Neighbor claims HOA notice arrived one day late

HOA meeting convened one day late, according to a neighbor

A sheet of paper posted in the lobby announces a meeting for owners of a residential complex to approve and vote on 12 points. The appointment: October 17 at 6:00 PM. The problem is not the agenda, but the date: the notice is read on the 18th, according to whoever found it. Whoever saw it describes it with police-report precision. They left home in the morning: nothing. Went to the gym in the afternoon: nothing. Returned at night: nothing. And the next day, at two in the afternoon, the notice was posted. By then the meeting had already passed—if it even took place—and with it the option to directly overturn much of the list.

The first move was to claim in writing. Email to the property manager (administrador de fincas). Silence. Call to the office landline and mobile. No one answers. The response came later, and according to the affected party, it doesn't add up: the manager maintains that the notice was placed on the morning of the 17th and that there is a letter in every mailbox. In the complainant's mailbox, they assure, there was nothing. "What you say is a lie," they reply in writing, before asking if they have financial interests in the companies being hired.

The twelve points of contention

The agenda mixes maintenance, works, technology, and a fees section. Among the points: install chargers for electric cars; change garage access to a system using the phone—whoever wrote this bought the remote five months ago; fix a sidewalk lifted by roots that has been like this for a decade; install solar panels; renew fire extinguishers; approve a study of cornices and a estimulante ilegal reduction system in the garage; and settle maintenance debts. Two points cause friction: the removal of cars without insurance or valid vehicle inspection (ITV) from the garage and the compensation for the president for their duties.

Whoever opens the issue offers their interpretation: if that compensation is actually voted on, they oppose it, and propose hiring an accounting firm that costs less than the current manager. They add that the complex has eight blocks, two underground garages, and two surface parking areas. And a suspicion runs through the entire conversation: that the list of works benefits the manager's companies.

Can a car without ITV or insurance be removed from the garage?

It is not the community that can do so, although the headline repeats itself in many minutes. The obligation to have valid insurance and up-to-date ITV falls on the vehicle owner, and non-compliance is sanctioned: some point to fines between 600 and 3,000 euros for driving without insurance. But the authority to remove a vehicle is not in the hands of the board. Some point out that traffic regulations apply to public roads or private roads used by an indeterminate collective of users; if the garage is entered with a remote, it does not fit that assumption. Others maintain what common sense demands: a car without insurance is not covered, and if it burns or hits another, the problem lands on the community's insurance.

One participant recounts a case: in a private parking lot of an administration, a vehicle without proper documentation hit another parked car, and the judge held the administration responsible for not controlling access. Hence the repeated conclusion: demanding paperwork is reasonable; removing the car yourself, no.

The six-day notice that leaves the meeting in limbo

Participants recall that owners' meetings must be called with a minimum advance notice of six days, both ordinary and extraordinary. If the call is posted in the lobby on the same day as the meeting, the meeting is contestable, and whoever has it clear says it bluntly: it is not valid. In the case that opens the conversation, the manager themselves admits having put up the notice on the 17th, which in the best-case scenario leaves only hours between the notice and the 6:00 PM appointment.

Regarding who watches the watcher, as recalled by a participant who presides over their community, the manager works for the community, not vice versa. The president should request budgets and control commissions, because they are the only real counterweight. And when they don't, the bill is signed by the homeowner.

Fees of 250 euros and a switchboard of 13,000, according to several forum users

The conversation shifts toward the cost of maintaining a building and the cost of having it managed. Some speak of monthly fees of 250 euros per apartment in coastal complexes with pools and gardens, compared to the 80 euros another user says they pay in others with similar services and the 50 euros mentioned for a building without an elevator. In the chapter of works, one participant recounts changing the elevator switchboard for 13,000 euros so the cabin stops at all floors, and another recalls new motors at 6,000 euros each.

Some recall that payment of fees corresponds to the owner and not the tenant, and that managers cannot claim against defaulters unless there is an express agreement from the board. The repeated solution is the judicial route: formal demand, fast-track procedure, and seizure if there is no response. Also appearing is the exception: managers who are neighbors, professional economists, who keep the books for free and without commissions.

The list of repairs and the figures for each item, broken down one by one, explain why the thread starter suspects the budgets signed by others.

The notice appeared, according to the neighbor who found it, the meeting passed, and there is no record that the minutes reached the mailbox. The manager responded in writing denying the delay in the notice. There the story stalls: no deadline is clarified, and no one has yet explained who voted on the agenda items.