Any installation of fencing or security grills on a window in a condominium constitutes a modification of the exterior appearance of the building. This point conditions the entirety of the procedure: prior authorization in the general assembly, urban planning compliance, and adherence to the condominium regulations. Here we detail the technical points that co-owners and property managers must master before launching such a project.
Prior Declaration and ABF Constraints on Window Grills
Before even submitting the project to the general assembly, it is necessary to check the urban planning situation of the building. Any modification of the facade, even minor, requires a prior declaration submitted to the town hall. This point is often overlooked by co-owners who consider a grill as a simple accessory.
Checking the protection perimeter is crucial. If the building is located in a protected area (remarkable heritage site, surroundings of a historical monument), the Architect of the Buildings of France may impose strict requirements on the model, material, and color of the grill. An ABF refusal blocks the project regardless of the decision of the co-ownership.
We recommend consulting the town’s urban planning department as early as the reflection phase, before drafting the resolution for the assembly. Obtaining informal advice on feasibility avoids mobilizing the property manager and co-owners for a vote on a project that will then be rejected by the administration. The Easy Home masonry and carpentry guide details the technical steps to anticipate for this type of installation on the facade.
Vote in General Assembly: What Majority for Fencing in a Condominium
The installation of protective fencing affects the common areas (exterior facade), even if it benefits only one unit. The requesting co-owner must obtain authorization from the general assembly voted by the majority of Article 25 of the law of July 10, 1965, which is the absolute majority of all co-owners (present, represented, and absent).
If this majority is not reached but the project receives at least one-third of the votes from all co-owners, a second vote may occur immediately with a simple majority of Article 24 (majority of the votes expressed by those present and represented). This bridging mechanism is provided for by Article 25-1.
Preparing the Resolution for the Property Manager
The resolution included in the agenda must be precise. A vague wording (“authorize Mr. X to install bars”) exposes the co-ownership to a subsequent dispute. We observe that the best-drafted resolutions include:
- The exact description of the device: material (steel, aluminum, wrought iron), dimensions, RAL color, type of fixation (in frame or surface-mounted)
- The precise location: unit number, floor, orientation of the concerned facade
- The mention that the work is carried out at the exclusive expense of the requesting co-owner, with no financial responsibility from the syndicate
- The commitment of the requester to provide a scaled plan and, if applicable, the receipt of the prior declaration at the town hall
A technical file attached to the notice (photos, plan, product sheet) significantly increases the chances of obtaining a favorable vote. Co-owners vote more easily when they visualize the final result.
What to Do in Case of Refusal by the Assembly
A refusal for authorization in the general assembly can only be contested for abuse of majority. The co-owner must then bring the matter before the judicial court and demonstrate that the refusal is contrary to the collective interest or motivated by considerations unrelated to the purpose of the co-ownership. In practice, this contentious route remains long and uncertain.
A more pragmatic alternative is to revise the project by incorporating the objections raised during the general assembly (aesthetic, color, type of grill) and to submit it again at the next general assembly with a modified model.
Aesthetic Standardization and Condominium Regulations
The trend towards aesthetic standardization of facades in condominiums explains a significant portion of refusals. Even when the principle of protection is accepted, a model deemed too visible or discordant with the style of the building will be rejected.
The condominium regulations may impose a unique model of grill for all units or prohibit certain materials. This clause, if it exists, takes precedence over the individual choice of the co-owner. Therefore, it is essential to read the regulations carefully before selecting a product.
Some condominiums adopt a framework resolution defining the authorized characteristics (colors, type of bar spacing). This provision simplifies subsequent requests: each co-owner who complies with the specifications no longer needs a specific vote; a simple notification to the property manager is sufficient. We recommend this approach for ground-floor buildings where several units are concerned.
Insurer Requirements and Non-Indemnification Clauses in Case of Burglary
Home multi-risk insurance contracts increasingly include clauses related to the protection of openings located on the ground floor. Specifically, some insurers refuse compensation in case of burglary if the dwelling does not have grills that comply with the contract’s specifications.
These requirements generally concern the material (steel or wrought iron, no simple aluminum), the maximum spacing between bars, and the mode of fixation (chemical or mechanical anchoring in masonry, no simple screwing in PVC). A lightweight grill installed on the surface without sufficient anchoring may not meet the insurer’s criteria.
Before choosing a model, we recommend asking the insurer for their written specifications. This document will serve both for product selection and for the preparation of the file presented at the general assembly.
Reversible Solutions for PVC Windows Without Drilling in a Condominium
For co-owners facing a refusal or wishing to avoid the general assembly procedure, reversible fixing solutions exist. Fencing systems can be installed by clamping onto the frame of the PVC window, without drilling the facade.
A no-drill installation does not exempt from authorization if the device is visible from the outside. The modification of the exterior appearance remains the determining criterion, not the mode of fixation. However, an interior grill (inside the room) or a security film does not fall under the general assembly since it does not affect the common areas.
The choice between an exterior grill subject to a vote and interior protection outside the procedure depends on the level of security sought and the specific constraints of each condominium. For child protection on upper floors, a net or interior grill fixed to the window frame can meet the need without involving the co-ownership, provided that nothing is modified on the facade.