By Mark Joseph M. Sanchez
HOMEOWNERS’ associations may impose penalties on members who fail to pay association dues, but they cannot prohibit them from using subdivision roads and other common areas, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled.
“While a homeowners’ association may deprive the delinquent association members of their right to avail [themselves] of or enjoy basic community services and facilities, it may not deprive the members of their right to use common areas, such as the roads,” the tribunal said in a decision written by Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa.
The court’s Third Division dismissed a petition filed by former directors and officers of La Costa Brava Homeowners’ Association, Inc. (LCBHAI), affirming earlier rulings by the Court of Appeals (CA) and the Human Settlements Adjudication Commission against sanctions imposed on delinquent homeowners.
The dispute involved spouses Linley and Juvy Retirado, who failed to pay association dues from 2016 to 2021.
LCBHAI declared the couple delinquent and imposed sanctions that included banning deliveries of food, packages, appliances, gas and construction materials to their home; preventing taxis, tricycles and Grab vehicles from entering the subdivision to pick them up; barring guests from entering; and charging fees on delivery vehicles bringing supplies to their construction site.
The spouses challenged the sanctions before the commission, which found that the measures violated Republic Act (RA) No. 9904, or the Magna Carta of Homeowners and Homeowners’ Associations. The agency also permanently disqualified the responsible officers from holding office in the association.
The officers appealed to the CA, which dismissed their petition after finding procedural defects, including serving copies on the spouses instead of their lawyer. The appellate court later denied their motion for reconsideration.
The officers elevated the case to the high court, but the tribunal said they availed themselves of the wrong legal remedy and filed their petition beyond the prescribed period.
Even if the procedural defects were disregarded, the officers’ arguments would still fail, the court said.
The SC said Section 7(a) of RA 9904 grants homeowners two distinct rights: the right to enjoy basic community services and facilities and the right to use common areas.
Although the law allows associations to sanction delinquent members, the court said that authority is limited.
The justices ruled that measures such as restricting grass-cutting and property maintenance services or reducing garbage collection are permissible because they involve community services and facilities.
However, sanctions affecting deliveries, transportation services and visitor access effectively restricted the spouses’ use of subdivision roads, which are classified as common areas under the law.
The court said the “full right” to use roads includes access to transportation and the delivery of essential goods.
It also upheld the permanent disqualification of the officers, rejecting their argument that their actions did not constitute a serious violation.
“Here, petitioners’ act of violating the spouses Retirado’s full right to use the roads produces great harm and dangerous consequences because it hampers the use of roads even for its basic purposes, such as the delivery of basic goods for survival, and mobile transportation,” the court said. “Thus, their offense is serious and grave.”
The SC ultimately affirmed the CA ruling and dismissed the petition.