Before reading the post, I invite you to watch the video https://youtu.be/VP-6B2dDbi0,
COMMON EXPENSES OF THE COMMUNITY OF OWNERS.
In the post, I write to you about CASE OF EXONERATION OF THE PAYMENT OF COMMON EXPENSES.
The owner who has not voted in favor, he is exempt from the payment.
This does not mean that it refers to the Title, although this referral will never have retroactive effects.
It must be approved unanimously, that is, by all the owners. Unless they are new services, in which the quorum of most of the totality of owners and quotas is sufficient.
The clauses should always be interpreted restrictively. An example: "Owners who have voted against the maintenance costs of the solar panel are exonerated", they are exonerated only from maintenance expenses, not from other expenses. Another example: "Owners who have not voted in favor of installing the solar panel are exonerated from all expenses", those who voted against all expenses are exonerated.
No owner can demand new facilities, innovations, services or unnecessary improvements for the adequate habitability, security, conservation and accessibility of the property.
If, by the favorable vote of three fifths of the total of the owners who, in turn, represent three fifths of the participation quotas, valid agreements are adopted to carry out the mentioned.
When the amount exceeds the amount of three ordinary monthly payments of common expenses, the dissident will not be obligated.
Copyright Abogada Nathalie González y Mediadora, Creadora de Objetivo Cero Víctimas