Five things decide this file.
An unresolved building-wide water problem: live litigation over post-ravalement infiltrations, and a roof-terrace repair refused for the third year running while infiltrations are reported.
A €240,000 façade ravalement already voted and only partly funded; the share carried by this lot is €3,480.
A fonds travaux of €9,500 against roughly €850,000 of works identified across the ravalement and the ten-year PPPT.
Arrears of €47,800 across the copropriété, about 37% of the annual budget, with one lot in recovery.
An F-class DPE collectif, and a syndic re-elected on a vote that may not meet the required majority.
On the documents provided, this file weighs toward renegotiate or step back rather than proceed as it stands. The deciding factors are the water problem and the gap between identified works and the fonds travaux. Several points cannot be closed until the missing documents arrive. The decision rests with you.
Our reading: with the refused roof repair and the reported infiltrations, this is an unresolved building-wide water issue, not an isolated 2021 defect. Future cost is indeterminate; the €18,000 provision is already called.
240,000 × 145/10,000 = €3,480. A first appel of €1,160 was due 15/03/2025 and is unpaid. Who pays depends on the compromis clause, which was not provided. See Questions.
86,000 × 145/10,000 = €1,247 if eventually voted. The cost of inaction usually rises, and the link to the live litigation is direct.
€47,800 is about 37% of the €128,000 annual budget. High arrears push unpaid costs onto the paying copropriétaires and signal pressure on future charges.
€9,500 cannot absorb the €240,000 ravalement plus €610,000 of PPPT works. The shortfall returns as exceptional appels, largely on the owner of the day.
To verify against the law. Désignation du syndic is an art. 25 decision requiring an absolute majority of all voices, at least 5,001/10,000. 3,310 reaches neither that nor the one-third threshold for an immediate art. 24 second vote. The resolution appears carried on a simple majority of those present, which is not the correct rule. This may be contestable, and it is a lever.
An F class affects value and, for a buyer who intends to let, the letting-ban calendar (to verify; that calendar is being amended). The lot's own DPE was not provided.
A syndic fee overrun and an un-tendered insurance contract, approved despite the council's objection, then followed by quitus.
To confirm, not in the documents provided. The figure is quoted; the sense that it is high rests on a market range not in the file. Compare against comparable contracts before treating it as a lever.
€2,150 arrears plus the €1,160 unpaid ravalement appel. Whether the seller clears these at the acte depends on the compromis clause. See Questions.
| Horizon | Item | Lot share |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | Ravalement, remaining appels (split per compromis) | ≈ 2,320 |
| Year 1 | Open litigation / arrears risk | indéterminé |
| 1–5 yr | Roof-terrace repair, if voted | ≈ 1,247 |
| 1–10 yr | PPPT programme, lot share | ≈ 8,845 |
| At acte | Seller to clear (arrears + unpaid appel) | 3,310 |
| Identified, excluding indeterminate litigation | ≈ 12,412 + | |
Figures are the lot's 1.45% share of building totals quoted in the documents. The seller and buyer split of called appels follows the compromis clause, which is not in the file.
Cross-checks
Verdict in depth · information, not advice
Two things drive the file. First, water: a live lawsuit over infiltrations, a roof repair refused three years running, infiltrations reported at the top floor. These compound. Second, funding: €9,500 set aside against roughly €850,000 of identified works, so the gap returns as appels on whoever owns the lot when each one falls due. The arrears and the F-class DPE sit on top. None of this is fatal, but as the file stands it argues for a price adjustment or a pause until the missing documents close the open points. The decision is yours.
Negotiation levers
Before the deadline
Scope, method & disclaimer
This Acquisition Brief is an analysis of the copropriété documents listed under Documents reviewed. It covers the governance, financial and legal-document layer of the copropriété. It does not assess the physical condition of the building, which is the role of the diagnostics techniques, and it does not value the property. It is an informational analysis prepared to support the buyer's own decision. It is not legal, tax or financial advice, and it is not a substitute for a notaire or a lawyer. Findings are limited to the documents provided; where a document was not provided, the related point could not be verified and appears under Questions. References to statute or majority rules are general context to verify in the specific case, not a legal opinion. The decision to proceed, renegotiate or withdraw rests with the buyer.
Yours covers your real file, with your figures, before your rétractation window closes.
Start an Acquisition Brief