THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW 
Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Dean

Lesson # 120 • Residents in a Housing Complex 

As was stated in prior lessons, in Talmudic times houses usually opened into a courtyard that opened into an alley that opened into a public street. Nowadays houses are not so structured, and in these lessons I substituted the concept of a housing complex or multiple-storied apartment buildings to take the halachic place of the courtyards and alleys, respectively. 

These lessons continue the obligations of those living in multi-owned apartments. 

The board of directors of an apartment building or complex usually have authority to compel the residents thereof to pay for the protective doors to the entrance to the building or complex, intercom systems, television monitoring equipment, a small entrance or guard-house to protect the inhabitants from outsiders, and any other security features that the board of directors deems necessary to protect the residents of the building or complex. In Talmudic times the purpose of the guardhouse was to screen persons who were entering the courtyard. Most well-managed buildings nowadays also have guards in the lobby of the building to maintaining the security of the building or complex. 

The halachah does not give the board the right to compel the residents to pay for painting and decorating the common areas. 

Nowadays the custom is to include decorating, heating, lighting of common areas, elevator maintenance and repairs, certain insurance, maintenance, salaries, taxes, water and sewer rates, and painting in common areas as the responsibilities of the residents. The board should have the right to assess residents of the building under the powers given to them by the laws of the community, the constitution of the building, or the bylaws. The board may act at a meeting or in informal sessions or any other manner provided by the bylaws and charter of the building complex. There are in contemporary times many new issues that arise from day to day for which the board of directors may find it necessary to assess the residents. 

The board should also provide an eruv when necessary to enable the residents to carry in the buildings and within the complex on the Sabbath. 

No neighbor has the right to place any item, such as chairs and tables, play equipment, and other items for the exclusive use of the resident and his guests in any common area where they might be an obstruction or compel other residents to take a longer route to their destination. 

The board can impose the duty of maintenance upon a nonresident of the complex who owns an apartment in the building or the complex. If the complex provides a synagogue for both residents of the complex and persons outside the complex, the complex may assess the outside persons for the use of the synagogue. If it does, then the assessed outsiders must be granted permission to enter into the building or complex whenever there are services being held there. next page 

The complex may keep nonresidents out of the premises except for the purposes of visiting residents in the complex. The complex cannot be used as a shortcut from a street on one side of the complex to get to the other side without having to make a detour around the complex. However, if the public has obtained an easement for the shortcut according to halachik terms, it cannot be taken away from them. 

The assessments for security or police services are to be paid by the residents and depend upon the value of their property and contents being protected. The more the person has to protect, the more he will have to pay for protection and for repairs, maintenance, heating, and decorating of the building. It has been said by the commentators, that the neighbor having more valuable assets to protect pays more since many items paid for out of assessments are for security arrangements. If a person has more money his many things are more vulnerable to thieves. Thus the protective aspects of the assessments will afford him more benefit than it does the poorer members of he complex or building with less assets to protect. There is an opinion that the closer the apartment is to the entrance to the building or to the ground floor, since such apartments are more vulnerable, that these residents should have to pay a higher assessment for security. 

All other matters shall be paid by all apartment owners in the same amounts, or according to the area of the apartment, as the bylaws provide. If a resident or nonresident owner fails or refuses to pay the assessment levied against his apartment, the board shall make the repairs or do any other thing for which they demanded payment from the member of the complex. The property of the resident who refuses shall be levied upon by the board of directors. Should he still refuse or be unable to pay, Beth Din may then take over his apartment and sell it, giving the moneys to the project for which the board requested the funds, and any surplus to the person whose apartment has been sold. 

Reuven, one' of the residents of the building complex, desires to do some decorating beyond what the board authorized to be done. It can be some other items, too, such as adding lighting. Or he wishes to use his apartment or the common areas for items prohibited by the board of directors or by the bylaws. An example of such a bylaw is one prohibiting admission of pets into the complex. Any member of the board or any resident can sue Reuven to obtain an injunction against him for his prohibited conduct. Many communities have laws that cover many of these types of items.

In halachah there is an exception regarding washing of clothes. Many communities had laws protecting the right of women to wash or dry clothes in the common area of the complex. Nowadays many buildings have installed for the convenience of the residents, washing machines and dryers that may be used for a modest fee. Where this is done, such an exception should not be necessary. 

I have included this paragraph to show the law as it appears in the codes, although nowadays a great many of these laws are controlled by the municipality or within an apartment complex by the bylaws of the complex. Also, modern water supply and sewer facilities obviate some of the effects of these laws. Five gardens, one behind the other, draw their water from the same well. The water flows downhill through a channel, first to Mr. A. then to Mr. B, then to Mr. C, then to Mr. D, then to Mr. E, and then out of the community. The water channel becomes damaged. The lower gardens must help the higher gardens, but the higher gardens need not help the lower gardens. Thus if the channel becomes damaged and stuffed up near the garden of Mr. B, Messrs. C, D, and E, must help Mr. B. Mr. A need not assist him in repairing the water channel. 

Five courtyards run off their surplus unclean waters into one sewer that passes by the courtyards of Messrs. A, B, C, D, and E, in that order. If the sewer becomes clogged or broken the earlier owners must assist the later owners. Thus, if it becomes clogged in front of Mr. D, then Messrs. A, B, and C must help Mr. D. Mr. E. need not help. 

The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in Vol. V, Ch.161 of A Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint, published by Jason Aronson, Inc. and on sale at local Judaica bookstores. 

Questions to quint@inter.net.il