AGM voting rights

Am I correct that if a person has not paid their community fees they cannot vote at the community meeting, and cannot be president or on the committee ?

Gwm:

I expect you have a copy of the by-laws for your residents' association?  These will state the restrictions which apply in the case you mention.  It is probable that those in arrears would not be permitted to vote at general meetings.

P.

 Voting rights are nothing to do with individual community by-laws but governed by the Horizontal Property Act Chapter 2 Section 15 (2).

http://www.eyeonspain.com/spain-magazine/horizontal-laws.pdf

Section 15

Thank you for your replies. The problem is that the promotor/builder has at least 50% of the properties unsold and is using these properties to vote at the community AGM. He has not paid the community fees on these unsold properties. And he has his  representative as President so the rest of the community does not have much of a say in community matters.

You can dispute the legality of any decisions taken at an AGM within a certain time limit (sorry don't know what the limit is off the top of my head, it will be in the Horizontal Property ACT). If that fails then you have recourse to the courts but as we all know in Spain that can take years, cost a lot of money and in the meantime you have to live with it.

Dear Gym

Hi,

I know this is an old thread, but I am curious about how communities deal with this part of Section 15.1

Section 15.1  Where a unit belongs jointly to different owners, these shall designate one representative to attend and vote on their behalf.

How does your community deal with joint owner attendance at a General Assembly (AGM or EGM).  Does your community require written notifications from the joint owners as to which one of them will represent the property?  Or??

Thanks

Joint owners must appoint from among themselves the one that will represent and vote for them in community meetings and, of course, they only have one vote plus the percentage coefficient that belongs to their property.

In general, if the community is not a large one and the attendance at meetings is not of  very many owners, it is normal to let joint owners both be present (frequently this is husband and wife) but they would still have to designate who will speak and vote for both of them.

However, those communitites that have a lot of owners will tend to limit attendance by joint owners to only one.

Legally, only one owner, the designated one, is permitted to attend, speak and vote, but presidents tend to be flexible (of course, only with the attendance requirement)  when there are not many owners present.  At least that is the way it has been in the communities where I have owned a property,

Thanks lobin,

Please may I ask, does your community or the ones you have been involved with require the designate be appointed in writing?

Thanks

"Thank you for your replies. The problem is that the promotor/builder has at least 50% of the properties unsold and is using these properties to vote at the community AGM. He has not paid the community fees on these unsold properties. And he has his  representative as President so the rest of the community does not have much of a say in community matters."

The only way you can defeat this situation is to put forward (on the agenda at the agm) "that where there is multiple properties owned by a single person or entity they are only entitled to one vote"

If you can't rally all the other owners either to vote at the agm or by proxy if they can't attend then you will have to live with that situation until more units are sold and the developer can be out-voted.

Of course if the developer does not pay community fees on the unsold properties then he is a debtor and canot vote, as other posters have said.

If the developer is not up to date with his community fees he is not alowed to vote. This is written in the horizontal properties legislation.

Perrypower.  The designation of one of the joint owners does not need to be in writing unless the statutes or regulations of the community so requires it.  The Law does not require it, so the designation can be communicated to the Community or person acting as Secretary of the Owners Meetings verbally, by telephone, email or whichever other form the joint owners choose.  

I do not believe the practice for the statutes or regulations to require the designation in writing is an extended one.  Imagine a property with many owners (it does happen some times with inheritance) and the document would have to be signed by all of them.  That would be very impractical and hardly necessary.

Thanks lobin.  It is a source of debate on my community.  You will not be surprised that some owners say exactly what you are saying while others quote lawyers that say it muct be in writing.  I think I will take the view that as long as it is not ambiguous then it is okay.

PP It is quite normal in Spain to ask 5 lawyers for an opinion and receive 6 different opinions.

The Secretary Administrator is tasked with advising the President on the laws governing voting requirements and they should be the one to ask for their interpretation.

It is normal for any owner to be allowed to attend with proof of identity i e passport but as others have stated only ONE vote per property, whoever attends.

Hi hugh_man, thanks for your response.  Five lawyers with six opinions...completely agree.

Our community is very small so the President serves as the Secretary/Administrator as well and we all know each other.

Although he/she can and does take advice from external council they end up in the position of having to make the decision.  Taken to loosely they are open to criticism that they are not following the Law, going the otherway if they do insist in things in writing they are open to criticism to 'prove' that that is what the law says when infact it is mute in that area.  Hence why I am asking for the way other communities deal with it.

One vote/one property is no problem.

Owner/owners represented by someone other than the owner(s) needing a signed proxy/podor/poa...no problem.

Where there is debate is where one owner in a jointly held property comes to a meeting (lets say husband of married couple who jointly own).  One group is saying that is fine, other group says he must provide written proof that other party (wife) has given him their consent to represent their interest.

What do you think? 

Think you have answered your own question.

There will always be debate as it depends on how the Community or the Secretary interprets HPA, IF there is section about approval to vote by joint owners.

What I think is only what we have used.

Initially our Administrator wanted signed and scanned proxy forms for voting.

Then they changed to accepting emails.

They have NEVER questioned voting intention on any joint ownership, accepting that the person in attendance or sending the property has the right to vote for ALL registered owners.

Also remember that bureaucracy at times in Spain requires all sorts of forms or permissions in triplicate.

I believe the President and or Secretary Administrator has the power to make the decision on behalf of the Community and if others don’t like it, let them challenge it. You’ll find they will back off as they are being ridiculously pedantic.

Thanks hugh_man