Aller au contenu principal
Condo Fees: The Owners' Association Cannot Claim Them from an Unsummoned Buyer
Droit-immobilier

Condo Fees: The Owners' Association Cannot Claim Them from an Unsummoned Buyer

📅 Décision du 08 July 2015⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 11 vues📖 6 min de lecture

The French Supreme Court reminds that if the owners' association has not notified the buyer of the transfer (Article 6 of the 1967 Decree), it cannot claim from him the condominium fees arising after the sale, for lack of having summoned him to the general meetings.

Reference Decision: cc • No. 14-12.995 • 2015-07-08 • View the decision →

You have just bought a flat in Tarbes, in a residence with a swimming pool and garden. The roof repair works were voted before your purchase, but you received no summons to the general meetings. Yet the managing agent is claiming €8,000 in fees for these works from you. What should you do? This decision of the French Supreme Court of 8 July 2015 provides a clear answer: the owners' association cannot claim the fees from you if it did not summon you to the general meetings because it was not informed of your acquisition. But what exactly does that change? Let's decipher.

The facts: a story like many that happen every day

Mr. X, a property owner in Tarbes, bought a unit in a condominium in 2006. Just before the sale, the general meeting of 16 December 2005 had voted for rehabilitation works with a schedule of calls for funds. The following general meetings (4 December 2006 and 7 December 2007) modified the timetable. Mr. X was never summoned: the owners' association objected that it had not received notification of the transfer (change of owner) in accordance with Article 6 of Decree No. 67-223 of 17 March 1967. Nevertheless, the owners' association claimed from him payment of the fees corresponding to the works voted before his acquisition, but also those decided after. Mr. X refused to pay. The owners' association sued him. The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the association. Mr. X appealed to the Supreme Court. In other words, the owner was ordered to pay fees for decisions in which he could not participate, because he was not informed of his right to vote.

The reasoning of the court — dissected

The French Supreme Court quashed the appeal judgment and remanded the case. Its reasoning is as follows: an owners' association which opposes to the buyer the absence of notification of the transfer (i.e., the fact that the seller or buyer did not inform the managing agent of the change of owner) to justify the failure to summon to general meetings cannot claim from him payment of the condominium fees. In plain terms, if the association knew (or should have known) that the unit had changed hands, it must summon the new owner. If it does not, it loses the right to claim the fees from him. The legal basis? Article 6 of the 1967 Decree requires the selling co-owner to notify the transfer to the managing agent within 15 days. But if this notification did not take place, the association is not for all that released from its obligation to summon the current owner to general meetings, if it has knowledge of him. In this case, the association had been informed of the sale by other means (e.g., the notary). The Supreme Court considered that the Court of Appeal did not investigate whether the association had knowledge of the transfer. So it is not a reversal, but a classic application of the principle that one cannot deprive a co-owner of his right to vote and then claim money from him. Beware, however: if the association really has no means of knowing that the unit was sold, the fees remain due by the former owner.

What this changes for you — concretely

For the buyer: if you buy a unit and the managing agent does not summon you to the general meetings because the transfer was not notified to him, you can refuse to pay the fees arising after the sale, provided the association had knowledge of your acquisition. Concrete example: you buy a studio flat in Saint-Jean-de-Luz in May 2024. The managing agent continues to send the calls for funds to the former owner. You receive no summons. In July 2025, the managing agent claims €1,500 in fees from you for works voted in 2024. You can challenge this if you prove that the association knew you were the new owner (e.g., you communicated your address, or the notary informed the managing agent). For the owners' association: if it has not received notification, it must prove that it was unaware of the transfer. In practice, notaries often transmit the deed to the managing agent, so the association is deemed informed. For the seller: you must notify the transfer to the managing agent within 15 days, otherwise you risk remaining liable for the fees if the association is not informed.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

  • Check that the managing agent has been informed of your purchase: ask your notary to send a copy of the sale deed to the managing agent immediately after signature. Keep a proof of receipt.
  • Attend the first general meeting after your purchase: even without a summons, show up with your title deed. The managing agent will have to register you.
  • If you are the seller, notify the transfer within 15 days: send a registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt to the managing agent, otherwise you could be held liable to pay the fees after the sale.
  • In case of a dispute, contest the fees in writing: send a registered letter to the managing agent explaining that you were not summoned. If the managing agent insists, take the matter to the judicial court.

Besoin d'un conseil personnalisé ? Contactez Maître Zakine — première consultation 30 min à 45€.

This decision is part of a line protective of buyers. Already, in a judgment of 9 June 2010 (No. 09-13.697), the French Supreme Court had ruled that the owners' association cannot oppose the lack of notification to the buyer if the latter proves that the association had knowledge of the sale. The trend is therefore consistent: the association must act diligently. What few people know is that since 2015, notaries are required to inform the managing agent of the sale via the condominium register. This reduces disputes, but does not prevent errors. undefined, I have come across cases where the managing agent claimed fees from a buyer who had never received a summons for 3 years. The court cancelled the debt. For the future, case law may evolve towards a systematic obligation for the managing agent to verify the identity of co-owners via the register.

What you absolutely must remember

FAQ:

  1. Can the managing agent claim fees from me if I was never summoned? No, if it had knowledge of your purchase. Yes, if it was legitimately unaware.
  2. How to prove that the managing agent knew I was the owner? By the notary's notification, a letter you sent to him, or the fact that you lived on the premises.
  3. What to do if the managing agent claims fees for works voted before my purchase? You must pay them if the seller did not pay them, but you can then seek recourse against him.
  4. What is the time limit to contest? Act as soon as the first claim is made. The limitation period is 5 years.

Are you in a similar situation? A first 30-minute consultation with Maître Zakine (€45) can save you months of proceedings — and often much more. Book an appointment →

📌 Does this apply to your situation? Maître Cécile Zakine, French real estate lawyer, practises throughout France.
→ Avocat copropriété & ASL  |  → Browse all our legal articles

Questions fréquentes

Le syndic peut-il me réclamer des charges si je n'ai jamais été convoqué aux assemblées générales ?

Non, si le syndic avait connaissance de votre achat (par exemple, via le notaire). Oui, s'il l'ignorait légitimement et que la mutation ne lui a pas été notifiée.

Comment prouver que le syndic savait que j'étais propriétaire ?

Par la notification du notaire, un courrier que vous lui avez adressé, ou le fait que vous habitiez les lieux et payiez les charges.

Que faire si le syndic me réclame des charges pour des travaux votés avant mon achat ?

Vous devez les payer si le vendeur ne les a pas réglées, mais vous pouvez vous retourner contre lui. En revanche, si vous n'avez pas été convoqué aux assemblées qui ont voté les travaux, vous pouvez contester.

Quel délai pour contester une réclamation de charges ?

Agissez dès la première réclamation. Le délai de prescription est de 5 ans à compter de l'exigibilité de chaque charge.

Le vendeur est-il responsable si la mutation n'a pas été notifiée ?

Oui, le vendeur doit notifier la mutation au syndic dans les 15 jours. S'il ne le fait pas, il peut être tenu de payer les charges postérieures à la vente si le syndic n'a pas été informé.

Informations juridiques

  • Numéro: 14-12.995
  • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
  • Date de décision: 08 juillet 2015

Mots-clés

charges de copropriéténotification de mutationacquéreurassemblée généraledécret 67-223

Cas d'usage pratiques

1

Buyer not summoned in Tarbes

You buy a flat in Tarbes in January 2024. The managing agent continues to send the calls to the former owner. You receive no summons. In June 2025, the managing agent claims €2,000 in fees from you for roof works voted in 2023 and 2024.

Application pratique:

You can refuse to pay if you prove that the association knew you were the owner (e.g., the notary transmitted the deed). Send a registered letter to the managing agent explaining that you were not summoned. If he insists, take the matter to the judicial court. You could obtain cancellation of the debt.

2

Seller forgetting to notify the transfer in Saint-Jean-de-Luz

You sell your studio flat in Saint-Jean-de-Luz in March 2024. You forget to inform the managing agent. The buyer does not pay the fees. The managing agent claims €1,200 in unpaid fees from you for 2024.

Application pratique:

You are liable to pay if the association was not informed of the sale. To avoid this, notify the transfer by registered letter within 15 days of the sale. If you have already paid, you can seek reimbursement from the buyer.

3

Association unaware of the sale in Pau

The managing agent of a condominium in Pau received no notification of transfer after the sale of a unit. He continues to summon the former owner who does not pay. The managing agent discovers the sale 2 years later and claims €3,000 in fees from the buyer.

Application pratique:

The association can claim the fees from the buyer if it proves it was legitimately unaware of the sale. But if the buyer proves that the association should have known (e.g., the notary sent the deed), the debt may be cancelled. The association must be diligent: consult the condominium register.

Maître Cécile Zakine

À propos de l'auteur

Maître Cécile Zakine — Avocate au Barreau des Alpes-Maritimes, Docteur en Droit. Chaque article de ce magazine est rédigé à partir de l'analyse d'une décision de jurisprudence réelle, commentée et mise en perspective par les équipes de Maître Zakine.

Prendre rendez-vous →

Avertissement: Les analyses présentées sur ce site sont fournies à titre informatif uniquement et ne constituent pas des conseils juridiques personnalisés. Pour une consultation adaptée à votre situation, contactez un avocat.

Articles similaires en Droit-immobilier

Voir tout →

Servitude de passage et tierce opposition : protéger son droit d'accès en copropriété

Un copropriétaire peut-il s'opposer à la suppression d'une servitude de passage qui profite à son lot, même si le syndicat accepte la fin de l'enclave ? La Cour de cassation répond oui, reconnaissant un intérêt distinct pour agir en tierce opposition.

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Enclave et servitude : quand le droit du travail ne crée pas de passage forcé

La Cour de cassation rappelle que l'état d'enclave d'un fonds ne peut résulter des obligations réglementaires imposées aux entreprises en matière d'issues et dégagements. Ainsi, un propriétaire ne peut exiger un passage sur le fonds voisin au seul motif que son bâtiment doit respecter des normes de sécurité incendie.

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Lorsque, faute de convention écrite ou dans le silence, le préavis s'impose

Lorsque, faute de convention écrite ou dans le silence de cette convention, les parties à un contrat de transport public routier de marchandises n'ont pas stipulé une durée de préavis de rupture, cette durée est fixée par un contrat-type approuvé par décret pris en application de l'article L. 1432-4 du code des transports. Les dispositions de l'article L. 442-6, I, 5°, devenu L. 442-1, II, du code de commerce ne trouvent alors pas à s'appliquer. Il en va de même lorsque la convention écrite renvoie expressément à la clause du contrat-type fixant une telle durée. Lorsque les parties ont conclu un contrat écrit stipulant la durée du préavis de rupture, les dispositions de l'article L. 442-1, II, du code de commerce sont applicables. Dans cette hypothèse, l'auteur de la rupture qui a consenti à son partenaire un délai de préavis au moins égal à celui prévu au contrat-type dans sa version en vigueur à la date de la notification de la rupture, ne saurait voir sa responsabilité engagée sur le fondement de ce texte

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Explorez plus d'analyses juridiques en droit droit-immobilier

Tous les articles Droit-immobilier
★★★★★4.9/5 — Avis Google

Maître Zakine, Doctor of Law

Phone and video consultations available — Fast appointments

Book an appointment
First consultation 30 minutes — €45

🔒 Confidentiel • Sans engagement • Réponse rapide