Unauthorized Work by a Unit Owner on Common Areas

Unauthorized work by a unit owner on common areas is one of the most delicate problems an administrator has to deal with: a balcony widened without a permit, a flue installed over the shared courtyard, a stairwell occupied with masonry work, or a system that alters the architectural appearance of the building. In every one of these cases the owner has acted on property that is not exclusively theirs, and the law offers precise tools to respond, starting with a formal notice and, if necessary, going all the way to court.

What separates lawful use from an abuse of common areas

A unit owner may use common areas according to their intended purpose, as long as this does not alter their function and does not prevent other owners from making equal use of them. When an intervention instead occupies a shared space exclusively, changes its structure, or affects the architectural appearance or the safety of the building, it goes beyond simple use and becomes a modification that requires the consent of the assembly. The practical difference is clear: using the landing to reach one's own flat is lawful, closing it off with a door to turn it into a private storage room is not.

The administrator's role in the face of unauthorized work on common areas

The administrator is responsible for protecting the common areas and, as soon as they become aware of an unauthorized intervention, they must act. The first step is always verification: an on-site inspection, photographic evidence and, where available, a comparison with the building's technical documentation or with the condominium bylaws. Once the irregularity is confirmed, the administrator sends a formal notice to the owner, requesting that the work be suspended and, if already completed, that the premises be restored within a reasonable period.

If the notice produces no result, the administrator may be authorized by the assembly to take legal action to obtain an order for restoration and, where the conditions are met, compensation for damages. In the presence of an imminent danger to the safety of the building, the administrator retains the power to intervene without waiting for a resolution, reporting to the assembly at the first available opportunity.

Improvements, alterations and limits set by the condominium bylaws

The condominium bylaws, when they exist and are contractual in nature, can set stricter limits than the law, for instance prohibiting certain uses or requiring assembly authorization for any intervention visible from outside. Work carried out in violation of the bylaws is unauthorized even if, taken in isolation, it would not affect the building's appearance or safety. For this reason, before evaluating an intervention, the administrator must always check both the general rules and the specific clauses of the bylaws in force.

Restoring common areas: timing and procedure

When the assembly or a court orders restoration, the responsible owner must remove the unauthorized work and return the common area to its previous condition, at their own expense. If the owner does not comply voluntarily, the condominium can carry out the restoration work itself and recover the costs, together with the legal expenses incurred to obtain the order. It is good practice to document the condition of the premises precisely before and after the unauthorized intervention, so as to have solid evidence in case of a dispute.

Damages and liability of the owner who carries out unauthorized work

Beyond the obligation to restore, the owner who carried out unauthorized work can be held liable for damages caused to other owners or to the common areas: water infiltration caused by a non-compliant opening, cracks generated by an unforeseen load, aesthetic damage that reduces the market value of the whole building. Liability is normally civil in nature, but if the intervention also involved building or planning violations, an administrative or criminal liability toward the competent public authorities may also arise, independent of the internal relationship with the condominium.

The use of shared property finds its natural limit in the equal right of the other owners to make the same use of it.

Assembly resolutions and majorities for authorizing or denying interventions

Some interventions on common areas, even if they qualify as improvements, can be authorized by the assembly with the majorities provided for, turning what would otherwise be an abuse into a legitimate modification. It is therefore important for the administrator, before proceeding with a drastic formal notice, to check whether the owner submitted a formal request and whether the assembly has already ruled on it, perhaps at an earlier meeting not fully remembered. Clear communication with all the owners involved often prevents a situation from escalating into a dispute.

Preventing unauthorized work through orderly management

Prevention remains the most effective tool: up to date condominium bylaws, timely communication of the rules to new owners and periodic monitoring of the building significantly reduce the risk of unauthorized interventions. Orderly, digital management of documentation, resolutions and communication with owners helps the administrator act promptly, and the features page of AmministraPro shows how to organize records, minutes and communications efficiently; anyone evaluating the cost of more structured management can check the pricing section.