Guangzhou issued a notice to comprehensively strengthen the construction of owner organizations and regulate the behavior of owner organizations
Xinkuaibao reporter learned yesterday that the Guangzhou Municipal Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau, the Organization Department of the Municipal Party Committee, and the Political and Legal Affairs Committee of the Municipal Party Committee jointly issued the " "Notice on Comprehensively Strengthening the Construction of Owners' Organizations and Standardizing the Behavior of Owners' Organizations" (hereinafter referred to as the "Notice"), strengthens grassroots political governance, and strives to build a first-class construction, governance and sharing pattern in the field of property management in Guangzhou.
It is understood that the notice targets some owners’ organizations’ preparations that depart from the guidance of grassroots governments, owners’ organizations’ candidates who do not meet legal standards, owners’ organizations’ electoral voting fraud, property service companies’ obstruction of the establishment of owners’ organizations, and special campaigns to crack down on gangs and evil. 30 work guidelines and supervisory measures were proposed for outstanding problems discovered in the work.
Citizens reported to the New Express reporter that the current property owners committee of Guangzhou Linhedong Commercial and Residential Community and the property company Guangzhou Jiahua Property Management Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Jiahua Property") have been involved in a lawsuit every year in recent years. It’s annoying to death.”
Data from Qichacha shows that Jiahua Property was established in 2005. It is understood that it is the second property management company of the community, and its charges have always been 30 yuan per household per month. The current owners' committee was successfully registered in the street on September 8, 2015, with a term of five years. On November 15 of that year, the owners' committee organized a meeting of owners and made a decision not to renew the employment of Jiahua Property Company. Since then, the two sides have launched a long-term "tug of war."
The property management company and some residents are dissatisfied with this decision. The person in charge of the property management department told the New Express reporter that there are problems in the election process of the property owners committee itself. On the voting form, there is a candidate named Dong Xiaoyao (pseudonym). A copy of the resident population information card of the Guangzhou Municipal Public Security Bureau in Guangdong Province shows that this resident was marked as dead in 2014. In addition, the owners who participated in the voting also had two votes from the Guangdong Provincial Trust Real Estate Development Company, which covers an area of ??27,350.698 square meters. It was the original developer of the community and no longer owned the property rights, so it should not be counted in the votes.
Xinkuaibao reporter learned that on August 6, 2017, more than 30 people gathered at the property office in an attempt to move office items, but to no avail.
Feng Wuli (pseudonym), a member of the Property Owners Committee, told the New Express reporter that the property management company uses public space for private gain. According to reports, before the management of the current property owners committee, the community had a large green area. Later, many green areas disappeared inexplicably and were turned into parking lots. During the day, foreign vehicles parked here from time to time. "It's understandable that there were parking lots when cars first appeared, but the income generated from them should belong to all owners, but we have never received it at all."
The relevant person in charge of Linhe Subdistrict Office People revealed that Lin Hedong Commercial and Residential Community is currently going through court proceedings, and no judgment has been made yet, and the court needs to make a final decision.
The relevant person in charge of the Tianhe District Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau told the New Express reporter that during the establishment process of the community property committee, all the materials that should be submitted were met and the conditions for establishment were met. However, the Provincial Trust Real Estate Development who participated in the voting The company does have flaws.
Why is it said that the conditions for establishment are met? How can there be flaws? The reporter reviewed the Civil Judgment of the Tianhe District People's Court of Guangzhou City, Guangdong Province (2017) Guangdong 0106 Minchu No. 21926 (hereinafter referred to as "Judgment No. 21926") ) shows that the filing behavior of the real estate administrative department and the sub-district office conducts a formal review, rather than a substantive review, on whether the filing materials submitted by the owners' committee are complete and in compliance with relevant laws and regulations.
The flaw refers to the fact that the ballot papers of the Provincial Trust Real Estate Development Company as a candidate for the election of the industry committee have neither an official seal nor the signature of the legal representative, so the authenticity is doubtful. It is understood that regarding the votes of the property owners committee of the community, the First Court of Guangzhou Railway Transport (2016) Guangdong 7101 Xingchu No. 568 Administrative Judgment further confirmed that 17 ballots were altered during the election process of the property owners committee, and their authenticity is uncertain. approved. "My name was written on the voting form, but I didn't know about it at all and I definitely never participated in voting," said Ms. Pang, a resident.
As for property owners committees and property companies, the relevant person in charge of the Tianhe District Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau said, “In actual work, many property owners committees do not operate according to procedures and laws and regulations, and want to break away from the government’s supervision and guidance. Some. The owners' committee did not fully respect the wishes of the owners and did not put the interests of the owners first. As for the property management company, it only needs to provide its own services and should not be too involved in the affairs of the owners' meeting and the owners' committee. In fact, as long as it is an expression of the residents’ true wishes, the government will support it.”
Highlights
Street and town governments
should check the representatives of the preparatory group of the property owners committee< /p>
The reporter found that a major highlight of the notice is that it clearly clarifies that grassroots governance should be the leading role and the supervision and guidance responsibilities of street and town governments should be fully implemented. According to the notice, the sub-district and town governments must check the qualifications of the owner representatives of the preparatory group. If the recommended owner representatives of the preparatory group do not meet the specified qualifications or forge the owner's signature for recommendation, their qualifications to participate in the preparatory group may be cancelled.
In addition, for construction units and property service companies that fail to fulfill their obligations of support and assistance and infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of owners, the street and town governments should conduct key investigations and punishments in conjunction with the district housing construction department, and take joint disciplinary measures for breach of trust. If the decisions made by the preparatory group, owners' meeting, or owners' committee violate the provisions of property management laws and regulations, the sub-district and town government, together with the district housing construction department, shall order them to correct or revoke their decisions within a time limit, and notify all owners.
The owners' meeting voted
Information should be disclosed through WeChat groups and other methods
Xinkuaibao reporter also found that the notice clarified important concepts with many conflicts and disputes, and detailed It streamlines the procedures for the establishment and operation of owners' organizations, ensures the exercise of the owners' legal rights, and is highly operable.
In terms of the voting process of the owners' meeting, the notice stipulates that the preparatory group or owners' committee should disclose information to all owners and solicit opinions through effective methods such as WeChat groups and public accounts; the voting of the owners' meeting should first use electronic voting. In this way, the district housing construction department should speed up the construction of electronic voting database in the jurisdiction.
In terms of the transfer of property management rights, the notice stipulates that if the owners' meeting selects a new property company in accordance with the law, the property owners committee shall promptly negotiate with the original property company on the transfer of property management rights; if the negotiation fails, it may seek advice from the street or town. The government applies for mediation, and property owners committees and new property companies are not allowed to forcibly take over the property management area. If the original property management company violates the regulations and refuses to exit the property management area, the district housing construction department will investigate and deal with it in accordance with the law.
The notice also clarifies that property management work will be included in the evaluation of comprehensive management work (safety construction) in each district. Relevant municipal departments will organize efforts to conduct city-wide inspections and supervision on the implementation of various tasks in the notice from time to time. It is found that Problems are coordinated and resolved in a timely manner. All district governments should refine their work systems, establish an assessment mechanism with the core of discovering and quickly handling problems, and improve the incentive and punishment mechanism for property management work.
Comments
The government should strengthen guidance and supervision of private self-governing organizations
Liu Yi, a member of the Guangzhou Municipal People’s Political Consultative Conference, believes that in terms of systems, my country’s current laws and regulations are not yet It is sound and lacks clear restrictions on the relevant rights of the owners’ committee. In reality, many property owners committees equate themselves with property management companies or their superiors, and use their unprofessional bodies to guide professional property management companies, which may lead to power rent-seeking.
The government should strengthen guidance and supervision of private autonomous organizations. The sub-district office and the Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau should go into the community, strengthen the publicity of the property committee, and awaken the general public's awareness of their rights. Just because regulations do not confer relevant rights does not mean that you do not want to cause trouble.
If you have objections to the decision of the property owner committee
There is the best time to refute
Wu Jie, a lawyer at Guangdong Legal Shengbang Law Firm, pointed out that if the community owners have objections to the property owner committee, There is an optimal time to reject an objection to a decision made by the Commission. According to the relevant provisions of the Property Law and the "Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Cases concerning Disputes over Differential Ownership of Buildings", community owners have the right to rescind. If the owners believe that the decision (resolution) made by the owners' meeting or the owners' committee infringes upon their If there is a violation of legitimate rights and interests or legal procedures, the owner has the right to sue to request the revocation of the decision (resolution). However, the right of revocation has a one-year expulsion period, and the owner should sue within one year from the date he knew or should have known that his rights and interests had been infringed, otherwise the right will be lost.