Information disclosure: copy of the apartment management agreement

Management agreement with the developer before the competition

Subject of management of MKD. Since it is impossible to hold a full meeting of owners after putting the house into operation, the legislation defines the procedure. Part 14 of Article 161 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation states that the developer must conclude a management agreement for an apartment building 5 days after its commissioning. In this case, the management company is the contractor of the developer, and the developer is the customer.

Validity. The conclusion of a management agreement with the developer is carried out for a period of 3 months. If the parties do not write a statement to terminate it, then, in accordance with Part 6 of Article 162 of the RF Housing Code, it will be extended for another 3 months under similar conditions.

Payment for services. The management company has the right to issue utility bills in the name of the developer until the premises become the property of the residents. Shareholders must pay for utilities themselves, depending on the terms of the contract, for example, after putting the house into operation.

Blog

Photo source: https://www.pexels.com/

Housing relations between the owners of the premises of an apartment building (hereinafter - MKD) and the manager for organizing the management of this MKD are not always bilateral. The current legislation also provides for the municipality’s responsibilities to “help” homeowners.

The provisions of part of Article 161 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Housing Code of the Russian Federation) provide for provisions on the “involvement” of local self-government bodies (hereinafter referred to as local self-government bodies), namely, the obligation to hold an open competition for the selection of a management organization in cases established by law, including if within six months before the date of the said competition, the owners of the premises in the apartment building have not chosen the method of managing this house or if the decision made to choose the method of managing this house has not been implemented.

Of course, these relationships are not without litigation. Controversial issues involving local self-government bodies are considered by various courts of the Russian Federation.

Thus, the Arbitration Court of the Kaliningrad Region considered the case on the claim of the manager of the apartment building - LLC "ZHEU No. 12Ts" to the Administration of the GO "City of Kaliningrad" about recognizing as illegal the inaction of the Administration related to the failure to carry out selection procedures, appointing a management organization to accept common property and technical documentation on the MKD; the obligation, within 10 days from the date of entry into force of the court decision, to select a management organization and transfer to it from ZhEU 12Ts LLC (hereinafter referred to as the MA) the common property and technical documentation for the apartment building.

Thus, the essence of the dispute was expressed in the unwillingness of the management company to continue managing the house after the expiration of the management agreement. In all likelihood, the MKD was unprofitable for the organization, and the relationship between the owners and the management company had long been tense. Back in 2021, the management company unilaterally tried to terminate the management contract, but following a claim by one of the owners of the apartment building premises, these actions were declared illegal, and the management company was entrusted with the responsibility for the proper execution of the management contract. In addition, residents often sued their management authority on other issues - the apartment building required various repairs, which the management authority did not carry out for various reasons.

Not wanting to renew the management contract, two months before the end of the contract (January 2021), the management notified the municipality that the apartment building would remain without management; the management had no intention of extending it, and therefore it asked to organize and hold an open house in a timely manner a competition to select a new management company or a general meeting of owners for the same purposes

. Already a month and a half after the expiration of this period (end of April 2021), the UO filed an application with the court to declare the municipality’s inaction illegal and to hold such a competition within 10 days after the court decision entered into legal force.

The Arbitration Court of the Kaliningrad Region, by decision of November 19, 2021 in case No. A21-6026/2019, rejected the main part of the UA’s requirements for the following reasons:

“...By virtue of the above provisions of the law, it is the owners of the premises who have the initial pre-emptive right to choose the method of management and the management organization and the law imposes on them the obligation to make such a choice, and only if the owners fail to exercise, including through inaction, the corresponding right, the local government body can hold a competition to select a management organization.

The owners of the apartment building at 11 Pugacheva Street chose the management company to manage the house; moreover, the owners of the apartment building did not express any intentions to terminate the management agreement with LLC Housing Department 12Ts.

As of December 1, 2016, LLC Housing Management Unit No. 12Ts unilaterally terminated the management agreement and stopped issuing bills for housing maintenance. However, these actions in the claim by the owner of the apartment building were declared illegal by the decision of the Central District Court of Kaliningrad in case No. 2-2036/2017 dated December 11, 2017. The Company is responsible for the proper execution of the management agreement.

The apartment building on Pugacheva Street, 11 was excluded from the register of houses served by the applicant at his request only on November 05, 2019 on the basis of order of the Ministry of Regional Control (Supervision) of the Kaliningrad Region No. ZhK-5730/pr....”

Local self-government bodies and other higher courts took the side on the following grounds:

• The responsibility for selecting a management authority for managing apartment buildings is assigned to local self-government bodies under the provisions of Article 161 of the RF Housing Code. This norm defines: the conditions for the occurrence of such an obligation and the method of selecting the MA (by open competition), as well as the deadlines for fulfilling the established obligation;
• the courts cited the provisions of Part 4 of Article 161 of the RF LC on holding an open competition;
• From the logical interpretation of the above norm it follows that the legislator has established the obligation Local self-government authorities to hold a competition only in cases where the owners of the apartment building have not chosen the method of managing it, or such a decision has not been implemented. Thus, the court in these respects indicated the priority of the decision of the owners of the apartment building premises

  ;

• in addition, the procedure for holding a competition is established by the Rules approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 02/06/2006 No. 75, according to which the competition is held if the owners of premises in an apartment building have not chosen a method of managing this house (including if the owners have not conducted an OSS on the issue of choice method of managing the house, or was carried out, but such a decision was not made) or the decision made on the choice of method of managing the house was not implemented (including agreements for management of apartment buildings were not concluded between the management company and the owners);
• at the same time, these Rules, taking into account the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of August 10, 2009 No. GKPI09-830, do not allow holding a competition for the selection of management in the event that, before the day of the competition, the owners of premises in the apartment building have chosen a method of managing their home, even if this does not implemented the decision;
• due to the above provisions of the law it is the owners of the premises who have the initial pre-emptive right to choose the method of management and management,

  it is on them that the law imposes the obligation to make such a choice, and only if the owners do not exercise, including through inaction, the corresponding right, the local self-government body can hold a competition for the selection of management entities;

• at the same time, the owners of the premises in the disputed apartment building, back in 2014, chose the method of managing the house by the management organization, that is, they made and implemented their decision on the choice of the management method and management;
• In addition, the owners of the apartment building premises did not express any intention to terminate the management agreement with the applicant management company;
• in particular, by the time the management company applied to the court, the latter, although it notified the municipality that it did not intend to renew the management agreement, but continued to provide maintenance of apartment buildings, charge fees for services provided for in the management agreement, issue receipts to owners and tenants of apartment buildings for payment for such services, including on the date of consideration of the case in the court of first instance
  Read also:  How to connect light at a dacha in a garden partnership to a plot of land without a chairman

  ;

• notification of termination of management of the apartment building due to the expiration of the contract was sent to the owners only two and a half months after the expiration of the contract (and a month after filing the application with the court);
• the controversial apartment building was excluded from the register of houses serviced by the management company at her request only several months after the expiration of the management agreement (by this time the case had been considered in the arbitration court for more than six months - the meetings were postponed several times);
• As a result, the court has no reason to consider the failure of local self-government bodies to hold a competition for the selection of management organizations as illegal inaction.

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation agreed with these arguments and Resolution dated August 5, 2021 No. ES20-10358, refused to review the case.

has developed a unique CRM system for management companies and homeowners associations. All the necessary information about the service is here

.

Change of management organization

Choice of management company. Owners can choose whether to change the management company or the HOA at a general meeting based on Part 3 of Art. 161 Housing Code of the Russian Federation. The basis for this is an agreement with signatures of 50% of the owners plus 1 signature of the total number of signatures.

Signature right. If the residents issued powers of attorney to the Chairman of the MKD Council, then he, on the basis of paragraphs. 3 paragraphs 8 art. 161.1 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation can conclude an agreement independently. His signature and copies of powers of attorney will be sufficient.

Change in the license register. After Goszhilnadzor confirms the changes to the register of licenses, the MKD passes to the selected management company, which undertakes to maintain it.

• 02.10.2019

Concept of management agreement for an apartment building

A management agreement is a basic document within which one party (MC), on the instructions of the other party (tenants), performs work to manage the building and all property within an agreed period of time for an agreed amount of money.

Determining the parameters of the contract is usually the second item on the agenda of the residents' meeting after choosing a management organization. The protocol, and subsequently the management agreement, sets out a list of all services that the company performs on the house being serviced. This list can be divided into two groups: utilities supply services and services related to sanitation and maintenance.

The management agreement is based on the following regulations:

• Article 162 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation
• civil code of the Russian Federation
• Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation 491 of August 13, 2006 - regulates the provision of housing maintenance services
• Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation 416 dated May 05, 2013 - regulates the procedure for managing apartment buildings
• Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 354 of May 6, 2011. – regulates the supply of utility resources

Signs of publicity of a management agreement

An enterprise carrying out business activities in the housing and communal services market enters into an agreement that has public status. The characteristics of such companies are:

1. One of the parties to the management company is a management company that has a business license
2. Fulfillment of your obligations subject to monthly payment for services rendered
3. Inability to individually refuse services provided by the company
4. The contract is concluded only with the owners of premises in the apartment building
5. The estimated cost is the same for all groups of residents.

The Housing Code of the Russian Federation does not force owners to enter into an agreement on the terms specified in the agreement with the management company.

During the general meeting, each resident has the opportunity to discuss the company's requirements and make changes. It is important to understand that by signing a maintenance agreement, the owner of the premises agrees to all the conditions specified in it.

Procedure if there is no agreement

If an agreement has not been signed with you as the owner, you can contact the management company and request a copy. If you need an original document with a blue seal, write a request to the Criminal Code to conclude an agreement with you personally.

If the owner does not have the document in hand, he may have a logical question: where to get the management agreement? To obtain it, you should send an official request to the Criminal Code. The application must indicate: “Please provide the agreement for personal review.” This is enough for the tenant to be provided with a copy of the agreement. In addition, you can always look at the form of a standard document.