Flair Towers homeowners challenge DMCI’s narrative on management exit

Homeowners point to unresolved questions over double billing, unverified charges, and lack of transparency.

Several Flair Towers homeowners are pushing back against the explanation given by DMCI Homes Property Management Corp. (DPMC) for its departure from the Mandaluyong condominium, arguing that the dispute was never simply about unpaid obligations.

In an advisory to residents, DPMC announced that it would conclude its property management engagement with Flair Towers Condominium Corporation (FLTCC) effective June 20, 2026, citing unsuccessful negotiations regarding “outstanding financial obligations.”

The announcement means DPMC-operated services, including Property Management Office operations, technical support, project management services, and digital platforms such as the DMCI App and Inventi, will cease beginning June 21.

But homeowners responding to the development have offered a different perspective.

One homeowner said the condominium corporation had consistently expressed its willingness to settle its obligations and was never refusing payment outright.

“The issue was never about refusing to pay,” the homeowner wrote.

According to the resident, concerns arose because some billings allegedly lacked supporting documents and included items that raised questions, such as possible double billing and alleged ghost employees.

The homeowner claimed the condominium corporation had merely requested documentation to verify the charges before payment, but that DPMC chose to end its engagement instead.

Another resident disputed reports suggesting homeowners were blindsided by the management company’s departure.

“Matagal na namin alam na aalis ang DPMC,” the homeowner wrote, saying residents had already discussed the company’s impending exit in multiple meetings.

The same resident also questioned why the condominium corporation should settle charges that allegedly lacked proper supporting documents.

Far from expressing alarm over the transition, some homeowners appeared to welcome DPMC’s departure.

One resident described the move as “good riddance,” alleging long-standing dissatisfaction with the company’s performance.

Another homeowner claimed DPMC’s exit was connected to questions surrounding the management of the property and accountability issues.

“They are leaving because they do not want to take accountability,” the resident wrote.

The comments reveal a narrative markedly different from the one presented in DPMC’s advisory. While the company characterized the split as the result of unresolved financial obligations, several homeowners argue the dispute centers on transparency, documentation, and accountability.

The allegations raised by residents have not been independently verified. DPMC has not publicly addressed the specific claims regarding documentation requests, alleged double billing, ghost employees, or accusations of mismanagement.

As Flair Towers prepares for a new management setup, the disagreement highlights a deeper conflict between the condominium corporation and its former property manager—one that residents say cannot be reduced to a simple payment dispute.

READ: