Taking Advance Maintenance From Homebuyers Is Illegal, Experts Urge MahaRERA To Stop Builders’ Recovery Practice
Taking Advance Maintenance From Homebuyers Is Illegal, Experts Urge MahaRERA To Stop Builders’ Recovery Practice
Housing advocates say pre-collecting 1–2 years’ charges violates RERA provisions and burdens buyers before societies are even formed.
In Mumbai, housing rights experts have raised serious objections to a widespread builder practice — collecting one or two years’ maintenance charges upfront at the time of possession. According to consumer representatives, this system places an unfair financial load on homebuyers and directly contradicts provisions under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act.
They argue that maintaining a building becomes the responsibility of a cooperative housing society or a legally recognised association of residents — not the builder — once the project receives an occupation certificate. For this reason, collecting advance maintenance before such a body exists is being described as both unlawful and unethical.
Housing activists say the issue has been affecting thousands of buyers across Maharashtra, prompting appeals to the state’s real estate regulator to intervene swiftly. They point out that the law is clear on the timeline for forming a society: once 51% of the flats are booked, the builder must facilitate the creation and registration of an association within three months. Failure to comply is considered a punishable offence under the Act.
Experts add that even in large townships with multiple buildings, a similar structure applies — societies for individual buildings and, where necessary, a federation for common amenities — all of which must be registered promptly after the final occupation certificate is issued. In redevelopment projects, they note, the process is easier because the society already exists and only the new members need to be added.
Consumer bodies say this makes the demand for one or two years’ advance maintenance both unnecessary and contrary to the law’s intent. They argue that RERA clearly places responsibility on the builder to provide essential services at reasonable charges only until the residents’ association formally assumes control. The charges for this interim period, they emphasise, cannot be arbitrarily fixed or collected in bulk.
Several homebuyers have reported that advance maintenance amounts, especially in large premium projects, run into significant figures. Advocates describe this as an attempt by some developers to secure additional revenue while avoiding timely formation of societies — an action that defeats the purpose of RERA reforms meant to ensure transparency and accountability.
Consumer panels have now urged MahaRERA to issue clear directives instructing promoters to stop advance recovery altogether and to ensure strict enforcement of society formation timelines. They argue that only consistent regulatory action can prevent what they describe as “unjust enrichment” at the expense of homebuyers.
The demand comes at a time when the real estate sector is seeing steady growth across Maharashtra, including in key markets such as Mumbai, Thane and Pune. Housing groups say strong regulation is essential to maintain buyer confidence, especially as more projects approach possession stages in the current cycle.
