A single owner disconnecting from a shared service

A single owner disconnecting from a shared service, in particular from the centralised heating system, is a right recognised by law but subject to precise conditions. Anyone who wants to disconnect to install an independent system must respect the limits set by article 1118 of the Italian Civil Code and continue to contribute to certain costs. Understanding when disconnection is lawful and which charges remain is essential for the administrator and the owners' meeting, who have to manage the disconnected owner's position correctly in the following years.

When disconnecting from a shared service is lawful

The fourth paragraph of article 1118 of the Civil Code states that an owner may give up the use of the centralised heating or air conditioning system if the disconnection does not cause significant operating imbalances or increased costs for the other owners. There are therefore two conditions: no significant technical imbalance of the system and no significant rise in the costs borne by those who stay connected. If even one of these conditions is not met, the disconnection is not lawful.

No meeting authorisation is required

Disconnection is a right of the individual owner and does not require authorisation from the meeting. The owner does not have to ask permission, but must be able to prove that the legal conditions are met. Case law has also clarified that disconnection is possible even when the condominium rules forbid it, because the right recognised by law prevails over the contrary clause. It is nevertheless good practice to notify the administrator of the intention to disconnect, attaching the technical documentation.

The costs the disconnected owner still bears

The owner who disconnects is not freed from every contribution. Article 1118 specifies that the one who gives up remains bound to contribute only to the costs for extraordinary maintenance of the system and for its conservation and bringing up to standard. They do not pay the consumption and ordinary running costs of the system, from which they have effectively broken away by no longer using the service. The distinction between consumption costs and conservation costs therefore becomes central in the allocation.

Why some costs remain due

The disconnected owner remains a co-owner of the shared system and keeps the possibility of reconnecting in the future. For this reason they continue to contribute to the costs concerning the survival and safety of the plant, such as extraordinary maintenance, conservation and bringing up to standard. It would be unfair for someone who retains co-ownership and a potential right of reuse not to help keep alive the common asset of which they remain a holder.

The burden of proof on the one disconnecting

The proof that the disconnection causes neither operating imbalances nor increased costs lies with the owner who intends to disconnect. In practice this means presenting technical documentation, usually a report drawn up by a professional, attesting that the disconnection is compatible with the remaining system. Without this demonstration the disconnection can be challenged and the owner can be required to keep paying the full share, including the consumption costs they thought they had shed.

The ban on renouncing indivisible common parts

Disconnecting from a service must not be confused with renouncing the right over the common parts. The second paragraph of article 1118 states that an owner cannot renounce their right over the common parts to avoid paying the related costs. An owner cannot therefore, for example, renounce the use of the lift or the stairs so as not to contribute to the conservation costs. Disconnection from the heating system is an exception expressly provided for by law, not a general rule extendable to every shared service.

The administrator's role

It is up to the administrator to handle the disconnection correctly on the accounting side. They must update the allocation criteria for the disconnected owner, excluding them from consumption costs and keeping them in the extraordinary and conservation ones. They must also keep the report and the disconnection notice and check that significant imbalances or increased costs do not emerge over time. An orderly approach avoids disputes and wrong allocations that could be challenged by the other owners.

Managing differentiated allocations with software

A disconnection introduces a differentiated allocation criterion: some items must be charged to everyone, others only to owners still connected. Doing this by hand increases the risk of error at every financial year. With management software you can set up separate allocation tables by type of expense, so the disconnected owner automatically contributes only to the items due and is excluded from the others, with an allocation that stays consistent over time.

AmministraPro lets you manage millesimal tables and allocation criteria differentiated by expense item, automatically applying the right allocation even when owners are disconnected from the shared system. You can see how it works on the features page or compare the plans in the pricing section.