Dear Fellow Owners,
We kindly request that you to take a few minutes to review the comments from our solicitor and the SRIOC before signing any new management contracts proposed by Iva and Petya of Elite Homes.
Please be aware that this management contract has been discussed between Boyan, Iva and Petya.
- When you sign the closed complex management contract, you agree to give the management company the authority to take legal action against you, including involving bailiffs and preventing you from entering the complex, if you fail to comply with the terms of the contract. It is important to be very careful in what you sign.
- Once a contract is signed, it becomes legally binding and can only be terminated by mutual agreement of both parties or through the courts.
- Owners who purchased apartments between 2004 to 2011 would have signed a management contract with Sunset. Until all owners had to cancel these management contracts through the courts.
This was due to the fact that the judge ruled in favour of the owners, stating that Boyan and his management team did not fulfil their obligations as outlined in the contract. So why would owners go there again?
- If you have already signed this contract, we highly recommend that you inform Iva, Petya (Elite Homes), and the Steering Committee to cancel it before it is too late. If you leave too late, you will become legally bound, which means you must follow all the rules and regulations outlined in the contract and pay all related bills, including future ones. ie utility bills which are not your responsibilities.
- Please remember that only the owners who sign this contract will be bound by it. Those who have not signed are not bound by the terms of the contract.
- It is important for new owners to consider the opinions and experiences of those who have been involved in Sunset for the past 14 years. We have witnessed various attempts to deceive us over the years. Our insights as fellow owners are invaluable, which sets us apart from estate agents who only became involved when the resort was shut down..
- Owners who sign these contracts are forfeiting their right to voice their opinions or vote on decisions at an AGM. This is unfortunate as online voting will soon be available in the coming months. We urge all owners to wait and have the opportunity to vote online from the convenience of their own homes. This eliminates the need for POAs and travelling to Sunset during the winter months or when direct flights are not available, As done previously by Iva, Petya, and Sunset Management.
COMMENTS FROM OUR SOLICITOR
First, I want to write in plain English about the regime of closed-gate complexes.
The law regulates how common areas in condominium buildings within gated residential complexes can be managed. This can only be done through a written contract with notarized signatures between the property developer (investor) and the individual owners of the units.
- The law creates a special management regime for gated residential complexes. It’s essential to interpret it narrowly, as it only applies to these specific complexes, not all condominiums. If no contract is in place, the condominium law may apply, but the contract takes precedence.
- The contract is between the property developer (investor) and the owners or occupants of the units in the gated complex. The investor is the one who sells the units and owns the common areas, while the other party can be an individual or a business. The law does not provide the term investor; however, according to available legal practice, investors can only be the corporation of Boyan that has built the complex.
- The contract is a private agreement (contract) made by the property developer (investor) and is related to the sale and management of the properties.
- The contract specifies the responsibilities of the property developer (investor) in managing the common areas and the obligations of the owners or occupants. The law does not provide any specific context or minimal level of consumer protection in the Condominium law.
- The contract must be in writing with notarized signatures and registered in the property register to be enforceable. Third parties, like potential buyers, will know about the contract through registration, and it will be binding on them if they acquire the property.
- The contract should be registered; the registration makes the contract enforceable against third parties.
In order to secure 100% coverage, the signatures of those contracts are made at the stage of buying the apartment, making a condition of the real estate deal.
We are in a situation where it is stated that a contract is proposed by Iva for the future.
However, there are several issues. Under the current law, only the property developer can be the managing side of this contract.
Let’s analyse the possible scenarios:
- Fraction of Owners Sign the Contract: If only a fraction of owners have signed the contract, those who have signed will be bound by the terms of the contract. It means they have agreed to the responsibilities and obligations outlined in the contract, including the terms of the management of the shared areas. They will be legally obligated to comply with the contract.
Since the contract contains notarized signatures, it carries additional legal weight and validity. This means the investor can seek to enforce the contract through legal means, including forced preliminary execution by a bailiff, if necessary. Preliminary execution allows the investor to take certain actions to ensure compliance with the contract’s terms, such as securing payment for services provided or enforcing specific obligations.
- Refusal to Sign the Contract:
Owners who have not signed the contract cannot be forced to abide by its terms since they haven’t agreed to it. They retain their rights and responsibilities under the general law governing the condominium management Act.
It’s important to note that the owners who have not signed the contract are not legally bound by its terms. They retain their rights and obligations under the general law governing condominium management Act.
In conclusion, the contract signed by a fraction of the owners is binding for those who have signed it, and the investor can take legal action to enforce the contract’s terms. But the contract does not apply to owners who have not signed it.
Problems that Arise with a Change in Regime:
- Never-Ending Legal Struggle: Transitioning to individual contracts may result in a continuous legal struggle. With multiple owners having separate (and possibly different) contracts and obligations, disagreements may arise over responsibilities, costs, and the quality of services provided.
If there was one case per building, if an individual contract is signed, every owner has to make his own legal case.
However, he starts with a disadvantage because of the nature of this contract (notarized signatures); he can be forced by the bailiff to pay first and then contest in court later.
- Legal uncertainty
There were court decisions for those who tried to terminate those contracts, and court cases related to terminating the contracts within the closed complex.
One of them was successful, while the other was unsuccessful. These court decisions can set precedents for future cases, but they can also lead to additional legal battles as owners might contest unfavourable rulings or try to find loopholes in the decisions.
In the successful example, an owner managed to terminate their contract with the management company by proving some contractual violation and mismanagement of the complex as the legal basis for termination. This might encourage other dissatisfied owners to follow the same path, leading to a series of similar court cases.
PLEASE NOTE THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED BACK IN 2011 AS DISCUSSED ABOVE.
On the other hand, in the unsuccessful example, the court ruled against the owner who attempted to terminate their contract. This outcome could discourage other owners from attempting the same, but it may also prompt the owner in question to pursue further legal actions or appeals.
Overall, these court decisions contribute to the legal complexity surrounding the closed complex. As owners witness both successful and unsuccessful attempts to terminate contracts, they might have varied interpretations of the law or contractual agreements. This could lead to a never-ending legal struggle as dissatisfied owners keep challenging the existing contracts and management arrangements, seeking better terms or alternative solutions.
However, despite being bound by these contracts and fulfilling their payment obligations, there is no guarantee that the closed complex will be opened as desired.
- Unpredictability
The closed status of the complex is primarily due to the mismanagement by the management company, especially their failure to pay the electricity and water bills. This situation leaves the owners in a difficult position where they are fulfilling their end of the agreement but are not receiving the services or benefits, they were promised.
Теодор Шейков
адвокат
Theodor Sheykov
Attorney at law