Urgent Safety Works in a Condominium: the Manager's Duties

When a common part becomes dangerous, for instance a cornice threatens to detach or façade plaster falls, the manager must act at once to secure it, even without an assembly resolution. The basis is twofold: the conservatory acts on the common parts provided by Article 1130 of the Italian Civil Code and the power to order urgent works granted by Article 1135. Removing the danger takes priority over any formality; the meeting is informed immediately afterwards.

The duty of custody over the common parts

The condominium, through its manager, has custody of the common parts and is liable for the harm they cause to third parties. This duty requires monitoring the state of the common assets and acting promptly when a danger emerges. Ignoring a report of detachment or postponing the intervention while awaiting a distant meeting exposes the condominium, and by reflection the manager, to liability if people or property are harmed.

When the intervention is truly urgent

Urgent securing presupposes a present and concrete danger, not merely the general decay of a common part. Typical situations are:

• Cornices, balconies, or façade elements threatening to detach
• Plaster or fragments falling onto pavements or passageways
• Structural cracks signaling a risk to stability
• Unstable trees in common areas after a weather event
• Systems creating an immediate risk to personal safety

In these cases the manager orders the work needed to remove the danger: barriers, shoring, removal of unstable elements, first consolidation works. The rule is to act at once, but within the limits of what is needed to make the area safe.

Securing versus the definitive work

It is important to distinguish urgent securing from definitive restoration. The former is unavoidable and falls within the manager's autonomous power; the latter, often a genuine extraordinary maintenance work such as redoing the façade or the cornice, remains within the meeting's competence. After removing the danger with temporary measures, the manager submits to the owners the choice of the definitive work with comparative quotes. Confusing the two levels leads to exceeding the mandate on the non-urgent part.

Coordinating with public authorities

Where there is a danger to public safety, the municipal authority may also step in, for example with an order requiring securing within a deadline. In such cases urgency is further reinforced and the manager must act to comply with the requirements. Keeping any order and the correspondence with the authority provides solid proof of the necessity and timeliness of the intervention.

Documenting the danger and the response

The correctness of the urgent intervention is shown through documentation. It is good practice to obtain photographs of the dangerous state, request a technical report when the situation allows, and note the time of the report and of the measures taken. These elements justify the expense at ratification and protect the manager should anyone challenge the need to act without waiting for the meeting.

Reporting to the meeting and allocating the expense

After securing, the manager convenes the meeting without delay, reports on the intervention, and proposes ratification of the temporary expense, along with the decision on the definitive work. Allocation follows the criteria of the common part involved, usually the ownership thousandths (millesimi), save special criteria for certain elements. Transparency over costs incurred in the emergency is essential to keep the owners' trust.

Keeping the state of the common parts under control

Preventing dangers requires constant vigilance and an orderly record of reports and checks. With a platform like AmministraPro the manager records the state of the common parts, tracks the reports received, documents urgent interventions, and prepares the ratification with the allocation already calculated: the features are on /funzioni, the plans for firms on /prezzi.