The obligation of apartment owners residing on the ground floor of the building to contribute to elevator expenses and the legal consequences faced in case of non-payment.

1. General Rule: Obligation to Participate in Common Expenses

According to Article 20 of the Condominium Law (KMK) no. 634, each condominium owner is obliged to contribute to the maintenance, protection, reinforcement, and repair expenses of the common areas of the main property, as well as the operating expenses of common facilities, in proportion to their land share, unless otherwise agreed among them.

As emphasized in Supreme Court decisions (5th Civil Chamber-2020/7902, 18th Civil Chamber-2015/9319K, 20th Civil Chamber-2019/4242K); condominium owners cannot avoid paying these expenses by waiving their right to use common areas or facilities, or by claiming that there is no need or necessity to benefit from them due to the condition of their independent section (such as being on the ground floor). In this context, since the elevator is considered a common area under KMK Article 20/4, ground floor owners are also generally responsible for elevator expenses.

2. Special Regulations and Exceptions in the Management Plan

The provision “unless there is another agreement between them” in Article 20 of the Condominium Law (KMK) states that special arrangements in the management plan take precedence. According to the established jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation (18th Civil Chamber-2013/2726, 18th Civil Chamber-2015/3119K, 20th Civil Chamber-2017/3604):

Exemption Provision: If the main property’s management plan contains a provision stating “ground/basement floor owners do not participate in elevator maintenance and operating expenses,” this provision is valid, and the ground floor owner cannot be held responsible for these expenses.

Decisions Contrary to the Management Plan: Even if there is an exemption in the management plan, requesting elevator dues from ground floor owners by a decision of the board of apartment owners is unlawful. In this case, the ground floor owner may demand the refund of overpayments or file a lawsuit for the annulment of the relevant board decision.

3. Distinction Between Routine Maintenance Expenses and Renewal Expenses

According to the decision of the 18th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (2013/1165), exemption provisions in the management plan are generally limited to “routine maintenance and operating expenses.”

Routine Expenses: Daily operation of the elevator, electricity expenses, and periodic maintenance fall under this category. If there is an exemption in the management plan, the ground floor owner does not pay these.

Renewal Expenses: The “inevitable and compulsory renewal” of the elevator and its related components (expenditures classified as fixed assets) is considered within the scope of the protection and soundness of the main structure in accordance with Article 19 of the Condominium Law (KMK). All condominium owners (including the ground floor) must contribute to such renewal expenses in proportion to their land share, even if there is a contrary provision in the management plan.

4. Consequences of Non-Payment of Elevator Expenses

The following legal procedures may be initiated against a condominium owner who fails to pay the elevator expenses or advance share:

Enforcement Proceedings and Lawsuit: The building manager or any of the other condominium owners can initiate enforcement proceedings or file a lawsuit against the owner who fails to pay their debt (KMK Art. 20).

Late Payment Penalty: A condominium owner who fails to pay the entire expense and advance share is obliged to pay a late payment penalty at a monthly rate of five percent (5%) for the days they are in default.

Execution Refusal Penalty: In cases where the receivable is liquid (specific and calculable), an execution refusal penalty may be awarded upon the debtor’s unjustified objection (20th Civil Chamber-2017/987).

Statutory Mortgage: (As stated in secondary sources) In case of non-payment of the debt, registration of a mortgage on the independent section may be requested.

5. Additional Information from Secondary Sources

The following points have been considered in a secondary context due to the limited information found in the decision texts:

Shops and Workplaces: Owners of shops or workplaces located on the ground floor cannot avoid expenses by claiming they do not use the interior of the building or do not need the elevator; they are subject to the general rule unless there is an exemption in the management plan.

Collective Structures and Site Managements: In sites built on multiple parcels and not fully subject to the Condominium Law (KMK), the provisions of the management plan are binding within the framework of contractual freedom. In these cases, the late payment compensation rate can be determined according to general provisions (statutory interest).

Tenants’ Responsibility: Pursuant to Article 22 of the Condominium Law (KMK), those residing in an independent section based on a lease agreement are also jointly and severally liable with the owner for the common expenses of the unit owner (limited to the rent amount).

Conclusion: The owner residing on the ground floor of the building must contribute to elevator expenses unless there is an explicit exemption provision in the management plan. Even if there is an exemption, responsibility for mandatory elevator renewal expenses continues. In case of non-payment, facing a monthly 5% late payment compensation and enforcement proceedings is legal.

Why is Expert Legal Support Necessary? | 2M Law Office – Istanbul Anatolian Side

The participation of unit owners residing on the ground floor in elevator expenses is a technical legal matter requiring the joint evaluation of Condominium Law, management plan provisions, and Supreme Court precedents. Even minor procedural errors made in practice can lead to significant financial losses for the rightful party.

Especially in apartment buildings and residential complexes located in the regions of Istanbul Asian Side, Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Aydınlı, and Bayramoğlu; misinterpretation of the management plan, disregard for exemption provisions, or incorrect itemization of elevator expenses frequently lead to disputes. In Gebze, especially, and its surrounding districts, contractual regulations specific to collective housing and residential complex managements further complicate the process.

Why is Expert Lawyer Support Important?

Accurate determination of ground floor owners’ elevator fee responsibility,

Lawful interpretation of exemption provisions in the management plan,

Distinction between routine maintenance costs and mandatory renovation expenses,

Execution of objection, cancellation, and refund processes against erroneous fee demands,

Lawful management of enforcement and litigation processes initiated for unpaid fees, is only possible with the legal guidance of an expert lawyer in this field.

Secure Legal Process with 2M Hukuk Law Office

2M Law Office, based in Istanbul, provides services within the scope of condominium disputes in the regions of Anatolian Side, Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Aydınlı, Bayramoğlu, and Gebze;

Legal consultancy to apartment and complex managements,

Enforcement and litigation processes regarding elevator and common expense receivables,

Annulment and supervision of condominium owners’ board decisions,

And in the areas of resolving management plan disputes, it provides effective and expert legal support. In elevator expenses and common fee disputes, expert lawyer support is of vital importance to avoid loss of rights and manage the process correctly.