By Vangelis Dourakis

Conversely, the time for the expiry of the mandatory registration, certification and upgrading deadline for lifts operating in public and private buildings. Although by June 30, the relevant procedure should be completed, objective difficulties arise, resulting in the Pan-Hellenic Federation of Property Owners (POMIDA) and the Pan-Hellenic Federation of Craftsmen-Assistants-Conservators (POPESA).

The application of state requirements, as the two bodies point out, proves to be extremely problematic. In their joint announcement, they raised the alarm, asking the state to intervene immediately with an extension of the deadline and a realistic redesign of procedures. The big “thorn” is that, 17 years after the institutionalization of the JMD, the state does not even know the exact number of lifts operating in the country. The single lift register, which was established by law in 2022 to fill this gap, remains inactive.

Extension and subsidies are requested by property owners

The applicable Joint Ministerial Decision 28425/2008, provides for specific requirements for elevators: initial and periodic controls, compliance with security standards, registration in the relevant technical services of the Municipalities.

However, as the two bodies point out, the activation of the electronic “single lift register”, which was adopted by Article 52 of Law 4961/2022 (amendment of article 11a Law 3982/2011) and will operate under the supervision of the YPANA and which will all installed lifts are registered.

Also, the technical capabilities of the market are limited. Today only 17 accredited lift control bodies are operating, which, due to legislative restrictions, can carry out a very limited number of audits daily.

A decisive parameter in the inability to improve the security of the lifts is – according to the Pomida and the PEOPES – that the vast majority in the general assemblies of the co -owners of apartment buildings do not decide and order the managers to proceed with the necessary work and certifications.

In an apartment building with a 1982 lift, the cost of studying, certifying and technical interventions reached 2,500 euros! The General Assembly of the owners refused to approve the expense, as the majority are elderly with low income. In another case, a 1975 apartment building needs a technical upgrade of EUR 4,700.

For this reason, POMIDA is urgently demanding a subsidy program, at least to cover the basic security provisions.

Even in cases where the elevator is modern and certified, the absence of registration mechanism has led to a deadlock.

‘Heavy bells’ for non -certification of lifts

In any event, the Joint Ministerial Decision 28425/2008 provides for a clear framework for administrative sanctions for infringements related to the installation, operation, recording and certification of elevators.

According to Article 11 of the JMD, those who violate the obligations arising from the provisions of the decision shall impose administrative fines, which ranges from 500 to 10,000 euros.

The amount of the fine is not stable but is formed according to the severity of the infringement, the nature of the danger caused by the non -compliance, and the recurrence of the manager.

In particular, it is provided that in the event of a lift operation without the required certification of good operation by an accredited body, the manager may be punished by a fine of up to 10,000 euros.

A similar fine may also be imposed for the non -registration of the elevator on the relevant technical services of the municipality concerned, as well as for non -compliance with maintenance and periodic audits.

In addition, when a lift operation is found that poses serious risks to user safety, audit authorities can order not only the imposition of a fine, but also the immediate shutdown of the lift until compliance is restored.

In cases of relapse, that is, when the owner or manager has previously violated the same provisions, the fine is increased.