For several years, it has been observed that the profession of “co-ownership manager,” referred to in QUEBEC as “co-ownership manager,” has not attracted new vocations, mainly among young people. Young or older individuals who choose this sector of activity are very rare in aspiring to the profession of real estate agent–co-ownership manager. Despite the efforts of schools responsible for basic training and of federations active in the sector, the number of co-ownership managers registered on the roll of the Professional Institute of Real Estate Agents (I.P.I.) has been steadily declining.
Shortage of co-ownership managers: a peril for co-ownerships
It should be recalled that the law on co-ownership in Belgium provides: “When not designated by the internal regulations, the co-ownership manager is appointed by the first general meeting or, failing that, by decision of the judge, at the request of any co-owner or third party having an interest.” It is in these terms that the Belgian legislator requires every association of co-owners placed under the compulsory regime of buildings or groups of built buildings to choose a co-ownership manager (manager). In their capacity as an organ of the association of co-owners, their designation by the general meeting is imperative, failing which the association would never be able to implement what it has decided. The presence of a co-ownership manager is therefore indispensable, because without one the functioning of the co-ownership is totally paralyzed. Let us recall that the co-ownership manager is at times a technician to identify construction needs, a knowledgeable financial manager to ensure efficient accounting management of the co-ownership, but also a psychologist to mitigate the differing perceptions of co-owners regarding life in co-ownership.
A profession in short supply and its causes
Faced with this observation, the Professional Institute of Real Estate Agents (I.P.I.), in collaboration with the Catholic University of Louvain (UCL), carried out a study aimed at identifying the reasons for this desertion. Three elements were identified, namely:
The lack of recognition from co-owners;
Difficult working conditions, mainly due to late general meetings;
The level of fees, which does not cover the investment required to assume both the legal functions and the day-to-day management tasks arising from co-owners’ demands.
An unloved profession
The law grants the co-ownership manager exclusive powers. In the course of their activity, they are in frequent contact with co-owners. While the vast majority of the latter have a perfect understanding of the operating process of the co-ownership, others demonstrate a behavior of rejection toward co-ownership in general.
As the legal representative of the association of co-owners, the co-ownership manager is obviously subject to criticism and will therefore be frequently exposed. These negative attitudes are poorly perceived by the co-ownership manager, who sees in them a lack of recognition of the steps taken between, on the one hand, legal constraints and, on the other hand, the multiple initiatives aimed at maintaining within the co-ownership comfort and the durability of installations, all based on an economic model of allocation of expenses. The holding of general meetings constitutes an additional source of difficulty insofar as it presupposes the availability of the co-ownership manager outside office hours and requires compliance with a precise formalism.
Let us hope that, in time, co-owners will be even more receptive to holding general meetings remotely, or even to holding co-ownership meetings (Board of Directors in Quebec) during office hours, and will therefore accept conditions more conducive to the search for practical solutions.
Even if identified as one of the causes of the shortage of co-ownership managers, the level of fees must be correlated with the quality of services. A co-ownership manager who properly assumes their mission, or even implements internal processes aimed at increasing the performance of the co-ownership, should have no difficulty justifying higher fees than a counterpart who does not develop the same skills.
The co-ownership must recognize that the intervention of a professional must have a positive impact on all the mechanisms of operation.
That said, the sector must not adopt a complaining attitude, but must implement all useful initiatives in order to equip the co-ownership manager with managerial skills aimed at enabling co-ownerships to find within themselves solid and relevant operating structures that meet the objectives of the co-ownership as a primary actor in sustainable development. Enhancing the participatory aspect of co-owners or members of the Co-Ownership Council is part of this.
For a better future for the profession
Numerous awareness-raising initiatives must be implemented with the public in order to better explain the operating processes of co-ownerships, while giving priority to first-time co-owners. These initiatives also require strengthening constructive dialogue between developers and co-ownership managers in the implementation of new real estate developments.
The co-ownership manager of the coming years will also need to acquire additional skills in the field of energy management and building quality. Strengthened training will be necessary so that it can no longer be questioned that the co-ownership manager performs an essential function and must reinforce their role as the cornerstone of the functioning of an association of co-owners. This should enable them to practice their profession in a more rational manner through operating processes that are defined and known to all stakeholders.
Jean-Pierre Lannoy, co-ownership manager
Director of COPRO ACADEMY
https://copro.academy
Avenue de l’Aulne 62
1180 Brussels
Tel.: +32 475 462 732
[email protected]
The columns express the personal opinions of their authors and in no way engage the responsibility of the site publisher, CondoLegal.com Inc. The content and opinions expressed in a column are the sole responsibility of their author.
