If you live in a building of six, eight or ten neighbours, the question has probably come up at some meeting: do we really need to pay a property manager? In small communities of owners, self-management is not an oddity: it is the most common model, and in many cases the most sensible one. But it has fine print too, and it is worth knowing before you decide.
In this article we look at what the law says about small communities, the real advantages of self-managing, the risks that usually go unmentioned, and when, honestly, hiring a professional pays off. If your community already runs without a manager, you will want to see the FixrOS platform for self-managed communities, which automates the work you currently do by hand.
Why self-management is the norm in small communities
The arithmetic is intuitive. A professional manager’s fees are shared between however many neighbours there are: in a forty-home building, each share is small; in a six-home building, the same bill weighs far more in every receipt. Meanwhile, the actual workload of a small community, a few utilities, one insurance policy, a couple of maintenance contracts, is a fraction of a large one’s.
That is why many small communities reach the same conclusion: the work involved does not justify the cost of outsourcing it. The Horizontal Property Law expressly allows it, as we covered in detail in is a property manager required?: its article 13.5 provides that, if no manager is appointed, the president performs those duties.
What the law says if you are 4 owners or fewer
For the smallest buildings, the law goes one step further. Article 13.8 of the LPH establishes that when the number of owners of homes or premises does not exceed four, the community may adopt the administration regime of article 398 of the Civil Code, if the bylaws expressly provide for it.
In practice this means a building of up to four owners can run under an even simpler regime than ordinary horizontal property, with resolutions by majority of interests instead of the full machinery of governing bodies and offices. Note the condition, though, it is not automatic: the bylaws must expressly provide for it. If your bylaws are silent, you remain under the general regime of the Horizontal Property Law, even if there are only three of you.
Real advantages of self-management in a small community of owners
- Direct savings. The manager’s fees disappear from the budget. In a community with few expenses, that line is usually among the largest of the year.
- Faster decisions. There is no intermediary: if the entry phone needs fixing, you get quotes, discuss them between neighbours and decide. No waiting for an office to deal with two hundred other communities first.
- Knowledge of the building. Nobody knows the property better than the people who live in it. The third-floor leak, the garage damp and the boiler’s quirks are shared history, not a case file.
- Neighbour involvement. When management is your own, accounts get looked at more and spending gets watched more. It is a well-known effect of self-managed communities.
The risks nobody tells you about
Self-management is not free: it is paid for in time and responsibility, and the bill almost always lands on one person. These are the three risks small communities most often end up suffering:
- The burnt-out president. The role of president is mandatory (article 13.2 of the LPH) and rotates between neighbours, but in practice the work tends to fall year after year on the same willing person. When that person tires or moves away, the community is left without memory or method.
- Legal deadlines slipping by. A meeting at least once a year to approve the accounts (article 16.1), minutes signed within ten calendar days at most (article 19.3), a reserve fund of at least 10% of the budget (article 9.1.f)… The law does not distinguish between communities with and without a manager: the duties are the same. We go through all of them in the obligations of a community without a manager.
- Conflicts between neighbours. Claiming a debt or enforcing a rule is more awkward without a neutral third party. Without clear written procedures, any financial friction can fester.
When hiring a manager pays off even if you are few
Let’s be honest: there are small communities where self-management is a bad idea. If the building is facing major works or litigation, if there are entrenched arrears heading for court, if it has employees on contract, or simply if no neighbour can or wants to take on the management, a chartered property manager brings professional judgement no tool replaces. It is also reasonable to hire targeted help, a lawyer for a claim, a surveyor for works, while keeping ordinary management in the neighbours’ hands.
Self-management with tools: the middle ground that works
Between paying a firm for a six-neighbour building and running everything with folders and WhatsApp there is a middle ground: self-managing with a platform that does the repetitive work. Receipts go out on their own, accounts stay visible to everyone, incidents are logged with photos and follow-up, the meeting notice and minutes draft themselves, and the LPH’s deadlines come flagged in advance.
That is exactly the gap FixrOS covers for running a community without a property manager: the community keeps the control and the savings, and the platform provides the order and consistency that used to depend on one person’s goodwill. For the full method, see our step-by-step guide to running a community of owners without a manager.
How a small self-managed community organises itself
The minimum scheme that works has four pieces. A president appointed each year from among the owners, by election, rotation or lot, as article 13.2 provides, who signs and represents the community. A bank account exclusively for the community through which all money flows, no exceptions. An annual calendar with the three fixed dates: budget preparation, the ordinary meeting to approve the accounts, and the reserve fund review. And a single archive, physical or digital, holding minutes, contracts, invoices and the history of resolutions, so the building’s memory survives each change of president.
With those four pieces in place, the ordinary management of a small building comfortably fits in a couple of hours a month. The usual failure is not lack of time: it is lack of method, which turns every meeting into an archaeology of papers and every incident into a chain of phone calls.
A checklist to decide
- How many homes are you, and how much does the manager weigh in the annual budget?
- Is any neighbour willing to serve as president with support, rather than alone?
- Are major works, litigation or serious arrears on the horizon?
- Do the bylaws provide for the simplified regime of article 13.8 (if you are 4 or fewer)?
- Do you have a tool that issues receipts, stores minutes and flags the deadlines?
If the answers point to a simple community, a minimum of organisation and a tool backing you up, self-management is a perfectly viable model, and the Horizontal Property Law supports your right to exercise it.