Bill 24,640, currently under discussion in the Legislative Assembly’s Legal Affairs Committee, proposes significant changes to the condominium ownership regime that have raised concerns among condominium owners, legislators, and legal experts.
One of the most controversial points is that the project would allow modifications to the characteristics of the condominium without the individual consent of the condominium owner, even with retroactive effect. This includes the possibility of a condominium being divided, merged with another, or incorporated into other properties, without requiring the express approval of the affected condominium owner.
What implications does this have for condominium owners?
Each person chooses their home based on their means and preferences: some seek a condominium with large common areas such as a pool, gym, clubhouse, or sports courts, and others prefer a simpler, quieter condominium, partly due to the impact on monthly payments or the cost of maintaining common areas they never use.
For example, a person may have purchased a condominium without recreational areas precisely to maintain a lower fee, or simply because they aren’t interested in it, or because they prefer a more peaceful and quiet environment. However, under the new legal proposal, that property could be merged with another condominium that does have more expensive amenities, which would automatically increase the monthly fee and also change the conditions they were trying to avoid.
Growing concern
This possibility of modifying the conditions under which a property was acquired has generated concern not only among the affected condominium owners, but also in the legislative sphere. Several representatives have publicly expressed their concern about the implications of the bill, and the issue has already begun to be addressed in discussion forums, newscasts on national television channels, and other mainstream media outlets. This debate is gaining momentum in public opinion due to the potential impact it would have on hundreds of thousands of families who acquired their homes under clear rules, but are now at risk of having their conditions modified without their consent and with retroactive effects.
