35% of contracts proposed by co-ownership trustees contain “serious irregularities”, according to the CLCV association

To carry out this study published on Monday, CLCV examined 200 contracts. These irregularities concern in particular the amounts of compensation, those of fees or even the terms of sale.

In total, 35% of contracts offered by co-ownership managers include “serious irregularities”, affirms, Monday November 3, in an investigation the Consumption housing and living environment association (CLCV). To carry out this study, 200 contracts were examined and the investigation focused on “the most significant violations that can be seen on the various contracts”, explains Monday on franceinfo David Rodrigues, legal manager at the CLCV association.

He points to the “amounts of compensation lower than those provided for in the texts”. “In the event of late submission of a document to the union council, the trustee has a penalty of 15 euros per day of delay”, develops David Rodrigues. The investigation reveals that on certain contracts, “this compensation is completely eliminated or the amount provided is much lower” going “a few euros or ten euros in the best case”. Regarding fees, some contracts only mention the fees “excluding taxes”what can “mislead the co-owner about the cost of the trustee”, “particularly in the context of competitive bidding” where we will not pay attention to the amount excluding taxes.
The study also notes irregularities during the creation of “new services, in terms of administrative management”. The trustees will “take a certain percentage from the accounts or impose a fixed remuneration on work”, while she is “fixed price normally depending on the amount of work”, David Rodrigues still assures.

The CLCV also noted “several sales violations”in particular concerning the dated state, an information note drawn up by the co-ownership trustee and sent to the seller upon transfer of a co-owned property. The cost of “dated state” is limited to 380 euros, but certain trustees, while respecting this ceiling, “will apply additional costs for updating this document, whereas this is normally prohibited”adds the legal manager to the CLCV association.
David Rodrigues recalls that “all contracts are supposed to be the same” in order to “promote the comparability of offers, particularly in the context of competitive bidding”. However, he notes, “certain trustees modify the wording of the clauses”what will have “an impact on the proper understanding and comparability of contracts”. “Certain elements will completely disappear, notably the possibility of having a reduction in fees”, he specifies. These are options which normally “must appear in the contract where the trustee must mention the fixed amount, in the event of recourse to an archivist for example”.

“We are in a form of deception since the co-owners, to detect these irregularities, will be forced to refer to the original text and see article by article, whether it is compliant or not.”

David Rodrigues, legal manager at the CLCV association

on franceinfo

Another irregularity concerns the duration of contracts. “Normally, we are on calendar dates, from June 1 to June 1 for example,” he notes. But some trustees will remodify the contract to extend the contract beyond June 1“until the next general meeting called to rule on the accounts”. “Ultimately, this may result in the trustee being present beyond the duration of his mandate”he warned.