Practical guide
Handling urgent extraordinary maintenance
A leak flooding a stairwell, an elevator stuck with someone inside, a crack threatening a balcony's stability: in these cases the property manager cannot wait for the next scheduled meeting. Article 1135 of the Italian Civil Code grants an autonomous power to order urgent works, but that power has precise limits and an obligation that follows immediately: ratification by the owners. Anyone who handles an emergency without following these steps risks disputes over the expense, even when the intervention itself was genuinely necessary. This guide explains when the manager can act alone, how to document urgency, how and when to convene the ratification meeting, and how to keep the resulting expenses in order.
What Article 1135 says about urgent works
The fourth paragraph of Article 1135 states that the property manager may order extraordinary maintenance works without prior authorization from the assembly when they are urgent in nature. The law does not define urgency abstractly: case law ties it to a concrete and imminent risk of harm to people or to common property, serious enough that it cannot wait for the timing of an ordinary meeting. It is not enough that doing the work immediately is convenient or advisable: there must be an actual, present danger.
Typical cases include repairs to systems that endanger safety (electrical systems, elevators, centralized boilers), water infiltration and structural failures, and damage from weather events that compromises the roof or exposed common parts. Maintenance that is simply postponable, even if delayed a long time, does not qualify, nor do improvements that can reasonably wait for a resolution.
The duty to ratify and its timing
The power to act alone does not exempt the manager from reporting back to the owners. Article 1135 itself requires convening the assembly for ratification without delay, meaning with the greatest speed compatible with the practical organization of a meeting notice: there is no fixed number of days, but the Court of Cassation has repeatedly criticized unjustified delays as a sign of noncompliant management.
Ratification is not an empty formality: it is the moment when the assembly can verify that the urgency was real, that the expense was reasonable, and that the manager acted properly. If the assembly refuses ratification because it considers the urgency unfounded, the manager may still be entitled to reimbursement of necessary expenses incurred in good faith, but the dispute must be handled with careful minutes and, if needed, legal advice.
For this reason it is worth putting a dedicated item on the agenda of the first available meeting, with supporting documentation attached to the notice: quotes, invoices, photos of the damage, and any communications sent to authorities (fire brigade, health authority, network operator) if they were involved.
Documenting urgency to avoid later disputes
Proof of urgency is what protects the manager if a dispute arises later. It is worth building a minimal file for every intervention:
Photographs and video of the damage at the time it was reported, dated. A written report received from a resident or the doorkeeper flagging the problem, with a timestamp. At least one written quote from the contractor, dated to the intervention. A technical report if a professional was involved (engineer, elevator technician, electrician) confirming the risk. Copies of any communications sent to third-party authorities if the danger involved public safety.
Keeping this documentation organized, ideally in a digital archive linked to the building's records, makes it possible to respond quickly if an owner disputes the expense and cuts down the time spent reconstructing events months later.
Expense management: who pays, how costs are split, when to advance funds
Expenses for urgent works remain subject to the ordinary allocation criteria (general ownership shares or specific tables depending on the nature of the asset involved): what changes is only the timing of authorization, not the allocation criterion. If the building's fund lacks sufficient reserves, the manager may need to advance money personally or quickly request an extraordinary contribution from owners, to be regularized at ratification.
It is good practice to keep urgent expenses separate in the accounts from ordinary, already budgeted costs, so the financial statement makes them immediately recognizable to the assembly instead of blending them into the annual management plan. A management tool that tracks the timeline of the intervention alongside supporting documents helps here: AmministraPro lets a manager log the urgent intervention, attach quotes and invoices, generate the update note for the ratification agenda item, and review the expense management features and pricing structure at amministrapro.it/funzioni and amministrapro.it/prezzi.
Frequently asked questions
Can the property manager spend any amount without consulting anyone just because the work is urgent?
No. The autonomous power covers the decision to start the intervention without waiting for the assembly, not a blank check. The manager must still act with diligence, choose an expense proportionate to the damage being addressed, and report back to the owners without delay for ratification. A cost clearly disproportionate to the actual urgency can be challenged even if the work itself was necessary.
What happens if the assembly refuses to ratify the urgent intervention?
If the assembly concludes there was no real urgency, it can deny formal ratification. This does not automatically mean the manager must personally reimburse what was spent: if the intervention was genuinely necessary and the expense reasonable, the manager may still be entitled to reimbursement under the general principles governing management of another's affairs. This is an area prone to disputes, so it is worth documenting urgency thoroughly from the start to reduce the risk of reaching this scenario.
Within how many days must the ratification meeting be called after an urgent intervention?
The Civil Code does not set a precise number of days, but it requires that the meeting be convened without delay, meaning at the earliest point compatible with the practical timing of a meeting notice (notices, agenda). Unjustified delays of weeks or months have repeatedly been criticized as a sign of management noncompliant with Article 1135, even when the urgency of the original intervention was never in question.
Is urgent maintenance on a system serving only some owners split differently?
Yes. Urgency changes only the authorization process, not the criterion used to allocate the expense. If the system serves only part of the building or specific units (for example, a system serving only one building within a multi-building complex), the specific allocation tables for that asset apply, not the general ownership shares. This should be stated clearly in both the financial statement and the ratification resolution to avoid disputes over allocation.
Can management software help prove urgency in the event of a dispute?
Yes, having an organized timeline with the date the issue was reported, quotes, invoices and correspondence all attached to the same file makes it much easier to reconstruct events before the assembly or, if necessary, in court. With AmministraPro the manager can log the urgent intervention together with its supporting documents and link it directly to the ratification agenda item, keeping the whole expense process traceable.
Try AmministraPro
Accounting, thousandths-based cost splitting, meetings, communications and artificial intelligence in a single Italian software, compliant with UNI 10801 and GDPR.