A lot of people lived in the neighborhood for years。
Up and down the stairs every day, the elevator was full of advertisements。
Furniture-sellers, hairdressers, commercial screens of all kinds are rotated。
MostOwnerThere's an inherent idea:
Elevator homePropertyManaging, advertising, and the money that comes from it, is the property。
Property is responsible for the security and cleaning of the sector and the maintenance of elevator equipment。
Take a little advertising, it seems reasonable。
This is a perceptible misperception prevalent among millions of owners。
Today i tell you the real truth:
The price of elevator advertisingLawNot on the property company。
According to the relevant provisions of the civil code, this part of the income
After deduction of a small amount of real and reasonable costs, all are shared by the owners。
But in real life, most of the money in the neighborhood
They are secretly held by the property, either in closed accounts or to cover the expenses of the district。
Many owners have lived for many years without knowing that they still have the benefit。
This article todayPublic revenueQuite well。
Who's got the proceeds, the property routine, how? HowDefenceAll clear。
By understanding, ordinary people can defend their legitimate rights and interests。
I. Recognizing reality: public areas, property rights belong to all owners
Let's get this straight。
Old perception: elevators are managed by the property, and advertising revenue goes to the property。
New perception: elevators, buildings and communal areas are shared by the owners and the benefits are shared。
Many owners have no clear separation between management and ownership rights。
Simple for example:
We bought the house, the elevators, the lobby, the block walls
It's all when we buy a house。
What's the role in property
Property is just the housekeeper we paid for。
The housekeeper is responsible for cleaning, overhauling the equipment and supervising the district order。
The housekeeper can take care of the owner's public area
But there is no right to put the proceeds of the owner's public space into his pocket。
Article 282 of the civil code contains clear provisions:
The company uses a share of the income generated by the owner
After deduction of reasonable operating costs, the ownership is shared by the owner as a whole。
Not just elevator ads。
All of the revenues generated by these projects are public revenues in the subdistricts:
Elevator sticker ads, elevator lcd ads, unit door ads
Commercial ads for the outer wall of the sector, delivery cabinet service fees
(c) rental of ground public spaces, rental of small areas and rental of public premises。
All business income above is owned by the owner。
This is the first time that property can be reduced by a small amount of real operating expenses
The costs must be certified and made public。
The law does not grant the property the right to retain and take possession of the money。
Ii. Three sets of statements that have been used, and many owners have been deceived
Why can't many owners get money when they have a right
It's because the property has a mature narrative。
Specialized in dealing with ordinary households who do not know the rules and do not want to be counted。
Set one: deduct public revenues from the daily expenses of the district
This is the most commonly used term for property。
When the owner comes to the door and asks for the proceeds of the advertisement, the property usually says:
“the money earned in advertising has been used to subsidize small areas and there is no surplus.”
A lot of owners stop asking questions and think that the property is real。
I don't know, this operation is itself non-compliant。
The property fee is the service fee paid by each of our households。
The communal gains in the districts are additional property shared by all owners。
The accounts must be separate and cannot be used in combination。
The property is not self-advocacy and takes the public gains shared by the owners
To cover the daily expenses that should have been borne by the property costs。
Nor can this money be used to offset property costs of owners。
It's a small area of cleaning, security, daily maintenance of elevators
It was originally covered by property fees。
Public revenue cannot be diverted to cover these expenses。
Set two: unpublicizing accounts and making a mess
In reality, there are a lot of pockets, and public revenue is a black book。
No details are posted and no amounts of cooperation in advertising are published。
The owner has no idea how much he earns, how much he spends and how much he has left。
Some owners would comfort themselves: without publicity, they would have earned less。
The truth is often that money is kept in the books, only in camera。
As required by the regulations governing property management:
Separate accounts and independent accounting of public revenues in the small areas are required。
At least half-yearly, complete income and expenditure details are disclosed and monitored by the owner。
The failure to build accounts, the lack of publicity and the vagueness of the accounts were themselves violations。
Property has no privilege and can conceal income belonging to all owners。
Set three: no need to account for distribution on the pretext that it's too small
There is also a kind of rhetoric that discourages owners from defending their rights。
“advertisements generate thousands of dollars a year, which is small and not worth a separate account.”
“cooperatives are acquaintances, with low returns and little surplus.”
This statement is totally untenable。
An ordinary medium-sized district, with dozens of elevators, is advertised every year。
A single elevator costs thousands of dollars a year for advertising, and the whole neighborhood comes down a year
Public revenue is tens of thousands less, and it can reach hundreds of thousands more。
It's a big amount。
Whatever the amount, if it's from public areas
Owners have the right to information, supervision and disposal。
The accounts could not be omitted simply because of the lack of money。
Public revenues, with only three legal uses
Many owners will wonder: even if the money belongs to all the owners, they will have to pay for it
It's not possible to share it directly with every household. What about the money
It is clear here that there are only three legal uses of public revenues。
In any use, property has no right to decide privately。
First: by vote of the owner, deduct property or parking fees
This is the way owners expect most。
If you vote in a general conference, you will have to vote
The balance of public revenue may be used to offset property and ground parking fees for all owners。
This is equivalent to a real benefit for all households。
Second: funds earmarked for maintenance in small areas
The balance could be fully transferred to the sector maintenance fund。
Later on, there were major repairs to the elevator, renovation of the exterior wall, repairs to the roads and replacement of public facilities
The funds could be used to reduce the cost of major repairs that the owners would have to share later。
Third: for public upgrades in small areas
After the vote of the owner, it can be used to improve the community environment。
For example, the installation of fitness equipment, the construction of children's playgrounds, the replacement of district street lights, and the greening of roads are some of the most important things
It's not like we're having a small festival or something。
Core key points:
The right to decide how, how and when public revenues are used is vested in the owner。
Property is simply an executing party and cannot be appropriated or otherwise disposed of。
Iv. Four steps for ordinary people to defend their rights
Many owners are worried: how do i defend my rights without a board of directors, a common household
No fights, no crowds, no complicated legal texts。
The following set of processes allows individual owners to operate at zero cost。
Step 1: written application for disclosure of all public revenue accounts
There is no need to exacerbate contradictions and follow formal channels。
Individual owners can apply。
You can write a paper application or send text by micromail。
The application is clear:
Publicity is required for almost three years, with all public revenues such as sector elevator advertisements, express containers, rental of premises, etc。
Cooperative firms, rates of fees, total income, breakdown of cost and expenditure, remaining balances, and the flow of funds to vouchers need to be identified。
The law provides that owners have the right to know and that property cannot refuse access。
If the property is perfunctory, delayed, and denied publicity, the representative is already in breach and goes straight to the next step。
Step 2: call the government hotline 12345 for complaints
The property refused to disclose the accounts and made a direct call to 12345。
To transfer to the local building authorities。
It can be described directly by this phrase:
I am the owner of the district and, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the civil code and the property regulations, i ask the property to publish the accounts of public revenue and expenditure in the district, the property to refuse to cooperate, the concealment of revenue and expenditure, and the competent authorities to intervene in order to verify the reorganization。
Following feedback from the relevant departments, property companies are interviewed to verify the accounts。
Most properties, after official intervention, are voluntarily advertised for account consolidation。
Step 3: unity of neighbourhood, unity of claim
A single individual has limited capacity to contact the neighbours of the building and communicate with the owner community。
You have made a single appeal:
First, the publication of a breakdown of all public revenues for almost three years
Second, the recovery of the funds remaining from the irregularly withheld funds
Third, the accounts will be published on time and on half-yearly basis
Fourth, the use of public revenues must be voted upon by the owner。
The combined feedback of multiple people will significantly increase the success rate of advocacy。
Step four: refusal to change and justice
If the competent authorities intervene, the property continues to refuse to change and return the proceeds。
Legal means are available to defend rights。
Two viable options:
The first is to institute civil proceedings in the local people's courts for disclosure of accounts and return of public proceeds。
The second is to apply for legal aid and seek legal assistance free of charge。
There are already a large number of such cases in the country, with a high probability that the owner will succeed if there is sufficient evidence。
V. Questions of greatest concern to you, one-off answers
Question 1: are the communities still in a position to defend their rights because of the absence of an industry committee
Absolutely。
A number of owners are in error and feel that only the commission is entitled to defend their rights。
In practice, every sub-district owner has the right to know and to complain。
There is no need for authorization from the commission and no need for a large number of signatures from owners, so that individuals can initiate advocacy。
The absence of a commission does not affect our claim to our legitimate interests。
Question 2: what would be reasonable for property to deduct operating costs
It is against the law that many properties include the entire cost of employees'salaries and cleaning costs。
The real permissible deduction of reasonable costs is limited to direct expenses:
Advertising installation of demanufacturing staff, advertising equipment consumables, and a small amount of equipment electricity。
For example, the ministry of social affairs and the ministry of social affairs, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and social affairs, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and social affairs, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and social welfare, the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and social welfare, the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and social affairs, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health, the ministry of health, the ministry of health and the ministry of health
All are covered by property fees and are not allowed to be deducted from public revenues。
Any person who withholds a large amount of money without any cost is guilty of an offence。
Question 3: can proceeds from years ago be recovered
Yes。
The law supports public gains dating back nearly three years。
Even if it had been 10 years, the proceeds of concealment had been withheld for almost three years and could be recovered by law。
Question 4: is the public proceeds recovered directly in the hands of each household
Generally, direct cash is not distributed to individuals。
In most cases, by vote of the general assembly of owners, they are used to offset property charges, either by depositing maintenance funds or by upgrading communal facilities in small areas。
None of this money is owned by the property company。
At the end of the text
Living in a small area, many people are used to getting smaller。
There's always a feeling that the property is working hard to manage the neighborhood, and it's nothing to gain from advertising。
But we have to understand that elevators, public areas, we buy houses。
The proceeds from these sites are originally owned by the owners。
Many times, it's not how powerful the property is
Rather, many owners chose to remain silent and were unaware of their legitimate rights。
The defence of rights is not unreasonable, it is not deliberate。
Just take back what should have belonged to all the owners。
If you're in the neighborhood, you've never advertised elevator advertising
It may wish to follow the steps in the text。
We can act on our own without waiting for others to come forward。
