NP "National Center for Public Control in the Housing and Public Utilities "ZhKKH Control" has formed a rating of problems in the field of housing and communal services for the 1st quarter of 2016. The rating was formed based on the results of citizens' appeals to public receptions operating in 72 constituent entities of the Russian Federation. In total, 8644 people applied to these receptions for the first quarter.
Executive Director of NP ZhKKH Control Svetlana Razvorotneva:
— During the year in the housing and communal services sector, there were certain changes. Most importantly, the intensity of passions around the topic is decreasing. overhaul. The percentage of those who applied for this topic fell by more than 5% over the year, and the topic itself in the ranking moved from 2nd place in the 1st quarter of 2015 to 5th place in 2016. Also, the number of applications on the topic “calculation of fees for housing and communal services” significantly decreased (by 8.5%), although this topic itself invariably ranked first in the rating both in 2015 and at the beginning of 2016. The percentage of calls on the topic “quality of communal resources” has seriously increased, although, in our opinion, this fact is due to seasonal factors and is mainly associated with the problems of passing the heating season of 2015-2016 (in the fourth quarter of 2015, the topic of quality communal resources came first). The number of applications on the management of MKD has slightly increased. At the same time, the topic "management of MKD" in both 2015 and 2016 invariably took 3rd place, and "unsatisfactory condition of MKD" moved from 5th to 4th place. All this, in my opinion, suggests that the licensing institution, which has been operating since May 1, 2015, has not yet brought the expected results.”
What worries Russian citizens most of all in the housing and communal sector in the first quarter of 2016?
| Position in the ranking | Number of hits | % of hits | |
| 1 | Calculation of utility bills | 1602 | 18,5 |
| 2 | The quality of public services | 1508 | 17,4 |
| 3 | MKD management | 1479 | 17,1 |
| 4 | 1155 | 13,4 | |
| 5 | Overhaul | 841 | 9,8 |
| 6 | 465 | 5,4 | |
| 7 | Problems with metering devices | 231 | 2,7 |
| 8 | Dilapidated and dilapidated housing | 133 | 1,5 |
| 9 | 123 | 1,4 | |
| 10 | Other | 1107 | 12,8 |
| TOTAL: | 8644 |
I. Calculation of payment for housing and communal services includes the following problems:
problems with the calculation of fees for housing utilities;
recalculations;
formation of payment documents;
additional payments;
including problems with the calculation of fees for utilities consumed for general house needs - 662 appeals (7.7% of the total).
II. Unsatisfactory quality of public services provided
III. MKD management includes the following issues:
management of apartment buildings (the problem of double payment documents);
the legality of the actions of HOAs, housing cooperatives, managing organizations (including issues related to financial and economic activity);
disclosure of information by managing organizations;
licensing activities for the management of apartment buildings - 129 applications (1.5% of the total)
holding general meetings of owners - 236 appeals (2.7% of the total volume):
- problems during the implementation;
— problems of execution of decisions made
- and others.
IV. The unsatisfactory state of the MKD includes the following problems:
improper provision of services for the maintenance and current repair apartment buildings.
V. Overhaul includes the following issues:
timing of the overhaul;
the quality of the overhaul;
the amount of the contribution for the overhaul;
lack of information on regional programs for capital repairs.
VI. Unsatisfactory landscaping of the adjacent territory
VII. Problems associated with individual and common house meters include:
acquisitions;
installations;
operation.
VIII. Dilapidated and dilapidated housing includes the following problems:
with the recognition of apartment buildings as emergency;
with the terms of resettlement;
with the quality of newly built apartment buildings.
IX. Complaints about actions and omissions authorized bodies state power and bodies local government affecting the observance of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens in the field of housing and communal services;
X. Other topics include the following issues:
use of the common property of an apartment building;
social recruitment;
corruption component;
other.
| Topics of concern to citizens | % of the number of hits in Q1 2016 | % of the number of hits in Q1 2015 |
| Calculation of utility bills | 18,5 | 27,04 % |
| The quality of public services | 17,4 | 13,72 % |
| MKD management | 17,1 | 14,07 % |
| Unsatisfactory condition of the MKD | 13,4 | 9,64 % |
| Overhaul | 9,8 | 15,2 % |
| Poor home improvement | 5,4 | 3,24 |
| Problems with metering devices | 2,7 | 2,3 % |
| Dilapidated and dilapidated housing | 1,5 | 1,3 % |
| Complaints about the inaction of authorized authorities | 1,4 | 0,8 % |
| Other | 12,8 | 12,69 % |
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/
FEDERAL PENALTY SERVICE
Vologda Institute of Law and Economics of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia
Department of Civil Law Disciplines
Control work on the discipline: "Housing Law"
Topic: "Management of an apartment building: methods, practice, problems and prospects."
Vologda 2014
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1. MANAGEMENT METHODS OF AN APARTMENT BUILDING
1.1 The concept of managing an apartment building
1.2 Direct control
1.3 Governance of the homeowners association
1.4 Management of the managing organization
CHAPTER 2. PRACTICE PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF MANAGEMENT OF APARTMENT BUILDINGS
2.1 Management practices for apartment buildings
2.2 Problems in the management of apartment buildings
2.3 Prospects for the management of apartment buildings
CONCLUSION
LIST OF USED SOURCES
INTRODUCTION
Eliminating legal problems in the field of organizing home maintenance is necessary condition creating an effective system for managing apartment buildings, improving the quality of housing and communal services and reducing their cost.
In the doctrine, little attention is paid to the issues of legal regulation of the management of apartment buildings. AT modern science fundamental approaches to the concept and legal entity management of an apartment building, without which it is not possible to create comprehensive ideas about how to manage an apartment building. Lack of proper level scientific analysis legal mechanisms for managing apartment buildings is partly due to the novelty of modern legislation. It is important to study the legal nature of the main contracts concluded in the management of an apartment building, their subject and essential conditions. These questions are currently under discussion.
In modern domestic science, insufficient attention is paid to the implementation and protection of the rights of members of homeowners' associations, and there are almost no works devoted to the management of apartment buildings by housing cooperatives.
All this indicates the relevance of the relevant issues and determined the choice of the topic. It seems necessary to study the institution of management of apartment buildings, develop proposals for improving legislation in order to create an effective legal mechanism for the implementation of each method of management.
The object of the study is the legal relationship that develops between different entities in the management of apartment buildings, the choice of management method and its implementation.
The subject of the study is a system of theoretical, regulatory and practical aspects of the concept of managing an apartment building and its legal essence, various ways management of apartment buildings, as well as typical legal relations that citizens and legal entities enter into in connection with the management of an apartment building.
The purpose of the study is to identify the legal essence of the management of an apartment building, the solution of theoretical problems related to the legal regulation of the management of apartment buildings in various ways.
Research objectives:
To study the procedure for choosing a method of managing apartment buildings;
Analyze the features of managing an apartment building,
Identify problems and determine the prospects for managing an apartment building.
The sources of this work are the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Civil Code Russian Federation, the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, various legal acts, as well as materials of judicial practice.
The methodological basis of the study was general scientific methods research, as well as special ones, such as the method of complex legal analysis, formal legal, comparative legal methods, etc.
This work consists of an introduction, two chapters, six paragraphs, a conclusion and a list of sources used.
CHAPTER 1.MANAGEMENT METHODS FOR AN APARTMENT BUILDING
1.1 The concept of managing an apartment building
Constitution Russian Federation establishes the right of every citizen to own property, own, use and dispose of it both individually and jointly with other persons. This constitutional provision is reflected in the housing legislation: the owners of residential and non-residential premises in an apartment building, at their own discretion and in their own interests, manage the apartment building. residential building with minimal government intervention.
The Housing Code of the Russian Federation does not give the concept of “management of an apartment building”, although an entire section is devoted to the management of apartment buildings.
The management of an apartment building must ensure favorable and safe living conditions for citizens, the proper maintenance of common property in an apartment building, the resolution of issues related to the use of this property, as well as the provision of public services to citizens living in such a house. The Government of the Russian Federation establishes standards and rules for the management of apartment buildings.
Proper maintenance of the common property of owners of premises in an apartment building should be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation, including in the field of ensuring the sanitary and epidemiological welfare of the population, on technical regulation, fire safety, consumer protection, and should ensure:
1) compliance with the requirements for the reliability and safety of an apartment building;
2) safety of life and health of citizens, property individuals, property of legal entities, state and municipal property;
3) the availability of use of premises and other property that is part of the common property of the owners of premises in an apartment building;
4) observance of the rights and legitimate interests of the owners of premises in an apartment building, as well as other persons;
5) the constant readiness of utilities, metering devices and other equipment, which are part of the common property of the owners of premises in an apartment building, for the supply of resources necessary for the provision of public services to citizens living in an apartment building, in accordance with the rules established by the Government of the Russian Federation.
The composition of the minimum list of services and works necessary to ensure the proper maintenance of common property in an apartment building, the procedure for their provision and implementation are established by the Government of the Russian Federation.
Activities for the management of multi-apartment buildings are carried out on the basis of a license for its implementation, with the exception of the case when such activities are carried out by a homeowners association, housing cooperative or other specialized consumer cooperative.
The owners of premises in an apartment building are required to choose one of the ways to manage the apartment building:
1) direct management of the owners of premises in an apartment building, the number of apartments in which is not more than sixteen;
2) management of an association of homeowners or a housing cooperative or other specialized consumer cooperative;
3) management of the managing organization.
1.2 Direct control
When implementing direct control apartment building, owners of premises in this building, persons who perform work on the maintenance and repair of common property in an apartment building, provide cold and hot water supply and carry out sanitation, electricity, gas supply, heating, are responsible to the owners of premises in this building for fulfilling their obligations in accordance with with concluded agreements, as well as in accordance with the rules established by the Government of the Russian Federation for the maintenance of common property in an apartment building, the rules for the provision, suspension and restriction of the provision of utility services to owners and users of premises in apartment buildings and residential buildings.
According to some experts, direct management is the oldest method that arose in prehistoric times, when housing and communal services did not yet exist. From a financial point of view, this method is low-cost. However, this applies only to the costs of managing the house, the rest of the costs associated with the provision of housing and communal services, the owners bear without fail.
It is not difficult to assume that the real effectiveness of independent management will manifest itself better in the conditions of a small number of owners of the premises. This is due to the fact that effective planning, organization and control of all processes aimed at managing a house are possible if there are a sufficiently small number of owners who have common interests and sufficient moral stimulation. The advantages of this method of control are especially well manifested in countryside when there is no multi-apartment building.
The decision to choose the method of managing an apartment building directly by the owners is made at a general meeting of owners who vote by a majority vote of those present. In the case of choosing a direct method of management, the owners of an apartment building, like the owners of individual housing, directly enter into contracts with resource-supplying organizations.
Maintenance of housing in the case of choosing a direct method of managing an apartment building is carried out either by the owners themselves or by contractors involved in the facility. The role of the latter can be played by one Management Company. But at the same time, it is also only a contracting enterprise performing work, its duties do not include either protecting the rights of owners or resolving other organizational issues.
1.3 Governance of the homeowners association
When managing an apartment building by a partnership of homeowners or a housing cooperative or other specialized consumer cooperative, the said partnership or cooperative is responsible for the maintenance of common property in this house in accordance with the requirements of technical regulations and the rules established by the Government of the Russian Federation for maintaining common property in an apartment building, for the provision of public services depending on the level of improvement of this house, the quality of which must comply with the requirements of the rules established by the Government of the Russian Federation for the provision, suspension and restriction of the provision of utilities to owners and users of premises in apartment buildings and residential buildings. The specified partnership or cooperative may provide services and (or) carry out work on the maintenance and repair of common property in an apartment building on its own or engage, on the basis of contracts, persons engaged in relevant activities.
When concluding an agreement on the management of an apartment building with a managing organization, the specified partnership or cooperative shall exercise control over the fulfillment by the managing organization of obligations under such an agreement, including the provision of all services and (or) the performance of work to ensure the proper maintenance of common property in this house, the provision of utilities services depending on the level of improvement of this house, the quality of which must comply with the requirements of the rules established by the Government of the Russian Federation for the provision, suspension and restriction of the provision of public services to owners and users of premises in apartment buildings and residential buildings.
The Homeowners Association is a membership-based non-profit organization, a voluntary association of owners of premises in an apartment building for joint management, maintenance of operation, possession, use and, within the limits established by the legislation of the Russian Federation, disposal of a complex of real estate (common property).
The HOA has special legal capacity. It has the right to engage only in those activities that are specified in its charter and correspond to the goals for which it was created.
The owners of premises in an apartment building can choose only one management method, therefore, only one HOA can be created to manage an apartment building. The basis for managing an HOA apartment building is the decision of the general meeting on the choice of the appropriate method of management, which is adopted by a majority of votes from the number of votes of the owners who took part in the general meeting or in absentee voting. Therefore, at the general meeting to create a partnership, it is also necessary to decide on the choice of the appropriate method of management.
The object of management of an association of homeowners can be not only an apartment building, but also several houses that are united by a single land plot, bordering land plots or other common property (engineering communications). Moreover, this common property should be intended to serve only these few houses.
The management of an apartment building by a homeowners association is considered by experts to be the most progressive method, since the partnership, being a legal entity, is able to conduct business activities and lobby the interests of residents in the most efficient way. Unlike individual households, in an apartment building where hundreds or thousands of people live, the direct method of management is ineffective. At the same time, the HOA consists of the homeowners themselves - in contrast to a third-party managing organization, the purpose of which is to make a profit from someone else's property.
When managing an apartment building by a managing organization, it is responsible to the owners of premises in an apartment building for the provision of all services and (or) performance of work that ensures the proper maintenance of common property in this house and the quality of which must comply with the requirements of technical regulations and the rules for maintaining common property established by the Government of the Russian Federation. property in an apartment building, for the provision of public services, depending on the level of improvement of this building, the quality of which must comply with the requirements of the rules established by the Government of the Russian Federation for the provision, suspension and restriction of the provision of public services to owners and users of premises in apartment buildings and residential buildings.
1.4 Management of the managing organization
The managing organization is a commercial organization that, by decision of the general meeting of owners of premises, can be delegated the authority to manage the common property of an apartment building, create favorable and safe living conditions for citizens and provide housing and communal services. Management organizations carry out their activities in accordance with the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and federal laws "On companies with limited liability", "About joint-stock companies”, “On state and municipal unitary enterprises”, “On production cooperatives”, “On state registration legal entities and individual entrepreneurs", as well as on the basis of contracts for the management of an apartment building.
The choice of the managing organization, the owners of the premises of an apartment building can be made:
* on a competition basis;
* According to the list prepared by the initiative group, i.e. without competitive selection.
The owners of the premises must develop and approve the Regulation on the Competitive Selection, which sets out the criteria for the selection of the organization. All organizations that have submitted applications for participation in the competition are selected based on the criteria specified in the Regulations.
If the owners do not conduct a competitive selection, then the choice of managers of the organization is carried out arbitrarily at the discretion of the majority of the owners of the premises. First, a list of managing organizations is compiled, then at the general meeting, the advantages and disadvantages of each of them, the conditions for concluding a management agreement are announced. By decision of the general meeting, a management organization is selected, and then contractual work begins with it, which ends with the signing of a management agreement between the selected management organization and the owners of the premises.
An apartment building management agreement is concluded in writing by drawing up one document and signed by the owners of all premises of this residential apartment building, on the one hand, and the head of the managing organization, on the other. The required number of copies of the contract is determined by the number of rooms in the house.
The method of managing an apartment building is chosen at a general meeting of owners of premises in an apartment building and can be chosen and changed at any time based on its decision. The decision of the general meeting on the choice of management method is binding on all owners of premises in an apartment building.
The local self-government body, in accordance with the procedure established by the Government of the Russian Federation, holds an open competition for the selection of a managing organization, if within a year before the day of the said competition, the owners of premises in an apartment building have not chosen a way to manage this house or if decision about the choice of how to manage this house has not been implemented.
CHAPTER 2. PRACTICE, PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF MANAGEMENT OF APARTMENT BUILDINGS
2.1 Management practices for apartment buildings
As practice has shown, a number of subjective factors influence the choice of a way to manage an apartment building: technical features and the condition of the object, the mentality of the owners, the level of development market relations in the local housing sector. In different cities and regions, preference is given to different forms of MKD management, which is also largely influenced by the number of storeys and building density.
Currently in the territory municipality"City of Vologda" is about 3 thousand apartment buildings with total area 6,957 thousand sq.m.
More than 64% of them have served for more than 25 years and need major repairs.
As part of the overhaul work performed, the largest share is occupied by the repair of elevator equipment.
Another problem of the housing stock is dilapidated housing. The demolition of dilapidated housing in the city of Vologda is carried out by the department for organizing the maintenance and overhaul of the municipal housing stock of the Department of Urban Planning and Infrastructure of the Administration of the city of Vologda as part of the implementation federal law dated July 21, 2007 No. 185-FZ "On the Fund for Assistance to the Reform of Housing and Communal Services" according to the approved List.
The list of the "city of Vologda" includes data on 84 managing organizations, 182 HOA and 27 housing cooperatives serving 2506 houses with a total area of 6,919,661 sq.m., in which 180,849 people live.
In most regions, the largest number of apartment buildings have chosen the direct method of management. But if we measure indicators not in the number of buildings, but in areas, management companies often come first.
2.2 Problems in the management of apartment buildings
As is known, the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, enacted in 2005 by the Federal Law 189-FZ “On the Enactment of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation”, has significantly changed the system of managing the housing stock in general and apartment buildings in particular. He proposed new approaches to the regulation of social relations arising between the owners of premises in an apartment building regarding their common property.
Most importantly, an exhaustive list of types of residential premises was determined - objects of housing rights. Regulated in detail legal regime common property of owners of premises in an apartment building, the procedure for possession, use and disposal of them. The methods and bodies of management of an apartment building, the procedure for coordinating the will of the owners of the premises are determined. Both external contractual and internal representative relations were reflected in the implementation of managerial activities.
In fairness, it must be admitted that the JK is replete with innovations that fill in previously existing legal voids, and contains clear achievements. However, not everything is so smooth, because one does not need to be a major specialist to see the obvious: most of the progressive norms adopted at first glance have not fully worked.
The owners of premises in apartment buildings, despite the obligation imposed on them by the Housing Code, today have taken a very restrained position regarding their participation in the management of the building. Their lack of enthusiasm for self-organization is motivated by distrust and serious fears, they believe that the authorities are still cunning when they present the process of transferring the right to property owners to manage the entire complex of real estate (formed on the basis of their apartment building) as a great blessing. The only thing they were guided by was the desire to quickly get rid of the extremely dilapidated housing stock lying on the state as a heavy burden. This suspicion, unfortunately, is partly confirmed by the current norms of housing legislation.
The Housing Code no longer contains the concept of “housing management” and the obligations of the state related to such management. Apparently, the legislator considered it possible to replace it with the management of an apartment building, the implementation of which is entrusted to the owners of the premises. Meanwhile, it would be naive to believe that by transferring the management of individual multi-apartment buildings to the owners of the premises, it is possible to solve all the existing problems in them in one fell swoop and relieve oneself of responsibility for the state of affairs in this area. The state still, in addition to the implementation of regulation and control, should assist in the creation, maintenance, operation and development of the housing stock.
The creation in 2007, on the basis of Federal Law N 185-FZ of July 21, 2007, of the state non-profit corporation "Fund for Assistance to the Reform of Housing and Communal Services" with a capital of 240 billion rubles intended for the "reanimation" of the dilapidated housing stock, was a serious step in the right direction. However, in order to provide financial assistance, the Law on the Fund (Article 14) provides for a long list of conditions that are difficult to meet, which, according to the legislator, are designed to simultaneously solve the organizational problems of housing and communal services along with restoration measures, namely, to induce owners to create HOAs en masse.
In addition, by ordering the owners of premises to manage their apartment building, housing legislation establishes that such management should provide favorable and safe living conditions for citizens (part 1 of article 161 of the RF LC). It seems that such requirements for the owner and the management carried out by him are not entirely acceptable, since in accordance with Article 1 of the Federal Law “On the sanitary and epidemiological well-being of the population”, the concept of “favorable conditions” means the state of the environment, in which there is no harmful effect of its factors per person, and under "security" - the state of protection of the vital interests of the individual and society from any threats. It is obvious that neither the one nor the other is fully able to provide the owners of premises in an apartment building. Moreover, the assignment of such duties to them is a direct substitution of the competence of numerous government agencies, directly designed to provide favorable and safe living conditions for citizens, which is provided for in Articles 5 and 6 of the Federal Law "On the sanitary and epidemiological well-being of the population."
Most apartment owners even today know little about the scope of their rights, and even more so about the possibilities and necessity of participating in the management of an apartment building. It also failed to create a competitive market for services offered by management organizations, which is essential for the success of housing and communal reforms.
Alas, almost every apartment building (with the exception of elite buildings) is represented by owners with disparate levels of well-being. Some, who make up the majority, received as a result of privatization the premises occupied by them under a social contract and hardly pay for utilities; The existence of such social and property inequality also negatively affects the process of self-organization and the development of agreed decisions by the owners of premises in one apartment building.
Many provisions of housing regulations, regulating various issues of managing an apartment building, do not take into account, and often neglect the interests of the owners. Yes, it leaves a very vague impression. legal status general meeting of owners of premises in an apartment building, the procedure for adopting general meeting decisions, as well as a mechanism for appealing them.
2.3 Prospects for the management of apartment buildings
apartment building partnership management
Today, housing and communal services is a technically complex economy that requires new developments and new technologies so that service structures "not only load residents with volumes of services, but also reduce the cost of these services."
In the context of improving the sector of the national economy (housing and communal services reform), the most important criterion for evaluating the work of housing and communal services is customer focus. What is customer focus - first of all, it is a characteristic of the business itself. It reflects the place of the client's interests in the system of priorities of management and owners.
If we want to work professionally and efficiently, then the management (management) of an apartment building must be “smart”. It is necessary to break the stereotype of "sovdep" in management. That is, in our management now there are 2 types of managers of apartment buildings:
Leaders who came out of the Soviet leadership structures;
Managers whose main goal is to make a quick profit.
Accordingly, for client-oriented quality management of an apartment building, no type of management is suitable. We need leaders of the "new generation" who will have a sufficient level of knowledge, education and the desire to put them into practice in the field of management. And this does not mean at all that it is necessary to change the leader of the 1st or 2nd type to the leader of the "new generation" - this suggests that the improvement of the management of an apartment building should be in the "minds" of managers, which will lead to further professional transformation of management in the industry.
It's no secret that customer service is one of the most weaknesses in the activities of housing and communal services. Many have felt the increase in utility tariffs and the reason for our indignation is not that they really increased, but that with the growth of tariffs we do not observe an improvement in the quality of service. After all, if you compensate for the growth of tariffs at least by improving service and focusing on the consumer, then consumer loyalty will increase. In turn, in the formation of public opinion there will be an understanding: increased tariffs - improved the quality of service. The quality of services can be improved due to the transparency of accounting and prompt response to consumer requests, and for this it is necessary to introduce modern software, to keep up with the times, by automating business processes, creating a unified information system.
As you know, the current housing legislation provides for three ways to manage apartment buildings: management of the managing organization, management of the HOA and direct management. The recently adopted federal law of July 21, 2014 N255-FZ on licensing activities for the management of MKD affects all these three ways.
The vast majority of the provisions of federal law 255-FZ came into force on September 01, 2014, but many housing and communal services specialists have been concerned about the upcoming licensing of MKD management since the drafting of the bill. I would like to note the following point: according to the adopted law, only managing organizations are subject to licensing. It turns out that out of the three methods of managing MKD provided by law (management of the managing organization, management of the HOA, direct management), only one will be affected in the licensing process.
And it seems that it is possible to “breathe with relief” to the HOA and the owners who manage the houses directly, but it turns out that 255-FZ makes changes to the Housing Code of the Russian Federation not only in terms of licensing. Thus, Article 4 of the new law establishes that the HOA established in two or more houses, if these houses have a total of more than 30 apartments, must be reorganized before July 01, 2016.
Paragraph 5 of Article 7 establishes that the owners of the premises of an MKD, the number of apartments in which is more than 16, in the case of direct management of such a house, by April 01, 2015, are obliged to hold a general meeting of the owners of the premises and choose a different method of management.
Thus, direct management can be preserved only in small houses, the number of apartments in which is not more than 16. Large HOAs that manage two or more houses will be reorganized.
It seems that management companies do not care about these processes, if not for one significant point. If direct management is not possible in the MKD, and the HOA is reorganized, such a house can only be managed by the managing organization, which will either be elected by the general meeting of the owners of the premises, or selected by local governments based on the results of an open tender.
It turns out that the law 255-FZ assumes the transition of the vast majority of apartment buildings in Russia to the management of managing organizations, which will be required to be licensed. Accordingly, the presence on the market for the management of HOAs and owners who manage their homes directly can be minimized.
CONCLUSION
The studies carried out in the framework of this work allowed us to formulate a number of main conclusions.
Previously, in all regions there was a situation in which most of the market for municipal housing stock management services was occupied by municipal unitary enterprises. Small business entities produced only 6% of the volume of services in housing and communal services.
The process of reforming the management of the housing stock is currently being completed. The state provides homeowners with the right to choose the method of management and thereby take part in reforming the housing and communal services. And the sooner homeowners realize this, the more profitable they will be able to use the rights granted to them. After all, in the end, self-government in the housing sector is one of the most effective ways protecting the rights of homeowners, controlling the volume and quality of housing and communal services by the population, influencing the cost and quality of services provided, and allows creating conditions for attracting additional sources of financing for housing maintenance and repair.
The owners of premises in an apartment building are required to choose one of the management methods: direct management of the owners of premises in an apartment building; managing a homeowners association; managing the governing body. In the first case, the owners have no status legal entity, and consequently, they are limited in economic activity, without which the management of an apartment building is difficult, and in the latter they are deprived of the ability to control the activities of the managing organization and influence it. The most rational form of management is the creation of an association of homeowners.
With the introduction of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, emphasis is placed on the partnership of homeowners as one of the effective forms of managing an apartment building. He is given a wide range of powers: managing an apartment building, concluding agreements on the maintenance and repair of common property in an apartment building, and on the provision of public services.
We should not stop reforming housing legislation. Its further improvement is needed, which will cover a wider range of issues and contribute to the introduction of self-management in housing.
Supplement the Housing Code with a number of rules that ensure the implementation of the rights of members of the HOA to participate in general meetings and prevent possible abuses in this area. In particular, it is necessary to establish the exclusive nature of the competence of the general meeting; the timing of the annual general meeting and the issues resolved at it without fail; the procedure for convening and holding general meetings, including the rules for the participation of members of the partnership in the formation of the agenda, the procedure for the participation of members of the partnership in general meetings, the rules for documenting the convening, holding and results of the general meeting; the procedure and conditions for holding extraordinary general meetings and meetings in the form of absentee voting; term for appealing the decisions of the general meeting in court. It is also necessary to establish requirements for the content of the charter of the HOA and the procedure for the members of the partnership to receive information about its activities.
Supplement the Housing Code of the Russian Federation with rules governing relations between a cooperative managing an apartment building and owners who are not its members.
In my opinion, the choice of a way to manage an apartment building is influenced by a number of subjective factors: the technical features and condition of the object, the mentality of the owners, the level of development of market relations in the local housing sector. In different cities and regions, preference is given to different forms of MKD management, which is also largely influenced by the number of storeys and building density.
LIST OF USED SOURCES
1. The Constitution of the Russian Federation (adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993) (subject to amendments made by the Laws of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of December 30, 2008 N 6-FKZ, of December 30, 2008 N 7-FKZ, of February 5, 2014 N 2 -FKZ, dated 07.21.2014 N 11-FKZ) // SPS ConsultantPlus, 2014.
2. Housing Code of the Russian Federation of December 29, 2004 No. 188-FZ (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on December 22, 2004) (current version of July 21, 2014) // SPS ConsultantPlus, 2014.
3. Federal Law 189-FZ of December 29, 2004 “On the Enactment of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation” (as amended and supplemented, entered into force on September 1, 2014) // SPS ConsultantPlus, 2014.
4. Federal Law of July 21, 2007 N 185-FZ (as amended on July 21, 2014) “On the Fund for Assistance to the Reform of Housing and Communal Services”// SPS Consultant Plus, 2014.
5. Federal Law of March 30, 1999 N 52-FZ (as amended on June 23, 2014) “On the sanitary and epidemiological welfare of the population” // SPS ConsultantPlus, 2014.
6. Federal Law of July 21, 2014 N 255-FZ (as amended on November 24, 2014) “On Amending the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation and Recognizing Certain Provisions of Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation as Invalid” // SPS ConsultantPlus , 2014.
7. Alexy, P.V. Housing law: a textbook for university students studying in the specialty "Jurisprudence" / P.V. Alexy and others; ed. I. A. Eremicheva, P. V. Aleksiya. - 7th ed., revised. and additional - M.: UNITY-DANA: Law and Law, 2012. - 480 pages.
Hosted on Allbest.ru
Similar Documents
The concept, goals and creation of conditions for the management of apartment buildings by local governments. Choosing a way to manage the owners of the premises. Analysis of the state of management of apartment buildings in the city of Kostroma and management prospects.
term paper, added 11/11/2011
Essential terms of the contract for the management of an apartment building. Ways to manage an apartment building. Conclusion, modification and termination of the contract. Pros and cons of signing a contract. Practical analysis of the contract for the management of an apartment building.
term paper, added 06/03/2009
Overseas experience apartment building management. Development of legal regulation of the management of an apartment building as an object of management and making proposals for improving legislation. Competitiveness of the managing organization.
term paper, added 01/26/2011
Three ways to manage an apartment building. The concept and features of a homeowners association, its charter, registration, governing bodies and legal status. Options for relations with organizations providing housing and communal services.
abstract, added 03/18/2009
Consideration of ways to manage apartment buildings and procedures for their selection. Characteristics of the procedure for concluding, changing and terminating a house management agreement. Assessment of the current legal regulations governing the management of apartment buildings.
thesis, added 05/17/2017
Rights, duties and responsibilities of a homeowners association in the management of an apartment building. The order of creation, functions, main advantages, reorganization, liquidation of the HOA. Ensuring favorable and safe living conditions for citizens.
thesis, added 12/01/2014
House management methods and criteria for their selection. Conclusion of contracts for the provision of housing and communal services. Purposes and benefits of establishing a homeowners association. Features of a housing cooperative. Managing organization management.
abstract, added 09/23/2012
The concept and methods of managing apartment buildings. Contracts for the provision of services and performance of work. Conclusion of contracts with contractors and resource-supplying organizations without intermediaries. The relationship between the management organization and the owners.
term paper, added 12/12/2013
The emergence and change of the legal institution of direct management of an apartment building by the owners of the premises. Information about the rights and obligations arising from the owners of premises on the property of an apartment building, problems and ways to solve them.
Housing and communal services of Russia (Housing and communal services of Russia) - occupies a key place among the intersectoral economic complexes of Russia and plays a significant role in their formation. According to the Ministry of Regional Development of Russia, housing and communal services account for 26 percent of the country's fixed assets and more than 20 percent of the consumption of energy resources. The functions of the housing and communal services are to maintain the required operational characteristics of the housing stock and the operation of the engineering infrastructure of settlements. The successful development of the housing and communal services of Russia determines the effective functioning of the main sectors of management at the regional level of the country, which is likely when developing strategic directions and mechanisms for its development in the future. However, today there are serious difficulties in the structure of housing and communal services, one of which is a high degree of depreciation of fixed assets. Since the beginning of economic reforms in Russia in the 1990s, investment in fixed assets has been drastically reduced. During the period of market relations, the state ceased to be the main participant in the housing market. After privatization and the decline in real incomes of the population, for 20 years the living conditions of citizens have not improved, and for the majority of the population they have significantly worsened not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively. On average, each inhabitant today accounts for about 20 m2. For comparison, in the countries of Eastern Europe - 35 m2, in France - 43, in Germany - 50, in the USA and Canada - 70 and 75 m2 - in the Scandinavian countries. In 2013, the total housing stock of the Russian Federation was 3.3 billion square meters. Of these, at least 100 million square meters accounted for emergency and dilapidated housing. As of the beginning of 2013, there were more than 1.6 million apartment buildings in the country that were 30 to 65 percent depreciated. About 45 million people live in them - almost a third of the total population of Russia. At the same time, the total volume of housing stock with a degree of wear of more than 66 percent is 56.9 million square meters. The current housing legislation imposes on the owners of premises the responsibility of managing apartment buildings (hereinafter - MKD), maintaining and repairing not only their apartments (premises), but also common property in the house, as well as timely payment of utilities and housing services. Thanks to the implementation of the provisions of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation and the Federal Law of July 21, 2007 No. 185-FZ - On the Fund for Assistance to the Reform of Housing and Communal Services, conditions have been created for the formation and development of market relations in the management of apartment buildings and the provision of public services, through managing organizations (MA) , homeowners associations (HOA) and housing and construction cooperatives (ZhSK). As of July 1, 2015, according to the Fund for Assistance to the Reform of Housing and Communal Services, the share of the area of apartment buildings in which the owners of the premises have chosen and are implementing one of the management methods, amounted to about 97%. In this case, priority is given to managing organizations. The area share of MFBs managed by MAs is about 70 percent. More than 11 thousand MAs have been created, of which more than 80 percent - commercial organizations. Owners' associations manage 23 percent of the MKD area, these are homeowners' associations (HOAs) and housing construction cooperatives (HBCs). The most problematic are the UOs, they were created on the basis of the old housing and communal services structure, which, with the transition to a market mechanism of relations, is not effective, since the same structures actually began to manage the housing stock as before, although the relationship between homeowners and the management structure took on a contractual character . In the market mechanism, in contrast to the planned economy, instead of one owner represented by the state, a community of numerous owners and a community of managers with very different goals has formed, the former seek to obtain the maximum benefit, and the latter seek the quality of the services provided. In our opinion, the interests of managers are “winning” so far. Growth rates for utilities in the second half of the 2000s exceeded the growth rate of prices for housing services, especially in 2009, tariffs increased by an average of 23% (with a general inflation rate of 8.8%). According to experts, since 2000, Russians have been paying 13 times more for housing and communal services than in 1991. According to Rosstat, the tariffs for housing and communal services in Russia in July 2015 jumped by 7.1 percent. The constant rise in prices for tariffs poses a threat to ensuring the availability of housing and communal services to the population. For 2015, according to the Central Federal District, 35 percent of residents do not pay for utilities due to financial problems. In order to somehow contain the rise in prices for tariffs, the Housing and Utilities Reform Assistance Fund introduced measures within the framework of the Federal target program"A comprehensive program for the modernization and reform of housing and communal services for 2010-2020." For example, the project of compensations (subsidies) is working effectively - targeted social assistance to pay for housing and utilities for citizens with low income. However, the upward trend in tariffs, with the same quality of services provided in the housing and communal services sector, continues. This may be due to subjective reasons that prevailed in the pre-market period with the cost economic structure maintenance of the housing stock and the administrative management system. Improving the quality of services provided and controlling the pricing policy of housing and communal services is possible only with the consolidation of the efforts of government agencies, private business and consumers. Homeowners should be directly involved in determining the main directions of spending funds and monitoring the quality of utilities. The most appropriate form for this activity is - HOA. HOA within the boundaries of a single complex of real estate today is one of the most effective ways to protect the rights of homeowners, and organize the management of an apartment building with different owners of individual premises. HOA is one of the forms of local self-government that allows the initiative group to solve problems, allows a wide range of interested people to take part in solving issues of the functioning of the house. Currently, 77 percent of housing has been privatized, and only 7 percent of this volume has been united in homeowners' associations. Private management companies serve the homes of 12 million citizens, or about 8 percent of the country's population. In our opinion, the growth of HOA will lead to the de-monopolization of the industry and, accordingly, to the regulation of tariffs, which in itself is a significant factor in stabilizing inflation. Thus, the way out of this situation lies through increasing the role of the state in the management of housing and communal services and turning the latter into one of the testing grounds for the modernization of the national economy. And due to the development of public self-government, which will ensure the participation of homeowners in management, in determining the main directions for spending funds on maintenance and repair, monitoring the quality of public services and repair and maintenance of the housing stock.
As practice has shown, the choice of a way to manage an apartment building is influenced by a number of subjective factors: the technical features and condition of the object, the mentality of the owners, the level of development of market relations in the local housing sector. In different cities and regions, preference is given to different forms of MKD management, which is also largely influenced by the number of storeys and building density.
Currently, there are about 3,000 apartment buildings with a total area of 6,957,000 sq.m. on the territory of the Vologda City municipal formation.
More than 64% of them have served for more than 25 years and need major repairs.
As part of the overhaul work performed, the largest share is occupied by the repair of elevator equipment.
Another problem of the housing stock is dilapidated housing. The demolition of dilapidated housing in the city of Vologda is carried out by the department for organizing the maintenance and overhaul of the municipal housing stock of the Department of Urban Development and Infrastructure of the Administration of the city of Vologda as part of the implementation of the Federal Law of July 21, 2007 No. 185-FZ "On the Fund for Assistance to the Reform of Housing and Communal Services" according to the approved List.
The list of the "city of Vologda" includes data on 84 managing organizations, 182 HOA and 27 housing cooperatives serving 2506 houses with a total area of 6,919,661 sq.m., in which 180,849 people live.
In most regions, the largest number of apartment buildings have chosen the direct method of management. But if we measure indicators not in the number of buildings, but in areas, management companies often come first.
Problems of management of apartment buildings
As is known, the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, enacted in 2005 by the Federal Law 189-FZ “On the Enactment of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation”, has significantly changed the system of managing the housing stock in general and apartment buildings in particular. He proposed new approaches to the regulation of social relations arising between the owners of premises in an apartment building regarding their common property.
Most importantly, an exhaustive list of types of residential premises was determined - objects of housing rights. The legal regime of the common property of owners of premises in an apartment building, the procedure for possession, use and disposal of it are regulated in detail. The methods and bodies of management of an apartment building, the procedure for coordinating the will of the owners of the premises are determined. Both external contractual and internal representative relations were reflected in the implementation of managerial activities.
In fairness, it must be admitted that the JK is replete with innovations that fill in previously existing legal voids, and contains clear achievements. However, not everything is so smooth, because one does not need to be a major specialist to see the obvious: most of the progressive norms adopted at first glance have not fully worked.
The owners of premises in apartment buildings, despite the obligation imposed on them by the Housing Code, today have taken a very restrained position regarding their participation in the management of the building. Their lack of enthusiasm for self-organization is motivated by distrust and serious fears, they believe that the authorities are still cunning when they present the process of transferring the right to property owners to manage the entire complex of real estate (formed on the basis of their apartment building) as a great blessing. The only thing they were guided by was the desire to quickly get rid of the extremely dilapidated housing stock lying on the state as a heavy burden. This suspicion, unfortunately, is partly confirmed by the current norms of housing legislation.
The Housing Code no longer contains the concept of “housing management” and the obligations of the state related to such management. Apparently, the legislator considered it possible to replace it with the management of an apartment building, the implementation of which is entrusted to the owners of the premises. Meanwhile, it would be naive to believe that by transferring the management of individual multi-apartment buildings to the owners of the premises, it is possible to solve all the existing problems in them in one fell swoop and relieve oneself of responsibility for the state of affairs in this area. The state still, in addition to the implementation of regulation and control, should assist in the creation, maintenance, operation and development of the housing stock.
The creation in 2007, on the basis of Federal Law N 185-FZ of July 21, 2007, of the state non-profit corporation "Fund for Assistance to the Reform of Housing and Communal Services" with a capital of 240 billion rubles intended for the "reanimation" of the dilapidated housing stock, was a serious step in the right direction. However, in order to provide financial assistance, the Law on the Fund (Article 14) provides for a long list of conditions that are difficult to meet, which, according to the legislator, are designed to simultaneously solve the organizational problems of housing and communal services along with restoration measures, namely, to induce owners to create HOAs en masse.
In addition, by ordering the owners of premises to manage their apartment building, housing legislation establishes that such management should provide favorable and safe living conditions for citizens (part 1 of article 161 of the RF LC). It seems that such requirements for the owner and the management carried out by him are not entirely acceptable, since in accordance with Article 1 of the Federal Law “On the sanitary and epidemiological well-being of the population”, the concept of “favorable conditions” means the state of the environment, in which there is no harmful effect of its factors per person, and under "security" - the state of protection of the vital interests of the individual and society from any threats. It is obvious that neither the one nor the other is fully able to provide the owners of premises in an apartment building. Moreover, the imposition of such duties on them is a direct substitution of the competence of numerous state bodies directly designed to provide favorable and safe living conditions for citizens, which is provided for in Articles 5 and 6 of the Federal Law “On the sanitary and epidemiological well-being of the population”.
Most apartment owners even today know little about the scope of their rights, and even more so about the possibilities and necessity of participating in the management of an apartment building. It also failed to create a competitive market for services offered by management organizations, which is essential for the success of housing and communal reforms.
Alas, almost every apartment building (with the exception of elite buildings) is represented by owners with disparate levels of well-being. Some, who make up the majority, received as a result of privatization the premises occupied by them under a social contract and hardly pay for utilities; The existence of such social and property inequality also negatively affects the process of self-organization and the development of agreed decisions by the owners of premises in one apartment building.
Many provisions of housing regulations, regulating various issues of managing an apartment building, do not take into account, and often neglect the interests of the owners. Thus, the legal status of the general meeting of owners of premises in an apartment building, the procedure for making decisions by the general meeting, as well as the mechanism for appealing them leaves a very ambiguous impression.
Loading...