I am an owner in the rights protection, because of the rights protection of the establishment of the account, the owners with the same problem can join the fan ** stream.
Article 275 of China's Civil Code stipulates that "within the building zoning, the ownership of the parking spaces and garages planned for parking cars shall be agreed by the parties through **, gift or lease." Parking spaces that occupy roads or other sites jointly owned by the owners for parking cars belong to the owners in common. ”
Some owners said that the parking spaces in our community do not occupy the common roads or other sites in the community, according to the developer, the parking spaces have been planned for a long time, and there are indeed planned parking spaces on the community planning map. The purchase contract stipulates that the ownership (right of use) of the planned parking spaces belongs to the construction unit, so the developer said that according to Article 275 and the purchase contract, the parking spaces in the community belong to the developer. We said that the land use right of the entire community belongs to the owner, and the developer does not have the property right certificate of the parking space, but the developer said that even if there is no property right, there is still the right to use. Now the parking spaces in the community are managed by the property and rented out, what should we do?
The main reason for such a problem is that the developer has a wrong understanding of Article 275, and if the legal principles discussed here are more complex and difficult for everyone to understand, the following cases can be more clearly explained.
The third owners' committee of Jiajing Tiancheng in Xiaoshan District, Hangzhou City, and Shunfa Nengcheng, the developer of the community, sued the Xiaoshan District Court due to a dispute over the ownership and use of 87 ground parking spaces in the community. After hearing the case, the court of first instance held that the focus of the case was the determination of the nature and ownership of the 87 ground parking spaces in the community.
During the trial, it was ascertained that although the ground parking space was planned by the building, the area occupied by the ground parking space was not included in the above-ground construction area of the floor area ratio, and the property right registration procedures could not be handled, so it was not the so-called "planned parking space". Even if the developer pays the transfer fee for the land use right in the building division when building the community, after the construction of the community is completed, the land use right in the building division of the community will also be transferred along with the housing in the community, and the common part of the land use right of the community belongs to the owners of the community, so the disputed parking spaces should belong to the owners.
With regard to Article 18 of the Contract for the Sale and Purchase of Commodity Housing in the Community, which states that the right to use the ground parking space in the community belongs to the seller, the court held that the agreement on the ownership of the ground parking space in the standard clause is obviously an exclusion of the main rights of the buyer and the owner, and should be invalid.
The final judgment was that the ground parking spaces in the community belonged to the owners. Dissatisfied, the developer appealed, which was later rejected by the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court. ((2022) Zhe 01 Min Zhong No. 9746).
Through this case, we can have a clear understanding of Article 275 of the Civil Code: the so-called planned parking spaces in the community are not only approved by the planning department, but also belong to the planned parking spaces that can be registered after completion. Although the 87 parking spaces in this case are marked on the floor plan of the community, the area occupied is not included in the floor area ratio, and they do not meet the conditions for applying for property rights certificates. Therefore, these 87 parking spaces cannot be "agreed attribution" in accordance with the provisions of Article 275, and even if the developer has agreed in the "House Purchase Contract", it is a standard clause that excludes the main rights of the owner and is invalid!
In reality, developers and property owners often take advantage of their dominant position to formulate standard terms that are unfavorable to buyers and owners, and illegally encroach on the legitimate rights and interests of buyers and owners, and everyone is often forced to sign such overlord contracts. However, even if we sign this kind of overlord contract, our rights and interests will not necessarily be lost, and we should still take up the law and resolutely defend the rights of black-hearted developers and properties.
Owners & Properties