Are agreements in homeowners' associations outside the agenda valid?

Welcome to the blog of Southern. In today's article, we will deal with a topic of great interest and relevance such as the validity of the agreements taken within the communities of owners but which have not been included in the agenda.

Are resolutions adopted by homeowners' associations on matters not included in the agenda valid?

We all know how important it is to have a good atmosphere of coexistence within a community of neighbours. This influences the common decisions taken and which affect the residents as a whole, and it is necessary for them to be to the convenience and liking of the community.

That is why, from time to time, regular meetings are held between homeowners. These community meetings, usually scheduled by what is known as the "Junta de Propietarios", are responsible for discussing matters that concern the community in general and for making final decisions on any matter of common interest. Proposals are put to a vote and approved or rejected by majority vote.

What to do if a new issue of interest arises?

Normally, the issues to be discussed at these meetings are known in advance by the attendees: it is known as a the agendaBut what happens if a new topic of interest arises, which requires the agreement of the community of owners for its implementation, and can it be voted on at that moment, even though it was not foreseen to be dealt with at the present meeting?

In other words: Is it legal to vote and take action on issues that are not implicitly included in the so-called "Agenda"?

What does the law say about this?

The regulation of community life is governed by what is known as the "...".Horizontal Property Law". These rules regulate all aspects related to the management bodies of the community, the interrelations of coexistence between its inhabitants and their rights and obligations with respect to the rest of the neighbours, tenants and owners of the properties.

If we dig a little into its contents, we can see that in Article 16(2), reads as follows:

"Meetings shall be convened by the Chairman or, failing that, by the promoters of the meeting, indicating the matters to be discussed, the place, day and time at which they are to be held on first or, where appropriate, second call...".

and continues below, continued:

"Any owner may request that the Board of Owners study and decide on any matter of interest to the community; to this end, he/she shall send a letter, clearly specifying the matters he/she requests to be dealt with, to the Chairman, who shall include them in the agenda of the next meeting to be held.

Here we are given to understand the importance of including all the items to be discussed in the "Agenda" and that this should be done in advance of the relevant meeting.

But we all know that, on many occasions, and taking advantage of the end of the meetings (at the last point of "Questions and Answers"), unannounced issues are often discussed as part of the items to be dealt with. There are even votes that allow decisions to be taken.

The problem here is: is this legal, does it not infringe the LPH, and if it does, can the decisions taken be challenged?

What do judges say in their judgments?

Although laws try to be as specific as possible, they often have the problem that they can be interpretable. That is why we need to look to precedents in case law on rulings challenging such votes and the decisions that were taken after such votes, in order to know whether they are legal or not.

I will not here make an argument about the judgments issued in this regard, as it is not the purpose of this article to enter into a study of judicial assessments, so I will limit myself to summarising the conclusions reached by bodies such as the Supreme Court itself on these issues.

To understand them better, we must first agree on a series of essential axioms.

The first of these is to recognise that attendance at meetings convened by the Neighbourhood Council is voluntary and is subject to prior knowledge of the points to be discussed at the meeting. In other words, it is understood that the neighbour who attends a meeting does so because he or she is interested in dealing with the issues that have been agreed to be discussed. These matters are included in the Agenda.

The second issue is the right of every neighbour to challenge any decision taken at a meeting, as long as the matter on which it was decided to do something was not included in the agenda. This challenge, if not respected by the Board, can even be taken to court as a complaint. L

Taking these two factors into account, let us see what conclusions can be drawn.

But then, are such votes valid?

The final conclusion is that, as long as the decisions taken are not challenged by any neighbour, the vote on the particular matter is valid. This is referred to in legal jargon as a "voidable action", as opposed to the concept known as a "null and void action".

The latter refers to the fact that the agreement taken infringes some other law of our penal code, but not implicitly this article of the LPH, as long as the whole community of owners agrees to accept the vote and its result on the matter not included in the agenda.

In short, if all the neighbours agree, it is considered valid. But if one of the neighbours does not agree, he or she can legally file a legal complaint if the execution of the decision taken and not communicated in advance to be dealt with in the meeting held is not annulled.

So, in order to avoid major problems and the consequent displeasure and expense that all these legal proceedings entail, let us be good neighbours and respect the rules. Let's take care of the quality of our neighbourly relations, let's make living together a good experience based on respect for others and we will be happier.

We hope this article has been of interest to you, if you still have any questions, you can contact us at this link