Advice on interpretation of statutes
There is another thread on the forum relating to the issue of incorrect charging of community fees at a Polaris World resort.
This is very much an owner verses owner issue now. Polaris World has sold the vast majority of the residential property off and so is no longer a major player in this particular process.
The resort is almost 2700 properties. It is subdivided into over a hundred communities. The statutes of the resort place most of the communal property in an overarching general community. So all the pools, most of the green areas, resort wall, lighting, roads, paths by roads, tennis courts are in this general community. In reality there are the apartment lifts, stairways and bits of underground car parks that are not in this community.
The reality is that although the law gives control to owners over their own property it is very theoretical. Only community presidents are allowed to attend the general community AGM. The community appears to be exercising section 24 3(a) in this matter.
Power is massively centralised - most of the community presidents have no knowledge of the law and although they can vote against issues at the general meetings they rarely do. A multi million euro budget is controlled by a handful of people.
Out of this failure to consult owners arose the change in the method of calculating the fees for properties for which some more enlightened owners are edging towards legal action.
The resort statutes state
"Article 20. Rights to attendance
1. The General Homeowners’ Meeting may be attended by the natural persons and representatives of the artificial persons that own independent plots in the complex..."
3.2 Plots under the ordinary or segregated condominium system.
Their representation shall correspond to the chairman of the plot association or, where applicable, the person specifically designated by the association in question to represent it at the General Homeowners’ Meetings.
In whatsoever case, the number of persons authorised to attend the General Homeowners’ Meeting shall be equal to the number of plots in the complex that are considered as private elements (not common elements)"
I am confused by the term ordinary or segregated condominium system.
The statutes mention at several points that owners are represented at the Homeowners' general meeting by their president or a representative of that president. At 3.2 of article 20 of the statutes it says just that. This is for owners of plots under this "ordinary and segregated condominium system".
However those who own independent plots may attend the meeting in their own rights.
This seems strange in itself - there are two classes of property on the resort.
Perhaps there is as some of the garages have their own president. Quite why this system arose is unclear as the president of the associated apartment block has always been the president of those garages.
Clearly if the statutes say in the section on rights of attendance at the AGM that owners may attend and the reality is they are being excluded from the AGM, there is a problem. There are many other problems but this is a huge problem as it calls into question the legality of the AGM's that have been held so far for the general community
Your advice on this article would be much appreciated.