How to Challenge an Irregularly Approved Special Assessment (Derrama) in a Spanish Community of Owners
Last updated: July 2026 · 9 min read · Category: Spanish Property Law
If a special assessment (derrama extraordinaria) in your Spanish community was approved with a defective notice, the wrong majority, or an item never listed on the agenda, you have three months from receiving the minutes to challenge it in court under Article 18 of the Ley de Propiedad Horizontal (LPH) — and, importantly, you must keep paying the assessment while the challenge is pending unless a judge specifically suspends that obligation. This distinction between challenging an assessment and stopping payment on it is the single most misunderstood point among foreign owners and expats dealing with a Spanish community for the first time.
Irregular derrama (special assessment): a community charge for extraordinary works or expenses that was approved in breach of the procedural requirements of the LPH — defective convening notice, agenda item added on the day, wrong quorum or majority for the type of work, or lack of an itemised budget — as opposed to one that is simply unwelcome or expensive. Only procedural or substantive defects under Articles 16, 17 and 18 LPH give you standing to annul it; disagreeing with the decision is not a legal ground.
3 months
That is the entire window under Article 18.3 LPH to file a challenge from the moment you receive notice of the agreement — and for owners who were not present and not properly notified, the clock does not even start running until notice actually reaches them.
— Ley 49/1960, de Propiedad Horizontal, Art. 18.3
What counts as an "irregularly approved" assessment?
Non-resident owners often assume that any assessment they think is unfair, badly timed, or simply too expensive can be challenged. Spanish law draws a much narrower line. Under the LPH, a community agreement approving a derrama can be annulled only when it is contrary to law or the statutes, seriously prejudicial to the interests of the community for the benefit of one or more owners, or approved through an actual procedural defect. The most litigated defects are:
- Defective convening notice (citación): the meeting notice under Article 16.2 LPH did not reach an owner, was sent to the wrong address (common when a foreign owner has not updated their registered address with the administrator), or did not state the specific agenda item covering the assessment.
- Item not on the agenda: the derrama was voted on as an ad hoc addition during the meeting without every owner's prior knowledge and consent, in breach of Article 16.2 LPH.
- Wrong majority applied: ordinary conservation works require a simple majority (more votes in favour than against, weighted by participation quota), while accessibility works above certain thresholds or works affecting the constitutive title can require three-fifths or unanimity under Article 17 LPH. Approving a derrama with the wrong threshold is a classic ground for annulment.
- No itemised budget or coefficient breakdown: the minutes approve a lump sum without specifying the total cost, the share attributable to each owner by participation quota, or the payment schedule.
- Lack of quorum at second call, or a vote taken without verifying that enough participation quota was actually present or represented.
If none of these apply and the derrama was simply approved by a valid majority at a properly convened meeting, it is binding on you even if you voted against it or were absent — that is the ordinary rule under Article 17 LPH, and it applies equally to resident and non-resident owners.
The three-month deadline — and why it matters more for overseas owners
Article 18.3 LPH gives any owner three months to challenge a community agreement in court, counted from the date they received notice of it (or, for owners who attended the meeting and voted against, from the date of the meeting itself). For owners who abstained, were absent without proper representation, or were never validly notified, this deadline only starts once the notice actually and correctly reaches them — which is precisely why a defective notification is both a ground for annulment and, separately, the reason the clock may not have started at all.
This matters enormously for non-resident and overseas owners who rely on postal notice to an address in another country, or on an administrator emailing minutes months late. If you can show the notice never arrived, or arrived defectively, you may still be within your rights to challenge an assessment approved a year or more ago. Keep every piece of correspondence with your administrator — email timestamps and courier tracking numbers are frequently decisive evidence in these cases.
IgeraFincas in action — a real owner query
Owner asks (from abroad, via WhatsApp):
"I live in the UK and never received notice of the meeting where they approved a €4,000 roof assessment. Can I still be forced to pay it?"
IgeraFincas answers:
You remain obligated to pay unless and until a court annuls the agreement or suspends it. But a missing or defective notice under Art. 16.2 LPH is itself a valid ground for challenge, and because you were never properly notified, your three-month deadline under Art. 18.3 LPH may not have started running yet. Gather the administrator's records of where notices were sent and request the full minutes before deciding whether to file.
Managing a Spanish community remotely, or advising owners who are?
IgeraFincas tracks every notice, deadline, and coefficient breakdown automatically — with the exact LPH article cited every time.
See how IgeraFincas worksNo card required · Set up in 24h · Support in English, Spanish and Catalan