If some owners want to fire the property manager but another owner doesn’t, is the property management contract still valid and enforceable? – North Carolina

Short Answer

In North Carolina, a property management contract is generally enforceable according to its terms unless the owners who signed it had authority to bind the other co-owners (or the other co-owners later ratified it). If one co-owner did not authorize or ratify the agreement, that co-owner may have a strong argument that the contract cannot be enforced against that co-owner personally. Even then, the contract may still be enforceable against the signing co-owner(s) and may still control the manager’s relationship with the property until it is properly terminated under the contract.

Understanding the Problem

In North Carolina, co-owners of inherited real estate often disagree about who gets to make day-to-day decisions for a rented property, including whether a property manager must be kept or can be fired. The core question is whether a property management agreement remains valid when some co-owners want to terminate it but at least one co-owner does not agree. The answer usually turns on who signed the contract, what authority that signer had to act for other owners, and what the contract requires for termination.

Apply the Law

North Carolina’s cotenancy rules focus on authority and consent. A co-owner’s act relating to co-owned property generally does not bind another co-owner as to a third party unless the other co-owner previously authorized it or later ratified it. At the same time, disputes about management and control of co-owned property often end up in a partition case in North Carolina Superior Court, where the court can address practical issues (like possession, rents, and expenses) while the case is pending.

Key Requirements

Who signed and in what capacity: If the management agreement was signed by all owners (or by an authorized agent for all owners), it is typically enforceable as written, including its termination clause.
Authority or ratification: If fewer than all owners signed, the key issue is whether the non-signing owner authorized the signer to bind them, or later ratified the agreement by words or conduct (for example, knowingly accepting the manager’s services under the contract and treating the contract as the governing deal).
Contract termination terms: Even when owners have the power to end the relationship, the manager’s contract often requires written notice, a waiting period, or payment of certain charges. Firing a manager “by vote” may not be effective if it does not follow the contract’s termination procedure.

What the Statutes Say

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 41-84 (Authority to bind another cotenant) – A cotenant’s act relating to the property generally cannot bind another cotenant as to a third party unless authorized or later ratified.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 41-87 (Modification by agreement) – Cotenants may make agreements about the property, including possession, sharing rents, reimbursements, and a cotenant’s authority to bind another cotenant.

Analysis

Apply the Rule to the Facts: Here, multiple relatives co-own an inherited home in North Carolina that has been repaired and is now rented under a multi-year lease. If a property manager was hired to handle the rental, the management contract’s enforceability depends first on whether all co-owners signed it or clearly authorized one person to sign for everyone. If one owner did not authorize or ratify the agreement, that owner may dispute being bound by the management contract, even if other owners want to keep or terminate the manager.

Process & Timing

Who acts: The owner(s) who want to terminate the manager, ideally acting through whoever has written authority to manage the property for the ownership group. Where: First, through the written property management agreement (notice to the manager at the address/email required by the contract). If the dispute escalates, it is commonly addressed in North Carolina Superior Court as part of a partition action involving the county where the property is located. What: Written termination notice that matches the contract’s requirements; if litigation is needed, a partition filing and related motions/orders addressing management, rent handling, and expenses while the case is pending. When: Follow the contract’s notice and waiting period; if the contract requires advance notice (often 30–60 days), termination is not immediate unless the contract allows it.
Next step: If owners disagree about authority, collect the key documents (deed/estate documents showing ownership shares, the management agreement, any written authorizations, and rent/expense records) and try to reach a written co-owner agreement about management and rent distribution going forward.
Final step: If no agreement is possible, a partition case can create a structured, court-supervised path to resolve control issues and ultimately separate the owners’ interests (by sale, division where allowed, or another court-approved outcome), while addressing credits/debits for rents, repairs, and carrying costs.

Exceptions & Pitfalls

Assuming “majority rules”: Co-ownership of a house is not the same as an HOA or corporation. Without a written agreement giving one person (or a majority) authority, one co-owner may not be able to bind another co-owner to a management contract under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 41-84.
Accidental ratification: Even if a co-owner did not sign, actions can be argued as ratification (for example, repeatedly approving the manager’s invoices, directing the manager’s work as if the contract governs, or accepting distributions that are clearly tied to the manager’s contract terms).
Improper termination: Terminating “effective immediately” when the contract requires written notice, a cure period, or a set end date can lead to disputes about unpaid management fees, transition fees, or continued authority to collect rent.
Tenant and lease disruption: A multi-year lease means the tenant relationship must stay stable. Changing managers does not automatically change the tenant’s lease terms, and mishandling the transition can create rent-collection and maintenance problems that later become issues in a partition accounting.

For more background on how North Carolina courts handle practical disputes among co-owners, including control and use issues that can come up in a partition case, see disagreement between co-owners about selling or using the property.

Conclusion

In North Carolina, a property management contract is usually enforceable as written against the owner(s) who signed it, but it may not be enforceable against a non-signing co-owner unless that co-owner authorized or later ratified the agreement. When co-owners disagree, the contract’s termination clause and notice requirements often control whether the manager can be removed right away. The most practical next step is to give written termination notice that matches the contract’s requirements (including any notice period) or negotiate a written co-owner agreement that clearly assigns management authority.

Talk to a Partition Action Attorney

If there is a co-owner dispute over keeping or firing a property manager for a rented, inherited home, our firm has experienced attorneys who can help explain options, authority issues, and timelines under North Carolina law. Call us today at [919-341-7055].

Disclaimer: This article provides general information about North Carolina law based on the single question stated above. It is not legal advice for your specific situation and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws, procedures, and local practice can change and may vary by county. If you have a deadline, act promptly and speak with a licensed North Carolina attorney.