[Anonymous]

Since he downturn in new building a developer has turned his attention to maximising his income by controlling membership of the maintenance junta. The individual simply uses his votes to elect only the residents he approves. In this way he is directing maintenance contracts to his own building company and charging excessive rates for any works carried out. He is able to do this without going out to tender for the works as his non democratically elected Junta Delegardos simply vote through his proposals. This rather unsavoury character has also earlier this year charged VAT on services when it was not applicable to a junta de compensation. When strongly challenged, he refunded the VAT charged saying it was a simple mistake! How do you make a mistake when claiming that the tax office had been chasing him to charge VAT?

The developer has conveniently ensconced himself as treasurer of the urbanisation’s Junta de Compensation and has used his votes to outvote the residents who oppose any of his actions. The developer can of course outvote all other residents as he has many undeveloped plots on the urbanisation. An external, independent, audit of the Junta’s accounts, demanded by owners was rejected. When members attending the AGM voted to reject the accounts the developer simply used his votes to approve them. One can imagine why.

Normally orderly control of an urbanisation’s maintenance spend, managed by a Junta de Compensation, would move to house owners as sales of plots increase and the number of unsold plots reduce. In our case, since the property market has stalled control of maintenance expenditure has simply remained with the developer. This is something never intended when the original legislation was drawn up.

Has any other property owners seen any other developers turn to milking the maintenance fund?

It’s so infuriating as the developer does not contribute a Euro to the fund but seemingly he can control the expenditure.

[Anonymous]

Boatlamps, this is not the first time I’ve heard of this. The only way to deal with it is to organise a counter block in the community, which takes time and effort and is guaranteed to set you on a collision course with the developer. Can prove illegal dealings by the developer, in which case you might be able to go to the police. But both of these options can be problematic if you have a very unscrupulous developer who is well-connected in the area, and both take a lot of time and effort, which means they rarely get done (and so the developer gets away with it). I know it’s no help to you now, but the only way to avoid this problem is never buy from developers like this. It always boils down to the people you deal with.

[katy]

Happens frequently, even in boom years. The only way to avoid these problems is to buy into an established well run community. Heard many stories. eg. When apartments completed and sold the grounds/infrastructure are not finished, the developers then use community fees to complete what should have been included in the purchase price. Very difficult to do anything about it due to problems communicating with non-residents, lack of interest etc.

[Fuengi (Andrew)]

@Boatlamps wrote:

Since he downturn in new building a developer has turned his attention to maximising his income by controlling membership of the maintenance junta. The individual simply uses his votes to elect only the residents he approves. In this way he is directing maintenance contracts to his own building company and charging excessive rates for any works carried out. He is able to do this without going out to tender for the works as his non democratically elected Junta Delegardos simply vote through his proposals. This rather unsavoury character has also earlier this year charged VAT on services when it was not applicable to a junta de compensation. When strongly challenged, he refunded the VAT charged saying it was a simple mistake! How do you make a mistake when claiming that the tax office had been chasing him to charge VAT?

The developer has conveniently ensconced himself as treasurer of the urbanisation’s Junta de Compensation and has used his votes to outvote the residents who oppose any of his actions. The developer can of course outvote all other residents as he has many undeveloped plots on the urbanisation. An external, independent, audit of the Junta’s accounts, demanded by owners was rejected. When members attending the AGM voted to reject the accounts the developer simply used his votes to approve them. One can imagine why.

Normally orderly control of an urbanisation’s maintenance spend, managed by a Junta de Compensation, would move to house owners as sales of plots increase and the number of unsold plots reduce. In our case, since the property market has stalled control of maintenance expenditure has simply remained with the developer. This is something never intended when the original legislation was drawn up.

Has any other property owners seen any other developers turn to milking the maintenance fund?

It’s so infuriating as the developer does not contribute a Euro to the fund but seemingly he can control the expenditure.

one or 2 questions:
First, as I understand it 1 owner 1 vote, regardless of the amount of properties. If I remember correctly he (promotor) would need to control 3/5 of the ‘cuotas de participación’ to run roughshod over the rest of the community.

Also any resolutions adopted at these meetings that are contrary to the law, or are harmful/detrimental to any owner of to the Community, may be challenged before the court.

Also you have the right to the accounts, if you can show the promotor is not paying, they he is ‘moroso’ and cannot be president.

[Anonymous]

These things often depend on the type of community. As you mention a Junta de delegados it is unlikely that you are talking about a comunidad de propietarios but probably an Entidad urbanisticas Colaboradores de Conservacion. These have their own rules (estatutos) agreed by the town hall and these will set out the voting rights. If your EUCC refuses you a copy go to the town and ask to see the representative for your urbanizacion. EUCCs have to collaborate with the public administrations of the town hall but this seems to be generally forgotten by petty dictators.

[Author]

Posts