No access control, water pipes broken and not repaired, 59 owners refused to pay property fees

https://www.zincheng.com.tw/he67.htm

For a long time, the conflict between property and owner has been a difficult problem. Owners of the Cathay Kowloon Bay Community in Changsha County were dissatisfied with the quality of the property service before, and some owners chose to refuse to pay the property fee. To this end, 59 owners were sued to the court by Hunan Branch of the former Guangzhou Guangdian City Service Group Co., Ltd. Think property is not responsible 59 homeowners refuse to pay property fees During the trial, the owners listed a number of evidence that the quality of the service of the previous property company was not sufficient, including the failure to fulfill the security prevention management obligations and the access control system not to be implemented; the public equipment and facilities management and maintenance obligations not fulfilled, such as the main water pipe broken, no maintenance, Some fire-fighting equipment are missing; the greening maintenance obligation is not fulfilled; the use of public revenue in the community is not disclosed as agreed; the property services provided do not meet the standard of charging property fees in full. The former property company believed that the owner's statement was untrue. The company overhauled the access control system in 2018, posting the community's public revenue on the wall of the property management office and writing to the street where the community is located. The property company did its best to provide property services according to the contract. Although there were defects, it was not caused by the unilateral reasons of the property company. Court ruling: 30% reduction in property fees for 2018-2019 The court held that the photos of the greening and environmental sanitation provided by the owner and the evidence of the property evaluation results in 2018 can prove that the quality of the property services provided by the former property company during the property service period of 2018 and 2019 and the quality agreed in the contract Standards, the gap is more obvious. In this case, the former property has already fulfilled the main property service obligations, and the owner should pay the property fee in accordance with the contract. Because the quality of the property services provided by the predecessor during the period 2018-2019 was significantly different from the standard agreed in the contract, the court did not support the claim of the predecessor for the full property fee and liquidated damages. According to the principle of equality of rights and obligations, the property fee payable by the owner for the period 2018-2019 is reduced by 30%. Although the former property company had a defect in property management services such as illegal building construction in 2017, the defect was not sufficient to constitute a cause of property fee reduction and exemption. Therefore, the court supported the 2017 property fee claimed by the previous property. Based on this, the Changsha County Court made the first instance judgment. Netizens hot discussion @ 申东华: All rights protection for property company service is not in place and service quality is poor. Property fee reductions should be supported. And the property companies can be vigilant. Only in accordance with the contract requirements to improve the quality of services can the owners willingly pay property fees.