Decisions in residential complexes regarding coexistence manuals, assemblies and appointments of administrators could be sued if they do not comply with current regulations.warned lawyer Nora Pabón Gómez, consulted by The Time.
One of the main errors is to believe that the cohabitation manual is part of the horizontal property regulations.when in reality it is an independent document that must comply with Law 675 of 2001.
The specialist explained that this manual does not require public writing or registration and can be approved by the assembly without a qualified quorum.which gives it greater flexibility compared to the regulations.
The document, although it is not part of the regulations, must respect its provisions and serve as a practical tool to regulate daily coexistence. Its preparation may involve the administrator, the board of directors, the fiscal auditor and the residents, who know the needs of the complex.
Another point that generates controversy is the holding of assemblies outside the first months of the year. The lawyer indicated that the law establishes that these must be carried out at least once a year on the date set in the regulations or, in its absence, within the first three months of the budget period.
However, he clarified that a call with greater advance notice does not automatically constitute an irregularity, as long as the minimum of 15 days prior notice is respected. Even so, he warned that failure to comply with the deadlines could open the door to legal challenges.
In the case of boards of directors, frequent errors also occur. Although some regulations establish a specific number of members, Law 675 allows this body to function with an odd number of three or more members.
This implies that, if the number provided for in the regulations is not reached but the legal minimum is met, the election may be valid. Otherwise, leaving the council unformed would generate greater administrative problems for the co-ownership.
The appointment of administrators is another of the issues that generates the most conflict. The specialist explained that the owners’ assembly is in charge of appointing it, unless there is a council with that power, but this process must be coordinated with the current contracts.
When there is an acting administrator with an active contract, this must be respected or terminated as agreed. Therefore, it is key that the assembly clearly defines the start date of the new appointment to avoid gaps in the administration.
One of the most critical aspects is legal representation. The lawyer pointed out that this can only be exercised by the person who is registered with the competent authority, generally the local Mayor’s Office, in charge of certifying the existence and legal representation of the co-ownership.
This means that, even if a new administrator has been elected, he or she will not be able to fully exercise until his or her appointment is formally registered, which can cause confusion when signing contracts or making decisions.
The coexistence of assembly decisions, current contracts and administrative procedures is one of the factors that generates the most legal risks in horizontal property. Therefore, it is recommended to review each case in detail to avoid later conflicts.
These situations reflect how seemingly minor errors in the internal management of the complexes can escalate into legal disputes, affecting the administration and coexistence between the owners.
