MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY GENERAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY OF OWNERS “EH-6 – MONTILLA IV”
HELD ON THE 19th JUNE 2019
In Orihuela Costa, at 16:30 p.m. on the 19th June 2019 the meeting started, being the second calling for the Ordinary General Meeting of the Community of Owners ‘E.H.6 – Montilla IV’, held at the Baker Foundation, being present and represented 39 owners, according to the following agenda:
ATTENDANTS AND REPRESENTED OWNERS
Property Owners: 401 (representing 405 and 437), 403, 404, 407, 410, 412 (representing 413, 430, 436, 464), 416, 419, 423 (representing 424, 425, 456), 426,427 (represented by Ignacio Pintado), 428, 433 (representing 438, 463), 447, 451, 452 (represented by Maite), 453 (represented by Rune Moldstad), 454, 458 (representing 414, 446, 459, 465, 470, 485, 487), 478 (representing 477),
| Present | Represented by | Coeficient (%) | Present | Represented by | Coeficient (%) |
| 401 | 0,9 | 438 | 433 | 1,07 | |
| 403 | 1,24 | 463 | 433 | 1,22 | |
| 404 | 1,24 | 447 | 0,8 | ||
| 405 | 401 | 1,24 | 451 | 1,07 | |
| 407 | 0,9 | 452 | Maite | 0,90 | |
| 410 | 0,8 | 453 | Rune Moldstad | 0,8 | |
| 412 | 0,96 | 454 | 0,9 | ||
| 413 | 412 | 1,24 | 458 | 0,9 | |
| 430 | 412 | 0,9 | 414 | 458 | 0,9 |
| 436 | 412 | 0,9 | 446 | 458 | 0,9 |
| 464 | 412 | 1,23 | 459 | 458 | 0,8 |
| 416 | 0,90 | 465 | 458 | 1,15 | |
| 419 | 0,96 | 470 | 458 | 1,15 | |
| 423 | 0,9 | 485 | 458 | 1,15 | |
| 424 | 423 | 0,8 | 487 | 458 | 1,22 |
| 425 | 423 | 1,07 | 478 | 1,15 | |
| 456 | 423 | 0,8 | 477 | 478 | 1,15 |
| 437 | 401 | 0,8 | |||
| 426 | 0,96 | ||||
| 427 | Ignacio Pintado | 1,24 | |||
| 428 | 0,9 | ||||
| 433 | 0,96 |
1.- President’s Report
The President welcomed all the attendants and she read her report. We enclose the said report.
She said that was a day for double celebration; Mark and Nikki had had a grandchild, for which everyone congratulated them and she has been the President of the community for 10 years now.
2.- Approval of the Expenses of last year
The Administrator indicated that, as they usually do, the report of Expenses had been sent together with the Calling so that the neighbours could have time to study the same, and he also indicated that those had been revised by Mike and Alan, who had confirmed they were correct.
Not having any questions, they proceeded to the voting of the Expenses, which were unanimously approved by the attendants and the represented Owners.
3.- Election of the Board-Members.
The Administrator wanted to thank the President for the work carried out, as well as the work of the rest of the Board and those Owners who had called into their office informing about Community issues.
They also thanked Mike and Alan for the job they do, controlling and supervising the accounts, and also Steff for dealing with a number of issues when Norah had been absent.
After this, candidates were asked for the different positions of the Board. Norah said she was willing to continue one more year and everyone agreed.
Then, both Steff and Alan said they were happy to continue being Vice-Presidents and everyone agreed.
Afterwards, candidates were asked to be Members of the Board, being once more the candidates for this year: Rita, Paul, Eric. Other new candidates were John Eyles, Andy Little, Magnus Sigurdsson, Neil Armstrong and Henry Clarke. Everyone showed their agreement.
The Administrator, as they do every year, wanted to put their position to the vote to continue one more year. They were re-elected unanimously by the attendants and represented Owners, for which they thanked all the attendants.
After the voting, the Community Board of the Community of Owners E.H.6 – Montilla IV was unanimously constituted as follows:
President: Norah Bond (house 433)
Vice-president: Stephanie Tempest (house 478) and Alan Cole (house 423),
Members: Mike Hampson (house 404); Rita Clarke (house 419), John Eyles (house 426), Paul Wyart (house 428), Eric Bond (house 433), Andy Little (house 452), Magnus Sigurdsson (house 404), Henry Clark (house 407), Neil Heginbotham (house 439)
Secretary-Administrator: The company Comunidades OCSI, represented by its registered property administrators Salvador Solano Salmerón and José Javier Ferrández Torres.
4.- Presentation for approval of the Budget for the following year.
The Administrator said that the Budget had also been sent together with the Calling so that the neighbours could have time to study the same, as they did every year.
He said that the community was in a good financial situation.
Some of the neighbours mentioned the possibility of reducing the fees and the Administrator said they’d rather keep the same fees as this year they had some projects. He said that, in the future, they could consider reducing the fees.
They asked about the reason why the community account is not accruing interests. The Administrator said that the community doesn’t have a fix term currently, although fix term does not have interests either, and thus the only products that can accrue interests are fund investments, but the problem is that they also have the risk of losing money and they would not recommend them.
Others asked, in case they were to sell the property, whether their money is refunded. They were answered it would not be refunded, and the money would remain in the community account.
They mentioned that the community has money, some 41.000€; the Administrator said this was not correct, as 7.500 € will be used for the project of painting the blocks. They also said that the new gate has to be paid with that money, together with the sliding gate situated opposite the commercial centre.
Not having any questions, they proceeded to the voting of the Budget, being unanimously approved by the attendants and represented Owners.
5.- Approval and settlement of Owner’s debt with the community, and authorisation to the President and Administrator to sign Power of Attorney for legal claims in the name of the community, if necessary and to put legal complaint to claim the arrears balance.
Debtors list on 19th June 2019 (debt up to 31/03/2019):
| Property | Owner | Debt | Property | Owner | Debt |
| Garage 13 Bq 2 | Maria Elizabeth Duffy* | 351,53 | Apart. 462 | Elaine Pimm | 241,57 |
| Apart. 480 | Maria Elizabeth Duffy* | 2.216,87 | Apart. 469 | Paul Edward Drew* | 749,57 |
| Garage 21 Bq 1 | Vincent Gardiner | 25,44 | Apart. 472 | Lee Phillip Hardman | 113,48 |
| Apart. 475 | Vincent Gardiner | 140,97 | Apart. 476 | Joan Gunnar Eric Nordeke | 255,34 |
| Property 406 | Jean Culligan | 541,70 | Apart. 481 | Bryan Raymond Bull* | 1.474,57 |
| Property 422 | Amanda C. McKnight* | 2.484,47 | Apart. 483 | Tomasz Foltyn | 807,15 |
| Property 435 | Thomas Delaney | 758,38 |
* Legal actions have been started against those Owners marked with an asterisk. Legal costs will have to be added to the above indicated amount.
On behalf of the Art. 15.2. of the law of Horizontal Property: “Owners, who at the time of the Assembly are not current in the payment of all their debts owed to the community (…), shall not be allowed to vote”.
It was said that the community continues with those legal proceedings initiated in order to collect debts. It was reminded that thanks to the agreement of OCSI with a solicitors’ office, the community will have to pay beforehand only a minimum part of the total cost of the proceedings, which will be around 50€ (if they didn’t have this agreement with the solicitor, in order to initiate legal action one must pay an initial cost of some 300 or 400 €.), the cost of the legal notification sent to the debtor (some 12 €) and any other extra expenses that may arise. The Solicitor will not charge the rest of his fees until the debtors have deposited in the community account the amount of their outstanding fees, plus the amount of the judicial expenses; the latter amount will be the one paid to the Solicitor. It was likewise indicated that the community is going to try an agency located in the UK to collect debts from the debtors.
After this, it was unanimously decided by the attendants and the represented Owners that, together with the Minutes, the estate of their respective accounts shall be sent to those Owners who have debts. If within the period of five days after having received the same they don’t pay up their debts, then the Administrator and the President were expressly authorised to proceed with the legal claim at the Courts. The Administrator and the President were also authorised to grant Power of Attorney in favour of the Solicitor and the Barrister in order to carry out the said judicial claim.
It was also unanimously agreed by the attendants and the represented Owners that all expenses arisen from the said claims, such us administration fees, delivery of certificates, burofax, solicitor, barrister, etc, shall be faced by the Owner with debts.
We enclose a form for bank direct debit for those owners who don’t pay like this yet, which shall be completed with the twenty digits and the IBAN of their account in Spain and sent to us by post, fax or e-mail, so we can send community fees to your account.
6.- Eazy Gates Presentation. The main pedestrian gate has been installed, to be monitored.
a.-The remaining side gates to be discussed and voted. To discuss the possibility of installing an opening system for the pedestrian gates, decide whether all the pedestrian gates with the same system that is already installed in C/ Niagara next to the blocks.
b.- Vehicle sensor pads for vehicle access gates. To avoid abusive use of the vehicle gates by the pedestrian gate, installing a sensor system to detect cars. With this system the vehicle gate would open only for cars. (In case of being approved this proposal it will be subject to obtaining authorization by the Town Hall). Cost: €1,600 + VAT (two sensors one interior and the other one for the exterior.)
c.- Authorize a Maintenance Contract with Easy Gates to maintain all the access gates regularly.
Neil Oliphant went to the meeting, as director of Eazy Gate, in order to make a brief presentation and answer possible questions that the neighbours may have.
He explained that they had just installed a system to open the gate of Calle Niagara, which was currently working properly, and the idea, if everything continued like this, was to install the rest of the gates.
They had also studied the possibility of putting a sensor in both sides of the vehicle door, which will only detect vehicles, therefore preventing pedestrians from using the vehicle gate to access the community walking. This way they could control who is accessing the community, as some times people not belonging to the community have parked their vehicles inside the community.
Neil said that both systems would increase security and access control.
They asked whether the sensor to open the vehicle gate would detect wheelchairs. They said it would. It would also detect bikes and scooters. He said that there would be a sensor on the ground on the public road and then to go out of the community you would only have to be over this sensor.
Some said that this system could mean a traffic problem as vehicles would queue to go in an out from the community, Neil said that this was exactly what was currently happening.
Some neighbours asked whether it was necessary to install that kind of sensor now that they had installed a code to access the community. Others said, in their opinion, this was necessary, as this would limit the use of the vehicle gate by the pedestrians.
They asked whether there was a system of emergency calls if anything happens, Neil said that, in case they don’t sign a maintenance contract, the cost of the travel expenses is 50€+VAT; in case of having a contract, this would be included in the Price. They asked about the Price, Neil said this was 285€+VAT per gate and per year. Then, they would make a 20% discount on each additional gate.
They indicated this was not a 24H service, but the company replied within 48H, but they do not have night or emergency service.
It was said that the codes can be changed as many times as necessary. It was also said that in case the supply is cut off, there was a battery system to open the gate until the supply is back, so there were other additional services that could be considered according to the community needs.
Several owners said that this was a lot of information and they asked Neil to make a report on the situation of the remaining gates and a proposal of what to do, in order to inform all the neighbours and that the Board has the faculty to decide; everyone showed their agreement.
7.- Authorisation for building works:
Before starting with the voting, the Administrator wanted to explain the way to vote. He said that, for building work issues, unanimous voting of attendants and represented Owners is required.
He said that some years ago, in 2013 the law changed and works can be approved since then with 3/5 of the Owners which form 60% of the Community, but the 60% of the neighbours must be present and/or represented on the date of the meeting. In this case, there were 91 neighbours, so at least 55 neighbours would be necessary to attend, there being only 39 neighbours present or represented today, for this reason, they are not the minimum 3/5 required and they cannot approve any building works.
a.- Authorisation to the Owners of property 404 to change metal grating (terrace on back and frontal side) for opaque crystals panels. Authorisation to extend their back and front terrace. Please find plans attached.
Several Owners said that, in their opinion, if the Owner liked a more modern type of property, he should have bought in another urbanisation, more modern, as this one had a more traditional style and neighbours wanted to continue like this.
Others mentioned that they had already agreed in the case of another neighbour in previous years to put crystal panels. In their opinion, it was complicated now to reject the approval to this neighbour. It was approved at the meeting held on the 20th June 2018.
Firstly, they voted the crystal panels with the following result: 11 votes against, issued by properties: 410, 426, 423, 424, 425, 456, 433, 463, 438, 452, 419; 2 abstentions of the properties 478 and 477. Therefore, this point was rejected. The administrator said that, if this had been approved in previous years, the proposal could not really be rejected, but in this case they could not either take legal actions as community in case the neighbour had the crystal panels installed, although any neighbour could.
Then, the extension of the front porch was put to the vote, with the following result: 16 votes in favour issued by the following properties: 458, 459, 487, 446, 485, 465, 470, 414, 404, 453, 427, 412, 464, 430, 436, 413; 2 abstentions issued by the properties 451 and 454, and 16 votes against..
Therefore, the proposal was rejected as there was not unanimity of the attendants and represented Owners.
b.- Authorisation to the Owners of property 412 to extend their solarium. To take off part of the roof to turn it into a new terrace, to reduce the solarium space to build an extra room and to remove part of the stairs and cover the other part so they are inside the property. Please find plans attached.
Several Owners said that, in their opinion, these works could not be approved without pictures of the likely result. The Owner said that they should have been sent, and the Administrator said that he had sent all the documentation that they had received.
The Owner said that, once the works had been carried out, they would not be noticed, as the appearance would be the same than the works carried out at the time by Villamartin.
One of the neighbours said that, these works would mean having direct views to the room of the neighbour, which would entail a lack of privacy.
Not having other comments, this was put to the vote with the following result: 16 votes in favour issued by the properties:
458, 459, 487, 446, 485, 465, 470, 414,404, 453, 427, 412, 464, 430, 436, 413; 2 abstentions issued by the properties 451 and 454, and 15 against.
Therefore, the proposal was rejected as there was not unanimity of the attendants and represented Owners.
c.- Authorisation to the Owners of property 415 to install an awning on the solarium similar to other properties. To put balustrade on the perimeter wall of their garden and to install a gate to access to the pool. Please find plans attached. PLEASE I NEED YOU TO CONFIRM THE COLOURS
It was unanimously approved by the attendants and represented Owners, as long as they respect the materials and the appearance of the community in already existing, similar works. This community approval does not exonerate the Owner from the obligation to have the necessary licenses and permits that the Town Hall of Orihuela may require, if any.
8.- Start legal action against the Owners of property 412 and 427 for altering the aesthetic, for proceeding with the construction/extension of terrace/solarium at the rear of their property overlooking the pool without the previous authorization from the community. Cost per property and legal action: +/-3.000€.
The Administrator said that the representative of the property 427 was also advising the Owner of the property 412, and according to the Representative this point could not be voted for the property 412 as the point has not been correctly written. The extension of the terrace of this property was in the front of the property and not the rear. The Administrator said he would ask their Solicitor, as this was what the Owner applied for at the time and what was rejected. He also said that the point is to vote the modifications made by the Owners without the Community consent, and not being the point correctly written does not mean that all, the Owner included, know what is being discussed.
Several Owners said that the works of the property 427 had been done for more than 11 years and that nobody had complained or said anything.
Several Owners said that, in their opinion, if those two extensions are accepted and they don’t do anything, others could do the same, as the Owner of the property 404 has requested at this meeting, which would affect the privacy of everyone. He said that terraces had been designed by Villamartin in such a way that the privacy of everyone could be respected and extending the same means that the neighbour properties can be seen.
Owners of properties 412/427 said that at the time they asked for permission to the next door neighbours and they agreed, but they did not ask permission from the community.
They said that many properties have the same in Montilla III and everything is fine there. The Administrator said that each community works differently and maybe in that community they authorise that kind of works but maybe not here.
Others said that people buy in this community just by the fact that the appearance is maintained.
Some neighbours mentioned that the Owner of the property 427 said that if anyone was to complain, he would be happy to remove the works.
They asked about the results if legal actions were inintiated and the Administrator said that the Judge had the final decision and the community had to report the said works because they have never given permission to carry out such works.
Not having more comments, this was put to the vote to take actions against property 427 with the following result: 18 votes in favour of taking legal actions issued by the properties 419, 454, 447, 428, 401, 405, 437, 403, 423, 424, 456, 425, 433, 463, 438, 478, 477, 410, 1 abstention issued by the property 426, and 17 votes against taking legal actions issued by the properties: 458, 459, 487, 446, 485, 465, 470, 414, 404, 453, 427, 412, 464, 430, 436, 413 and 407. Therefore, it is approved by majority of attendants and represented Owners to take legal actions.
As it was indicated at the beginning of this point, they will see with the Solicitor whether legal actions can be also started against the property 412 due to the mistake in the description of the works. This was put to the vote in case this would be possible, with the following result: 19 votes in favour of taking legal actions issued by the properties : 419, 454, 447, 428, 426, 423, 424, 456, 425, 433, 463, 438, 401,437, 405, 403, 410, 477, 478; 1 abstention issued by the property 451, 16 votes against: 458, 459, 487, 446, 485, 465, 470, 414, 404, 453, 427, 412, 464, 430, 436, 413. Therefore, in case of being possible, legal actions will be taken, being approved by majority of attendants and represented owners.
9.-Painting the individual properties
a.- Decide whether to paint individually or to contract a company to paint all the properties at the same time. If it is decided to do it individually, to decide a deadline for all the properties to have the painting completed.
b.- In case of approval to contract a company the cost per property would be as detailed here below. In case of being approved to decide the date to pay the extra fee payment, to decide how to finance the painting of the properties from debtors.
* Quote from Pinturas Carmelo SL:
- Upstairs Bungalow (similar to nº 408): 950€+VAT
- Downstairs Bungalow (similar to nº 407): 850€+VAT
- Duplex properties (similar to nº 404 & 405): 900€+VAT
- Duplex properties (similar to nº 406):1.050€+VAT
The Administrator said that the previous year they had agreed to get quotes to discuss this year whether to do the same with the blocks and create a fund for painting the individual properties.
Some mentioned that last time they agreed to paint, only 4 or 5 properties were not painted. They asked how they can force an Owner to paint and they answered by taking legal actions.
Several said that, in their opinion, it would be cheaper to do it privately and they thought it made not sense that the community would do it.
Not having more comments, this was put to the vote with the following result:
- Votes in favour of having the properties painted by an external company: 454, 447, 428, 401, 437 and 405 – 6 votes in favour.
- Votes in favour of having the properties painted individually: 404, 453, 458, 459, 487, 446, 485, 465, 470, 414, 412, 464, 430, 436, 413, 416, 419, 423, 424, 456, 425, 433, 463, 438, 407, 410. – 26 votes in favour of having the properties painted by each of the Ow Therefore, this will continue being done individually
- Abstentions of the properties 426 and 427.
It was agreed that, as the blocks will finish the painting by April/May 2020, the properties should be finished at the same time.
They reminded the Paint colour they must use is: <3>ROMBOS TORREHUESO – PINTURAS ADORAL
This can be found in the paint shop which is located in Calle Acacio Rebagliato Pamies in the industrial area of Torrevieja, close to the Water Park (blue façade)
We enclose a picture.
10.- Proposals
a.-To discuss whether to change or repair the streetlights on the wall when needed.
The Board was authorised to decide whether it is more economic to change them or maybe paint them.
b.-To remove trees next to pump houses by the big pool, the roots, causing damage to the pipes, sewage system and the pools.
Mantenimientos Alvarez the new Pool Company recommends the trees be removed as the roots could be causing damage to the structure of the pool and the irrigation system.
Not having more comments, this was unanimously approved by the attendants and the represented Owners.
c.- To discuss how to use skip containers in community areas. Approve a maximum period of time of 20 days to have the skip container. To agree there can be only one container at a time and agree that the Owners have to inform the Administrator beforehand.
It was said that skip companies normally leave them 20 days and then they come and collect them.
Not having any comments, it was agreed that there can only be one container at a time in the front parking lot and another one in the back parking lot.
d.-To discuss buying a Defibrillator to be installed central on the Community. Approx. Cost 1500/1700€+VAT.
Steff said that somebody had told her this could be hired and in this case the company would be in charge of the maintenance. She said that somebody would send her the details to contact and require the information.
Norah said that there are courses to learn how to use it. They said this should be located in a community area, but in a safe place, so nobody can misuse the same.
Not having more comments, they agreed to authorise the Board to see the best option, whether to hire it or to buy it.
e.-Authorization to change Bank entity if needed.
It was said that this was a formality so that the Administrator could change the bank entity in case the current entity would increase their commissions. The Administrator said that nothing would change for those who pay through bank direct debit and for those who pay directly; in case this would change, they would be informed of the new bank details.
Not having more comments, this was put to the vote and it was unanimously approved by the attendants and the represented owners.
f.-Do we employ a Pool Guard.
The President said that summers are a nightmare with people not respecting the rules or ignoring the reproaches.
It was reminded that the top swimming pool is for swimming and the bottom one for enjoyment of families.
Not having more comments, this was put to the vote and the proposal was rejected by majority of attendants and represented Owners.
g.- Authorise widening of the entrance to the underground parking.
It was mentioned that it was complicated to access the garage and that removing the flower bed, there would be more space to manouvre the car.
It was suggested that the Board studies the options and considers what can be done.
11.- Date of the next meeting.
There was a proposal to hold the meeting in July, when more Owners can attend. Others said that they prefer to hold it in June. This was put to the vote with 17 votes in favour of July and 16 for June. It was agreed to hold the meeting on 1st July 2020 by majority of attendants and represented owners, if possible.
12.- Any other business.
Some owners asked the reason why there was a post in the area opposite the blocks and who had the key. They answered that this had been installed to prevent vehicles from getting in and parking and that Norah and Steff had the key in case it was neccessary.
They asked for the signs again, in order to put them outside the community with the map of the community.
Not having more points to deal with, the President and the Administrator thanked the Owners for their attendance to the meeting, and the meeting was then finished at 19.40 p.m.
The President The Secretary-Administrator
Oficina / Office: C/. Mar, 13. Edif. Faro, 2º B. 03189 Orihuela Costa (Alicante)
Correo / Mail: Apartado de Correos 248. 03189 Orihuela Costa (Alicante)
Tel.: (0034) 96 532 24 50 / Fax: (0034) 96 532 28 58
E-mail: ocsi@ocsi.es