APAERTMENT BLOCK STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE

 Hi There

The owner of the Almacen (Basement Storage area) (on our Urbanization) has pointed out that the pillars on which a particular Apartment building sits, badly needs structural maintenance. He also states that the waste-water pipes need replacing. He is at present converting this Almacen area into 7 Different Studio Residential Properties.
This brings is us to the questions who is deciding what, and who is paying for what.
Both Apartment Buildings have separate statutes (like the locales) and the Apartment Building in which the Almacen is situated has actually held an AGM of its own in 2007, with the owner of the Almacen acting as President. In my eyes this was illegal as he nominated himself for this position as it was not sanctioned by the President of Urbanization. 
A vote for the Almacen Conversion was taken at this meeting which was not unanimous and as there was not a fair representation of all 35 owners in this block. Also a Vote on this resolution at the 2007 Urbanization’s AGM was also not unanimous(33 votes to 29 votes) but was obviously carried as far as this Almacen Owner was concerned.
As far as decisions are concerned, from a legal point of view, only the AGM´s of the respective Apartment Buildings can take decisions concerning the Apartment Buildings. Is this the correct interpretation of the Horizontal Law in Spain in respect of these Statutes? I do believe that our President of our Urbanisation is passing the Buck here as us Block Owners pay the same Quarterly Quota as all the other House,Villa and Duplex owners on this Community.

I am referring to decisions re. Structural maintenance etc. and their accompanying cost.

Please can anyone give us some advice on the above problem?

Many Thanks

Regards

A vote for the Almacen Conversion was taken at this meeting which was not unanimous and as there was not a fair representation of all 35 owners in this block. Also a Vote on this resolution at the 2007 Urbanisation’s AGM was also not unanimous (33 votes to 29 votes) but was obviously carried as far as this Almacen Owner was concerned.

I do not profess to be an 'expert' on community law, however, over the years I have attended seminars where those making presentations  said that for a 'change of use' of a community area,  a unanimous vote of ALL owners (not just those present)  must be obtained.

An example of charge of use was, if a garden area were to be changed to a parking area.

 Johnx is correct in stating that the change in the way a common area is used requires unanimous vote.  This means that no owner votes against the use change, not that ALL owners need to vote in favour.

 The way this works in practice is that all owners present or represented at the meeting must vote in favour of the proposal and the owners not present or represented at the meeting must not communicate that they are against the proposal within 30 days from the date they received the Minutes of the AGM or EGM.  After the 30 days, those owners that have not communicated that they are against the resolution will be deemed to have voted in favour of such resolution.

However, the OP is not very clear as to the Almacen because it seems from his first line that the Almacen is not a common area but rather the property of an owner and then further on states that a vote for the conversion was taken at a meeting.  If the Almacen is not a common area, but rather the property of an owner, then the rule of authorization by the Community by unanimous vote as a change in use of a common area is not applicable and other rules apply (possibly requiring only majority or 3/5 in favour).  The OP needs to clarify what the situation really is.  

 Hi Lobin

The Almacen was originally classified as a Commercial  Property which the Current Owner has obtained the relative permission to have it rezoned for Residential Use.It is in the Basement of our Building without back windows because it below all the Apartments and Windows have now  been constructed on each end of this Almacen. Folding Doors form the Entrance for each Apartment.

The question here is ,if there is Structural Damage to the Internal Pillars supporting the Building and waste water pipes need to be replaced. Who is ultimately responsible for this Maintenance. Our Urbanisation was contructed in 1974,I think.

Thank You

Regards

 The opening of those windows as a modification to the outside walls of the building does require unanimous vote.

The cost of structural damage to the internal pillars and waste water pipes and the maintenance thereof must be borne by the Community (unless such damage was caused by the Almacen owner's renovation works), because those are commonly owned.  The issue here is proving that the damage was the responsibility of the Almacen owner or not and if there is discrepancy it is possible that a professional evaluation by an arquitect to determine where the responsibiity lies becomes necessary, adding to the cost of repairs.

 Hi John &  Lobin

Many thanks for all your replies. They have   all been noted.

Regards

 These two guides might be of help to you

•Q&A on Community of Owners in Spain Free Guide

•Community of Owners in Spain Free Guide