Grounds for privatization of official housing. What is needed to register a property?

Home » Housing disputes » Privatization of official housing

In a normal situation, privatization concerns exclusively municipal housing provided to citizens on the basis of a social rental agreement. The main features of such an agreement are its open-ended nature, as well as the lack of a clearly defined purpose. Due to the presence of the right to reside in such real estate, citizens, on the basis of Article 2 of Law No. 1541-1, can register housing as their own. That is, privatize. But do these standards apply to office housing?

Is it possible to privatize a service apartment?

A service apartment can be privatized only theoretically. In practice, such situations arise extremely rarely. The main problem is the need for the consent of the owner of the premises. And the state cannot force him under any circumstances. There is one controversial option - to transfer service housing to the municipal section and only then engage in privatization, but this also requires the permission of the owner. It is logical that the latter are extremely reluctant to take such measures, since they, in fact, involve the free transfer of real estate into the ownership of the municipality.

What kind of apartment is called a service apartment - definition, nuances of housing

Official housing is a living space provided to a citizen employee due to the nature of his employment relationship. In simple words, an employee can receive official housing for his work merits.

Service housing is provided to Russians, as a rule, for the duration of their work in the organization or institution that provided the residential square meters for use.

According to Article 104 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, office premises may be:

1. Residential property.
2. Apartment.

Housing may be provided during work if the citizen does not have any other housing . The period of use of the premises is usually specified in the rental agreement. The conclusion of a rental agreement is mandatory (Article 100 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation).

All issues related to the provision of this type of housing are regulated by Chapter 10 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation.

The homeowner himself must decide who will use the residential squares and on what basis. Typically, owners act on behalf of authorized state authorities or local governments.

Reasons

The main basis for privatization of a service apartment is the consent of the owner. All other factors often do not play a special role and remain on the conscience of the owner of the premises. According to average data, potential apartment owners must meet the following requirements:

• They must enter into a rental agreement for this premises with the owner-enterprise.
• Residents or a tenant who has entered into a rental agreement must work in this company for at least 10 years. And he must live in the apartment for the same amount of time. It should be borne in mind that this norm is not fixed anywhere and is not formally binding. However, for a company that does go for privatization, it is important that the employee who registered ownership of the property continues to work successfully.
• Free privatization is possible only once in a lifetime, so it is important that a company employee has not previously participated in it. On the other hand, since the premises belong directly to the enterprise, it can simply be donated to the tenant, so the right to privatization will not be used.

State registration

After any change of rights, this fact must be registered. After the owners privatize the housing and register them, they will have access to all rights to the apartment.

State registration is carried out in several steps:

1. preparation of documents: passports of privatization participants, privatization agreement, technical and cadastral passport for the property;
2. payment of state duty;
3. drawing up an application.

You can contact both Rosreestr and the MFC.

Duration of state registration is up to 10 working days. After its completion, owners have the right to dispose of housing at their own discretion. You can sell the property, rent it out, transfer it by will or deed of gift, or use it as collateral to obtain a bank loan. To carry out all these and other actions, it is no longer necessary to obtain permission from the former owner of the office premises.

Going to court

If the employer refuses to change the status of official housing to municipal, then the employee has the right to initiate legal proceedings. However, the courts usually side with the employer. The reason for refusing to satisfy the claim is the fact that the applicant does not have significant grounds for living in official housing after the expiration of the employment contract.

If the employer agrees to transfer housing into the ownership of the municipality, but administrative workers, having considered the application, made a negative decision, then the applicant has the right to go to court. In this case, he has a higher chance of achieving a positive court ruling.

To initiate legal proceedings

, you need to do the following.

1. Collect documents. They must prove the existence of grounds for the privatization of official housing. The more documents, the higher the chances of a positive court decision.
2. File a claim. It is recommended to seek help from an experienced lawyer who will reflect all the essential circumstances in the statement of claim and present arguments.
3. Pay the state fee for filing a claim. The payment receipt is attached to the general package of documents.

The defendant is informed of the upcoming court hearing. He has the right to justify his refusal, provide counterarguments, and provide evidence of his position.

The court examines documents, evidence and current circumstances, after which it makes a decision in accordance with Russian legislation.

In judicial practice, there are cases when the courts satisfied the demands of the plaintiffs. Thus, in the Yaroslavl region, the controversial issue of housing privatization was considered. In 1988, the plaintiff’s father found work at an enterprise that provided him with office housing, and 10 years later he quit. However, the employer did not demand eviction, and therefore the employee continued to live with his son in this apartment.

On the date of appeal to the judicial authority, the plaintiff’s father had already died, and the applicant, after the decision to privatize the housing, found out that it was on the city’s balance sheet. Administrative workers refused to privatize him due to the fact that the applicant did not have a social rent agreement. Moreover, he was also not allowed to conclude this agreement, since the apartment was a service apartment and was included in a separate housing stock.

The court satisfied the claims for two reasons: firstly, the plaintiff had already lived in that apartment for a long time, and secondly, the previous owner of the property did not challenge the right of residence of the employee and his son. After this, the plaintiff, together with his son, carried out the privatization procedure on legal grounds.

Who is eligible

Based on Article 4 of the Law “On Privatization”, only those persons who live in premises belonging to the housing stock of state farms or similar agricultural enterprises have the right to privatize official housing, provided that they are located in rural areas. This also includes apartments with similar purposes that belong to permanent organizations involved in social protection of the population. In any case, it is the owners who decide whether residents will be able to exercise their rights to privatization or not.

Who can privatize residential premises for officials and on what grounds?

Privatization of departmental/official housing is prohibited by law. This point is clarified by Article 4 of Law No. 1541-1. The procedure is possible only in a number of cases. Unlike the privatization of municipal housing, the privatization of a service apartment is carried out only by permit, that is, with the consent of the owner.

The following have the right to privatize service housing:

1. Employees of budgetary organizations. These include teachers, medical workers, deputies and others.
2. Servants of law enforcement agencies.
3. Customs workers.
4. Citizens working in agriculture.
5. Forestry and fishing industry employees.

The right to privatization is granted only to those workers to whom the company has provided housing on the basis of a rental agreement. Privatization is formalized on the basis of Federal Law No. 1541-1 of July 4, 1991 and the Housing Code of the Russian Federation.

Conditions for privatization:

• Concluding an agreement on the rental of office space.
• Work experience in the organization equal to 10 years or more.
• Received permission from the owner of the residential property.
• Actual residence in the premises for 10 years.
• Previous non-participation in the privatization process.

State employees

State employees are employees of the following areas:

1. medical personnel;
2. teachers, educators and teachers (the entire sphere of public education);
3. workers of cultural institutions;
4. emergency rescue teams;
5. agricultural workers.

Employees of these categories must live in this residential premises for at least ten years.

Military personnel

The following military personnel are entitled to receive free housing:

1. dismissed for health reasons;
2. retired from service due to length of service;
3. members of military families.

Service residential buildings belong to the housing stock of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation. They are intended for those citizens who provide security and protect our country. To privatize such living space, you must obtain permission from the owner - the Ministry of Defense.

Office rental agreement

The contract for hiring office housing is concluded between an employee and an employer, be it a company or a government agency. Basic provisions based on the Housing Code of the Russian Federation:

• The agreement is concluded on a voluntary basis. The employer cannot force the employee to enter into it. The opposite is also true; the employee does not have the right to demand the provision of a separate place of residence if an agreement on this has not been reached earlier and has not been recorded in other documents.

Example: An employee gets a job at a company. At the time of his admission, an employment contract was concluded, one of the clauses of which indicates that the person must be provided with official housing. In such a situation, the employee has every right to demand the specified premises. If there is no such clause, then the requirements will be unreasonable.

• The tenant of service housing has no right to rent it out to third parties or exchange it. It should be borne in mind that usually all potential tenants are specified in the contract, starting directly with the employee and ending with members of his family.
• The agreement is concluded exclusively in writing and certified by the signatures of the parties. Notarization is not required.
• The contract is terminated in the event of dismissal.
• The employer is not required to register the occupants of the office premises.

Privatization of official housing: myth or reality?

Real estate prices in our country are very high, and not everyone can afford to own a living space. Many are trying to get out of the situation and take out loans, some are joining the mortgage program, but the majority of the population does not have enough money even for the entrance fee. Budgetary organizations meet the needs of the population halfway and provide their employees with office apartments.

Official housing is apartments that belong to a specific organization or government agency and are provided to employees for temporary residence. The employee enters into a contract for the rental of office premises, which cannot exceed the employee’s service period specified in the contract or employment agreement. Thus, departmental housing is a temporary solution to the problem and does not provide confidence that tomorrow the employee will not be fired and asked to vacate the premises. Moreover, office apartments tie an employee to a workplace in a specific organization in a specific region and make the person completely dependent on the employer. Thus, the privatization of official real estate is one of the most pressing and pressing problems, since it is almost impossible to obtain ownership of it.

The Housing Code of the Russian Federation does not provide for a procedure for the privatization of service housing, and Part 1 of Article 4 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the privatization of housing stock in the Russian Federation” stipulates that service apartments are included in the list of objects not subject to privatization. However, despite the general rule prohibiting the privatization of official housing, the legislation of the Russian Federation still allows for a certain freedom of action in this area.

1. There is a loophole in the Law of the Russian Federation “On the privatization of the housing stock in the Russian Federation,” namely: in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 4, the owners of the housing stock or bodies authorized by them, as well as enterprises to which the housing stock is assigned with the right of economic management or operational management , with the consent of the owners, can decide on privatization on their own initiative. According to the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated March 30, 2012 No. 9-P, the above norm is recognized as not contradicting the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and accordingly, gives the right to the owner of a municipal housing stock, when exercising his right, on the grounds, on the terms and in the manner established by federal legislation, to issue regulatory legal acts relating to decision-making on the privatization of individual office residential premises. But provided that such decisions are made as an exception and allow the preservation of an array of office residential premises in an amount corresponding to their intended purpose.

Thus, one of the options for solving the problem of privatization of service housing is the publication by the owner of the municipal housing stock of a regulatory legal act regarding decision-making on the privatization of individual service residential premises. The basis for issuing such a legal act is the application of the tenant of the service residential premises or the initiative of the owner of the municipal housing stock.

However, a positive decision on privatization is a right, not an obligation, of premises owners, and is the exception rather than the rule.

2. It is possible to privatize office residential premises that were voluntarily transferred to local government bodies by a state or municipal enterprise or institution, for example, in connection with the liquidation or reorganization of a municipal unitary enterprise, state unitary enterprise, or due to the inability to bear the costs of maintaining the premises. In this case, the residential premises lose their “official” status and are subject to privatization as housing provided under a social tenancy agreement. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation adheres to a similar position: in the Review of Legislation and Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the first quarter of 2006, the fact of making a decision on the transfer of office residential premises that were in state ownership and were assigned to state enterprises or institutions with the right of economic management or operational management into municipal ownership, involves a change in the status of the residential premises.

But even with such clear regulation, local government bodies do not always meet citizens halfway, and the matter has to be resolved in court. Judicial practice in this case is on the side of citizens.

Determination of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 14, 2013 No. 5-KG13-18.

From the case materials: N.V.I., N.E.V., N.A.V. filed a lawsuit against the Department of Housing Policy and Housing Fund of the city of Moscow and the territorial administration of the Federal Agency for State Property Management for recognition of ownership of residential premises through privatization.

In support of the claim it was stated that N.V.I. in connection with his work in the housing and communal services department of the city of Moscow, which is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, on the basis of a service order, a three-room apartment was provided to a family of four. Currently, the activities of the commandant's office have been discontinued. In accordance with the resolution of the Moscow Government dated July 19, 2005 No. 536-PP, the house in which the residential premises occupied by the plaintiffs is located was transferred from the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation to the ownership of the city of Moscow. The plaintiffs cannot exercise their right to privatize residential premises due to the fact that the Department of Housing Policy and Housing Fund of the City of Moscow, in response to their appeal on the issue of privatization, informed that the apartment occupied by the plaintiffs is a service apartment and is not subject to privatization, the decision to exclude it from the number of office residential premises was not adopted by the executive authority.

Having checked the case materials and discussed the validity of the arguments in the cassation appeal, the Judicial Panel finds the complaint to be satisfied.

In accordance with the Decree of the Moscow Government dated July 19, 2005 No. 536-PP “On the acceptance of departmental housing stock and engineering and communal facilities of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation into the ownership of the city of Moscow in 2005-2006,” the residential apartment building in which the disputed residential premises are located was transferred owned by the city of Moscow.

Article 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation dated July 4, 1991 No. 1541-1 “On the privatization of housing stock in the Russian Federation” provides for the right of citizens occupying residential premises in the state and municipal housing stock, including housing stock under the economic management of enterprises or the operational management of institutions (departmental fund ), acquire ownership of these premises on social rental terms.

Based on the provisions of Article 7 of Federal Law No. 189-FZ dated December 29, 2004 “On the implementation of the RF Housing Code”, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the Review of Legislation and Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the first quarter of 2006, approved by the resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 7 and June 14, 2006 (issue 21), clarified the following.

The fact of making a decision to transfer office residential premises, which were in state ownership and were assigned to state enterprises or institutions with the right of economic management or operational management, to municipal ownership implies a change in the status of the residential premises.

Consequently, when transferred to municipal ownership, such residential premises lose their official status, and the legal regime established by Article 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the privatization of housing stock in the Russian Federation” is applied to them.

Consequently, the disputed residential premises, after being transferred to the ownership of the city of Moscow, lost their official status, therefore the legal regime established for residential premises provided under social tenancy agreements is applied to it.

The plaintiffs, who lived in the disputed residential premises at the time of its transfer from federal ownership to the ownership of the city of Moscow, acquired the right to use it under the terms of a social tenancy agreement and have the right to acquire ownership of it, in connection with which their claim should be recognized as justified and subject to satisfaction.

It should be noted: if a state unitary enterprise or municipal unitary enterprise was corporatized or otherwise reorganized into a commercial company, but for some reason did not transfer its housing stock to the municipality, or local governments did not accept it on their balance sheet, residents of such premises have the right to demand a contract with them social rental agreement and further participation in privatization.

By the way, the transfer of office housing into municipal ownership can be carried out in agreement with the enterprise that owns the office premises, as a result of which the owner submits a petition to the municipal authorities with a request to take the housing on the balance sheet of the local administration. This practice is used mainly with housing stock owned by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Emergency Situations and other law enforcement agencies.

3. Even if service housing is not transferred to municipal ownership, one should not lose hope. It is necessary to check the legality of assigning the status of official housing, since the presence of a stamp in the order does not mean that the apartment is official, and there are a number of conditions under which the assignment of the status of official housing will be considered legal.

Decision of the Oktyabrsky District Court of the city of Omsk dated December 3, 2007.

From the case materials: N.D., A.V., also acting in the interests of their daughters A.A., P.A. filed a lawsuit, asking to recognize their right of shared ownership and the right to privatize the apartment.

Having examined the evidence presented, the court finds the claims to be satisfied.

The disputed apartment was provided to A.V. for a family of four, including wife N.D., daughters A.A., P.A. in connection with labor relations with PA "SPS" as official housing under a warrant. The order has a corresponding stamp.

The employer is A.V., who was in an employment relationship with the SPS PA, and was dismissed on 09/01/1997 at his own request. After his dismissal, the enterprise did not make any demands to evict the plaintiffs from the said residential premises.

On the basis of an agreement on the gratuitous alienation of state property in the Omsk region into municipal ownership dated November 1, 2001, the disputed apartment was transferred to municipal ownership.

The plaintiffs wish to privatize the residential premises they occupy into common shared ownership of ¼ for each of them. The administration believes that the specified residential premises are official, the plaintiffs are denied its privatization. The city administration has not provided a document by which the specified residential premises, in the prescribed manner and by the authorized body, are classified as a specialized housing stock. If we assume that there is no such decision, then, regardless of the presence of a warrant with the “official” stamp, it should be assumed that the plaintiffs occupy the specified residential premises on the terms of social housing rental, and there are no obstacles to acquiring it into ownership through privatization under the wishes of the plaintiffs.

In accordance with Article 7 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation “On the implementation of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation”, as a result of the transfer of the residential building in which the disputed apartment is located into municipal ownership, the specified apartment, as an integral part of this house, also became municipal property. Thus, from the moment the house was transferred to municipal ownership, the plaintiffs’ apartment, which is located in this house, lost its official status; the legal regime established for residential premises provided under a social tenancy agreement is applied to it. Decisions of municipal authorities to remove the status of official housing from the specified apartment (excluding residential premises from the specialized housing stock) are not required for its privatization.

Thus, the plaintiffs have all the rights and obligations arising from the legal relationship of social housing rental of an apartment, including the right to privatize the said residential premises.

Based on the above, we will determine the conditions that are necessary to assign the premises the status of “official”.

The decision to include an apartment in the number of service apartments must be made by authorized bodies managing the state and municipal housing stock, in compliance with established requirements and in the manner established by the Government of the Russian Federation (clause 2 of Article 92 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation). The decision to classify an apartment as a service apartment can be made only before the apartment is provided to residents.

Decision of the Aleisky City Court of the Altai Territory.

From the case materials: A.N.V. applied to the court to invalidate the decision of the housing and maintenance department of the Siberian Military District (KEU), pointing out that in June 2006 her husband (A.S.A.) as a military serviceman was provided with an apartment.

In 2009, she learned that the apartment in which she lived was classified as a service apartment. It turned out that there was an extract from the KEU decision “On inclusion in a specialized housing stock,” according to which her apartment was included in this housing stock.

She believes that the decision of the Economic Commission should be canceled, since this apartment was occupied by her and her family members before the inclusion of the residential premises in the service housing.

Having examined the case materials, the court comes to the following conclusion.

In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 92 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, the use of residential premises as specialized residential premises is permitted only after such premises are classified as a specialized housing stock.

From the content of paragraph 3 of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 42 “On approval of the Rules for classifying residential premises as a specialized housing stock and standard rental agreements for specialized residential premises” it follows that the classification of residential premises as a specialized housing stock is not allowed if the residential premises are occupied under social tenancy agreements.

As established at the court hearing, the living quarters of the family of A.S.A. was provided for residence before being assigned “official” status.

This circumstance indicates the illegality of the CEU’s decision “On inclusion in a specialized housing stock” regarding the inclusion of the disputed apartment in the service housing.

The fact that with A.S.A. an agreement for the lease of office residential premises was concluded cannot serve as a basis for recognizing the subject of the agreement - the apartment - as official, since at the time of the conclusion of the agreement the disputed apartment was not official.

Based on the foregoing, the court decides to satisfy the requirements stated by A.N.V.

After a decision is made to assign the status of “office” to a residential premises, this housing must be registered as official in the prescribed manner with the state real estate registration authorities.

The necessary information about assigning the status of official housing can be obtained from the archives. If such information is not found in the archive, it should be assumed that the residential premises were provided under a social tenancy agreement, therefore, it can be privatized.

If it is not possible to privatize official housing, you can refer to the provisions of Article 103 2 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, which sets out the list of persons who cannot be evicted from official residential premises and dormitories without the provision of other residential premises. Provided that these persons are not tenants of residential premises under social tenancy agreements or family members of the tenant of residential premises under a social tenancy agreement, or owners of residential premises or family members of the owner of residential premises and registered as those in need of residential premises:

1) family members of military personnel, officials, employees of internal affairs bodies, federal security service bodies, customs bodies of the Russian Federation, state fire service bodies, bodies for control of the circulation of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, institutions and bodies of the penal system, deceased ( deceased) or missing in action while performing military service or official duties;

2) old age pensioners;

3) family members of an employee who was provided with official living quarters or living quarters in a dormitory and who died;

4) disabled people of groups I or II, whose disability occurred as a result of a work injury due to the fault of the employer, disabled people of groups I or II, whose disability occurred as a result of an occupational disease in connection with the performance of work duties, disabled military personnel who became disabled of groups I or II due to injury , concussion or injury received during the performance of military service duties or as a result of an illness associated with the performance of military service duties.

These citizens are provided with other residential premises, which must be located within the boundaries of the relevant locality.

Appeal ruling of the Rostov Regional Court in case No. 33–6459/2013 dated May 27, 2013.

From the case materials: FSBEI HPE “TSPI named after A.P. Chekhov” filed a lawsuit against D.N.I., D.B.A. about eviction from the hostel.

The substantiation of the claim states that the FSBEI HPE “Tashkent State Pedagogical Institute named after A.P. Chekhov" owns the hostel building with the right of operational management. The defendants live in room No. 115 of the said dormitory. D.N.I. in the period from April 1983 to August 1992, she was an employee of the institute, but on August 29, 1992 she terminated her employment relationship, resigning of her own free will.

There was no rental agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants. The plaintiff believes that since the defendants are not currently students of the institute and are not in an employment relationship with the institute, there are no grounds for them to live in the disputed residential premises.

The decision of the court of first instance rejected the claims.

Having studied the case materials, the judicial panel finds no grounds to overturn the court's decision.

In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 103 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, old-age pensioners cannot be evicted without the provision of other residential premises.

The court found that the defendant has been an old-age pensioner since September 1, 1995.

Also, the trial court came to a reasonable conclusion that D.N.I. belongs to the category of persons in need of residential premises provided under a social tenancy agreement, and has the right to be registered as such (Part 1 of Article 51 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation).

Article 13 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation “On the entry into force of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation” establishes that citizens who live in office residential premises and residential premises in dormitories provided to them before the entry into force of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation are, in accordance with paragraph 1 of part 1 Article 51 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, registered as those in need of residential premises, cannot be evicted without the provision of other residential premises, if their eviction was not allowed by law before the Housing Code of the Russian Federation came into force (clause 6 of Article 108 of the Housing Code of the RSFSR).

Thus, Article 13 of the above law supplements the list of persons defined by Part 2 of Article 103 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation who cannot be evicted without providing them with other residential premises.

Thus, the court of first instance reasonably concluded that the defendants could not be evicted from the hostel without the provision of other living quarters.

It is important to note that there are unconditional prohibitions on the privatization of official housing. For example, houses in disrepair are not subject to privatization, or if one of the residents of a service apartment objects to privatization. Also, privatization will be denied to persons who have previously participated in privatization. According to Article 11 of RF Law No. 1541-1 “On the privatization of housing stock in the Russian Federation,” re-privatization of an apartment is impossible.

Conclusion: The privatization of a service apartment, despite the prohibitions established by law, is still real. And in court, as a rule, it is possible to achieve the right to privatize housing, unless it is proven that the residential premises were provided to the tenant specifically as a service property, and not under a social tenancy agreement.

VAT – 2022

The best speaker on tax topics, , will prepare you for filing your return on January 14 . There are 10 out of 40 places left for the online workshop . The flow is limited, as there will be live communication with the teacher live. Hurry up to get into the group. Sign up>>>

How to privatize a service apartment

There are two ways to privatize a service apartment:

1. Obtain permission from the landlord for such a procedure, provided that the premises are one of those that can generally be privatized (the main requirement is that they are located in a rural area).
2. Convert a service apartment into a municipal one and then privatize it on a general basis. This is also only possible with the permission of the landlord. This system can be used if the premises are not located in a rural area.

Regardless of the chosen/available option, the general privatization procedure, with the exception of the mandatory requirement of permission from the landlord, is fully consistent with the usual one.

An employer can simply donate an apartment for good service/long service, but this is a very rare occurrence. In this case, privatization is not required and all that is needed is simply to register ownership.

Procedure

1. Obtain permission from the property owner.
2. Collect consent for privatization from all residents.
3. Prepare the necessary documents (see below).
4. Submit an application to the MFC.
5. Sign the privatization agreement.
6. Contact Rosreestr with the agreement and register ownership.

Procedure

Let's take a closer look at the procedure. The first step is to obtain permission from the employer. Usually, if the landlord agrees in principle to issue such a document, he also puts forward counterclaims.

Example: An employer is ready not only to provide a person and his family with housing, but will also allow them to register it as their property. However, the employment contract will stipulate the obligation to work at the enterprise for at least 15 years from the date of registration of ownership of the housing. Otherwise you need to pay a fine.

In fact, such situations are very rare. Most often, they are associated with the desire to attach a particularly valuable employee to the company, or they actually relate to rural areas, where there is a constant shortage of personnel. However, if permission for privatization has been received, then it is necessary to collect consent for this procedure from all inhabitants of the premises. In the vast majority of cases, they all belong to the same family and there are no problems. If one of the residents has previously participated in privatization, he can give consent, but then write a refusal to personally participate in privatization.

In such a situation, it turns out that the person does not mind that the premises in which he lives will be privatized, but at the same time he personally refuses to participate in the procedure, thereby losing the right to his share.

Next, after receiving consent, you need to collect all the necessary documents. Here the procedure differs somewhat from the standard one in favor of simplification. The point is that the owner-company usually already has all the necessary documentation on hand, since at one time he had to somehow obtain ownership of this very apartment. Thanks to this, there is no need to separately order certificates, extracts, registration certificates, and so on. All this is issued by the employer, which greatly simplifies and speeds up the procedure.

The next stage is submitting documents to the MFC. It is through multifunctional centers that it is easiest to formalize privatization. To do this, you need to provide the consent of all residents, permission from the owner and a certain list of documents (see below). You will also have to write a corresponding statement on the spot.

Once submitted, the application will be reviewed for a couple of months or less (but no more). If approval follows, a privatization agreement will need to be signed. The last stage is registration of property rights in Rosreestr. To do this, you will need the same package of documents, permission from the owner and a privatization agreement.

Privatization procedure

In order to privatize a service apartment, you need to perform the following steps:

1. obtain permission from the apartment owner;
2. change status to municipal;
3. prepare documentation;
4. send an application to local municipal authorities;
5. contact Rosreestr to register rights and obtain title documentation for former official housing.

These steps are discussed in more detail below.

1. Change of housing status. Without this step, it will not be possible to privatize the object. It is necessary to obtain consent from the employer, indicating, for example, that the applicant for housing has worked for the apartment for more than 15 years. If the employer agrees to the procedure, then privatization will be carried out by the enterprise, and not by the employee. The latter will only need to fill out an application.
2. Contacting administrative authorities. After changing the status of housing, an apartment, house or other property becomes the property of the municipality. After this, you need to draw up an application for privatization, sending it to the administrative office of your locality.
3. Getting a solution. The application will be reviewed within several weeks. If administrative workers make a positive decision, the applicant will receive an order for privatization.
4. Conclusion of a privatization agreement. The contract must contain the signatures of all people registered in the housing. If any of them refuses to sign, then it will not be possible to privatize the housing. If one of the employer’s relatives does not want to take part in privatization, it is enough to issue a written refusal, and then have the paper certified by an employee of a notary agency. Next, you need to come to the administration to conclude an agreement.
5. Contact Rosreestr. The last step is to contact the Cadastral Chamber to confirm ownership. Each person registered in housing must fill out an application. Documents are attached to the applications, after which the entire package is submitted to the chamber staff for consideration.

After the object is registered

, the employer comes to Rosreestr again. Authorized persons issue him an extract from the Unified State Register of Real Estate. This is the official title documentation for housing.

Drawing up an application

The employee must submit a statement

and forward it to administrative staff.

The application will need to include the following information:

• name of the registering authority (in the unabridged version, without abbreviations);
• information about the applicant: full name, passport details, contacts (residence address, telephone);
• characteristics of the office premises, address of the facility location;
• request to approve the privatization of the apartment;
• an indication that the applicant has not previously exercised the right to privatization, that the housing is not collateral or the subject of court proceedings, that the procedure for privatization by the residents has been agreed upon, and that no claims will arise in the future;
• Full name and signature of the applicant.

Owner's decision

If the owner makes a positive decision, then the employer draws up a document indicating the following information:

• the circumstances on the basis of which the applicant was allocated housing, the date the premises were provided;
• information about the premises;
• the number of people registered in service housing;
• grounds for obtaining permission for an employee to obtain property rights.

The owner of the living space makes a decision based on compelling circumstances for permission or refusal. So, if the company’s Charter states that after continuous service of 15-20 years, an employee has the right to privatize official housing, then this basis can be used to approve the employee’s request.

The property owner formalizes the decision in writing, even if it is negative. The document must contain the manager's signature and seal. The decision is registered as an outgoing document.

Conclusion of an agreement

If the employee’s request for privatization has been approved, an agreement on the transfer of ownership rights will need to be concluded.

The parties to the agreement are the current and future owner of the property.

The contract will require information about privatization

, rights and responsibilities of an employee after obtaining property rights to housing.

The document must also contain the following information:

• information about the premises: address of the property, size of the total and living area, number of rooms in it;
• information about all residents who are given a share in the former office space;
• the size of the share of each new owner;
• information about the employment contract under which the employee received official housing;
• grounds for transfer of housing;
• responsibilities of new owners.

The agreement must contain the signatures of the privatization participants and administrative employees responsible for the procedure.

Required documents

To ensure that your privatization application is not rejected, you need to prepare the following package of documents:

• Passports of all residents.
• Power of attorney for a representative (if required).
• Birth certificate of minors (if they live in the premises and do not yet have a passport).
• Permission from the guardianship authorities for privatization (subject to the residence of persons under the age of majority in a service apartment).
• Consent of all residents, including children aged 14 years and older.
• Permission for privatization from the owner of the apartment.
• BTI technical passport.
• Certificate stating that persons have not previously participated in privatization.
• Refusal to participate in privatization (if required).
• An account statement stating that there is no debt on the apartment.

Since the privatization of official residential premises is still not a standard and widespread procedure, in some cases additional documents may be required. It is recommended to clarify this point in advance, before submitting your application.

Basic conditions

How to privatize service housing? The Law “On Privatization...” in paragraph 2 of Article 4 contains a clause on the possibility of privatization of office residential premises by decision of the owner.

Since this type of living space
belongs directly to enterprises that provide apartments to their employees during the performance of their official duties, the decision on the possibility of transferring them to private ownership remains with them.
Such a norm was recognized as not contradicting the Law by the Resolution of the Constitutional Court No. 9 - P of March 30, 2012. The enterprise issues a regulatory legal act, and on its basis housing is transferred to the private ownership of citizens.

Thus, the privatization of official housing becomes possible with the permission of the relevant organization that manages its own housing stock.

In addition, there are a number of residential premises transferred by state or municipal unitary enterprises to the balance of city administrations.

After transfer, they lose their official status and are provided to citizens on the basis of social rental contracts. Their privatization is possible without any conditions, since they become municipal.

Currently, many large cities have adopted their own by-laws regulating the procedure for the privatization of official housing.

have worked at the enterprise for 10 years or more have the right to privatize them .

You can learn about how to privatize an apartment if the order is lost, how to restore the contract for transferring ownership of the apartment, as well as about the procedure for deprivatization of residential premises on our website.

Reasons for going to court

If the employer refuses to give permission for privatization, theoretically, you can file an application against him in court demanding permission, or change the status of the apartment from service to municipal. Almost always, such statements yield nothing, since permission for privatization must be voluntary. It is legally impossible to force someone to transfer their own property to other persons. The only exceptions are those situations where the right to privatization was agreed upon between the employee and the company management in advance and written down in the employment contract.

How to find out the status of official housing

It is very important to know what the status of a residential property is if you are planning to register it as your property, so that there are no future problems with documentation and privatization.

Where and how to check whether the premises are registered as official housing?

1. First of all, a citizen must address this issue to the owner who provides the residential premises.
2. You can also get information from an organization or institution that provides housing . You should send a written request and ask for copies of documents according to which this or that housing was endowed with a certain status.
3. In addition, you can contact the territorial body of Rosreestr . Specialists can inform the applicant about all information related to the residential premises; this information is not hidden.

As practice shows, owners do not hide the status of office premises. So all you have to do is contact the owner of the property directly and ask him about what kind of housing is provided, what kind of contract will be concluded with you, and whether you will be able to privatize it in the future and become a full owner. It is better to resolve all issues immediately.

Deprivatization of an apartment - pros and cons, rights of residents and registration procedure

When identifying the status of a residential property, it is also necessary to determine the date when the housing began to be considered official. Please note that official status must be assigned before the property is provided to the tenant. In such a transaction, it is necessary to draw up a social tenancy agreement.

If the status was assigned already at the time the citizen moved in and began using the premises, then it will be difficult to privatize the square meters.

Arbitrage practice

Example No. 1 : A man worked at the enterprise for more than 17 years. As a result of an accident that was not his fault, he became a group 2 disabled person. He has no other housing, no opportunity to purchase one, and working with a disability is too difficult. The man submitted an application to the management of the enterprise with a request to transfer the housing to the municipal fund for the purpose of subsequent privatization, but was refused. Then he went to court and indicated the current situation. Taking into account the length of service, disability and absence of debts for the apartment, the court ordered permission for privatization.

Example No. 2 : A man worked in the police for 8 years, during which he lived in a service apartment. After this, he turned to management with a request to give permission for privatization. There was a refusal. After this, he filed a lawsuit. There was also a refusal, since the service life is only 8 years and there is no consent from management.

One should especially take into account the fact that rare decisions in favor of the plaintiffs only confirm the general rule - it is pointless to demand from the owner permission to privatize an apartment without compelling reasons supported by documents.

Privatization of official housing can be a rather complicated procedure, even taking into account the fact that usually no documents are required. Experienced lawyers will clarify the main points during a free consultation, and subsequently they can act as representatives both in the privatization process and when going to court.

FREE CONSULTATIONS are available for you! If you want to solve exactly your problem, then

:

• describe your situation to a lawyer in an online chat;
• write a question in the form below;
• call Moscow and Moscow region
• call St. Petersburg and region

Save or share the link on social networks

Author of the article

Natalya Fomicheva

Website expert lawyer. 10 years of experience. Inheritance matters. Family disputes. Housing and land law.

Ask a question Author's rating

Articles written

513

- FREE for a lawyer!

Write your question, our lawyer will prepare an answer for FREE and call you back in 5 minutes.

By submitting data you agree to the Consent to PD processing, PD Processing Policy and User Agreement

Useful information on the topic

4

Eviction from official residential premises

A certain (considerable) category of citizens of the Russian Federation lives in official housing. At…

4

Can they be evicted from an apartment if there is no other housing?

Forced eviction from a residential premises is an unpleasant phenomenon, one might say...

1

Privatization of land

What is land privatization? This is the actual purchase or receipt of land...

Privatization of land in SNT using a membership book

SNT is a gardening non-profit partnership, within which the main…

Privatization of land under a private house

Despite the fact that the right to privatize land already exists...

How many times can you participate in privatization?

Privatization is a free procedure for obtaining home ownership. How many…

Nuances of privatization

At the moment there is a free privatization program. The program first appeared in 1992, after which its duration was repeatedly extended. Until March 1, 2021, residents of the Crimean Peninsula and citizens whose housing was recognized as unsafe could privatize their housing for free. From March 1, 2021, free privatization is available to all residents of the Russian Federation.

Important! The application is submitted by all citizens who are registered in the apartment, otherwise it will be considered invalid and a negative response to the request for privatization will be given on behalf of the owner organization.

Privatization after March 1, 2021

Russian President V.V. Putin signed the Federal Law, which refers to the abolition of deadlines for the privatization of residential premises. This means that privatization is now permanent. Citizens using office premises have the right to transfer them to the balance of the municipality and accept them as property without a time limit.

State employees

State employees have the right to receive real estate from organizations that own real estate with operational management rights, and the state acts as the owner. Privatization of official housing is possible only after the state makes a positive decision and transfers ownership of the property to the persons living there.

Military personnel (Ministry of Internal Affairs)

The acquisition of service housing by military personnel depends on the location of the military unit and its status. If a serviceman’s real estate is located in a closed area, then privatization of official housing is impossible. Sometimes exceptions are possible; the decision remains with the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation.

What is official (departmental) housing?

Service housing refers to the state (or municipal) housing stock.

It is provided:

• civil servants;
• military personnel sent to another area;
• elected to government bodies;
• or local government;
• appointed to government positions;
• working in state (municipal) organizations.

This is stated in Article 93 of the LC. And according to Article 104, such housing can be:

• room;
• apartment;
• residential building.

The specifics of providing departmental housing to military personnel are reflected in Law No. 76-FZ of May 27, 1998. As a rule, departmental housing is provided if there is no one of your own in the same locality or area.

Upon provision, a rental agreement is concluded between the owner (his representative) and the one to whom it is transferred for use. A warrant is issued for a departmental apartment. The period of validity ends when the employer ceases to work in the position giving such right or leaves service.

After this, the housing is rented out according to a separate act, which describes its condition. Another reason for a break is the destruction of real estate (for example, due to a natural disaster).

Until this time, the tenant bears certain responsibilities in relation to the apartment (or house):

• pay for accommodation and utilities;
• repair;
• compensate for losses that occur due to his fault;
• comply with all other terms of use.

Members of his family can live with the person himself, that is:

• husband wife;
• children;
• parents;
• dependents.

The number of family members is taken into account when determining the footage and number of rooms. Those living with the tenant have the same rights of use and bear the same responsibilities.

Since departmental apartments are transferred for use and not ownership, this imposes certain restrictions:

• they cannot be rented out to other people;
• exchange (even for official ones);
• make redevelopment, re-equipment, etc. (without the written permission of the owner).

In general, according to the law “On Privatization”, it is also impossible to privatize such housing.

This requires:

1. A separate decision of the owner of the premises (this possibility is indicated in paragraph 2 of article 4 of the law “On Privatization”).
2. Or its transfer to municipal ownership.

In the latter case, real estate from specialized (service) becomes municipal. The rules regarding social hiring will apply to her. Sometimes this happens due to the reorganization of the enterprise or the inability to bear the costs associated with maintaining the premises. But it is also possible to transfer a separate apartment for further privatization. This option is used with real estate that is on the balance sheet of law enforcement agencies.

How to register a company apartment for social rent - is there any benefit in re-registration?

In order for a citizen to enter into a social rental agreement, housing must be transferred from a specialized housing stock to municipal housing.

The decision to transfer official housing from one fund to another is made by the organization providing this premises. The basis for the transfer is the application of the person living in the official residential premises.

After the institution providing service residential premises to the tenant has made a decision to transfer the service residential premises to the municipal fund, it will be possible to conclude a social tenancy agreement.

The employer can only be a citizen of the Russian Federation . Family members of the applicant-employer will act as co-tenants.

You can also achieve the transfer of office space to a municipal fund through the courts.

A citizen can write a statement of claim with this requirement if there are good reasons for this.

What is the need for the procedure?

Many citizens, even living in office premises for a long time, do not fully understand why they should privatize an apartment?

What is the need for this? There is no such thing as too much real estate . You must agree, it is much more pleasant to acquire your own personal property than to live in office premises all your life on a bird's license.

In addition, the privatization of a service apartment is simply necessary and suggests itself if citizens have been living in this premises for a long time for social rent or at the expense of an organization, have made changes and improvements to the general condition of the housing and now want their efforts to pay off.

But, unfortunately, people are not aware of their rights and even those who have all the rights and legal grounds for this do not take any action simply because they do not know about this possibility.

In this regard, it is very important to familiarize yourself with the law and look for possible sources of benefit for yourself.

Find out from our articles about the rights and responsibilities of the owner and those prescribed in a privatized apartment, as well as what the owner of privatized meters will have to pay for out of his own pocket.

Advantages and disadvantages

Now, immediately after privatization, you will have many significant advantages. But it won't be without its downsides . Let's consider all possible options.

The advantages include:

• own real estate will appear;
• there is no significant amount for receiving it;
• You have already lived in this apartment for a long time and have adjusted the whole life to suit yourself.

A plus can be considered the convenient location of the real estate , because predominantly office living space is located in the central areas of the city, has access to transport interchanges and is located close to the department to which it belongs.

The disadvantages include the length of registration - this procedure is very lengthy. Also, a significant disadvantage is the collection of a huge number of documents and a long journey through authorities.

The disadvantage is also that you cannot always get exactly the apartment in which you lived; they may offer something similar due to the fact that the property you are using already belongs to someone else.

Read about whether it is possible to privatize a cooperative apartment or a room in a communal apartment on our website.