

Foreigners who own apartments, villas or units in residential complexes in Turkey may experience disputes with an apartment or site manager over maintenance fees, unexplained expenses, failure to provide accounts, unauthorized contracts, neglected common areas or decisions taken without proper approval. A foreign owner is not required to accept improper management merely because they do not speak Turkish or live outside Turkey. Depending on the ownership structure, management plan, decisions of the owners and circumstances of the dispute, the manager may potentially be replaced through an owners’ meeting or the matter may require judicial intervention.
The first question is not simply whether the owners are dissatisfied with the manager. It is necessary to determine how the manager was appointed, what the registered management plan provides, whether a valid owners’ meeting can be convened, what voting requirements apply and whether there are financial or legal irregularities requiring additional remedies.
In buildings and residential developments subject to condominium ownership rules, management of common areas and collective expenses is generally organized through the owners and the management structure established for the property.
The manager may be an individual owner, another person or, depending on the structure, a professional management organization.
Large residential developments may have considerably more complex management structures than a single apartment building.
Yes. Ownership rights are not lost merely because an owner is a foreign national.
A foreign condominium owner can generally participate in the management process, attend owners’ meetings, vote within the applicable legal framework, examine relevant management matters and challenge unlawful decisions where the legal requirements are satisfied.
The owner’s nationality does not give the manager greater authority over that owner’s property.
One of the first documents a foreign property owner should obtain is the management plan.
The management plan can regulate important matters concerning the administration of the building or complex and should be reviewed together with the Condominium Ownership Law and relevant owners’ decisions.
In large developments, the management structure may involve blocks, collective structures or different representative bodies. The correct decision-making body should therefore be identified before attempting to dismiss a manager.
Determine whether the manager was appointed by the condominium owners, another competent management body or under another legally relevant arrangement.
Obtain the meeting minutes and appointment decision.
A removal strategy should be based on the actual legal source of the manager’s authority.
Potentially, yes. A manager does not ordinarily have an unconditional right to remain in office regardless of the decisions of the competent owners’ body.
However, the correct meeting and voting procedure must be followed. The specific management structure and management plan should be reviewed before determining the required procedure.
If the owners want to replace the manager, an owners’ meeting may need to be convened in accordance with the applicable rules.
Meeting notices, agenda, timing and service should be handled carefully. Procedural errors can later become grounds for challenging the decisions adopted at the meeting.
The agenda should clearly identify the management issues to be discussed.
Where replacement is intended, it is prudent to address not only dismissal but also the appointment of the new manager, transfer of documents, bank-account authority, accounting records, keys, passwords and other management assets.
Voting in condominium management should not be approached as an informal show of hands without checking the applicable rules.
The number of independent units owned, representation arrangements and statutory voting restrictions can affect the calculation.
For large sites, the management plan and specific collective-building structure may require additional analysis.
A foreign owner who is present in Turkey can participate personally, subject to the applicable meeting rules.
The owner should bring documents establishing identity and ownership where necessary.
Living outside Turkey does not necessarily prevent participation in management matters.
Depending on the action involved, the owner may appoint an authorized representative. The power of attorney should be prepared with sufficient authority for the intended management and legal actions.
Representation may be possible subject to statutory limitations and the applicable management structure.
Where several foreign owners plan to coordinate their votes, proxy arrangements should be reviewed before the meeting rather than after a disputed decision has already been adopted.
A manager should not be assumed to have unlimited power to prevent owners from exercising their statutory management rights.
Where the conditions for an extraordinary meeting are satisfied, the applicable condominium rules and management plan should be examined to determine how owners can initiate the process.
A dispute becomes more serious where owners cannot determine what happened to collected maintenance fees or reserve funds.
Warning signs can include unexplained withdrawals, payments without invoices, unusual related-party contracts, missing receipts, cash transactions, unexplained bank transfers or refusal to provide financial information.
The manager’s financial administration should be capable of scrutiny within the applicable legal framework.
Owners concerned about irregularities should seek relevant income and expense records, invoices, receipts, bank statements, contracts and other supporting documentation.
The management should be able to explain the relationship between amounts collected and expenses incurred.
Large unexplained discrepancies should be investigated before documents or electronic records disappear.
Where possible through lawful procedures, relevant management-account records should be preserved.
If litigation becomes necessary, financial evidence may become central to determining whether funds were used for legitimate common expenses.
Managers may enter into contracts concerning security, cleaning, maintenance, elevators, landscaping, repairs and other common services.
The owners should determine whether the manager had authority to enter the contract and whether required approvals were obtained.
If the manager awards work to relatives, affiliated businesses or companies with undisclosed relationships, the circumstances should be reviewed carefully.
A related-party relationship does not automatically establish wrongdoing, but transparency concerning price, authorization and actual services becomes especially important.
Repeated refusal to provide meaningful financial accountability can become an important factor in the dispute.
The owner should make requests in a provable manner and preserve the manager’s responses or failure to respond.
The legal analysis depends on the circumstances, but persistent failure to perform management responsibilities can support efforts to replace the manager.
Examples may include failure to maintain common areas, failure to implement valid owners’ decisions, poor financial administration or failure to address urgent building problems.
First determine whether the amounts were established through a valid budget, operating project or owners’ decision under the applicable framework.
An owner should distinguish between disagreeing with an expensive but lawful budget and challenging an amount imposed without proper authority.
This can be risky.
A management dispute does not automatically eliminate an owner’s obligations concerning legitimate common expenses. Unilateral non-payment can result in separate collection proceedings.
The legality of the management decision and the payment obligation should therefore be analyzed separately.
If the problem originates from an owners’ meeting decision rather than solely from the manager, the owner may need to challenge the relevant decision.
Applicable judicial deadlines can depend on whether the owner attended the meeting, voted against the decision, learned about it later or alleges a type of invalidity with different legal consequences.
Prompt legal review is therefore important.
Owners should obtain and preserve the minutes of disputed meetings.
The minutes can establish attendance, voting, agenda items, decisions and objections raised by individual owners.
If a foreign owner attends a meeting and disagrees with a decision, the objection should be reflected properly in the meeting records where appropriate.
This can become important in later litigation.
Potential problems may include invalid proxies, incorrect vote calculations, persons voting without authority, fabricated signatures or minutes that do not accurately reflect what happened.
Preserve copies of the attendance list, proxies, meeting notice and signed minutes.
If an owner believes their signature or another person’s signature has been forged, the matter can extend beyond an ordinary condominium dispute.
Original documents should be preserved and potential civil and criminal consequences assessed separately.
Judicial intervention may be available in circumstances contemplated by condominium law where management cannot be established properly or statutory conditions for court involvement exist.
The appropriate remedy depends on the specific management problem. Court proceedings should not be used as a substitute for an available and workable owners’ decision without first analyzing the statutory structure.
Urgent legal action can become relevant where there is a risk that management funds will disappear, documents will be destroyed, common property will be seriously damaged or another difficult-to-reverse loss will occur.
The available interim remedy depends on the facts and legal claim.
Removing the manager is only part of the process.
The decision should address transfer of accounting books, invoices, contracts, bank information, keys, access cards, digital management systems, passwords, insurance documents and technical records.
If the former manager has authority over management accounts, the newly authorized management should address banking authority promptly following a valid change.
Leaving obsolete signing authority in place can create unnecessary financial risk.
Modern residential complexes may use accounting software, resident applications, cloud storage, security systems and electronic payment platforms.
Administrative access to these systems should be included in the handover.
Where financial irregularities are suspected, the new management should consider reviewing previous accounts.
Compare bank transactions, invoices, contracts, maintenance-fee collections and actual services provided.
Potentially, if evidence establishes that the manager caused a recoverable loss or improperly used management funds.
The legal basis, responsible claimant and amount of loss should be established before proceedings are initiated.
Not every accounting dispute is a criminal matter.
However, evidence of forged documents, fraudulent transactions, unlawful appropriation of funds or other criminal conduct may require a separate criminal-law assessment.
Civil recovery and criminal investigation should not be confused with each other.
Review the management agreement as well as condominium decisions and the management plan.
Termination rights, notice periods, service obligations, fees, document-return obligations and liability provisions may become relevant.
Removing the management company from its condominium-management role does not necessarily answer every contractual question.
An improperly terminated service agreement could generate a separate contractual claim. The contract should therefore be reviewed before replacement.
Meeting minutes, settlement documents, debt acknowledgments and powers of attorney can have important legal consequences.
Foreign owners should obtain an accurate translation before signing documents whose legal effect they do not understand.
Unpaid common expenses, ongoing litigation, extraordinary repair decisions and disputes concerning the management can complicate a future property sale.
Owners planning to sell should review outstanding management liabilities and documentation beforehand.
A residential complex containing several blocks can have a different management structure from a single apartment building.
There may be block-level management, representatives or collective management mechanisms. The correct authority to dismiss or appoint a particular manager must therefore be identified before a vote is organized.
A foreign owner seeking removal should first obtain the title information, management plan, current manager’s appointment decision, recent meeting minutes, operating budget, financial statements and relevant management contract. The owner should then determine which management body has authority, organize the required meeting procedure, ensure voting and proxy rules are followed, adopt a clear removal and replacement decision, arrange immediate transfer of records and financial authority and separately investigate any suspected financial misconduct.
Yes, foreign ownership does not by itself prevent participation in condominium management. The applicable voting and meeting rules must still be followed.
Representation may be possible through an appropriately authorized person, subject to applicable rules concerning proxies and voting.
Ordinarily, removal through the owners’ management structure requires the legally necessary decision rather than the unilateral demand of one owner. Judicial remedies may be relevant in appropriate circumstances.
The statutory rules and management plan should be examined to determine whether owners can initiate an extraordinary meeting through another legally permitted procedure.
Doing so can create separate collection risks. A dispute with the manager does not automatically eliminate legitimate common-expense obligations.
Owners may have rights concerning scrutiny of management administration and accounts under the applicable condominium framework. The precise records and procedure should be evaluated according to the dispute.
Preserve bank, accounting and contractual evidence immediately. Depending on the facts, civil recovery and potentially criminal-law issues may need separate consideration.
Court involvement may be possible where the statutory requirements for judicial appointment or intervention are satisfied.
The new management should promptly implement valid changes to authorized signatories and obtain control of the relevant financial records and banking arrangements.
Obtain the management plan and the documents showing how the current manager was appointed before attempting removal. The correct meeting body, voting procedure and replacement mechanism depend on the legal management structure of the particular property.
Disputes with apartment and residential complex management can involve manager removal, invalid owners’ meetings, excessive maintenance fees, accounting irregularities, unauthorized contracts, missing management funds, disputed proxies and court proceedings. Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign property owners in protecting their ownership and management rights in Turkey. Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance in reviewing management plans and meeting decisions, organizing manager-removal procedures, challenging unlawful decisions, examining financial irregularities and pursuing judicial remedies where necessary.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile / WhatsApp: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Office No:148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey