Community quota calculated incorrectly in our apartment in Spain

[Lawbird Lawyer]

Dea Sir/Madam,

As you correctly write in your post, Spain's Commonhold law (Ley de Propiedad Horizontal) requires as per its arts 5 and 17 unanimity to change the assigned quotas. Any amendment to the quotas which hasn't been approved unanimously by all communers would not be legal.

If you were to take this matter to a Spanish judge he would assign fairly the quotas, yes, if they are blatantly unfair as it seem they are now to some of the communers. Art 18 rules this matter of challenging illegal agreements in commonholds before a judge.

[Unregistered]

Dea Sir/Madam,

As you correctly write in your post, Spain's Commonhold law (Ley de Propiedad Horizontal) requires as per its arts 5 and 17 unanimity to change the assigned quotas. Any amendment to the quotas which hasn't been approved unanimously by all communers would not be legal.

If you were to take this matter to a Spanish judge he would assign fairly the quotas, yes, if they are blatantly unfair as it seem they are now to some of the communers. Art 18 rules this matter of challenging illegal agreements in commonholds before a judge.

The administrator advised apartment owners that they have interpreted the HPA. We are talking of a villa with a very large plot of 450 m2, now only paying for 144m2 because the administrator now calculates the community charge using the The Superficie Construida, reducing the amount that villa owners have to pay.

[Unregistered]

Well let’s have some facts shall we. Firstly I thought lawyers only gave opinions when they knew all the facts, not in this case obviously. Secondly the current administrators did not change the cuotas or arrange the calculation in favour of the Villa and Townhouse owners. What they did was to use the guidance from the college of administrators to look at how the fees should be divided fairly amongst the owners on a mixed urbanization such as this one where you have a range of property types. Indeed there have been rulings on this issue in the High court in Madrid. Please also see this link which covers the issue of mixed urbanizations. Have a look at the figures quoted in this article for community fees.

eyeonspain.com/spain-magazine/communities-in-spain.aspx


Using just the cuota for our resort results in Villas paying some 400€ a month, townhouses paying up to 270€ per month and apartments paying 50€ per month despite having lifts, communal lighting, cleaning, underground parking etc. Totally unfair and not acceptable.

The committee is made up of a range of owners including Apartments, town houses and Villas. The majority of owners are happy with the current fees as they are fair and reasonable. In addition the current committee has reduced the budget by 1.5 Million Euros compared to when PW were in charge and set aside some 1.5Million Euros in disputed bills. A good result for all owners.

The current fees range from 86€ to 110€ Apartments, 96€ to 131€ for townhouse and from 131€ to 250€ for villas. So the villa and townhouse owners are still paying considerably more into the community than the apartment owners despite not having Lifts, cleaning etc. The apartment owners also have direct access to the 24 communal swimming pools.

Out of the apartment costs around 33€ per month is for the direct costs, i.e. lifts etc, leaving their contribution to the general resort as low as 53€. The direct costs for a villa are much lower (Back lawns only) meaning the majority of their 131€ to 250€ per month goes toward the general resort costs and the same for townhouses who have little or no direct costs. The general resort costs are made up of swimming pools, communal gardens, security, fountains, road cleaning, administration etc which all owners benefit from equally but apparently some feel that they should not pay their fair share.

As for the debt that has been quoted on this site this is because some owners have never paid their fees and is not because of the additional fees that the apartment owners are now paying most of whom realize that they are getting very good value for money.

If the fees were to go back to the range we had before then I am afraid the services would undoubtedly suffer as the fees of up to 400€ per month were plainly unaffordable.

So Lawbird lawyers now you have some more facts perhaps you would like to comment again.

[Unregistered]

Just to complete the facts as posted above.The voting rights in this development are as follows:

All villas = 455 Have 47% of the vote

All townhouses = 518 Have 23% of the vote

All apartments = 1729 Have 17% of the vote

Town centre = 10% of the vote


These voting rights have remained the same despite the fact that apartment owners are now collectively paying 50% of the costs described by the administrator as general resort costs.

The administrators fees are now spread equally across all owners. The apartment owners also pay administrative costs in their direct costs.

The committee does have apartment owners on it. They also happen to be villa owners.


The community fees paid by the hotel, the golf club, the conference centre, the bars, restaurants, supermarket, shops – all commercial buildings, all owned by Polaris, are unknown since the administrator and president refuse to answer the question. Whether the new system of Sq meterage has been applied to these entities is unknown.I do know that in all other situations such commercial entities would pay far more than domestic and would pay business rates.

[Unregistered]

This from the eyes on Spain article referred to above. "The percentage of the budget that each property pays is set in the Title Deeds (escritura) as this is determined by the developer."

To say the administrator did not change the cuotas and then go on to say he took guidance from the college of administrators in order to divide the fees fairly is a contradiction, he either used the cuotas or he didn't.
Spanish law dictates that community fees be distributed as per the cuota written in title deeds, what is being suggested is that this law has been overruled by the high court of Madrid and that for a mixed urbanisation fee distribution need not be distributed as per cuota and that a different set of rules could apply. And yet the statutes of La Torre state that fees be distributed as per cuota.

I would think it unlikely that any high court ruling would give an administrator who is a servant of the community the authority to implement such a shift in fee distribution without the communities approval, even if approved by the college of administrators

[Unregistered]

The administrator advised apartment owners that they have interpreted the HPA. We are talking of a villa with a very large plot of 450 m2, now only paying for 144m2 because the administrator now calculates the community charge using the The Superficie Construida, reducing the amount that villa owners have to pay.

Further to my posting yesterday, i would like to provide you with the cuota for the large villa. The formula i believe would be budget x Parchela / 100 gives you the parchela cuota. Parchela cuota x villa cuota/100 is the amount that this property would pay in community fees.

Budget 2,874.500.53

Parchela cuota 2.47635

Villa cuota 5.727705

By using Superficie Construida, you will see they are only paying for 144m2 of there 450m2 plot.