"Governing the country is permanent, and benefiting the people is the foundation". Property is related to people's livelihood, and its service quality is closely related to people's quality of life and community harmony and stability, so the resolution of property disputes has gradually become an important part of the people's courts' active attention and participation in grassroots social governance.
This morning (June 25), the Shanghai Hongkou District People's Court (hereinafter referred to as the Hongkou District People's Court) held a press conference on the white paper on the management of the source of litigation related to property disputes, informing the litigation situation of property disputes in 2023, putting forward governance suggestions and releasing 6 typical cases, so as to promote the resolution of property disputes from the source and realize a new pattern of grassroots social governance. Zhao Yan, member of the party group and vice president of the Hongkou District People's Court, reported on the relevant situation of the white paper, and Shi Xiaofeng, president of the case filing division, reported on typical cases. The press conference was presided over by Xu Yang, member of the Party Leadership Group and Director of the Political Department of the Hongkou District People's Court. Representatives of the Hongkou District Justice Bureau, various streets, relevant property service enterprises and a number of media representatives attended the press conference.
This press conference is the 19th in a series of press conferences on "Ensuring Fairness and Efficiency: Deepening the Modernization of Shanghai Court Work".
Pre-litigation mediation
Efficiently resolve all kinds of property disputes
According to the white paper, in 2023, the Hongkou District People's Court will accept a total of 812 property service contract dispute cases in Hongkou District, and 802 cases will be concluded. The main way to close the case was withdrawal and mediation, of which 687 cases were withdrawn, 5 cases were handled according to withdrawal, and 20 cases were mediated, with a withdrawal rate of 87.68%.
Property dispute cases mainly present the following characteristics:
➤ First, the number of disputes remains high, and the litigation diversion mechanism needs to be improved. The root cause of property disputes lies in the fact that property owners are dissatisfied with the services of the property management company and exert pressure on the property management company by refusing to pay the property management fee, which in turn leads to property disputes. In the absence of improvement in the quality of property services, property disputes are common and recurrent.
➤ Second, the focus of disputes is relatively concentrated, and the rate of accepting judgments and ending litigation is low. The main body of litigation in property service contract disputes is the property service enterprise, and the litigation claims focus on the payment of outstanding property fees and liquidated damages, while the reasons for the owner's refusal to pay the property fee are mainly reflected in the defects in the quality of property services or inconsistent service standards. It is difficult to settle the case, even if the arrears are settled, the existence of property service quality defects cannot avoid potential disputes.
➤ Third, the dispute involves the interests of the group, and the process and result of the handling have an exemplary effect. The process and outcome of such disputes will have a demonstration effect on outsiders in the same community or related communities, and improper handling will affect the order of community life and even cause group conflicts.
Combined with the relevant situation of property-related disputes in various streets in Hongkou District, the press conference notified the four major reasons for the frequent occurrence of property-related disputes:
➤ First, the industry standard of property service has not been unified. The laws and regulations related to property disputes need to be further refined and adjusted, the relevant industry standards and self-discipline norms need to be clarified, the competent authorities do not have enough regulation, guidance and supervision of property services, and the owners also lack an objective evaluation basis for property services.
➤ Second, the quality of property services is difficult to quantify. The obligations of property service enterprises in property service contracts, especially in the early property service contracts, are highly summarized and formatted, and there are subjective cognitive differences between different owners and between owners and property service enterprises.
➤ Third, the concept of property service needs to be changed. Some property service companies still have the business philosophy of "heavy charges and light services", and have not yet changed from "management" to "service". Some owners have a weak concept of receiving paid property services, and cannot accurately identify the quality of housing and the subject responsible for property services.
➤ Fourth, the functions of the owners' committee have not been effectively played. The owners' meetings and owners' committees of some communities have not been established and operated normally, and the owners' committees of some communities have not effectively and deeply involved in the property management of the community, resulting in a lack of effective ways to resolve disputes between owners and property service enterprises.
Focus on source resolution and explore linkage and multiple dispute resolution
In order to effectively promote the source management of property disputes and form a stable and orderly property service environment, the Hongkou District People's Court put forward three suggestions for relevant units and individuals in the white paper, based on how to reduce the occurrence of property disputes:
The first is to improve targeted prompts and suggestions and build an internal virtuous cycle system of property services. Improve tips and suggestions for property service enterprises, owners or tenants, owners' committees, and administrative departments, and promote all parties to fully fulfill their obligations and exercise their rights.
The second is to strengthen the resolution of the source of contradictions, and explore the closed-loop disposal mechanism of linkage and joint investigation of property disputes. Relying on the platform of "three courts and one court" and the relevant regular meeting system, with the help of the neighborhood (neighborhood committee), business committee, people's mediator, lawyer volunteers and other forces, explore and promote the working mechanism of appointing mediation before filing property disputes. Explore the adoption of a hierarchical governance model, and strengthen the demonstration and guidance of the first case.
The third is to pay attention to multi-party cooperation and participation, and incorporate the resolution of property disputes into the unified deployment of grassroots governance. Give full play to the leading role of party building, stimulate the vitality of the "troika" of residents' committees, owners' committees, and property service enterprises, and build a grassroots autonomy and co-governance pattern for property disputes.
At the same time, the white paper selects six typical cases with clear legal relationships from the property-related disputes handled by the Hongkou District People's Court in 2023 and publishes them, covering many topics of public concern such as property service quality, property fee deposits, and property fee payment, and summarizes the judicial exploration and innovative practice of the Hongkou District People's Court in handling property-related disputes, aiming to play a leading role in rules and provide behavioral guidance for the effective operation of property services in the jurisdiction and the protection of their legitimate rights and interests by all parties in accordance with the law. (The full text of the case is attached)
Comments on behalf of the committee members
Liu Miao
Deputy to the Shanghai Municipal People's Congress, Secretary of the General Party Branch of Hong Kong Liyuan Residential Area, Jiaxing Road Street, Hongkou District
The community is the end of social governance and the focus of grassroots governance, and property management is an important part of community governance. This press conference allowed me to further understand the difficulties and pain points in the resolution of property disputes, and also had a deeper study of the legal relationship of relevant cases, which provided a clearer direction for participating in grassroots governance in the future.
The Hongkou District People's Court actively explores and promotes the diversified resolution mechanism for property disputes, and has the courage to pioneer and innovate by establishing the city's first litigation source management center and actively participating in the "three courts and one court" diversified dispute resolution work, so as to promote new development in the trial of property disputes within its jurisdiction. This not only helps grassroots community governance and creates a positive and strong legal atmosphere, but also helps to form a harmonious and symbiotic atmosphere between property service enterprises and resident owners, improve property services and improve the quality of life of community residents, and build a solid line of defense for judicial protection in the construction of a grassroots social governance system of co-construction, co-governance and sharing.
Lv Yi
Member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference of Hongkou District, equity partner of Beijing Guantao Zhongmao (Shanghai) Law Firm
Participating in this press conference allowed me to have a more comprehensive study of property obligations, causes of property disputes and related legal knowledge. Property disputes are related to the stability of people's livelihood, and the Hongkou District People's Court has innovatively moved the "court" into the community, and provided "rule of law lessons" to neighborhood committees, property owners and residents in a timely manner through community circuit hearings, going deep into the community to popularize relevant legal knowledge, and striving to promote new development in the trial of property disputes.
Relying on the Litigation Source Governance Center, the Hongkou District People's Court continues to promote the resolution of hot and difficult issues in people's livelihood on the basis of deepening the "three courts and one court" mechanism, and provides strong judicial services and guarantees for promoting the construction of a new pattern of grassroots social governance.
Typical cases
directory
/ Case 1 /
A property management company in Shanghai and Xue in a property service contract dispute case
-- Refusal to pay property fees on the grounds of non-actual residence cannot be established
Brief facts of the case
Xue is a businessman from other places in Shanghai, purchased a community property in 2006, during his residence, that is, he was dissatisfied with the property service of the community, thinking that the environmental maintenance of the public area is not in place, the common equipment is not updated, the service attitude of the property staff is poor, and the business loss in recent years, he has moved out of Shanghai a few years ago. At the same time, due to Xue's difficult economic situation, his real estate has entered the judicial auction procedure. On the grounds that he did not live in the house, he even believed that there was a reasonable reason for not paying the property fees, so he owed nearly $30,000 in property fees for 10 years. Later, the property company sued the court and demanded that Xue pay the property fee.
At the end of January 2024, the Hongkou District People's Court held a public hearing of the case in the Liangcheng Xincun Street Community Circuit Court, during which the property company and the owner fully explained their respective reasons. During the trial, the judge explained to the defendant that the court could not make a determination based solely on its unilateral statement that the property management services were not in place, and that even if the owner, as the property owner, did not actually live in the house, the owner had to fulfill the obligation to pay the property fee because the property management company had provided the cleanliness and cleaning of the community where the owner's house was located and the daily maintenance of the public parts of the house. On the other hand, considering the actual situation of Xue, the property management company no longer claims the claim for late fees. After analyzing the arguments, Xue went to the property management company to pay all the arrears of property fees on the same day after the trial, and the property management company applied to this court to withdraw the lawsuit. On the same day, a number of community owners also observed the trial of the case and received legal education at zero distance.
▴ Swipe up to see more ▴
Typical significance
The Hongkou District People's Court adheres to the concept of justice for the people, further implements and adheres to the work related to the "Fengqiao Experience" in the new era, builds an innovative model of "three courts and one court" for conflict and dispute resolution formed by "judicial office + police station + law firm + circuit court", selects typical cases to carry out circuit trials, and resolves disputes on the spot. In this case, it is clear that the refusal to pay the property fee on the grounds of not actually living in the case cannot be supported by the court, and it also allows residents to receive legal education at zero distance while immersively observing the trial of the case, so as to achieve the unity of legal and social effects.
/ Case 2 /
Shanghai Mougen Co., Ltd. v. Chen and other series of property service contract disputes
-- Appoint neighborhoods to participate in the resolution of pre-litigation conflicts
Brief facts of the case
The plaintiff, Shanghai Root Co., Ltd., is a property service enterprise in a community in Hongkou District, and its service objects include shops and commercial houses, and the plaintiff is now filing a lawsuit against the owners of all the shops in the community, demanding the payment of property fees and overdue interest that have been owed for up to six years, involving nearly 20 shops. In this series of cases, some of the defendants settled abroad, and some of the defendants rented out their shops to outsiders and did not return for a long time. The defendant's defence to refusing to pay the strata fee includes, but is not limited to: the leakage of the water pipe affects the normal operation of the shop and damages some of the equipment, the slippery ground has not been repaired for a long time, and the failure to claim against the tenant due to the failure to receive a notice of demand for the strata fee, etc., which has led to disputes between several landlords and tenants, and the landlords are generally agitated. Based on the group characteristics of this series of cases, the contradictions between shop owners and property service enterprises are easily intensified, and they are in the stage of replacement of new and old property service enterprises. After accepting this series of cases, the court relied on the conflict resolution mechanism of "three courts and one court" to first appoint the local sub-district to carry out pre-litigation mediation. The street took the lead, arranged for neighborhood committees and social workers to carry out on-site investigations one by one, made work logs to record the demands of the owners, and appeased the emotions of the owners; Interview the property management company to rectify and improve the quality of service. At the same time, relying on the district people's mediation committee for property disputes, an expert mediator is appointed to conduct mediation, and the court guides judges to participate in the mediation throughout the process and explains the main points of the adjudication of similar cases. After multi-party joint investigation, nearly eighty percent of the cases reached mediation at the street level, and the owners involved paid off all the outstanding property fees.
▴ Swipe up to see more ▴
Typical significance
The Hongkou District People's Court innovated the working mechanism of "three institutes and one court", combined grassroots mediation resources, participated in the early stage of guidance and mediation, boosted the pre-litigation resolution of disputes, and avoided the intensification of conflicts. At the same time, relying on the People's Mediation Committee for Property Disputes, give full play to the advantages of the experts of the Property Mediation Committee, grasp the key points of the conflict, and conduct mediation. At the same time, in view of a large number of similar disputes that may occur in the future, smooth the channels for the expression of opinions and information communication between the demonstration case and similar cases, so as to encourage the parties to similar disputes to choose mediation before litigation, and according to the wishes of the parties, the court will give judicial confirmation in a timely manner, forming a closed loop of the whole process of dispute resolution, and realizing "centralized mediation and simultaneous resolution of similar cases".
/ Case 3 /
A property management company in Shanghai and Zhang in a property service contract dispute case
-- Model judgments to resolve disputes, combine mediation and judgment with the reduction of litigation burden
Brief facts of the case
The plaintiff, a property management company in Shanghai, sued the defendant Zhang, demanding support for the outstanding payment of property fees of 1,048.80 yuan from January to December 2022. Defendant Zhang argued that the plaintiff did not sign the "Property Service Contract" with the community business committee in 2022, and during the property service period in 2021, the quality of property services did not match the charging price, and the community had problems such as dirty environment, private wires, and occupation of residents' fire escapes, and did not agree with the plaintiff's request.
After investigation, the property company sued more than 50 cases similar to Zhang's at the same time. After receiving the batch of cases, the fast-track trial team of the case filing division of the Hongkou District People's Court immediately extracted the key elements in the trial of such cases, such as the specific situation of property services and the publicity of property fee charging standards, according to the element trial work method. Judges and clerks have gone to the scene several times to conduct on-the-spot investigations to understand the actual situation at the scene, and to do a good job of preliminary fact-finding work in similar cases, so as to save trial time. At the same time, in order to promote the resolution of conflicts at the source, the trial of the case is to be placed in the community circuit court of the community involved in the case, and residents of the same community are invited to observe the trial of the case. During the trial, the judge analyzed whether the property management company provided property management services and whether some of the management problems reported by the owner could become the focus of the dispute such as refusal to pay property fees. In the end, it was determined that the property management company had in fact performed the property management services, and made timely rectification reminders in response to the problems reported by the owners, and finally ruled that the defendant should pay the plaintiff a property fee of 1,048.80 yuan. The case has now come into effect and has formed a model precedent, guiding the subsequent conflict resolution of similar cases. In the cases accepted during the same period, three persons reached a settlement with the plaintiff after the judgment. In the end, a total of 42 cases were settled by the original defendant and the automatic performance of property fees, and the model judgment played a positive guiding role.
▴ Swipe up to see more ▴
Typical significance
The Hongkou District People's Court adheres to the concept of governance of the source of litigation, gives full play to the spirit of the "Fengqiao Experience" to resolve disputes and contradictions at the source, actively explores the working methods of elemental trial, and selects representative disputes that involve a wide range of disputes and homogeneous types of disputes to conduct demonstration trials, and gives full play to the demonstration and leading effect of the judgment to guide and drive the rapid and efficient resolution of similar disputes, so as to achieve the goal of "one lawsuit, one solution" and improve the effect of determining points and ending disputes.
/ Case 4 /
A property management company in Shanghai and Tao in a property service contract dispute case
——When the management of property services is not in place, the property fee shall be reduced or exempted as appropriate
Brief facts of the case
In the case of a property service contract dispute between a property management company in Shanghai and Tao, the defendant Tao reported that the plaintiff's property company failed to provide the relevant services agreed in the "Property Service Contract", and there were serious problems in the security service, resulting in the theft of Tao's electric bicycle parked in the specified area of the community; There has been long-term management chaos in the garbage room in the community; The property management company cleaned the landscape pool and dumped the wastewater directly on the main road and green belt at the entrance of No. 1-3 of the community, causing many owners to fall; There is a serious problem of water accumulation in the children's playground in the community. At the same time, from 2012 to 2020, the amount transferred by the property company from public revenue to the maintenance fund was seriously inconsistent with the actual public revenue of the community; The public income of the community, including the income from parking fees, the rental income of the base station site of the communication company, and the advertising income of the public area of the community, have not been recorded. In addition, in the 2020-2023 audit of the special maintenance fund for residential buildings, public revenue and the working expenses of the property committee, the property company twice refused to provide the accounting firm with audit information that met the requirements, infringing on the legitimate interests of the owners of the community, so it refused to pay the property fee.
During the trial, the presiding judge immediately went to the scene to investigate and confirmed that there were indeed problems in the management of the greening and public areas of the community. The judge further checked the evidence provided by Tao, and the relevant accounting firm issued a "Withdrawal Statement", stating that there were discrepancies in the information provided by the property committee and the property management company, and the audit could not be confirmed and the audit was terminated. The local sub-district office issued an "Opinion on the Handling of Petition Matters", stating that the property management company had problems such as discrepancies in the public revenue accounts and inconsistencies between the property management service contract and the management agreement. Subsequently, the judge interviewed the property management company, pointed out that there were serious problems in its service and management, and explained to it that although it provided basic property services for the community under this circumstance, there was no basis for requiring full payment of property fees. Under the judge's explanation, the property management company took the initiative to improve its services and management issues, and applied to withdraw all the lawsuits involving the owners of the community. After that, the property management company made a comprehensive rectification and took the initiative to negotiate with the owner for a discount on the property fees that had been generated.
▴ Swipe up to see more ▴
Typical significance
Property management companies that provide property services to the community should ensure that the quality of services they provide meets the requirements of the contract. At the same time, property management companies should establish and improve compliance ledgers in their daily operations, and ensure that all public revenue expenditures are recorded accurately and in a timely manner. Only by abiding by the contract and providing high-quality services can the corresponding property fee be charged according to the contract. For the owners, in order to clarify their own rights and interests, they should raise the defects in property management in a timely manner, keep the relevant evidence materials, and protect their rights and interests through legal channels. The owner can report to the property management company, or through the property management committee and other platforms, so as to resolve the conflict in a timely manner. Although the case was not concluded by a judgment in the end, it also played a good guiding effect through the judge's interpretation, so as to achieve the social effect of "small property and big governance".
/ Case 5 /
A property service contract dispute between a leasing company and a property management company
-- The subject of rights shall exercise its rights in a timely manner within the statute of limitations
Brief facts of the case
The plaintiff, a leasing company, was one of the owners of a commercial plaza. The defendant, a property management company, was the property service unit of the plaza and collected a property fee deposit of RMB 18,000 from the plaintiff in March 2015. In February 2020, after the defendant terminated the property management service of the plaza, the plaintiff repeatedly demanded that the defendant seize the property fee deposit without reason and refused to return it, so the plaintiff sued the court.
After the court accepted the case, it ascertained that the defendant did not deny the fact that it had received the plaintiff's property fee deposit, but held that the plaintiff's lawsuit had exceeded the statute of limitations. According to the law, the statute of limitations for filing a request to the people's court for protection of civil rights is three years. The defendant terminated the property service in February 2020, and the plaintiff did not file the lawsuit until 2024, which exceeded the three-year statute of limitations in terms of time span. However, according to the relevant laws and regulations, the following circumstances may cause the interruption of the statute of limitations: (1) the obligee submits a request for performance to the obligor; (2) The obligor agrees to perform the obligation; (3) The right holder initiates a lawsuit or applies for arbitration; (4) Other circumstances that have the same effect as filing a lawsuit or applying for arbitration. During the trial of this case, the plaintiff claimed that it had claimed return to the defendant several times in the past four years, and that there were reasons for the interruption and recalculation of the statute of limitations. To this end, the plaintiff provided two sets of evidence: one was a lawyer's letter mailed at the end of 2022 to prove that it was recovering the property fee deposit from the defendant; The second is the video of the plaintiff coming to the defendant in mid-2022 to recover the property fee deposit. After review, it was found that because the defendant's property had been withdrawn, the mailed lawyer's letter had not yet been delivered to the defendant, which did not meet the requirements for the right holder to submit a request for performance to the obligor. However, the second video evidence can prove that the right holder has claimed the right, and the litigation time is interrupted, and the statute of limitations can be recalculated. In the end, the court found that the defense of the defendant property management company on the statute of limitations could not be established, and the plaintiff leasing company filed a lawsuit that did not exceed the statute of limitations, and ordered the defendant to return the plaintiff's property fee deposit in full.
▴ Swipe up to see more ▴
Typical significance
In practice, after a commercial property is changed to a property management company, there are often related derivative disputes, such as the refund of the property fee deposit. The right holder should exercise its rights in a timely manner within the statute of limitations, otherwise the relevant claims will not be supported. At the same time, the rights subject shall keep the relevant materials for the exercise of rights to prove the reasons for the interruption of the statute of limitations.
/ Case 6 /
Shanghai Jiamoude Property Management Co., Ltd. v. Shanghai Xinmoumou Media Co., Ltd. Property service contract dispute
-- Rules for determining the property fee of commercial buildings facing the street
Brief facts of the case
In July 2016, Shanghai Jia Moude Property Management Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Jia Moude Property Company) entered into a property service contract with the owners committee of a community in Hongkou District, Shanghai, entrusting Jia Moude Property Company to manage the community, with a property fee of 0.4 yuan/month/square meter for residential buildings and 2.16 yuan/month/square meter for commercial buildings, which were charged by Jia Moude Property Company to the owners and property users. Shanghai Xinmou Media Co., Ltd. is the owner of the real estate in the community and operates externally. From July 2016 to December 2022, Xin Moumou Media Co., Ltd. refused to pay the property fee on the grounds that the house was facing the main street, did not need to enter and exit from the community, and did not enjoy the services of Jia Moude Property Company. Houjia Moude Property Company sued Xin Moumou Media Co., Ltd. to the court.
After investigation, the "Property Service Contract" signed by Jia Moude Property Company and the Community Owners Committee is legally binding on all owners, and Jia Moude Property Company provides relevant evidence to prove that it has provided corresponding property services. Xin XX Media Co., Ltd. asserted that the shop faced the main street, and the property management company did not provide property services, but the shop involved in the case belonged to the management area of the property management company, and the shop and other residences in the building shared the building body and public facilities such as water supply, power supply, and sewage, which belonged to an inseparable and unified whole, and the claim of Xin XX Media Co., Ltd. was not supported. In the end, this court ruled that Xin XX Media Co., Ltd. should pay the corresponding property fees, and the judgment has now taken effect.
▴ Swipe up to see more ▴
Typical significance
At present, disputes between property management companies, property owners, and property committees emerge one after another, among which the dispute over whether the shops on the street in the community need to pay property fees is more special. Shop owners often claim that the outside of the shop does not border the community and does not enjoy the relevant services provided by the property management company in the community, and refuse to pay the property fee as a defence. Whether or not a street shop is required to pay a strata fee depends on whether the street shop is part of the community property. The shops on the street are located on the edge of the residential community, and the geographical location is different, but the infrastructure such as electricity, water, heating, and sewage required by the shops on the street is generally shared with the residential buildings in the community, and they have the obligation to pay property fees. However, if there is evidence to prove that the property service personnel have not fulfilled or have not fully performed the relevant property management and service obligations, they may propose to reduce the relevant fees.
Source丨Shanghai Hongkou District People's Court