## Facts

- G. Thomas and Patricia Montgomery owned a condominium unit in Columbia Knoll, governed by the Virginia Condominium Act and the condominium’s master deed and bylaws.
- The governing statute allocated responsibility for maintenance and replacement to the council for common elements and to individual unit owners for “any unit or any part thereof.”
- The master deed defined each “unit” to include its windows; the council did not dispute that the Montgomerys’ windows were part of their unit rather than common elements.
- Because utilities were not separately metered, the council sought ways to reduce shared utility costs and received professional advice that insulated windows would be the most effective measure.
- A majority of unit owners present at a council meeting voted to replace all windows across the condominium at an aggregate cost of about $125,399.06.
- The Montgomerys objected, but the council authorized replacement of windows in all units and assessed each unit owner, including the Montgomerys, for the cost.

## Issues

1. Whether the condominium council had statutory or contractual authority to replace windows that were part of an individual unit and assess the unit owner for the cost without the owner’s consent.
2. Whether the council’s general rulemaking and “health, comfort, safety and general welfare” powers could be read to permit unilateral physical alteration of unit property to reduce shared expenses.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the trial court.
- The court held the council lacked authority to replace the Montgomerys’ unit windows and assess them for the cost without their consent.
- The court declared the council’s action exceeded its authority under the statute and the condominium instruments.

## Legal Principles

- When condominium law and governing instruments expressly allocate maintenance and replacement responsibility between common elements and “any unit or any part thereof,” an association may act only within that allocation unless an explicit contrary grant exists.
- General welfare, regulatory, and rulemaking powers allow reasonable regulation of unit use and maintenance, but do not imply authority to physically alter or “improve” parts of an individual unit at the owner’s expense without consent.
- Economic benefit to the community (including reduced common utility expenses) does not expand an association’s powers beyond those granted by statute and the condominium instruments.

## Conclusion

Because the windows were part of the Montgomerys’ unit and neither the governing statute nor the condominium documents expressly authorized the council to replace unit components and charge the owner without consent, the council’s window-replacement project, as applied to the Montgomerys, was ultra vires.


Montgomery v. Columbia Knoll Condo. Council of Co-Owners, 231 Va. 437, 344 S.E.2d 912 (Va. 1986)