To the Minister of Internal Affairs Mr. Kostas Skrekas
The Deputy Minister Minister of State Mr. Nikos Tagara
Here Athens, 17.5.2021
SUBJECT: Right to unilaterally modify the ceiling in favor of or to the detriment of neighboring property.
Honorable Ministers
With par. 5 of article 98 of Law 4495/2017, as amended by Law 4759/2020, the insurmountable problem faced by tens of thousands of owners of horizontal properties in all over Greece, the apartments of which had some difference in their surface in relation to the approved urban plans, in favor or at the expense of the common areas of the apartment buildings, something which – until the adoption of the aforementioned beneficial regulations – required a modification of the composition of the property horizon , which requires the consent of all co-owners of the building, which is completely impossible in the vast majority of cases.
However – despite the above regulations – there are not a few the cases where the small difference in the surface of the horizontal property that is to be subject to the provisions of Law 4495/2017, has not arisen in favor of or against the common areas of the apartment building, but from differences in favor of or against one or more of neighboring horizontal properties. These cases are not covered by the above regulations, with the result that it is not possible to unilaterally amend the constitution, but requires a unanimous amendment of all co-owners, although in fact, the problem that has arisen does not even concern all of the co-owners. co-owners, but only the owners of the affected horizontal properties.
In these cases, discrepancies are found between the plans attached to the horizontal property constitution, the approved from the town planning plans, and the actual situation formed during the construction of the building, and the owners do not have the slightest suspicion about them, and they are informed when the engineer is called to issue the certificate for the transfer of the property. Obviously all these cases are less problematic than those in which common areas of the building have been occupied and affect much less or not at all the relations between the co-owners, as well as the form of the building.
For all these reasons, the aforementioned provision must be extended to cover the cases in which surface differences arise in favor of or against neighboring horizontal properties, and accordingly, the provision in question must be worded as follows:
“5. Especially in the cases of horizontal property with violations concerning its extension in height or width (horizontal) and the occupation of shared or jointly owned space, as well as violations that create a difference in the outline or the surface of the horizontal property, in favor of or at the expense of another adjacent horizontal property it is possible to include them here, without the consent of the other co-owners, only in the following cases:
a) when the arbitrary extension exists since the construction of the building or
b) when the same arbitrary extension exists on all floors of the building.
At your disposal for any clarification and cooperation!
With special regards
The President The Vice President The Secretary General Stratos I. Paradias Charalambos Tsoutrelis Tasos G. Vappas “text-align: justify?” /p>
