Fines in condominiums: who can impose them, how much, and how they get overturned

Quick answer: in a condominium the fine is imposed by the administration committee, not the administrator, and it can only be applied if that conduct and that amount are set out in the condominium regulations. Law 21.442 does not set a general tariff: the amount comes from each community's own regulations. That is where the problem almost no one sees coming comes from. The deadline to bring the regulations into line with the law expired on 9 January 2026, and a community still operating under old regulations is charging fines that can be overturned before the Local Police Court.

There are two different conversations tucked inside the same word, and it is worth separating them from the start. One is the fine the community charges a co owner for noise, for a pet, for parking in a visitor spot or for an enclosed terrace. The other is the sanctions the State applies to the administrator and the community for failing to comply with the law. These involve different procedures, different amounts and different courts.

Who can impose fines within the condominium

Article 17 of law 21.442 gives the administration committee the power to impose the fines set out in the condominium regulations. The wording matters for what it leaves out:

• The administrator does not impose fines. They carry out the committee's decision, notify it and add it to the common expenses, but the decision is not theirs to make. A fine issued on the administrator's own authority is challengeable for that reason alone.
• The conduct has to be in the regulations. It is not enough for it to be a nuisance, or for the assembly to disapprove of it. If the regulations do not set it out as an infraction, there is no fine to apply.
• The amount also comes from the regulations. The law does not set a general value for fines between co owners. What gets charged is whatever the regulations say, and that is why outdated regulations become a practical problem, not just a formal one.

The consequence that surprises committees. If your community charges a fine that is not in the regulations, or the administrator applies it on their own, the co owner can ask the Local Police Court to declare it void. And if the regulations were never updated, there is a second uncomfortable question waiting: whether that clause is still valid under the new law.

How a fine has to be applied to hold up

There is no legal form to fill in, but there is a minimum standard, which is what the Local Police Court checks when someone complains:

• That the infraction is defined in the current, registered regulations. Regulations approved at the assembly but not registered with the Conservador do not bind third parties, and that detail brings down entire agreements.
• That there is a record of the fact. An entry in the logbook, photographs, camera footage or witnesses. A fine based only on a neighbour's complaint is weak.
• That the co owner is notified in writing, stating the fact, the rule of the regulations that was breached, and the amount.
• That the decision is made by the committee and recorded in the relevant minutes.
• That the person affected has had the chance to give their side before the fine is treated as final.

Where the money goes is also defined: the fine goes into the community's funds, not into the pocket of the administrator or the committee.

A debt for common expenses is not the same as a fine

The two get mixed up all the time, and the rules are different in each case.

On cutting off services, which is the issue that causes the most conflict, the law's regulations set conditions worth having on hand before arguing with the administration:

• Notice must be given at least five business days in advance.
• It covers services such as electricity, heating or telecommunications.
• If the co owner pays or signs a payment agreement, the cut off does not go ahead.
• Once the debt is paid, the service must be restored within the next business day.

And there is one scenario the law treats as the most serious infraction of all: suspending services during a state of constitutional emergency. It is not a theoretical figure, and it is enough on its own to put the administrator at risk of removal from the register.

Sanctions on the administrator and the community

This is the other half of the matter, and the one most communities are unaware of. Law 21.442 created a National Register of Administrators, and being registered is a requirement to practise. Infractions of the rules governing the administration of condominiums are sanctioned by the Secretaría Regional Ministerial de Vivienda y Urbanismo (the regional office of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Planning), with a four level scale:

Repeat offences make it worse: repeating an infraction within the timeframes the law sets moves it up a category. For a community this matters for a very concrete reason: if the administrator ends up suspended or removed from the register, the community is left with no one to sign, no one to account for the funds, and the obligation to call an assembly to replace them.

The insurance: the obligation that shows up when it is already too late

Residential condominiums must maintain a collective fire insurance policy. All co owners pay the premium together with the common expenses, as a mandatory item, and it is the administrator's responsibility to keep the cover in force at all times.

It sounds administrative until there is a claim. At that point the question stops being who paid the premium and becomes who is liable for the lack of cover, and that discussion lands directly on the administrator and the committee that failed to check. Along with outdated regulations, it is the most serious exposure an average community has today.

The deadline that has already expired, and what it means today

The regulations implementing law 21.442 were published in the Diario Oficial on 9 January 2025 through decree number 7 of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Planning. From that publication the one year deadline for communities to update their condominium regulations began running, and it expired on 9 January 2026.

The deadline having expired does not mean the community is automatically sanctioned, or that the old regulations disappear. It means something more uncomfortable: the community is operating with an instrument that may contain clauses contrary to the law now in force, and every agreement reached relying on those clauses is challengeable from the moment it is made. Article 44 of the law allows the Local Police Court to declare the total or partial nullity of the condominium regulations, and of assembly agreements that are contrary to the law or the regulations.

Put another way: the risk is not a fine arriving in the post, it is the community losing disputes it thought it had already won. Fines overturned, charges refunded, agreements without effect, and a committee personally exposed. The step by step guide to sorting it out is in how to update the condominium regulations.

Frequently asked questions

Can the administrator fine me on their own?

No. The power to impose fines belongs to the administration committee, and only for conduct that the condominium regulations set out. The administrator notifies and collects whatever the committee agreed. If the fine was decided by the administrator, that fact alone is grounds to ask for it to be set aside.

Is there a legal cap on the amount of a fine?

The law does not set a general tariff for fines between co owners: the amount is whatever each community's condominium regulations establish. So the right question is not how much the law allows, but what the current, registered regulations say, and whether that clause is still compatible with law 21.442.

I was fined for something that is not in the regulations. What do I do?

Ask the committee in writing for the rule of the regulations the fine is based on, and the record of the fact. If it is not covered, you should complain to the Local Police Court of the comuna. It is worth doing before the fine accumulates in the common expenses account, where it gets mixed in with debt that is actually enforceable.

Can they cut off my electricity for not paying a fine?

Suspending a service is provided for arrears in paying common expenses, with at least five business days' prior notice, and it does not go ahead if the co owner pays or signs a payment agreement. It is not a mechanism for collecting fines.

Does the regulations we approved at the assembly but never registered count?

Not as condominium regulations. Until it is put into a public deed and registered in the Registro de Hipotecas y Gravámenes (the register of mortgages and encumbrances) at the Conservador de Bienes Raíces, the earlier one keeps governing. It is the most frequent mistake among communities that believe they met the deadline and did not.

We are a small condominium. Does this still apply to us?

The law applies to condominiums under the condominium ownership regime, regardless of how many units they have. A condominium of a few houses with old regulations has exactly the same problem as a tower block, with the added complication that it often has no formally constituted committee, so there is not even anyone with the power to impose fines.

Can a co owner in arrears refuse to pay by arguing the regulations are outdated?

The obligation to contribute to common expenses does not depend on the state of the regulations: it arises from the budget approved by the assembly and from the law. Being out of date opens up discussion about fines, quorums and specific clauses, not about whether the debt exists. And a co owner who does not pay is also liable for the losses their failure to pay causes the community.

What if the community never appointed an administration committee?

It is more common than it seems, and it leaves the community with no body empowered to impose fines. Article 44 allows the Local Police Court to summon an assembly to elect a committee when there is none. That is usually the first step before anything else.

How we handle it

When a community comes to us over a challenged fine, the problem is almost never the fine itself. The first thing we check is the current, registered regulations, the date of their registration, and whether the sanctioning clauses hold up against law 21.442. That determines whether it is worth defending the specific charge or simply putting the instrument in order before five more complaints show up.

After that comes the formal part: the minutes appointing the committee, the logbook, the record of notifications and the state of the insurance. It is unglamorous work, and it is exactly what gets checked when the dispute reaches the Local Police Court.

We handle the update of the regulations from start to finish, including drafting the deed and registering it with the Conservador, which is where most communities get stuck halfway. If there are also unapproved constructions within the condominium, enclosed terraces or extensions, that gets resolved in parallel and is covered in the guide to the ley del mono and in the one on Municipal Building Department fines, which is a separate front with its own court.

If litigation is needed, whether to overturn a fine, challenge an assembly agreement or collect common expenses, that falls to our litigation team. And if the conflict comes from the title of the units rather than the administration, we start with the title study.

Send us your community's condominium regulations and the fine or agreement in dispute, and we will tell you whether it holds up, what would need correcting, and whether it is worth updating the whole set of regulations at once.