Legal Advice for Problems with the VvE

Questioner

I would like to receive legal advice regarding the options available. I live in an apartment complex that dates from 1978 in which an active VvE represents the interests of the residents. I occupy an apartment on the 5th and highest floor. At the end of 2015, I unfortunately found serious mold behind the couch in the living room and behind the wardrobe in the bedroom. I immediately reported this to the board of the VvE. After this, a technical construction company was called in to determine the cause (roof leakage, condensation from the inside, cold bridge/insulation leak and possibly another cause). This investigation was carried out using a high-resolution thermal camera. This investigation showed that there was a cold bridge in various places along the entire length of the outer wall (both at the wall behind the couch in the living room and the wall in the bedroom). The insulation (according to the structural engineer) has probably sagged/collapsed, which has caused the cold bridge, and with it the mold and high humidity in the house. The structural engineer gave two options as a solution: install an extra inner wall/insulation wall along the entire length of the outer wall (which of course is at the expense of my living space), or install new insulation in the cavity wall (by means of a cavity sweep). After deliberation, the board of the VvE has decided not to implement any of these solutions. The argument they use for this: The VvE has no fault or shortcoming in this situation and the VvE is only required to have repairs/maintenance carried out, which in their opinion is not the case. In addition, they report that I am the only resident who is experiencing this problem. They advise to change the layout in the living room, so that the temperature and ventilation behind the couch is improved. In addition, I wonder whether this is a realistic proposal or a structural solution, where unfortunately there is no possibility to apply this in the bedroom (unless the entire wardrobe is removed). In addition, the humidity will still remain high, which of course means that the heating costs will be above average. As far as can be seen now, the outer wall falls under the common area, but it is not clearly stated whether the cavity wall/cavity insulation also falls under the common area. Pending your legal advice, I will request the General Meeting to vote on whether the cavity wall/insulation also falls under the common area. I would like to hear from you, what legal possibilities there are for me to enforce repair/restoration or insulation replacement via (the board of) the VvE. The other solution: placing an extra insulated inner wall is in my opinion not an acceptable solution (given the consequences and the limitation of the living space). To what extent can I hold the VvE liable for the mandatory repair/restoration of the cold bridge/insulation leak? In addition, I am curious to what extent I can hold the VvE liable for the consequential damage: a large part of the plasterwork has been damaged by the mold and partly by removing the mold. The back of the couch is full of mold and (wooden) paintwork that was mounted on the wall above the couch is bent. In addition, I am confronted with higher heating costs (at least in the last year, and in all probability also the year before given the amount of the final heating bill). My girlfriend, who I live with, has been suffering from allergic complaints for months, which the GP (after we discovered the mold) blamed on. She has therefore suffered adverse medical consequences (which will hopefully be temporary after the thermal bridge has been remedied) and her living pleasure has also been partly destroyed. Are there also possibilities for holding the VvE liable for this?

Lawyer

It is important to determine whether the outer wall with the cavity belongs to the common areas. If the cavity continues beyond the boundaries of your apartment, it is certainly defensible that the cavity is a common facility. This means that the costs of repairing the (insulation in the) cavity are for the account of the joint owners. The VvE may be able to have the repair costs covered under the building insurance that has been taken out for the property.

Lawyer

Generally, the outer walls of an apartment building, including the cavity wall (insulation), are part of the common areas, so that the costs of maintenance and repair of defects to the outer wall are borne by the VvE and therefore by the joint owners. I recently handled a case in which a similar issue was at stake. In that case, the cavity wall (insulation) was also considered a common area/item. Given the nature of the defects found and the inconvenience this causes, the VvE is obliged to have the recommended repair work carried out at its own expense. Since the costs of this work will be considerable, the meeting must grant permission for the repair work. The board of the VvE cannot independently decide to carry out the repair work. Permission must therefore be requested from the meeting. You should initially ask the board to convene a meeting at which this decision is on the agenda. If the board does not wish to convene a meeting, you can convene a meeting yourself, depending on what is stated in the division regulations. If the vote against the repair work is taken at that meeting, you can apply to the subdistrict court with a request to annul this decision and grant you a replacement authorisation to have the repair work carried out at the expense of the VvE. If no meeting is held at all, then after having issued a formal notice to the VvE, you can also enforce in court - depending on the urgency, whether or not in summary proceedings - that the VvE proceeds to repair. I am specialized in apartment law and, if desired, I am happy to advise you further in this matter and, if necessary, to assist you. Please feel free to contact me without obligation and free of charge if you have any questions or require legal assistance.