor. — https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-109
  • Buyer’s interest insurable: Yes; vendee’s-interest coverage and owner’s policies at deed delivery are available from Colorado title insurers.
  • Risk of loss: Contract-governed; the vendee in possession holds the equitable and possessory interest and ordinarily bears risk of loss absent a contrary clause (equitable conversion).
  • Improvements and waste: The vendee in possession may improve the property; improvements made and equity built are precisely the facts the court weighs under Grombone in deciding whether forfeiture is unconscionable. — grombone-v-krekel-1988, 754 P.2d 777 (Colo. App. 1988).

3. Default & Remedies → see forfeiture-vs-foreclosure

  • Primary remedy: Forfeiture/possession by FED, subject to equitable conversion to foreclosure. There is no statutory cancellation procedure for CFDs. On default the vendor typically brings a forcible entry and detainer action (C.R.S. § 13-40-101 et seq.) to recover possession and enforce the contract forfeiture; the vendee may defend by invoking equity. — paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray-1999, 981 P.2d 681 (Colo. App. 1999), https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1160933/paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray/
  • Forfeiture available? Yes — but not as of right. Forfeiture is available and is not barred by statute; § 38-38-305’s “vendee as owner” language describes redemption rights when a foreclosure is conducted and does not require a vendor to foreclose as a matter of law (Paraguay’s holding). But the trial court has discretion to refuse forfeiture and require foreclosure as an equitable mortgage. — paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray-1999, 981 P.2d 681; C.R.S. § 38-38-305, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-38-305
    • Substantial-equity bar: Exists as an equitable (not bright-line) standard. There is no numeric threshold; the court weighs the Grombone factors — the amount and length of the default, the vendee’s accumulated equity, whether the vendee made improvements, whether the property was adequately maintained (and the willfulness of the default). Substantial vendee equity is the factor most likely to defeat forfeiture and require foreclosure. — grombone-v-krekel-1988, 754 P.2d 777 (Colo. App. 1988), https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1172101/grombone-v-krekel/
    • Compare skendzel-v-marshall-1973 (Ind.): Colorado reaches the same substantial-equity protection through case-by-case equitable discretion in an FED action, rather than Indiana’s categorical foreclosure rule. Contrast sebastian-v-floyd-1979 (Ky.), which abolished forfeiture outright — Colorado has not gone that far.
  • Statutory cancellation: None. Colorado has no § 559.21-style (Minnesota) or § 5.064-style (Texas) statutory notice-and-cure cancellation procedure for contracts for deed. Cure/redemption rights arise only if the matter is treated as a foreclosure (then the Article 38 redemption framework applies, with the vendee “as an owner” and vendor “as a lienor”). — C.R.S. § 38-38-305, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-38-305
  • Judicial foreclosure required when: When the trial court, weighing the Grombone factors (chiefly substantial vendee equity), determines that forfeiture would be unconscionable — then the contract is treated as an equitable mortgage and the vendor must foreclose, giving the vendee redemption rights. Colorado foreclosures of real-property security ordinarily run through the public trustee (Title 38, Art. 38), but a contract foreclosed as an equitable mortgage is typically a judicial foreclosure. — paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray-1999, 981 P.2d 681.
  • Acceleration enforceable? Conditional / contract-governed. No CFD-specific statutory rule located; enforceability follows ordinary Colorado contract and equitable-mortgage principles. (See needs_verification.)
  • Restitution offset on forfeiture? Not by statute. Where forfeiture is allowed, the vendee forfeits payments; where the equities make that result unconscionable, the court’s remedy is to require foreclosure (with redemption) rather than to order a restitution offset. The buyer’s separate voiding remedy under § 38-35-126(3) (return of all payments + statutory interest + fees) applies only to the tax-escrow/notice violation, not to ordinary default. — C.R.S. § 38-35-126(3), https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126
  • Seller’s other remedies: specific performance / action for the purchase price, damages, FED for possession (forfeiture), and — where equity requires — foreclosure of the contract as an equitable mortgage.

▸ For Sellers / Operators — Colorado is a hybrid state, and that ambiguity is the deal-defining fact. (1) Forfeiture is available but not guaranteed: you may bring an FED to recover possession on default, but a buyer with substantial equity can ask the court to convert the matter into a foreclosure as an equitable mortgage (with redemption) under the Grombone factors — Paraguay v. Gray confirms the court’s discretion. Do not assume summary possession against an equity-rich buyer. (2) There is no statutory cure/notice cancellation procedure to follow — but also no statutory shortcut; budget for contested FED litigation. (3) § 38-35-126 is the compliance trap: if the deed is delivered 180+ days out, you must designate the public trustee for tax escrow (or qualify for the subsec. (4) carve-out by keeping taxes current on a 1-acre-plus parcel) and file the notice of transfer with the county treasurer within 90 days plus a transfer declaration with the assessor — or the buyer can VOID the contract and recover every payment with interest and fees (§ 38-35-126(3)) for up to seven years. (4) Watch the 45% usury ceiling (§ 5-12-103; criminal above that), your federal threshold exposure (§ 4), and due-on-sale on any wrap (§ 5).

▸ For Buyers — Two protections matter most. First, on default your equity is your shield: plead the Grombone factors (your equity, improvements, maintenance, the size/length of the default) to convert the seller’s FED into a foreclosure with redemption rights (§ 38-38-305 treats you “as an owner”). Second, if the seller never set up the public-trustee tax escrow or never filed the county-treasurer notice, you may void the contract and recover all payments plus statutory interest and attorney fees (§ 38-35-126(3)).

3b. Remedies — Advanced

  • Election of remedies: The vendor chooses among FED/forfeiture, suit for the price/damages, specific performance, or foreclosure; the court’s equitable discretion may override an attempted forfeiture by requiring foreclosure. No rigid one-shot election doctrine specific to CFDs located. (See needs_verification.)
  • Deficiency after forfeiture/foreclosure: Where forfeiture is allowed the seller recovers the property and retains payments (no deficiency mechanism built into FED); where the contract is foreclosed as an equitable mortgage, ordinary Colorado deficiency principles in foreclosure would apply. (See needs_verification for any CFD-specific deficiency limit.)
  • Anti-forfeiture / equitable relief from forfeiture: Yes — this is the heart of Colorado’s regime. A court will deny forfeiture and require foreclosure (or otherwise relieve against forfeiture) where enforcing it would be unconscionable on the Grombone factors, chiefly substantial vendee equity. — grombone-v-krekel-1988, 754 P.2d 777; paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray-1999, 981 P.2d 681.
  • Ejectment vs. eviction path: A defaulting CFD buyer is pursued through a forcible entry and detainer (FED) action (C.R.S. § 13-40-101 et seq.) — the summary possession statute — but the buyer is not a mere tenant: the buyer may assert ownership/equitable-mortgage defenses that, if successful, route the dispute into foreclosure instead. — paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray-1999, 981 P.2d 681.
  • Quiet title after cancellation: Where forfeiture is upheld by FED judgment, the judgment and recorded documents establish the vendor’s possession/title of record; a separate quiet-title (C.R.S. § 38-41-101 / C.R.C.P. 105) may be used to clear the vendee’s recorded interest. (See needs_verification for routine practice.)
  • Forfeited payments treatment: Forfeiture of installments is permitted where the equities allow it; the doctrinal check is unconscionability/substantial-equity (the court converts to foreclosure rather than policing the forfeiture as a penalty clause). — grombone-v-krekel-1988, 754 P.2d 777.
  • Intervening seller-lien risk to buyer: The vendor holds record legal title during the contract; a judgment lien or other encumbrance against the vendor can attach to the vendor’s interest. The vendee’s defense is recording the contract (§ 38-35-109) and the § 38-35-126(2) notice of transfer.

4. Federal Overlay (as applied in-state) → see dodd-frank-seller-financing, safe-act-mlo

  • Dodd-Frank exposure: Federal seller-financing rules apply in Colorado with no special state carve-out. A natural-person seller financing one dwelling in 12 months may use the ≤1-property exclusion (no balloon limit, no ATR test) and the ≤3-property exclusion (with ability-to-repay, no negative amortization), per the mortgage-originator definition and seller-financer exclusion (15 U.S.C. § 1602(dd)(2)(E); 12 C.F.R. § 1026.36(a)(4)–(5); § 1026.43). — see dodd-frank-seller-financing.
  • SAFE Act MLO licensing: A seller who exceeds the federal seller-financer thresholds may need a mortgage loan originator license. Colorado administers SAFE-Act MLO licensing through the Division of Real Estate (Department of Regulatory Agencies / DORA) under the Mortgage Loan Originator Licensing and Mortgage Company Registration Act, C.R.S. § 12-10-701 et seq. — C.R.S. § 12-10-701, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_12-10-701; see safe-act-mlo.
  • State consumer-protection overlay / CFPB enforcement notes: Colorado has no comprehensive CFD consumer-protection statute of the Minnesota ch. 559A type; its CFD-specific protection is the § 38-35-126 tax-escrow/notice regime (with the buyer’s voiding remedy). General unfair-practices exposure runs through the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, C.R.S. § 6-1-105. The post-2016 national CFPB/state-AG scrutiny of predatory contract-for-deed selling forms the compliance backdrop. — C.R.S. § 6-1-105, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_6-1-105

5. Title, Recording & Wraps → see garn-st-germain-due-on-sale

  • Memorandum recording: Permitted. The contract or a memorandum may be recorded under the race-notice recording act (C.R.S. § 38-35-109) to give constructive notice; § 38-35-126(2) separately requires the seller’s notice-of-transfer filing with the county treasurer within 90 days. — https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-109
  • Garn-St. Germain due-on-sale: A contract for deed is a transfer that can trigger a due-on-sale clause. Garn-St. Germain (12 U.S.C. § 1701j-3) preempts state law and makes due-on-sale clauses generally enforceable, subject to the enumerated residential exemptions (none of which squarely covers a straight wrap to an unrelated buyer). A Colorado vendor wrapping an existing mortgage risks acceleration. — see garn-st-germain-due-on-sale.
  • Underlying-mortgage / wrap: Permitted but risky. Colorado law does not prohibit wraps, and they are used here (often via “installment land contract” structures), but a wrapped senior lender can call or foreclose the underlying loan even if the buyer pays the seller on time; disclosure of the underlying loan to the buyer is prudent and material. (No CFD-specific Colorado wrap-disclosure statute located — contrast Minnesota § 559A.04; see needs_verification.) — see garn-st-germain-due-on-sale.
  • Deed delivery: The deed is delivered at payoff / on satisfaction of stated conditions — by definition a contract for deed withholds the deed for at least 180 days and until the conditions (e.g. full or partial payment) are met (§ 38-35-126(1)(b)). Escrow of the executed deed (commonly with the public trustee or a title company) is the standard mechanism. — C.R.S. § 38-35-126(1)(b), https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126
  • Marketable title at payoff: The vendor must convey marketable title at payoff; the recorded contract/notice plus the warranty deed clear the chain.
  • Title insurance: Available to buyers (vendee’s-interest coverage during the contract; owner’s policy at deed delivery) through Colorado title insurers.
  • Seller death / bankruptcy effect: The vendor’s interest (legal title + payment stream) passes to the estate or bankruptcy estate subject to the vendee’s recorded equitable interest and right to the deed on performance.

6. Tax Treatment

  • IRC § 453 installment reporting: A contract for deed is an installment sale; a non-dealer seller may report gain under IRC § 453 as principal is collected (dealer and other exceptions apply). — 26 U.S.C. § 453, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/453; see irc-453-installment-sale.
  • Property-tax responsibility: Contract-governed, and Colorado forces the mechanism: for a 180-day-plus contract for deed the buyer’s monthly property-tax payments run through the county public trustee as escrow agent, which remits to the county treasurer each April (§ 38-35-126(1)); a compliant seller can instead keep taxes current under the subsec. (4) carve-out. In practice the vendee in possession bears the property-tax burden. — C.R.S. § 38-35-126, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-35-126
  • Homestead exemption for equitable owner: Colorado’s homestead exemption (C.R.S. § 38-41-201 et seq.) protects an “owner’s” homestead; the vendee in possession is the equitable owner. (Exact eligibility of a CFD vendee for the homestead exemption — and for any senior property-tax/homestead exemption — should be confirmed; see needs_verification.) — C.R.S. § 38-41-201, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-41-201
  • Transfer / documentary fee: Colorado imposes a documentary fee of **one cent per 0.01/500), payable by the person recording the deed that conveys title — so it is due on recording the deed at payoff, not on recording the contract for deed (which does not convey title). — C.R.S. § 39-13-102, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_39-13-102
  • Mortgage registration tax: Colorado imposes no mortgage-recording/ registration tax; recording fees are nominal per-page charges.

7. Bankruptcy & Death / Divorce

  • Buyer bankruptcy: National split on whether a CFD is an executory contract (11 U.S.C. § 365) or a secured debt. Colorado’s statutory treatment of the vendee “as an owner” and the vendor as a “lienor for the unpaid portion of the purchase price” (§ 38-38-305) supports secured-debt-style characterization, but the federal bankruptcy characterization is fact- and court-specific. — C.R.S. § 38-38-305, https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-38-305; see needs_verification.
  • Seller bankruptcy: The vendor’s interest enters the estate subject to the vendee’s recorded equitable interest and right to the deed on performance.
  • Assignability by buyer: Generally assignable subject to contract terms; § 38-38-305(3) contemplates a vendee transferring a portion of the property by recorded instrument. Enforceability of an anti-assignment clause is contract-specific. — C.R.S. § 38-38-305(3), https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_38-38-305
  • Survivorship / divorce treatment: The vendee’s equitable interest is property that passes by the vendee’s estate plan/intestacy and is divisible in dissolution; no CFD-specific Colorado statute alters ordinary marital-property/survivorship rules. (See needs_verification.)

8. Case Law (real, verified)

CaseYearTopicHolding (plain English)Source
paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray-19991999remedies / forfeitureColorado’s foreclosure statutes do not require a land-contract vendor to foreclose as a matter of law; the trial court has equitable discretion to uphold forfeiture (FED possession) or to require foreclosure as an equitable mortgage.https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1160933/paraguay-place-view-trust-v-gray/
grombone-v-krekel-19881988remedies / forfeitureA vendor may recover possession on default rather than foreclose, depending on equitable factors — the amount/length of default, the vendee’s equity, improvements, and maintenance — which decide whether forfeiture stands or the contract is treated as a mortgage.https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1172101/grombone-v-krekel/

9. Edge Cases (state-specific notes)

  • garn-st-germain-due-on-sale — Colorado does not bar wraps; a wrapped senior loan’s due-on-sale clause remains enforceable (Garn-St. Germain), so a CFD/wrap can trigger acceleration of the underlying mortgage.
  • § 38-35-126 voiding trap — Failure to designate the public-trustee tax escrow or to file the 90-day notice of transfer lets the buyer void the contract and recover all payments + statutory interest + fees for up to seven years.
  • Substantial-equity buyer — A defaulting vendee with significant equity can convert the vendor’s FED into an equitable-mortgage foreclosure with redemption (Grombone / Paraguay).
  • 45% usury ceiling — Seller-carry interest above 45% is criminal usury (§ 18-15-104); the contractual cap is 45% (§ 5-12-103).
  • (Add: manufactured/mobile-home land contracts; SCRA servicemember protections; subdivision-control implications of selling raw land on contract.)

10. Operations

  • Where records live: County clerk and recorder (deeds, recorded contracts, memoranda; documentary fee collected here) and the county treasurer (the § 38-35-126 notice of transfer) and assessor (transfer declaration); the county public trustee acts as tax-escrow agent and as the foreclosure officer.
  • Recorder portals: County-by-county clerk-and-recorder e-recording / search portals (e.g., Denver, El Paso, Arapahoe).
  • Who may draft (UPL notes): Colorado Real Estate Commission approved/standard forms exist for real-estate transactions; preparing CFDs for others raises UPL exposure, and contested forfeiture/FED-or-foreclosure litigation is commonly run through counsel given the fact-bound Grombone analysis.
  • Typical costs: Nominal recording fees + the 100 documentary fee at deed delivery; public-trustee escrow fee (C.R.S. § 38-37-104(1)(d)); litigation costs if forfeiture is contested.
  • Typical timelines: Deed withheld ≥ 180 days by definition; seller’s 90-day notice-of-transfer filing deadline; buyer’s 7-year § 38-35-126 voiding window; FED actions are summary but the equitable-mortgage defense can extend them.
  • Key agencies: County clerk and recorder, treasurer, assessor, and public trustee; Colorado Division of Real Estate (DORA) (real-estate forms; SAFE/MLO licensing, C.R.S. § 12-10-701); Colorado Department of Revenue (documentary fee / transfer declarations).
  • Useful forms: Real-estate transfer declaration (TD-1000, § 39-14-102); § 38-35-126(2) notice of transfer by contract for deed; warranty/special-warranty deed at payoff.

11. Meta

Disclaimer. This page is legal information, not legal advice, and may be out of date. Contract-for-deed statutes are frequently amended and remedies turn on facts. Colorado’s forfeiture-vs-foreclosure outcome is committed to a court’s equitable discretion on the facts. Consult a licensed Colorado attorney before drafting, enforcing, or signing an installment land contract.

Graph View

Backlinks