A practical legal article on when “waived,” “condoned,” or “discounted” association dues can still be collected—and when they can’t—under Philippine law and common association structures (condominiums, homeowners associations, and similar community associations).

1) Why this topic matters

In the Philippines, “association dues” (and special assessments) are the lifeblood of common-area operations—security, utilities for common facilities, repairs, insurance, garbage collection, staff payroll, and reserve funds. Disputes arise when a board, developer, officer, or manager says dues are “waived,” “free,” “condoned,” “discounted,” or “not collectible,” then later the association attempts to collect them (sometimes with penalties and interest).

The key legal question is:

Is the waiver valid and binding on the association, and if so, does it extinguish the obligation—permanently or only temporarily?

2) The legal nature of association dues

Association dues are not “optional fees.” In Philippine practice they typically arise from a mix of:

A. Contractual sources (private law)

Master deed / declaration of restrictions / condominium bylaws / house rules
HOA articles/bylaws and membership undertakings
Deeds of sale or contracts to sell (sometimes with developer representations)
Board or membership resolutions authorizing assessments

Under the Civil Code principle that contracts have the force of law between the parties, these documents are the backbone of enforceability—especially for condominiums and HOAs.

B. Statutory/regulatory sources (public law overlays)

Depending on the community:

Condominiums: unit owners are generally obligated to contribute to common expenses through the condominium corporation/association structure created by governing documents and condominium law practice.
Homeowners associations (HOAs): the HOA framework (including recognition of associations, governance, and member obligations) typically supports the association’s authority to levy and collect dues/assessments, subject to its bylaws, rules, and due process requirements.
Corporate overlays: many associations are organized as non-stock corporations, so corporate governance rules (board authority, member approval requirements, fiduciary duties) can limit who can “waive” receivables like dues.

Bottom line: dues are usually enforceable as (1) contractual obligations tied to membership/property ownership and (2) obligations necessary to fund common expenses. That context heavily affects whether a waiver is legally effective.

3) What “waiver” can mean legally

In real disputes, “waived dues” may actually be any of the following:

True waiver – intentional relinquishment of the right to collect (often permanent).
Condonation / remission – a gratuitous release of a debt already due (often treated like a form of donation conceptually).
Discount / rebate – reduction of dues, typically conditional or time-bound.
Forbearance – agreement to delay collection (no extinguishment).
Compromise / settlement – reduced amount in exchange for payment or other consideration.
Promotional developer subsidy – developer pays dues on behalf of buyers for a period (not a “waiver” by the association unless structured properly).
Administrative error – statements like “waived” appear in SOAs but were never authorized.

The label doesn’t control. The substance does. Courts and adjudicators look at authority, intent, form, and effects on other members.

4) The core enforceability test: authority + form + consistency with governing documents/law

A “waiver” is most likely to be enforceable against the association only if all of the following line up:

(1) Proper authority

Who waived it?

Board of directors/trustees?
General membership?
Developer?
Property manager?
Officer (e.g., president/treasurer) acting alone?

A common rule in Philippine corporate/association practice: individual officers and property managers generally do not have inherent authority to permanently condone receivables unless:

the bylaws/rules expressly allow it, or
the board authorizes it by resolution, or
the membership approves it where required.

If the person who “waived” dues lacked authority, the waiver is typically:

not binding on the association (subject to possible ratification), and/or
may expose the association to internal governance disputes (members suing directors/officers for ultra vires acts).

(2) Proper documentation / proof

Waiver is an affirmative defense in collection disputes—the burden is usually on the unit owner/member claiming it to prove it clearly.

Because dues are money obligations often exceeding ₱5,000, written evidence is crucial:

Board resolution
Approved policy (hardship program, calamity relief)
Signed compromise agreement
Developer subsidy agreement acknowledged by the association
Official SOA reflecting approved credit with clear reference to authority

Verbal “okay na ’yan, waived na” statements are notoriously hard to enforce—especially if the association disputes authority.

(3) Not contrary to governing documents or law/public policy

Even a board resolution can be attacked if it:

violates the master deed/declaration/bylaws,
imposes unequal burdens without authorization, or
effectively transfers one owner’s share of common expenses to others without a legal basis.

In many condominium/HOA setups, each member’s obligation to contribute proportionately to common expenses is fundamental. A waiver that simply excuses one owner while others shoulder the shortfall can be challenged as improper unless the governing documents allow subsidies or the association funds it from permissible surplus/reserves in a properly approved way.

5) Different contexts, different outcomes

A. Condominium associations / condominium corporations

General principle: the duty to contribute to common expenses is central. A “waiver” is more legally vulnerable when it undermines proportional sharing of common expenses.

More likely enforceable:

A temporary discount approved by the board under a published policy (e.g., early payment discount), applied uniformly.
A compromise settlement reducing arrears in exchange for immediate payment (consideration exists).
A developer subsidy where the developer pays (or credits) the dues, and the association receives equivalent funding—so common expenses are not underfunded.

More likely unenforceable or challengeable:

Selective, permanent condonation granted informally (especially by a manager/officer).
Waiver that effectively gifts association funds/receivables without required approvals.
Waiver that conflicts with declaration/bylaws or harms other unit owners (e.g., creating a deficit covered by everyone else).

B. Homeowners associations (subdivisions, villages, gated communities)

HOAs also rely on dues for common services. Waivers are examined through:

HOA bylaws and rules on assessments,
member voting requirements for budgets/assessments/collection policies,
due process requirements before penalties/sanctions,
fairness/non-discrimination within the membership class.

Watch-outs specific to HOAs:

Some HOAs tie voting rights or access to amenities to “members in good standing,” but the HOA must follow its own rules and due process.
Cutting essential services as a “collection tool” can be legally risky; remedies generally should track lawful collection mechanisms.

6) The most common waiver scenarios (and how enforceable they are)

Scenario 1: “The manager said it’s waived.”

Usually weak, unless the manager shows written board authority or the board later ratified it.

Scenario 2: “The board president promised me a waiver.”

A president acting alone often cannot permanently condone dues without board action (and sometimes member approval).

Scenario 3: “It’s in an email/Viber message from an officer.”

Helpful for proof of representation, but authority still matters. If unauthorized, the association may still collect, though estoppel arguments may arise if reliance was reasonable and the association’s conduct was consistent.

Scenario 4: “The board passed a resolution waiving dues for officers.”

Legally sensitive. If it functions as compensation/perk, it may need:

explicit bylaw authorization,
clear policy approval,
proper accounting/tax treatment considerations,
and avoidance of self-dealing/breach of fiduciary duty.

Scenario 5: “The developer promised one year free dues.”

This is often not a waiver, but a developer subsidy. Enforceability depends on whether:

the association agreed to honor it, and
the developer actually funds the association so common expenses are covered. If the association never consented, the owner’s claim may lie against the developer—not necessarily against the association.

Scenario 6: “They waived my arrears during the pandemic/calamity.”

Could be valid if:

adopted via board/member action per governing documents,
applied uniformly or under an objective hardship program,
and properly documented.

Scenario 7: “They didn’t bill me for years; now they want back dues.”

Non-billing is not automatically a waiver. The association can often still collect, subject to:

prescription (see Section 10),
laches/estoppel (equitable defenses),
and internal document proof (what the governing docs say about accrual and demand).

7) If dues were “waived,” can the association later collect them anyway?

It depends on the legal character of the waiver:

A. If it was a valid remission/condonation (true extinguishment)

If properly authorized and documented, the obligation may be extinguished. The association generally cannot revive the same obligation later unless a new obligation is created (e.g., new assessment) consistent with rules.

B. If it was forbearance (delay) or conditional discount

The association may collect once:

the grace period ends,
conditions fail (e.g., discount only if paid by a date),
or the policy is properly changed prospectively.

C. If it was unauthorized (ultra vires) and not ratified

The association can usually disaffirm and collect, but it must consider:

Whether the member reasonably relied on official association acts (not just rogue statements),
Whether the association’s own documents/records created a strong appearance of authority,
Whether equity (estoppel) could limit retroactive collection.

D. If it was illegal or contrary to governing documents

Even if someone “approved” it, an unlawful waiver is typically void/voidable, and the association may be compelled internally to collect (and directors may be exposed to liability for allowing improper condonation).

8) Defenses unit owners/members commonly raise (and how they fare)

When an association sues to collect, a unit owner/member may argue:

Waiver / condonation – must be proven clearly; authority is the battleground.
Estoppel – “you represented it was waived; I relied.” Stronger if the association issued official SOAs/receipts reflecting the waiver.
Laches – delay that made collection inequitable (case-by-case; not a substitute for prescription).
No due process for penalties – can reduce/strike penalties/interest if not authorized or not properly imposed.
Invalid assessment – not approved per bylaws (especially special assessments).
Selective enforcement / discrimination – relevant where similarly situated members were treated differently without basis.

9) Remedies and collection tools associations commonly use (and limits)

Associations typically rely on:

Demand letters, statements of account, notices of delinquency
Interest/penalties only if authorized by governing documents/rules
Suspension of certain privileges (amenities) if authorized and with due process
Civil collection suits (including small claims where applicable to the claim type/amount and parties)
In some condominium structures, lien-based remedies may be available if provided by governing documents and the legal framework (often requiring careful procedural compliance)

Caution: Some aggressive tactics (e.g., harassment, public shaming, cutting essential services) can backfire legally.

10) Prescription (time limits) in practical terms

Associations that wait too long can face prescription defenses. In general Civil Code terms (practically applied):

Written contract-based claims often prescribe longer than oral ones.
If dues arise from written governing documents (common), a longer prescriptive period often applies than if the claim were purely based on unwritten arrangements.
Each monthly due may be treated as a separate accrual.

Because prescription analysis is highly fact-specific (document type, cause of action, demand letters, acknowledgments/part payments), associations and members should treat this as a major risk point.

11) Governance risks: waived dues can create director/officer liability

Even when a unit owner “wins” a waiver, the board may face internal consequences if the waiver was improper.

Common theories in internal challenges:

Ultra vires acts (beyond authority)
Breach of fiduciary duty (favoritism, self-dealing, negligence)
Violation of bylaws / declaration
Improper donation of association assets/receivables

A board that wants to grant relief is safer when it uses:

objective hardship guidelines,
uniform discount programs,
properly approved compromises for delinquent accounts,
transparent resolutions and accounting.

12) Best practices to make waivers (or relief programs) legally defensible

For associations/boards

Put waiver/discount/compromise authority explicitly in board resolutions and (if needed) obtain member approval.
Use written agreements for any condonation/compromise, signed by authorized officers.
Treat “free dues” offers by developers as subsidy agreements (developer pays; association is made whole).
Apply relief uniformly or via objective criteria (hardship program).
Document everything: minutes, resolutions, SOAs, receipts, credits.

For unit owners/members

Get it in writing and confirm board authority (resolution number/date).
Keep SOAs/receipts showing credits or “zero balance.”
If it’s a developer promise, secure the written undertaking and clarify whether the association recognizes it or the developer is paying on your behalf.

13) Practical conclusions (what is “enforceable” most of the time?)

A real, permanent waiver of association dues is enforceable only when properly authorized and documented.
Unauthorized “waivers” by managers/officers are commonly unenforceable, though reliance-based defenses may reduce retroactive collection in some cases.
In condominiums and HOAs, selective waivers are legally sensitive because dues fund shared obligations; improperly excusing one member can be attacked as unfair, ultra vires, or contrary to governing documents.
Discounts, forbearance, and compromises are usually safer than outright condonation, because they are easier to justify as policy-based or supported by consideration.
Developer “free dues” are best treated as subsidies, not as the association giving up its right to collect without replacement funding.

Note

This is general legal information in the Philippine setting and is not a substitute for advice on a specific dispute. If you want, paste (a) the exact waiver wording you were given, (b) who issued it, and (c) what your bylaws/master deed say about assessments and board powers—and I’ll analyze how strong enforceability is on those facts.