Early warning signals

Most poor decisions are made long before a contract is signed — at the stage where there are no documents yet, only a conversation. This page is not a catalogue of property risks: it is about what is visible in the first contact. How a direct question is answered, what stands next to an attractive number, how readily paperwork is shown. For each signal: why it is worth noticing, what follow-up question to ask, and which answer settles it and which does not.

How to use this

Three rules, without which the page turns into a list of suspicions.

1. A signal is a question, not a conclusion. Every item below has a calm explanation: the person does not know the answer, is following someone else's script, is in a hurry. What matters is not the signal itself but what happens after your question.
2. Judge the reaction, not the tone. A confident voice and a pleasant manner confirm nothing, just as brusqueness disproves nothing. Only one thing is checkable: whether a document, a date, a name or a reference appeared after the question.
3. Ask for a document, not an assurance. "Send me the page of the contract where this is written" has exactly two possible answers: a file or a refusal. "Is that definitely the case?" can be answered with anything.

And one more thing: none of the signals is a characteristic of a particular company or person. Each describes what you are still missing in order to decide.

Signals in the conversation

Urgency arrives before information

Why it is worth noticing. A shortage of time obstructs checking more effectively than any withheld information: you do not get through the contract, wait for your lawyer, or compare options. When a deadline is stated before you have the basic facts about the property, the order of operations has been reversed.

What to ask. "What exactly changes after that date, and where is it recorded — in the price list, in the reservation terms, or in the contract?"

The answer settles it if a specific mechanism with a document is named: the reservation period, the date of the next payment stage, written confirmation of terms. It does not settle it if the answer amounts to "it may be gone tomorrow" with no indication of where that rule is written down.

The answer to a direct question arrives at the wrong address

Why it is worth noticing. This is the most common and the most underrated signal. You ask about documents and are told about the district and the view. Formally the dialogue continues; in fact the question went unanswered, and half an hour later you no longer remember what you asked.

What to ask. Repeat the same question in the same words, adding nothing: "Back to my question: who is named as the seller in the contract?"

The answer settles it if the second attempt produces specifics or an honest "I don't know, I'll check and write to you". It does not settle it if the second attempt also drifts away: persistent avoidance of the same question is a fact in its own right.

Personal trust is offered instead of verification

Why it is worth noticing. Lines along the lines of "that's how everyone works here" and "why do you need a lawyer, we get on fine" move the decision out of what can be checked and into the register of relationships. The problem is not the friendliness but that, inside such a frame, awkward questions become awkward to ask — and those are exactly the questions to ask.

What to ask. "I will show the contract to my lawyer regardless. What do you think they will look at first?"

The answer settles it if the other side calmly names the contentious clauses themselves — a sign they have read the document. It does not settle it if involving a lawyer is presented as distrust or as an unnecessary expense.

One thing is said aloud, but not put in writing

Why it is worth noticing. A gap between a verbal promise and the written form is a future dispute. Whatever did not make it into the contract does not exist when there is a disagreement, however confident the tone at the meeting was.

What to ask. "Let's put this in writing: have I recorded the condition correctly in this wording?"

The answer settles it if the wording is confirmed in writing, or corrected in writing. It does not settle it if no written confirmation appears and the conversation returns to verbal assurances.

Signals in the pitch and the price list

A number with no source and no date

Why it is worth noticing. A figure with no indication of who calculated it and as of when can neither be verified nor compared with another figure of the same kind. It is not necessarily wrong — it is simply unusable for a decision.

What to ask. "Where does this number come from and as of what date? Is it a report, an internal calculation, or an estimate?"

The answer settles it if a source and a date are named and, where possible, the document itself is sent. It does not settle it if the source turns out to be "the market" or "our experience" with no way to look at the calculation.

Income shown without costs

Why it is worth noticing. A calculation containing a rent and a price but no service charges, management, vacancy, commissions, repairs or taxes is not a yield — it is the upper bound of a hope. The gap between the gross and the net picture is discovered after the purchase.

What to ask. "Show me the same calculation with costs in it: service charge, management, vacancy, commission, taxes. What figure is left?"

The answer settles it if the calculation is redone in front of you and comes out more modest — that is a normal sign. It does not settle it if costs are described as immaterial or left "to be worked out later".

"Guaranteed income" with no answer on who pays it and out of what

Why it is worth noticing. A guarantee is an obligation of a specific party, for a specific period, backed by a specific source. Until the obligated party, the term, the source of payment and the consequences of default are named, the word "guaranteed" describes an intention, not a right.

What to ask. "Who is the obligated party under the contract, for what period, out of what source are payments made, and what happens on default?"

The answer settles it if you are shown the contract clause containing all four answers. It does not settle it if the guarantee exists only in the presentation while the contract calls it an expected return.

The discount lives outside the price list

Why it is worth noticing. When special terms exist only verbally and only "today", there is no way to check what base the discount is calculated from. Sometimes this is simple untidiness, but the result is the same: you do not know your real entry price.

What to ask. "Please send the current price list and a written calculation of the final amount with all discounts and payments."

The answer settles it if a document arrives with a base price, a list of discounts and a total. It does not settle it if the final amount is quoted afresh each time and does not agree with itself.

Key parameters described in words rather than values

Why it is worth noticing. "Spacious", "within walking distance", "premium finishes", "handover soon" are impressions, not characteristics. Two properties cannot be compared on descriptions like that, and the difference surfaces at handover.

What to ask. "Give me those points as values: the area and how it is measured, the contractual handover date, the schedule of finishes and equipment."

The answer settles it if the wording is replaced by numbers and annexes. It does not settle it if the same words come back in different words.

Signals around the documents

The draft contract is not shown before payment

Why it is worth noticing. The sequence "reservation first, text later" removes the one moment at which the terms are still negotiable. After a payment your negotiating position is different, even if the money is formally refundable.

What to ask. "Please send the draft contract and annexes before any money moves — I do not sign what I have not read."

The answer settles it if the text arrives, even marked "standard form". It does not settle it if seeing the text is made conditional on paying.

The brand in the pitch and the seller in the contract are different entities

Why it is worth noticing. Obligations are carried by whoever signs the contract, not by whoever's logo is on the cover. The divergence is often entirely ordinary, but it should be explained rather than discovered by you on the last page.

What to ask. "Who is named as seller in the contract, how does that entity relate to the project brand, and who signs on its behalf under what authority document?"

The answer settles it if the structure is explained and supported by authority documents. It does not settle it if the question is treated as a formality.

The contract arrives without its annexes

Why it is worth noticing. The annexes usually hold the substance: the payment schedule, the finishes specification, the floor plan with the area, the house rules. A contract without them reads easily precisely because it says almost nothing.

What to ask. "Please send the full set of annexes as listed in the contract itself — they are enumerated in the text."

The answer settles it if the set arrives in full. It does not settle it if the annexes are promised "at signing".

The question of independent checking is met with reluctance

Why it is worth noticing. A buyer wanting their own lawyer and their own checklist is an ordinary part of a transaction. Resistance to that step says nothing about the property's risks and something about the fact that your independence is not part of the script here.

What to ask. "How do you normally work with a buyer's lawyer: where should questions be sent and how long do answers usually take?"

The answer settles it if a procedure and a contact person are named. It does not settle it if checking is described as a delay that will cost you the unit.

The accumulation rule

What counts is not the number of signals but their variety. Three similar complaints about the wording of a pitch amount to a house style. One signal from each group at once — in behaviour, in the numbers and in the documents — is a pattern, and it means one thing: the decision would have to be taken on unverified data.

It helps to keep a short log: date, question, answer received, what supports it. After two or three meetings such a log shows the picture better than memory does — you can see which questions were asked twice and which of them never produced an answer. That log is also the raw material for the risk register on your particular deal.

What this is not

None of the points above supports a conclusion about the good faith of the person opposite. A hesitant answer more often means the person does not know the subject than that something is being hidden; a missing document at a meeting more often means disorganised paperwork than absent paperwork. The right response to a signal is a follow-up question and a pause until it is answered — not an accusation and not a public verdict about a company.

The reverse is also true: an absence of signals does not replace checking. A tidy pitch, courteous communication and quick replies confirm neither the title, nor the signatory's authority, nor the payment schedule. Behaviour helps you decide whether to move on to the next step; it does not tell you how the deal will end.

What to do next

• Due diligence scope and roles — who is responsible for verifying each answer you received.
• Property purchase risk register — where to move open questions so they do not get lost.
• Investment mandate — limits set in advance, which protect against deciding under time pressure.
• Liquidity scorecard — how to compare the options that remain.

Frequently asked questions

Is a signal already a reason to walk away?

No. A single signal is a reason to ask a follow-up question, and most signals have a calm explanation: the person does not know the answer, is working from someone else's script, or is simply in a hurry. What matters is not the signal but the reaction to the question. What should concern you is that after a direct question there is no more clarity than before and the conversation has moved elsewhere.

How do I ask a question so that the answer is verifiable?

Ask for a document rather than an assurance, and ask one question at a time. "Please send me the page of the contract where this is written" works better than "is that definitely the case?": the first can only be answered with a file or a refusal, the second with anything at all. It helps to move key questions into writing — a written answer can be checked, a spoken one cannot.

What if several signals add up?

Count the types, not the number. Signals from different groups at once — in behaviour, in the numbers and in the documents — weigh more than three of the same kind. Look separately at whether avoidance repeats: one vague answer happens to everyone, three in a row on different questions is a stable pattern, and the decision on it is taken before any money moves.

Does a signal mean the person in front of me is acting in bad faith?

No, and that conclusion should not be drawn from one conversation. What is described here are signs that you do not yet have enough information to decide — not an assessment of a company or a person. A signal tells you about the state of your own knowledge: what you do not know yet and what needs to be confirmed by a document. Labels are useless in this work; questions and paperwork are useful.

Sources

NovAsia editorial corpus on preparing an investment decision · practice of supporting buyers in Phnom Penh · verified in July 2026. There are no market figures on this page; the example phrasings are anonymised and do not refer to any specific company, project or person. This material is for general information, is not individual investment, legal or tax advice, and contains no promise of a result.