Banning tourist flats in a Spanish community of owners

For years, tourist flats in Spanish apartment buildings worked the other way around: the owner started renting, and the community had to chase them if it wanted to stop it. That logic has now been flipped. Banning tourist flats is no longer the hard part for a community of owners; since 3 April 2025, the hard part is opening one. New tourist rentals require the express, prior approval of the owners' meeting, by a majority of three fifths of all owners representing, in turn, three fifths of the ownership quotas (article 17.12 of Spain's Horizontal Property Law, the LPH).

The change came with Organic Law 1/2025, which reformed the LPH with a clear message: short-term tourist use is no longer a default right but an exception that gets voted on. This applies across Spain to buildings under the LPH regime. Let's look at what your community can decide, how the vote works, what happens to flats that were already operating and how much extra they can be charged.

Can my community ban a tourist flat?

Yes — and strikingly, it no longer even needs to ban anything actively.

The new article 7.3 of the LPH requires the owner to obtain the community's express approval before starting the activity. If nobody asks for it, or the meeting says no, the tourist flat simply cannot open. The community's silence no longer protects anyone: it counts as a no. The meeting is not limited to a yes-or-no choice either. The resolution can approve the activity, restrict it, attach conditions to it or prohibit it outright. Some communities veto it completely; others allow it under specific terms: a cap on the number of units, entrance rules, time limits on the use of shared areas.

Before the reform, many communities could only block tourist rentals if their bylaws prohibited them, which required unanimity and almost never happened. That statutory lock still works, but it is no longer necessary: the law itself has handed the key to the owners' meeting.

What majority is required and how is it voted?

The majority is three fifths, but with a nuance that decides votes: it is calculated over all owners and quotas in the community, not over those attending the meeting. In a meeting where half the building stays home, that bar sits very far away, and that is where many perfectly viable resolutions die. So the real work happens before the meeting. Put the item expressly on the agenda ("approval, restriction or prohibition of the tourist rental activity") and collect signed proxy votes from neighbours who will not attend. A trick seasoned property managers use: send a ready-made proxy form together with the notice of meeting; it multiplies the number that come back signed.

The minutes must leave the resolution watertight, stating at least:

• Exactly what is resolved: full prohibition, restriction or specific conditions
• The result of the vote, counting both owners and quotas
• The date from which the resolution takes effect

Legal note: the resolution has no retroactive effect. It closes the door to future tourist flats; it does not evict those that were already operating in compliance with the rules.

Does it affect tourist flats that were already operating?

No. The reform included a transitional provision designed to provide legal certainty: anyone who was already carrying out the activity before 3 April 2025, in compliance with the tourism regulations of their region (licence or registration, as applicable) may continue. The meeting cannot vote them out.

The word doing the work is "legally". The umbrella only covers activity that was compliant before that date. A flat advertised on platforms without a licence or registration consolidates no rights, however long it has been running, and the community can demand it stop just like any newcomer.

Can the community charge them up to 20% more?

Yes. The same article 17.12 allows the meeting, with the same three-fifths majority, to approve special fees or an increased share of common expenses for tourist-use dwellings, capped at 20%. The reasoning is common sense: a constant rotation of guests wears down the lift, the entrance hall and the cleaning far more than a resident family — and until now everyone else was footing that bill.

Whether the surcharge can be applied to tourist flats that predate the reform is debated: the resolution cannot have retroactive effects, although part of legal doctrine argues the increase can be demanded going forward even from existing operators. If your community is in that situation, get professional advice before issuing the bills: a badly applied surcharge is an easy target for a legal challenge.

How to act against a tourist flat operating without approval

If a tourist flat is running in your building without the meeting's approval (and without rights consolidated before the reform) the first move belongs to the president: formally demanding that the owner cease the activity immediately, on their own initiative or at any neighbour's request. Do it in a verifiable way, by burofax (certified letter), because that demand will be the first piece of evidence in court.

If the owner persists, the meeting can authorise the president to file the cessation action under article 7.2 of the LPH. The judge can order the immediate end of the activity and compensation for the damage caused. In parallel, if the flat operates without a tourism licence, reporting it to the regional tourism authority usually speeds things up on the administrative side.

One piece of advice from someone who has watched these disputes up close: document the activity before making a move. Dated screenshots of the platform listings, the availability calendar, testimony about the constant flow of suitcases. Judges do not take the tourist activity as proven because the neighbours talk about it; they want to see it on paper.

The reform has given communities back control over an activity that affects them directly and that, until now, they suffered as a done deal. If the issue is on the table in your building, the path is concrete: an express item on the agenda, proxies collected, the double three-fifths majority and minutes without cracks. With that, the decision (a veto, a surcharge or a conditional yes) rests with the people who actually live in the building.

Information updated July 2026. This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It refers to Spanish law.