Affiliated management company mkd. Onf proposes to prohibit founders from creating more than one management company in the housing and communal services sector. These include

From Oleg Shein

As a member of the Expert Council of the State Duma Committee on Housing and Communal Services, I attended a meeting today. The law on licensing management companies was discussed.

The project causes general rejection. All factions, except United Russia, are against it. Homeowners' Associations and Direct Management Associations are opposed. The Accounts Chamber spoke out against it. The Legal Department of the Presidential Administration and even the Government expressed their comments. But there's a lot of money at stake. Very big. And the comfortable life of several generations of individual families of government officials and members of the United Russia party.

Galina Khovanskaya (SR) is strongly against the project. She is the chairman of the Committee, but the majority in it belongs to United Russia.

I spoke and said the following: “This law is not directed against management companies, but against the owners, against the population. What is this law about? - Let’s say the owners chose a company to repair a house. But there are problems in the house, since for the last 20 years it has been destroyed by the housing office appointed by the local authorities, and then privatized by them. The very next morning after the decision of the residents of the house, the authorities have the right to begin issuing orders for the repair of the house, which must be completed within two months. Note that the state itself promises to repair houses only in thirty years.

So, if the instructions are not fulfilled, and the number of houses for which they are not fulfilled exceeds 15% of the total number served by the company, then its license is confiscated, and a municipal official comes to the house, who:

Appoints the company he wants;

Determines the terms of the contract with her;

He decides how much to pay residents.

This law is about the abolition of house councils and the right of residents to decide for themselves who will maintain their house and how. Mr. Chibis, the Deputy Minister, explained why this was being done: the officials did not fulfill their obligations for major repairs, so they are going to take away from the citizens of the country the right to choose service companies themselves, and then collect money from the residents of some houses and, through their companies, supposedly send it to repair others . It’s very good, Mr. Chibis, to manage other people’s money. We are categorically against this law. We are the Union of Residents of Russia, which I represent, and thousands of representatives of residents who have already sent letters of protest."

Chibis was moved and he shouted loudly that he wanted to protect the active owners, apparently meaning Vaxelberg, who was friendly towards him. “Who has ever held a meeting of owners??!” - Chibis shouted. “Well, I spent it. Many, many times. So what?” - I asked him. Chibis did not answer. There is nothing to answer, and why, when there is a faction of the parliamentary majority at its disposal, ready to vote for any decision, especially concerning public money. In this case we are talking about one trillion rubles a year.

Nikolaeva and Sidyakin

In general, 12 for the law: EP only (including Neverov, Nikolaeva and Sidyakin)

10 - against, namely the Socialist Republic (including Khovanskaya and Mironov), the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (Abalakov) and the Liberal Democratic Party (Smirnov and Zhuravlev.

The enemy is already nervous today. Letters of protest have their effect. There are a lot of them and management starts asking questions. Today Sidyakin imitated a picket in support of their thieves' law. As many as five people came out + the foreman.

Well, we'll be stronger. And not only in Astrakhan, as in this photo. Since the end of April we have been launching performances on the streets.

Without increasing the regulations in the Civil Code, lobbyists are juggling with corrupt schemes for access to the market - the Housing and Communal Services Committee is discussing licensing, confusing the Sheins with Chibis’ fairy tales. The hall was crowded and there were agencies, this time the discussion in the housing and communal services committee was abundantly covered and it was worth it.
During the break of the plenary meeting, the State Duma Committee on Housing Policy and Housing and Public Utilities considered and, with the votes of United Russia members, recommended for the first reading the corruption law of United Russia members Martin Shakkum and Alexander Sidyakin on replacing self-regulation with licensing for the management of apartment complexes. Khovanskaya went to room 304 in advance, but the speaker from United Russia Kachkaev wisely went into the toilet to relieve his soul preventively before a new sin, rightly believing that without his package of powers Khovanskaya would not be able to do anything, not even vote against. The document is promoted in the State Duma by Andrey Chibis. The adopted laws, in particular on fees for major repairs, are being raked up in the Northern Fleet by Mikhail Men. Let us emphasize that the main driver of the bill in the Duma, Martin Shakkum, ignores discussions in the Housing and Communal Services Committee.
The chairman of the housing and communal services committee, Galina Khovanskaya, told the MP that she would not sign a positive conclusion on the bill. Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Housing and Communal Services Elena Nikolaeva will not support the bill without the condition of its deep revision.
The voluminous conclusion of the committee indicates the need for significant revision of the bill. Numerous absurdities are pointed out, starting with the fact that licensing activities for the management of apartment buildings is not included in the subject of legal regulation of housing legislation, defined in Article 4 of the Housing Code.
An expert in the housing and communal services sector, Astrakhan deputy Oleg Shein assured the MP that he would influence the passage of the bill in the broadest sense of the word. There is no licensing for this type of activity anywhere in the world. To build a house you do not need a license; to sweep the area around you do need a license. It's like licensing a store.
Opening the discussion, Khovanskaya emphasized that we do not have much time and gave the floor to the author, deputy chairman of the committee Pavel Kachkaev.
Kachkaev believes that the bill was not only discussed for a very long time and passed a full zero reading. Concept one is the introduction of state licensing in the management of houses. It is very difficult to change the management company, they disappear along with the money, and the authorized capital is only ten thousand in accordance with the law. The objections concern the following. The postulate of licensing by HOAs and cooperatives raises many questions. Management of the house and maintenance of the house are blurred. There are many questions about entering the market for management companies that do not yet have a list of managed houses. The termination of a license in case of two violations raises questions. The role of self-regulation is completely unclear. The bill was supported by the committees on local self-government, on property, and there is a conclusion from the legal department.
Questions
Galina Khovanskaya obtained an honest, direct answer from Pavel Kachkaev that the problem of financial responsibility is not solved by this bill.
Alexander Smirnov asked on what basis will we make an assessment if there are no standards, no training program? Will the bill become another round of rampant corruption? Kachkaev said with regret that no one was involved in personnel and handed the floor over to the Ministry of Construction.
Deputy Minister of Construction Andrey Chibis said in response that the requirements for the management company had been prepared and asked what other conditions the management company should satisfy on the market? Between the first and second reading we will prepare a government resolution. As part of the package, the management company must submit a qualification certificate of the manager. The examination must be open to public participation.
Deputy Alexander Abalakov asked why Kachkaev considers state regulation to be the best. Kachkaev did not say that we are introducing state regulation throughout the industry.
Deputy Anatoly Shein said that they categorically reject the system of fines. So much has been entrusted to housing supervision, we are creating a monster, but there are no specialists. Kachkaev peacefully explained that only one thing was being added. Homeowners associations with a common network and territory will leave the law. Chibis argued that no new functions were assigned to the housing inspectorate.
Khovanskaya stated that there is no money provided in the budget, there is no financial justification, and there is no full-fledged government conclusion. We will find out why such burdensome bills are introduced without government approval.

Andrey Rudenko raised the issue of dilapidated and emergency funds. What does the dilapidated emergency one have to do with it, Kachkaev was surprised, assuring that they will also be licensed, perhaps the 15% norm will not apply to them. However, Khovanskaya argued that Kachkaev, as an experienced person, understands that no one will take on dilapidated and dilapidated housing under the threat of losing their license.
Chibis argued that we do not have two types of owners for bad and good houses, another thing is that in worn-out houses it costs more. According to Chibis, not 60%, but 51% need repairs.
However, the deputy chairman of the committee, Elena Nikolaeva, reported letters from mayors who have 60 and 70% of houses in need and they do not know where to get the money. Lapwing with a blue eye began to say that cross-subsidization should be legalized.
Khovanskaya stated that her colleague from the ministry did not read the reviews. Half are categorically against it and raise exactly the issues that the deputies are talking about.
Answering questions from Astrakhan Duma deputy Oleg Shein, Kachkaev suggested that we would decide how to count 15% of the number of houses or the area.
Dmitry Gordeev The Institute of Urban Economics asked whether it is possible to name point by point what issues the law solves? According to Kachkaev, only 20 subjects do not support it, of which 10 support the concept, there are comments. Licensing can be improved and there will be a normal law. Kachkaev understands that this is also a temporary measure and no one has canceled self-regulation, he thinks we will build it in.
Viktor Pleskachevsky asked whether the introduction of essentially regional licensing is consistent with the Constitution? The procedure for introducing a bill is violated if the law is jointly administered. Kachkaev argued that no. And the Constitution allows you to introduce restrictions.
Khovanskaya posed the main question: do we have no corruption in this area at all? Who will have their license taken away - those who are able to work or those who are independent? Kachkaev confirmed that we have corruption, including in this area too. There is also lobbying. Kachkaev typed on the Internet: SRO in ten minutes - three thousand rubles, five, ten. There will still be some kind of control and not elements like now.
Performances
Andrei Rudenko emphasized that the authors of the bill have raised a terrible layer. Licensing had to be introduced into the licensing law. Targeted licensing will knock them out of the market and make them affiliated. No one will get involved with the licensing of dilapidated and dilapidated housing or major repairs. We want to pass the law, but there is no money in the budget.
Alexander Smirnov expressed condolences to Kachkaev that he had to present a bill of such quality. In recent bills, there has been a bad tendency to curtail or not pay attention to the rights of the owner. Control is secondary against the background of ensuring the rights of the owner. We pretend that we know better how to make the owner happy. We created an SRO and collected money, now licenses. Where the money comes from is a joke: they gave you a gun and do as you please. The law cannot be passed.
Raisa Karmazina loves your committee, 93% of the citizens who came to the reception. One of the claims under the Criminal Code. There are no complaints about new houses; homeowners associations are being created there. But where is the hedgehog municipal housing, someone gave it as a gift, someone bought it. Some are against others with their own HOAs, and some say: we are your HOA. If we want to restore order, let's work. There is no other way, the pile of problems will only accumulate.
Viktor Pleskachevsky headed the property committee for 12 years and did not know that the discussion would reach this level. Over the past five years, nothing has happened, tariffs are rising, buildings are deteriorating. The law has no subject of regulation. The subject of regulation in operation may be only ensuring security. Pleskachy can support the law only if only the name remains. Create a working group and do it again.
Alexander Sidyakin said that we should not immediately take initiatives with hostility. The Prosecutor General came to us, do you remember what numbers he mentioned? Well, let's sit and look at each other. Sidyakin went to the Duma today and saw several pickets in support of the bill.
Khovanskaya has different information. She asks you to refrain from attacks against her, this is incorrect.
Alexander Abalakov stated that we are creating an organization that will live at the expense of the management company.
Oleg Shein said that the law is against owners to destroy house councils. Repairing at the expense of other houses is a very convenient way to manage other people's money. People are against it.
Andrei Chibis thanked for the interesting discussion and aggressively announced blocking any attempts to restore order. Why the government will support it - it will allow the owners to be pulled out of the communal wars and to change the management code imposed by the municipality or abandoned by the developer. It is necessary to give the right of veto to owners and split payments. Chibis asked for support.
Galina Khovanskaya noted in the government's response the need for simultaneous amendments to the Tax and Budget Codes; there are no projects.
Andrey Kuzin emphasized that the problem is far from being resolved and the bill does not solve it. All officials and the Criminal Code are against it, but all people are categorically for it.
Elena Nikolaeva agreed with Pleskachevsky, we can accept licensing and clearly say that we are licensing - only safety, everything else is the rights of the owners. We need to ensure competition. Responsibility to the owner is the subject of discussion before the second reading. We need to understand that when introducing licensing, it is necessary to exclude sole control of both licensing and license control. The qualification exam is a subject of self-regulation by the professional community. The bill must be adopted subject to significant revision. A working group needs to be created in the committee and Nikolaeva is ready to work.
Gennady Nosovko agrees that the problem needs to be solved, but not in this way. The law won't solve anything.
Gordeev argued that we all understand that only a baton was offered to remove the Criminal Code. It does not solve the problem of owner passivity. Nosovko held a meeting, could not recruit owners and could not count votes because it was impossible to count shares. There are no clear requirements. There will be corruption.
Khovanskaya expressed her point of view: a tool, more precisely a skating rink, has been proposed that will destroy the competitive environment and create affiliates. The process is underway in Moscow and St. Petersburg, houses are being taken away and homeowners associations are being destroyed. We did not receive a conclusion from the prosecutor’s office about corruption, nor did we receive information about budget expenditures. SP vs. Have we forgotten how the housing and communal services departments were managed? Not in our favor.
The draft decision does not contain a recommendation for adoption in the first reading. However, Kachkaev insisted. Khovanskaya said that we know what the decision will be, you EP bear responsibility. Kachkaev agrees.

We are creating a working group, Khovanskaya heads it. Unanimously
The bill 448902-6 “On amendments to the Housing Code of the Russian Federation and certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation (on licensing activities for the management of apartment buildings)” was discussed.
The document was submitted on 02/11/14 by deputies V.A. Vasilyev, M.L. Shakkum, S.A. Popov, P.R. Kachkaev, O.I. Arshba, O.Yu. Batalina, V.S. Timchenko, D. V. Savelyev, N.I. Bulaev, G.N. Karelova, R.E. Goldstein, S.V. Zheleznyak, R.S. Ilyasov, V.I. Afonsky, D.F. Vyatkin, R.A. Batalova, M.T. Gadzhiev, V.P. Vodolatsky, B.V. Agaev, D.O. Khorolei, A.V. Kaminsky, V.B. Efimov, R.K. Tikhonov, S.V. Maksimova, M.M. Abasov, A.V. Bogomaz, A.Yu. Bryksin, U.M. Umakhanov, R.H. Natkho, R.D. Kurbanov, A.L. Krasov, M.B. Terentyev, R.Yu. Chuychenko, N.S. Valuev, P.M. Fedyaev, V.G. Gridin, V.V. Burmatov, R.V. Karmazina, Z.M. Stepanova, P.N. Zavalny, P.I. Pimashkov, S.V. Chindyaskin, T.K. Aguzarov, M.E. Nikolaev, V.A. Krupennikov, I.N.Igoshin, S.Yu.Ten, A.B.Vyborny, V.V.Ivanov, V.M. Kononov, O.M. Kazakova, A.B. Vasilenko, N.I. Makarov, Sh.Yu.Saraliev, M.V. Tarasenko, M.A. Mukabenova, Z.Ya. Rakhmatullina, E.N. Senatorova, Yu.A. Lipatov, A.G. Kogogina, G.A. Balykhin, V.E. Bulavinov, I.V. Belykh, A.N. Khairullin, A.A. Makhmutov, M.S. Gadzhiev, A.G. Sidyakin, V.I. Lysakov, B.V. Mikhalev, V.V. Belousov, G.V. Kuranov, D.V. Volkov, R.Sh. Khairov, I.B. Boguslavsky, R.M. Mardanshin, E.I. Kuzmicheva, B.K. Balashov, N.F. Gerasimenko, M.A. Kozhevnikova, I.Yu. Fakhritdinov, N.A. Shaidenko, A.E. Karpov, F.A. Klintsevich, BEHIND. Askenderov, O.D. Valenchuk, B.D. Zubitsky, V.A. Kazakov, D.S. Konkov, E.A. Valeev, A.N. Tkachev, M.Yu. Nazarova, V.E. Pozgalev, I.I. Kvitka, S.V. Petrov, L.A. Ogulem, G.K. Safaraliev, E.Yu. Ushakova, V.M. Zavarzin, V.A. Ponevezhsky, A.N. Ponomarev, Z.D. Gekkiev, A.A. Remezkov, M.V. Slipenchuk, S. Sh. Murzabaeva, S.P. Kuzin, L.I. Shvetsova, A.M. Metkin, V.V. Tereshkova, Z.A. Mutsoev, G.A. Karlov, V.A. Yazev, L.N. Yakovleva, M.Yu. Markelov, R.F. Abubakirov, A.N. Degtyarev, E.G. Glubokovskaya, N.V. Pankov, G.V. Anikeev, E. S. Moskvichev, V.V. Kabanova, I.V. Sokolova, O.V. Lebedev, A.I. Fokin, V.B. Kidyaev, E.F. Lakhova, M.M. Bariev

A management company in the housing and communal services sector is a non-profit organization founded to perform economic and operational functions related to the sanitary and technical maintenance of apartment buildings (MCD).

It should be noted that the term “housing and communal services management company” is a common name, in housing legislation the designation “management organization” is used.

This confusion often causes misunderstanding of the essence of the Criminal Code and creates discrepancies in references to legislative acts. However, we will henceforth use the term CC as it is more familiar.

According to the definition of the Housing Code, a management organization is one of the forms of managing a residential apartment building, the same as HOA or direct management.

Essence, purpose and purpose

All activities of the management company are subordinated to one goal - to free residents of apartment buildings from worries about maintenance, repair and maintenance of the house, cleaning the territory, removing solid waste and other necessary constant actions, performing all these for a certain fee.

Without such an organization, the house simply risks being left without maintenance and will gradually be destroyed, since not all residents will be able to organize themselves and provide proper care for their housing.

Moreover, it will be almost impossible to ensure legality in this matter. Therefore (housing associations, other types of management) as responsible executors is vitally important and established by law. Residents of an apartment building enter into a management agreement with the general meeting, on the basis of which the management company carries out its activities.

Video about what a management company is, how to choose it correctly and what its main goals are:

What types of management companies are there?

According to the form of management of the management company there are:

• Housing associations.
• Private management companies.
• State Unitary Enterprises (SUE), Directorate of the Single Customer (DEZ).
• Direct management by owners.

Wherein, Management companies may have different specializations- only maintenance, only management, both functions at once, or some other options. But most often management companies are involved in fulfilling all duties, since it is much more convenient for the customer of services - in our case, for residents - when all functions are concentrated in a single center.

Don't know which management company services your home? Read about how to clarify information in. And if you want to give up your management company, read about how to do it right.

Activities

The operating principle of a management company in the housing and communal services sector is based on the management of an apartment building and includes the following stages:

• Collection of information about the control object;
• Study of the obtained data;
• Activities aimed at improving the quality of life of apartment owners.

Residents of buildings using the right to participate in the management of an apartment building must have complete information about the types of management.

General operating rules

In April 2018, the government of the Russian Federation made changes to inspections of common property, minor current and major repairs, and reporting to owners of residential premises. Let's take a closer look.

Inspection of common property should be carried out for leaks and breakdowns twice a year: in spring and autumn.

• Routine inspection carried out in accordance with technical documentation. Each element has its own deadline and frequency;
• Seasonal inspection carried out once every six months. In the spring it is carried out after turning off the heating, in the fall - before the start of the heating season. Owners of residential premises, if desired, can take part in a walk-through of common property and draw up a list of work for routine repairs.
• Extraordinary inspection The management company is obliged to conduct it within 24 hours after an emergency: hurricane, accident, etc. The results of all inspections are stored with the documents for the house; if you wish, you can get acquainted with them, and proposals for current and seasonal inspections must be communicated to all residents.
• About tariffs for services. How much to pay is decided by homeowners at a general meeting (valid for 1 year). The management company offers tariffs for services. tenants accept or reject the offer. The changes affected the procedure for notifying new proposals of the management company.

  Reference! Owners of an apartment building receive information about tariff changes 30 days in advance using a special service on State Services and notifications on bulletin boards.

• Control over the management company has become easier. The company must place information about itself (contact details, tariffs, standards, reminders, etc.) in a place accessible to residents.

What laws govern the activity?

The legislation regulating their standards includes the following acts:

In addition to these basic documents, various regulations, regulations and decisions of local administrative bodies can be used in the work process.

The Housing Code takes precedence as a fundamental document, and any discrepancies will be interpreted in its light. All orders or other actions that are contrary to the norms of law have been submitted to supervisory authorities or have been challenged in court.

Charter

The charter is the main document that defines the goals, operating rules and operating conditions of the management company, its legal status, and distribution of responsibilities. The document covers in detail all areas of work, regulates relations between employees, residents of subordinate buildings and other persons.

The charter also resolves financial issues, regulating the wages of hired workers, monetary remuneration for engineers, etc. All provisions of the charter must strictly comply with current legislation and regulations.
Any contradiction between clauses of the charter and legal requirements is unacceptable and repeals these paragraphs and sections.

To whom do the organizations managing apartment buildings report?

Who runs housing and communal services management companies? The management company has its own manager, appointed by management. We talked about his responsibilities.

However, in any case, the general meeting of apartment building owners. Wherein, The Criminal Code has no administrative subordination. The meeting of owners can make claims, make proposals, etc.

The activities of public utilities often cause criticism and complaints, sometimes justified, sometimes not.

If serious violations occur on the part of the management company, it is better for residents to contact the management company directly to resolve the issue on the spot. According to the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, the complaint to the Criminal Code must be considered within 3 days.

If a decision is not made or is unreasonably delayed, then residents should contact the Housing Inspectorate at the city administration, which is the most reliable and effective authority that exists to resolve such issues.

There are other authorities, contacting which helps resolve issues, for example, the prosecutor’s office or the city administration, but the Housing Inspectorate is the most reliable among them.

If no other method helps, all that remains is to defend your point of view in court. This is an option that is time-consuming, nerve-wracking and requires the help of a lawyer, but if successful, a solution to the issue is guaranteed. It must be borne in mind that after two lost trials, the management company is deprived of the right to manage the house.

Housing legislation allows us to successfully solve problems with the housing stock. with the help of management companies - the most competent and professional type of housing maintenance and service. Only people who have full time to do this, and not a couple of hours after work, can achieve success in this direction.

A large number of organizational, technical and legal issues require the work of a whole team of specialists, and Management Company is the right choice for this.

Typical violations in housing and communal services in the Perm region:

The prosecutor's office summed up the results of the work on observing the housing rights of citizens when setting tariffs, collecting payments from the population in the housing and communal services system, including when exercising state (municipal) supervision (control) in this area.

The results of prosecutorial checks showed that violations of this legislation are committed both by the executive bodies of state power of the region, local government bodies, and by management and resource supply organizations.

In particular, the work of the State Housing Supervision Inspectorate of the Territory revealed facts of improper execution of control and supervisory functions within the framework of state housing supervision, namely, the implementation of measures to monitor the implementation of issued orders in violation of the established deadline or not carrying them out at all. In this connection, there are facts of inaction of management organizations, expressed in the failure to comply with the corresponding recalculation according to regulations, and, as a result, a continuing violation of the rights of citizens.

In the activities of the Ministry of Energy and Housing and Communal Services of the Territory, facts were revealed of improper fulfillment of responsibilities for approving investment programs of organizations carrying out regulated activities in the field of water supply and (or) sanitation, as well as for monitoring the implementation of investment programs of electric power industry entities.

An inspection carried out by the Regional Tariff Service of the Territory (hereinafter referred to as RST) showed that the implementation of legislation on pricing in the field of housing and communal services of the RST Territory is not carried out in full, which is reflected in poor-quality inspections of organizations operating in the field of regulated pricing, in parts of the validity of the magnitude and correctness of the application of tariffs (prices); failure to timely consider applications from regulated organizations to set tariffs; in inadequate control over the implementation of production programs by regulated organizations.

In connection with the identified violations of the law, the regional prosecutor's office made representations to the heads of these control and supervisory authorities of the region, based on the results of consideration of which the authorities took specific measures aimed at eliminating the violations.

The most common violations in the area of ​​law enforcement under consideration are the failure of local governments to exercise their authority to adopt municipal legal acts regulating the provision of information, including information on established prices, tariffs, etc. by organizations supplying utility resources.

For example, as a result of the intervention of the prosecutor's office of the city of Aleksandrovsk, local government bodies of 4 municipalities took measures to develop and adopt these acts.

There are widespread cases of improper execution by local government bodies of their powers to conduct inspections of the fulfillment by management organizations of the terms of apartment building management agreements.

For example, an audit carried out by the Perm Prosecutor's Office in December 2013 in the Department of Housing and Communal Services of the Perm City Administration revealed more than 20 complaints about the failure of management organizations to fulfill the terms of the management agreement, including regarding the unreasonable accrual of utility bills, subject to consideration in accordance with requirements of Part 1.1 of Art. 165 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation. However, checks on them were not organized or carried out.

Based on the results of the submission made by the prosecutor on December 30, 2013, the decision of the Perm City Duma dated January 28, 2014 No. 12 approved the Procedure for conducting unscheduled inspections of the activities of management organizations managing apartment buildings. Over the past period of 2014, the Housing and Communal Services Department of the Perm City Administration initiated 15 inspections in accordance with Part 1.1. Art. 165 Housing Code of the Russian Federation.

As before, facts of illegal adoption of municipal regulatory legal acts on the issues of setting prices (tariffs) in the housing and communal services sector and standards for the consumption of utility services are admitted.

For example, on March 17, 2014, the prosecutor of the Nytvensky district filed a protest against the resolution of the administration of the Ural urban settlement dated January 22, 2014 No. 10, adopted in excess of the powers of the local government, which approved the tariff for the provision of services for the removal and disposal of solid waste for the population living in houses located in management of LLC “UK “Leader”. The protest was satisfied, the illegal legal act was canceled.

:
Violations of consumer rights are widespread when calculation and collection of fees for utilities consumed during the use of common property in apartment buildings. There are facts of management organizations issuing "double receipts" to pay for housing and communal services.

Thus, during an inspection carried out by the prosecutor’s office of the city of Lysva in LLC Management Company “Housing and Maintenance Site No. 2”, an illegal increase in payment for the technical maintenance of common property in an apartment building was established. Similar violations were identified in the activities of LLC Management Company Service Plus - 3. Based on the results of the inspection, submissions were made to the directors of these management organizations, based on the results of which, the residents of the houses were recalculated to pay for the maintenance of common property, and officials who committed violations of the law were brought to disciplinary liability.

According to the prosecutor of the Motovilikha district of Perm, the court decided to recognize as illegal the actions of the management company, which does not have the right to manage an apartment building, to charge fees for maintenance and current repairs, as well as to collect in favor of citizens the funds they contributed towards the fee of this service.

Typical violations of citizens' rights associated with the illegal use of citizens' funds, which are allowed by management organizations, are: unlawful use of citizens' funds allocated to pay for the maintenance of the common property of the house; illegal retention of residents' funds by a management organization that has ceased management of the building; unreasonable payment by the management organization at the expense of citizens for work that has not actually been completed; unlawful use of citizens' funds by management organizations to issue loans to third parties, incl. affiliated.

In order to eliminate the above violations of the law, prosecutors used the entire range of prosecutorial response measures, including those of a criminal legal nature.

For example, the prosecutor's office of the Dzerzhinsky district of Perm revealed the fact that the managers and founders of the management organization Domoupravleniye LLC misappropriated citizens' funds received to pay for utility services in the amount of 9,268,133 rubles, as well as theft of funds by issuing short-term loans to affiliated organizations in in the amount of RUB 8,185,000. In this regard, on September 10, 2013, the district prosecutor’s office sent the inspection materials in accordance with paragraph 2 of part 2 of Art. 37 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution of the managers and founders of Domoupravlenie LLC. Based on the results of the procedural check, on September 23, 2013, a criminal case was initiated under Part 1 of Art. 201 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, under which a preliminary investigation is currently underway.

According to information from law enforcement agencies in this area for the period 2013 - the current period of 2014. 13 criminal cases were initiated and investigated, the total damage from crimes of this category amounted to over 360 million rubles. At the same time, as part of the preliminary investigation, the property of the accused persons was seized in proportion to the amount of damage caused.

This issue was considered at a meeting of the board of the Prosecutor's Office of the Perm Territory.
(prepared based on materials from the Office for Supervision of the Execution of Federal Legislation)

It's no secret that utility tariffs are constantly increasing. Over the past few years, their growth percentage has been 25%.

Dear readers! The article talks about typical ways to resolve legal issues, but each case is individual. If you want to know how solve exactly your problem- contact a consultant:

APPLICATIONS AND CALLS ARE ACCEPTED 24/7 and 7 days a week.

It's fast and FOR FREE!

Can management companies “cash in” on Russian citizens? Is there a practice of double payments, about which there are more and more rumors? How does management company fraud manifest itself? All these issues will be discussed in the article.

Responsibilities of housing and communal services

These include:

• carrying out maintenance and repair work (inspecting and preserving the property of the house, cleaning entrances, providing everything necessary to comply with safety rules, etc.);
• provision of organizational services (fighting debts, organizing general meetings, owners about changes, etc.).

Violations

The most common violations by housing companies include:

• improper conduct of meetings;
• violation of payment rules;
• failure to comply with measures established by current legislation.

Each of these violations must be considered separately.

Holding meetings

The following violations are permitted during meetings:

1. The initiator is the executive of the management company. In accordance with, holding an extraordinary meeting is possible only on the initiative of one of the owners of the residential space. Moreover, the procedure (appointment, determination of date and time) must occur with the consent of the owners.
2. The rules used to determine the total area of ​​the building and individual premises are violated. Often, the total footage of the premises in the house is reduced, since some of the areas, for example, non-residential premises, are not included in it. This approach to counting is called “artificial”. It is used to increase the percentage of residents participating in the general meeting, therefore, the number of those who voted for a certain decision increases.
3. Issues that are not within the competence of the management company are brought up for consideration (for example, approval of service consumption parameters, redistribution of payment for them). In accordance with the utility type, no savings are provided for them, since the fee is calculated in accordance with a certain formula (it excludes profit or loss).

Calculation of payments

Violations are also found in the area of ​​apartment owners in an apartment building for the provision of services.

The form of transfer of payments for the maintenance and repair of living space is violated.

There are several options for violations of this nature:

• the owners do not have a decision on the amount of payment for the maintenance of living space; if self-government bodies independently apply tariffs approved without the consent of the owners, then this is legal only in some cases, and in no way can it apply to city residents;
• The structure of payment for maintenance and repair work of residential space has not been developed.

The procedure for transferring payment for major repairs may be violated.

The following types of violations are provided:

1. there is no list of works for major repairs indicating the cost of each of them, as well as the deadlines for implementation;
2. payment for utility services contradicts and violates the rules adopted at a previously held general meeting, for example, it was decided to take part in a program of federal significance (regulated by Federal Law No. 158), therefore, it is necessary for the owners to pay 5% of the fee, but the payment is calculated continues even after the owners have already contributed their share, which is a contradiction.

There may be a violation of the form of transfer of payment for the provision of utility services during periodic recalculations. Payment occurs according to established formulas, but recalculations occur once a year.

Management companies, even together with a meeting of apartment owners, cannot redistribute funds received from payment for services.

Failure to comply with laws

In addition to the Housing Code of the Russian Federation and the Rules for the provision of services, other legislative acts are provided that are mandatory for execution.

These include:

1. Technical rules operation of the housing stock - the provision of this document is mandatory for apartment owners and management companies.
2. who carry out work in the field of management of multi-apartment buildings.

Often these legislative acts are violated, which homeowners do not think about.

Management company fraud

Many people suspect that management companies use fraudulent schemes in their activities.

There are so many of them that it is almost impossible to list them all. However, this article will cover several of the most widely used options to help prevent their further spread.

Frequently encountered schemes

Main cases of fraud:

1. When carrying out repairs, materials of inadequate quality are used. To create the appearance of servicing houses, employees of organizations choose the most accessible methods. The fact of fraud can be detected at the first breakdown. The way to prevent payment for these “false services” is to ask for an invoice.
2. The management company hires people who don’t actually exist. For example, the director and accountant of a company register non-existent people as janitors. They receive money for their work, but in reality it goes towards issuing bonuses to the director and accountant.
3. “False” bankruptcy is based on the fact that companies begin to deliberately accumulate debt. All funds paid by citizens are “wasted” on companies that can close at any time. Along with this, documentation is being prepared, on the basis of which money is transferred for construction activities, overcoming problems, etc. Service providers in such a situation write off the debt, but cut off communications (for example, electricity).
4. The struggle of the Criminal Code with each other. Companies are willing to do a lot to ensure that some of the houses are in their possession, since this directly affects profits.

How to fight?

To prevent fraud by housing and communal services management companies from continuing, this must be combated.

The method of struggle is determined by the nature of the problem. Let's say the tenant is not satisfied with the amount indicated on the receipt, since it is not clear why it was charged.

In such a situation, you need to contact an accountant who will explain:

• what was this money taken for?
• under the influence of what factors the price is formed;
• what formulas are used for this?

As for solving a common problem - paying for repairs, entrance, etc., you need to contact the director or accountant of the management company to receive a report on how much is needed for payment and what work will be carried out.

Most companies actually refuse to provide this information because it is a lot of paperwork, but it is one of their responsibilities.

Are you satisfied with the work of your management company? Most likely not very much. According to statistics, only a few percent of Russians have no complaints about the management company working in their home. Some are not satisfied with the cost of the services provided, while others are not satisfied with their quality. Often this dissatisfaction is projected onto the entire residential complex, and then onto the developer. People don’t really want to figure out whose fault it is that the plaster is falling off in their entrance – did the conventional GC “NedoStroy” fail to complete it or did the conventional management company “Through the Sleeves” fail to follow up? Moreover, recently the second increasingly belongs to the first.

According to Russian law, every residential building must be under someone's control. Therefore, having completed construction, the development company either begins to monitor the operation of the project itself, or transfers it to the reliable hands of professionals.

What is an “affiliated management company”?

By the way

However, the word “affiliated” also has a second, figurative meaning – “connected by common interests.” Perhaps, according to the documents, the management company is not part of the developer - but if the developer trusts his projects to the same management company over and over again, it is not so difficult to draw certain conclusions about, at a minimum, oral agreements.

This is how developers have affiliated management companies. Officially, “affiliated” means “legally related.” Indeed, large developers, especially those carrying out a full cycle of work, can easily afford to maintain a staff that will monitor the house during its operation. By the way, even if the management company is completely independent, it still comes “from the developer” - at the first stage after the delivery of the house, it is the developer who chooses who to give it to.

Management companies legally associated with the developer began to appear in Russia around the mid-2000s. Mainly in high-end housing projects. After all, by buying an apartment in such a facility, a person, as they often say in advertising, “gets not just square meters, but also a lifestyle.”

Not only does the comfort of its residents depend on the maintenance of a house, but the reputation of the developer also directly depends on it. It is unlikely that cold radiators, dirty inter-apartment hallways and an undeveloped yard will fit well into someone’s lifestyle. Moreover, maintenance and even technical equipment of some business-class houses often turns out to be more difficult than cheap properties. This cannot be done without responsible professionals who know the house from A to Z.

Why do property management companies usually have a bad reputation?

Now, of course, management companies from the developer often (possibly even more often) appear in comfort and economy class projects. The larger the project, the greater the likelihood that it will be given to “their own”. Firstly, the responsibility is great - you can’t shift it onto someone else’s shoulders. Secondly, if the management company works only at one facility (or several, but similar), she is more likely to do a good job than a company that works in different houses throughout the city. And thirdly, large projects are as profitable as possible.

An affiliated management company receives almost complete power over the house - and this, unfortunately, is not always good. If tariffs for payment of utility services are at least somehow regulated by the state authorities, then the management company offers and evaluates the rest of its services independently.

Don’t rush to rejoice if, say, the balcony glazing on the outside is washed too often - do not forget that you will have to pay for it. Be on your guard when representatives of the management company invite more professional specialists for various reasons - you will have to pay both (and why do you need such a management company that can’t do anything on its own?). If the barrier in the yard was replaced, cameras were hung throughout the house, and a security guard now sits at the entrance instead of the old concierge, this means not only that the management company cares about your safety, but also that the bill on the receipt will now be higher than before. This is especially unpleasant when such increased care in your area is, in general, unnecessary.

In addition, developers have other ways to earn extra money with the help of affiliated management companies:

For example, an agreement is concluded with her while the house has not yet been put into operation or even completely completed. When residents just move into their apartments, they are already faced with a hefty bill for the services provided.

Or the developer delays the transfer of ownership of a parking space in the parking lot - instead of paying only for the operation of the purchased space, the resident also pays for its rental from the management company.

And sometimes, if the buyer does not agree to a certain management company, communications are not even carried out to his apartment.

Perhaps it is this feeling of complete power and impunity of the management company from the developer that residents dislike most of all. A management company from a developer is already a priori perceived by people as an indisputable disadvantage of a residential complex.

It is not surprising that the management company itself, in such conditions, works according to the principle “even if there is a flood after us” - at the end of the term in the contract (and this is usually a year) it will be replaced anyway. In general, this attitude of the management company from the developer is understandable. Forgive - never.

What to do if the management company requires a replacement?

By the way, changing the management company may be no less difficult. Let's start with the fact that the new one, instead of the old one, the residents themselves must want it. Social responsibility and careful attitude towards other people's property - unfortunately, it seems that this is not about us. What do you see more often when you enter the entrance - advertisements of concerned citizens calling for a reduction in utility tariffs or painted walls, broken light bulbs, cigarette butts? For some reason, many residents do not understand that the entrance and surrounding area are also parts of their home, so sometimes it is impossible to get careful respect from them.

Let’s say that some kind of initiative group has gathered in the house. Several people are willing to spend personal time to ensure that the level of service is higher and its cost lower. But just their desire will not be enough; the support of all other owners is also needed. It will be very difficult to get her. Recently, an apartment in a new building has often been purchased as an investment. Some people, even if they intend to live in the purchased apartment, are in no hurry to complete the renovation. Some people, even if they have completed the renovation, are in no hurry to move – you never know what the circumstances may be. By the time you find everyone, notify them and persuade them to sign in the right place, a year will already have passed.

And if the tenants did not inform on time about the termination of the contract with the management company, the contract is simply considered extended.

Why does even a management company from a developer have its shortcomings - and how can one come to terms with it?

So, in the worst case, in the person of the management company from the developer, we get a lazy but resourceful contractor; greedy but passive; powerful, but carefree. This executive does not think about the well-being of the residents of the house, but about how to earn more money from them. And he has no intention of leaving anywhere, but only wants to hold out in his place longer. Not the best picture, is it?

For the sake of objectivity, the colors in this picture are still somewhat thickened. Experienced developers who value their reputation make quality service their hallmark and another plus in the client’s perception. All the terrible cases mentioned above are mentioned precisely because they do not happen all the time - they amaze and sometimes even attract public attention. Changing the management company, although difficult, is quite possible - you just need to convince your neighbors that you all need it. If the management company does require replacement, it should be easy to do.

Representatives of management companies say that residents’ complaints about high prices are often caused by a simple misunderstanding of where and what exactly their money is going to. This, however, is not so much a problem for the management company as for its clients - no one usually delves into the details of the invoice they receive, everyone sees only the final amount. “We used to pay much less!” the residents are indignant. “Yes, but before you lived in a one-room apartment on the outskirts, and now you have huge apartments in a residential complex in the city center with 24-hour security and a fountain in the yard,” the management company responds to all complaints. “Hmm, that’s fair...” the residents finally agree.

Conclusion

The management company from the developer really knows the house in which it has to work better than anyone else. Representing a much larger and more serious company, she is well aware of the responsibility that lies with her. If you are still not satisfied with something in its work, first try to understand the reasons, do not rush to blame the management company for all the troubles. And finally, think about whether it will be so easy to find a management company that works cheaper, better, faster. Dig into this service market - will you find anything better than what you have now? No matter how you yourself then have to ask her for understanding, forgiveness and... Return.