Short answer. The delay costs him nothing in the end. Once the security is finally given, Article 588 entitles the usufructuary to all the proceeds and benefits counted from the day the creating document said his enjoyment should have begun — not from the day he posted the bond.
What the law says
After the security has been given by the usufructuary, he shall have a right to all the proceeds and benefits from the day on which, in accordance with the title constituting the usufruct, he should have commenced to receive them.
Civil Code, Article 588 — Effect of Later Giving Security. Read the full provision →
The rule is retroactive by design
Article 588 says that after the security has been given by the usufructuary, he shall have a right to all the proceeds and benefits from the day on which, in accordance with the title constituting the usufruct, he should have commenced to receive them. The reference point is the title constituting the usufruct — the deed, contract or will — and not the date the bond was actually put up. So if a will gave a widow the usufruct of a rented building from the day of the testator's death, and she only posted security eight months later, the rentals for those eight months are still hers once the security is in place. The delay suspends her enjoyment; it does not forfeit it.
Why security is required at all
A usufructuary enjoys property he does not own. He takes the fruits and the use, while the substance belongs to the naked owner, who must get the thing back at the end in substantially the same condition. Security exists to protect that reversion — it answers for damage, for waste, and for the obligation to restore. That is why the Code ordinarily requires the usufructuary to make an inventory and give security before entering into enjoyment. It is not a penalty on the usufructuary; it is the price of being handed someone else's property to enjoy for years, and the naked owner is entitled to insist on it before turning over possession.
What happens during the gap
Until the security is given, the naked owner may withhold possession, and where the property is being administered in the meantime the fruits collected are held to account rather than kept. This is the practical consequence people miss: withholding possession is lawful, but the income is not the owner's to absorb. When the bond is finally posted, an accounting follows for the whole intervening period, and the usufructuary is credited with what accrued from the starting date fixed in the title. Keeping clean records during the gap — rents received, expenses paid, repairs made — is therefore in both sides' interest, because that ledger is precisely what the later reckoning is built from.
The limits of this rule, and what to check
Article 588 does not excuse the usufructuary from giving security at all, and it does not decide the form or amount of it. It does not apply where security has been dispensed with — the creating document may waive it, and the Code exempts certain usufructuaries — nor does it override a contrary stipulation in the title, which governs first. It does not entitle the usufructuary to take possession before the bond is posted, and it does not turn the income of the gap period into a windfall for either side. It also says nothing about who pays taxes, ordinary repairs or extraordinary repairs during the usufruct; those are separate provisions. Practically: read the creating instrument for its start date and any waiver of security, make the inventory properly, keep receipts and rental records from day one, and take the document to a lawyer if the naked owner disputes the accounting.