Let me ask using a hypothetical apartment building as an example: The tenant on the ground floor says they don’t use the elevator and doesn’t want to contribute to the monthly expenses, while the upstairs residents think it’s a common-area expense. Everyone in the building is charged the same amount. Do you think the cost should be split equally or vary based on usage?
If it's a shared building expense, simply saying “I never use it” may not be enough to determine whether you should pay. But people should also discuss what the charge covers—is it maintenance or electricity? When people know what they're paying for, the issue becomes less contentious.
It’s not like it’ll just disappear from the list of expenses because they don’t press the elevator button.
I understand the idea of paying according to usage; for example, usage comes to mind when we're talking about the elevator's electricity consumption. But maintenance and repair costs may not be caused only by the people who ride it. So debating a single equal amount without separating the items is a little unclear. The apartment building's own agreement and the relevant rules may also affect the outcome; it wouldn't be right to draw a definitive legal conclusion from this.
@balkonperdesi, separating the expense items is a good point. Let’s assume that in the example, maintenance and electricity are combined into one figure; in that case, do you think management should show them separately? It also makes a difference whether the main objection is to the amount or to the idea of paying for a service they never use.
