Search:     Go  
The Spanish Lawyer Online
The Spanish Lawyer Online
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Community quota calculated incorrectly in our apartment in Spain

  1. #11
    Unregistered
    Guest

    Default

    Thank you again.

    I will explain:-

    Fistly Polaris were running the community with their chosen administrator No 1, they didn't perform, so administrator No 2 came in, they did perform, but the villa owners fees went up with administrator No 2, so they got with administrator No 1 and got themselves (villa owners mostly) voted on the committee and the administrator No1 was voted back in, along with the new commmittee (not Polaris)

    Then in September this year, well it took them from April to September to work out how they could try and reduce their fees (villa owners), but the apartment owners fees went up and the villa owners fees went down, but they were didn't get that some apartment owners noticed that they were not distrubting the fees correctly as per their deeds.

    The administrator will not provide by law the calculation of their fees requested by burofax within 10 days, they have chosen to not reply, but they can't reply as they have't been calculated as per the deeds, we have clear % cuota's and they have worked out to their advantage some odd method, using surface area, plot size, and then funny enough they have used the correct calculation for the direct apartment cost, using the % cuota.

    So, can you tell me is it the administrator and president that we take to court not the community, how long could court action take, and can the apartment owners get compensation and their fees backdated correctly? Can the administrator be struck off the College of Administrators?

    Thanks again for your assistance in this matter

    Ian

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Marbella
    Posts
    1,095

    Default

    Dear Sir,

    You will have to take legal action.

    How long does it take?

    It will depend if you reach an out-of-court settlement or not, if the First ruling is appealed or not etc.

    On average at least 2-3 years until the ruling is final (can no longer be appealed).

    can the apartment owners get compensation and their fees backdated correctly?

    Regarding claiming compensation, I'm unsure. The whole point is to readjust the shares and have them calculated as they should as well as removing the current admninistrator from his post. This will depend on the judge and how long has this been going. As far as I know from the other queries it's only been like this only for the last 2 or 3 months.

    I refer you to one of our articles (point 8).- 10 Reasons Why Your Case Against a Spanish Developer May be Thrown Out of Court

  3. #13
    Unregistered
    Guest

    Default

    Administrator no.1 was sacked by PW because they disputed bills being presented by PW and refused to pay them. Administrator No.2 were then appointed and signed everything off, i guess that is performing with the best interests of the community. PW then held an AGM behind closed doors, approved the accounts and the following years budget. Under admin no.2 community fees were 30-50€ a month for apartments and 400-500€ a month for villas, very fair, not, therefore the owners got together formed an owners association, open to all, held mini agms, open to all, and voted Admin No.1 back in.
    The Mini community presidents then voted in the committee, this included aparment mini-presidents, so to say the villa/townhouse owners rigged it all is rubbish. All the owners are guilty of is mobilising the community to the fact we were being ripped off, from then on EVERYONE had a vote.

    Since last April Admin No.2 has managed to decrease the budget by over 1,000,000€ per annum and are again disputing bills from PW. i would say that was performing.

    Admin No.2 went to the college of administrators to check that the interpretation of the act they were proposing was legal before implimenting it.

    Is it really reasonable to expect one resident to pay 10 times more than another?

    Lawbird Lawyer :-The PW serving Administators were replaced last year on our PW resort

  4. #14
    Unregistered
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Administrator no.1 was sacked by PW because they disputed bills being presented by PW and refused to pay them. Administrator No.2 were then appointed and signed everything off, i guess that is performing with the best interests of the community. PW then held an AGM behind closed doors, approved the accounts and the following years budget. Under admin no.2 community fees were 30-50€ a month for apartments and 400-500€ a month for villas, very fair, not, therefore the owners got together formed an owners association, open to all, held mini agms, open to all, and voted Admin No.1 back in.
    The Mini community presidents then voted in the committee, this included aparment mini-presidents, so to say the villa/townhouse owners rigged it all is rubbish. All the owners are guilty of is mobilising the community to the fact we were being ripped off, from then on EVERYONE had a vote.

    Since last April Admin No.2 has managed to decrease the budget by over 1,000,000€ per annum and are again disputing bills from PW. i would say that was performing.

    Admin No.2 went to the college of administrators to check that the interpretation of the act they were proposing was legal before implimenting it.

    Is it really reasonable to expect one resident to pay 10 times more than another?

    Lawbird Lawyer :-The PW serving Administators were replaced last year on our PW resort
    oops, that should read Admin No.1 went to the college of administrators, and admin No.1 saved 1 000 000€ per annum.

  5. #15
    Unregistered
    Guest

    Default

    I and my family own several apartments on this resort And we too are very concerned as to how the fees are being distributed.
    The following are probably the main points of which I have taken from the resort forum.

    There are 455 villa owners on the resort who collectively share 47% 0f the resort vote.

    There are 1729 apartment owners who only share 17% of the vote while currently contributing to more than 50% of the budget

    The statutes seem to speak of fee distribution by cuota and clearly state that the salaries of those employed by the community should be distributed as per cuota.

    The administrator in an open letter posted on the forum stated that he has made an interpretation regarding his fees and that they would be distributed equally amongst all owners as this has already been established in law, approved by the college of administrators, and much fairer as we all benefit equally from this service

    In his open letter he also states that he has taken from the deeds the same square meters used by the council to calculate taxes, and from this seems to have developed his own cuota in which to distribute what he calls general resort expenses

    All that I have written is directly from the resort forum and therefore I cannot verify it's truth, but if true may I ask a lawyer is it your opinion either of these deviations from cuota distribution are legal?

    (I can confirm that no vote has ever been taken regarding a change of fee distribution)

  6. #16
    Unregistered
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lawbird Lawyer View Post
    We have received like over 40 queries on PW within the last weeks. Always on the same point.- how they've changed the process of calculating the Community quotas.

    In our opinion you should all group together and appoint a law firm to have the Community quotas correctly calculated and upheld before a law court if neccessary.

    Everyone cannot pay the same, that's just not possible nor fair. Each of you will have to pay in proportion to your share in the Commonhold.

    We have the suspicion that the rules have been amended so as to benefit the developer which still has a large number of units to offload.

    We believe your administrators, appointed by PW themselves, are acting in the best interests of...PW.
    The Administrators have been appointed by the Community of Owners - NOT PW.

    These '40' posters, are part of the Community of Owners - who appointed the Administrator.!!

    Therefore, these posters are looking at a legal process whereby they can sue themselves.

    How can this be possible?

    Thank you

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Marbella
    Posts
    1,095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    The Administrators have been appointed by the Community of Owners - NOT PW.

    These '40' posters, are part of the Community of Owners - who appointed the Administrator.!!

    Therefore, these posters are looking at a legal process whereby they can sue themselves.

    How can this be possible?

    Thank you
    Dear Sir/Madam,

    The feedback we've received is that PW still owns a sizesable stock of property and that the appointed administrators have changed the rules of calculating the quota to benefit the developer so he pays less community fees and so the difference is shared among the other owners.

    I have no idea who appointed the administrators. But what seems clear enough is that they seem to be favouring the developer from the queries we've received. It's up to the communers to group and remove the administrator/s and have the quotas correctly calculated.

  8. #18
    Unregistered
    Guest

    Default

    I am an apartment owner on La torre and I have been following this thread. What has happened here is that Polaris and their architects originally set up these quotas, in their own interests and to their own benefit. The result of that was that the town centre, owned by polaris including the hotel, the conference centre and the golf club were allocated a quota of 10%, the apartment owners had 17% and the villa and town houses the rest.

    This state of affairs resulted in some villas paying 10 times more than apartment owners so the villa owners did not pay their fees. These villa and town house owners then got together and ousted the administrator and without any vote or consultation created their own method of fee calculation, which reduced their fees and more than doubled the apartment owners fees. Unfortunately this resulted in the apartment owners paying 50% of what the administrator terms general resort costs, 30% of the gardening costs and the majority of the administrators fees.The apartment owners still have only 17% of the vote. The apartment owners then stopped paying their fees. We now have a debt of 1.5 million euros on our community fees.

    However this new method of calculation we have been advised is illegal. No unanimous vote has been obtained and no court order obtained to change the method of fee calculation legally.

    Is it correct that these debts will not be able to be legally collected or enforced because they are illegally calculated?

    If we took this to court would a judge be able under Spanish law to change this original quota distribution and apportion it fairly, including imposing greater charges on the commercial buildings?

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Marbella
    Posts
    1,095

    Default

    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.
    Last edited by Lawbird Lawyer; 04-14-2009 at 11:43 AM.

  10. #20
    Unregistered
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lawbird Lawyer View Post
    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.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •