How to spot suspicious items in the statement

Comparing with the budget and the previous year

The first check is comparing the final-account items with those of the approved budget, as well as with the previous year's statement. A significant deviation, up or down, is not in itself a problem, but it is a signal that deserves an explanation in the explanatory note.

If an item doubles without any tariff increase or extraordinary work, or if a recurring expense suddenly disappears, it is worth asking why. Legitimate variations always have an explainable cause: a contract renewed on different terms, an unplanned intervention, a change of supplier. The absence of an explanation is what makes a variation suspicious.

Expenses without a resolution or without a document

Extraordinary expenses must have been authorised by a meeting resolution. An extraordinary expense item that finds no match in any minutes is an important signal: it could be an unresolved work or an expense wrongly attributed to the condominium.

Likewise, every outflow must have a supporting document. An expense without an invoice or receipt, or with a generic document not traceable to a precise service, requires clarification. The owner has the right to inspect the supporting documents under Article 1130-bis, and an expense that remains undocumented after the request is the suspicious item par excellence.

New suppliers, round figures and generic expenses

Some clues recur often. A supplier that never appeared before, for a service previously carried out by another, deserves checking: who they are, how they were chosen, whether the meeting was informed. Round figures, such as exact amounts without decimals, can be entirely legitimate, but when they recur systematically on items that should derive from invoices with VAT they are a signal to look into.

Generic descriptions too, such as sundry expenses, reimbursements, unspecified interventions, reduce transparency. A correct management describes every item in a recognisable way. A pile-up of vague items proves no wrongdoing, but makes control impossible and justifies a request for detail from the manager.

The manager's fee and management expenses

Article 1129 of the Italian Civil Code requires the manager to state their fee analytically when accepting the engagement. A fee that in the statement differs from the agreed one, or inflated by unagreed accessory items, is an item to check by comparing it with the fee estimate approved by the meeting.

Watch also for repeated, undocumented management expenses, such as postage, stationery or secretarial costs: individually small, added up they can weigh. They are not necessarily irregular, but if they find no match in supporting documents and grow without reason they deserve clarification, especially when the contract with the manager provided for an all-inclusive fee.

How to investigate without making accusations

Spotting a suspicious item does not mean accusing the manager: many anomalies are clerical errors or imprecise attributions, easily corrected. The correct method is to request clarification on the item in writing, indicating the reason for the doubt, and to check the supporting document before the meeting. A calm and documented request resolves most cases without conflict.

A management platform like AmministraPro makes this check easier because it links every statement item to the invoice, the resolution and the cash movement, so that the owner can trace the origin of every expense from the reserved area. On /funzioni you can see how expenses, documents and allocation are linked, while /prezzi describes the plans. If after the clarification the item remains unjustified and the statement is approved anyway, the right remains to challenge the resolution before the court within thirty days.

Frequently asked questions