This article is for general information and education. It is not legal advice.

1) The setting: what a “condominium association” is in Philippine practice

In Philippine condominium projects, the management body enforcing dues is commonly one of these (sometimes both, depending on project structure and turnover stage):

Condominium corporation (often SEC-registered as a non-stock corporation): the juridical entity through which unit owners act collectively to administer the condominium.
Condominium/homeowners association (often organized in relation to subdivision/condominium regulatory frameworks and project turnover).

Regardless of label, its real authority comes from a combination of:

Republic Act No. 4726 (Condominium Act)
The Master Deed / Condominium Plan / Declaration of Restrictions (the project’s “constitution”)
Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws (and house rules/policies consistent with them)
General civil law principles (Civil Code on obligations, contracts, damages; general doctrines on abuse of rights, unjust enrichment, etc.)
Applicable regulatory rules (often affecting developer turnover, associations, and utilities arrangements)

The question “Can they cut utilities?” is usually answered less by a single statute and more by (a) who controls the utility supply and (b) what the governing documents actually authorize, (c) whether the method is lawful and reasonable.

2) Special assessments: what they are and why they matter

A. What is a special assessment?

A special assessment is typically a one-time (or time-limited) charge imposed on unit owners for an extraordinary expense, such as:

Major repairs or replacement (elevators, roof, façade, waterproofing, structural retrofits)
Capital improvements
Compliance works (fire/life safety upgrades)
Insurance shortfalls or deductible funding
Litigation/claims expenses
Reserve fund deficiencies (depending on what the governing documents require)

It differs from regular monthly dues (common expenses/association dues) which fund ordinary operations (security, janitorial, admin, common-area power/water, preventive maintenance, etc.).

B. When is a special assessment valid?

A special assessment is easiest to enforce when it is:

Authorized by the Master Deed/Declaration/By-Laws (and any required voting threshold is met),
Properly approved (board resolution; sometimes unit-owner vote depending on size/type),
Properly noticed (written notice, basis, computation, due dates, and consequences),
Allocated according to the project’s allocation rules (often by percentage interest in common areas, or as otherwise provided).

If a special assessment is imposed without following required procedures or voting thresholds, the delinquent owner may attack the assessment’s enforceability—sometimes the dispute becomes less about nonpayment and more about validity and due process.

3) The association’s core collection powers (before you even get to utilities)

Across Philippine condo practice, the most legally defensible tools for unpaid dues/assessments usually include:

A. Interest, penalties, and collection costs (if authorized)

Associations often impose:

Late payment interest
Surcharges/penalties
Attorney’s fees / collection costs (when provided in governing documents or allowed by contract and proven reasonable)

Courts can reduce unconscionable charges. The safer course is: clear authority in documents + reasonable rates + uniform application.

B. A lien-like claim against the unit (the “property follow” concept)

Under condominium frameworks and typical project documents, unpaid common expenses and assessments are frequently treated as a charge that attaches to the unit (often described as a lien). Practically, this matters because it:

Creates leverage at sale/transfer (buyers demand a clearance)
Supports collection actions and potential enforcement against the unit

How “automatic” and how “foreclosable” this lien is depends heavily on the exact wording of the master deed/declaration and how it’s recorded/implemented.

C. Judicial collection (including small claims where applicable)

Associations can sue for collection:

Ordinary civil action; or
Small claims procedure if the amount and requirements fit the rules (thresholds can change over time)

D. Suspension of non-essential privileges (more on this later)

Common examples:

Pool/gym function room access
Guest privileges
Use of association-controlled parking privileges (where not a separately titled right)
Voting rights in the corporation/association (often for delinquent members)
Issuance of certain clearances/certifications (subject to reasonableness and document basis)

These are often easier to justify than cutting off basic utilities—because they don’t create immediate health/safety/habitability issues.

4) The core issue: can the association cut utilities to force payment of special assessments?

The short, practical answer

Sometimes they can physically do it, but that does not mean they are legally safe to do it. Legality depends on who provides/controls the utility, what the contract/governing documents allow, and whether the act crosses into unlawful self-help, coercion, or regulatory violations.

To analyze properly, split the problem into four scenarios.

5) Scenario-based analysis

Scenario 1: The unit owner has a direct utility account with the public utility (most important distinction)

Example: The unit has its own Meralco account in the unit owner’s name, or its own Maynilad/Manila Water account, and disconnection is governed by the utility’s rules for nonpayment of that utility bill.

General rule: The condominium association cannot legally compel the public utility to disconnect a unit’s electricity/water for unpaid association dues or special assessments. Public utilities disconnect based on their own billing relationship (nonpayment of the utility bill), not to enforce private condo debts.

Additional risk: If condo personnel interfere with the metering equipment, service entrance, seals, or cabling/piping associated with the public utility service, this can create exposure for:

Contractual violations (with the utility/service provider)
Regulatory issues
Potential criminal/civil liability if tampering, damage, or hazardous interference occurs

Bottom line: If the utility contract is directly between the unit owner and the utility, using disconnection to collect special assessments is generally not a lawful enforcement method.

Scenario 2: The condominium (or association) is the customer of record, and units are submetered internally

Example: The building has a master meter; the association pays the utility; individual units are billed through submeters (common for water; sometimes for electricity in certain setups, or for generator/other building-supplied power).

Here, the association has more practical control because the distribution to units is internal. But the legal analysis still differs depending on what is unpaid:

(A) If what’s unpaid is the utility charge itself

If the delinquency is specifically for water/electricity charges billed by the association (not condo dues), disconnection is more defensible if:

The governing documents/policies clearly allow it,
Notices and due process are followed,
Disconnection is done safely and consistently,
It does not violate any utility/regulatory conditions applicable to that setup.

This resembles a supplier disconnecting for nonpayment of the supplied service.

(B) If what’s unpaid is special assessments/association dues, not the utility bill

This is the contentious case.

Even if the association can technically close a valve or flip a breaker, cutting essential utilities as a penalty for a separate debt can be attacked as:

Unlawful self-help (private coercive enforcement without court process)
Abuse of rights (Civil Code principles: exercising a right in a manner that is unreasonable or oppressive)
A coercive act potentially exposing actors to complaints (civil damages; in extreme fact patterns, even criminal complaints such as coercion-type allegations)

Why it’s legally riskier: electricity/water are basic necessities tied to health, safety, and habitability. Courts and regulators tend to view harsh deprivation as a red flag, especially when the association has other lawful remedies (collection suit, lien enforcement, etc.).

Bottom line: Where the association is the utility customer and uses internal controls, disconnection for unpaid utility charges is more defensible; disconnection for unpaid special assessments is legally risky and often challenged as improper.

Scenario 3: Utilities or services are “association-provided” and non-essential

This includes things like:

Cable TV package paid by the building and rebilled to units
Association-provided internet bundle
Association-controlled LPG pipeline service (where applicable)
Extra amenities billed monthly

Disconnection here is typically more defensible because:

The service is closer to a discretionary benefit/contracted add-on,
Health/habitability stakes are lower than water/electricity,
It’s easier to characterize as a service suspension for nonpayment of that service.

Still: there must be authority in governing documents/policies and due process.

Scenario 4: “Common area utilities” vs “unit utilities”

A condominium’s duty includes keeping common areas functional—hallway lights, elevators, fire pumps, alarms, security systems, etc. These should not be compromised to penalize one owner.

Even if targeting a single unit, a disconnection method that affects building systems or safety can create large liability exposure.

6) Due process: what an association should do (and what owners can demand)

Whether suspending privileges or attempting utility-related measures, associations should observe procedural fairness. A robust process usually includes:

Clear written billing showing the special assessment basis, computation, and authority
Written notice of delinquency and demand to pay (with grace period)
Board/authorized committee action (not just a guard or property manager improvising)
Opportunity to contest (especially if the owner disputes validity/computation)
Uniform application (avoid selective enforcement; avoid targeting)
Documented escalation steps (reminders → final demand → legal action)

Owners disputing a special assessment commonly argue:

improper approval threshold,
lack of required notice,
improper allocation formula,
assessment not authorized by governing documents,
conflict-of-interest procurement/irregular project expenses.

When the underlying assessment is in serious dispute, aggressive sanctions like utility interruption become even more vulnerable.

7) Why utility cutoffs for special assessments are particularly exposed to challenge

Even when an association points to a house rule that says “utilities may be disconnected,” several legal vulnerabilities remain:

A. Contract and hierarchy problem

House rules and policies cannot override:

The Master Deed/Declaration/By-Laws (if inconsistent), or
Law/public policy principles (reasonableness; non-oppression)

B. Public policy and essential services

Electricity and water are viewed as essential. Cutting them to enforce a debt unrelated to the utility bill itself can be characterized as an oppressive collection tactic.

C. Tort / damages exposure (Civil Code)

A wrongfully disconnected unit owner may seek:

Injunction (to restore service),
Actual damages (spoiled goods, alternative accommodation, business loss if unit is used for business),
Moral damages (in appropriate cases),
Attorney’s fees (when justified by bad faith or contract).

D. Potential criminal exposure in extreme cases

Depending on facts and intent, complaints may be framed as coercive or harassing acts—especially where there is:

force/intimidation,
entry into the unit without authority,
tampering with meters/seals,
endangerment (elderly, infants, medical devices).

Not every dispute becomes criminal, but the risk increases when essential services are used as leverage.

E. Third-party harm (tenants, family members, guests)

Cutting utilities punishes occupants who may not be the debtor (e.g., tenants). This complicates liability and can worsen the “oppressive” characterization.

8) Safer enforcement alternatives (commonly used in condos)

Associations seeking to collect special assessments typically rely on measures that are easier to defend:

Record and enforce the assessment claim against the unit (lien-type mechanisms where properly provided and recorded)
Collection case (including small claims where available)
Interest/penalties within reasonable and authorized limits
Suspend non-essential amenities (pool/gym/function room; guest privileges)
Suspend voting rights for delinquent members (if by-laws allow)
Withhold certain certifications/clearances that are legitimately within association control and not used abusively
Payment plans approved by the board (often effective for large special assessments)
Set-off arrangements (where legally and contractually appropriate)

A common best practice is a written Collections Policy adopted by the board that:

defines delinquency stages,
standardizes notices,
sets escalation to counsel,
avoids high-risk tactics like utility deprivation (especially for debts not tied to the utility bill).

9) What unit owners can do when utilities are cut or threatened

Immediate steps (practical/legal)

Document everything: notices, emails, photos of valves/breakers, incident reports, witness statements.
Demand written basis: cite the specific by-law/declaration provision authorizing disconnection and the delinquency computation.
Pay under protest / escrow conceptually: If the issue is urgent and health/safety is affected, some owners pay to restore service while formally disputing validity (the strategy depends on facts and documentation).
Seek injunctive relief: Courts can restrain continued disconnection where there is a clear right and urgent harm.
Regulatory/administrative complaints: Depending on the entity and dispute type, complaints may be brought to the proper housing/association regulator or other competent forum.
Damages claims: where there is wrongful disconnection, bad faith, or abusive conduct.

Substantive defenses against the special assessment itself

lack of authority,
improper vote/approval,
defective notice,
improper allocation,
ultra vires expenditures or conflicts of interest.

10) Practical checklist: is a condo legally “on solid ground” to disconnect anything?

Before any suspension/disconnection, check:

What exactly is unpaid?
- Utility bill under association billing? or condo special assessment/dues?
Who is the utility customer of record?
- Unit owner directly? (association has little to no lawful disconnection authority)
- Association master account with submetering? (more control, still regulated/risky)
Where is the authority written?
- Master Deed/Declaration/By-Laws (stronger) vs house rules only (weaker)
Is the sanction proportionate and lawful?
- Cutting water/power to collect a separate debt is high-risk.
Was due process followed?
- Notices, grace periods, board action, chance to contest.
Is the method safe and compliant?
- No meter tampering, no unsafe electrical work, no trespass.
Is it uniformly applied?
- Selective enforcement creates discrimination/bad faith problems.

11) Bottom line conclusions (Philippine condo reality)

For utilities directly contracted by the unit owner with a public utility: a condominium association generally cannot use utility disconnection to collect unpaid special assessments.
For utilities billed through a building master account and distributed internally: disconnection is more defensible for unpaid utility charges, but using it as leverage for unpaid special assessments/dues is legally exposed and commonly challenged as oppressive self-help.
The most defensible collection paths for special assessments remain document-based enforcement (lien-type mechanisms where applicable), judicial collection, and suspension of non-essential privileges, backed by clear authority and due process.