At present, China is the only country in the world that adopts shared area. As for the reason why only China has a shared area, some people explain it like this: one reason is that the use of shared area can effectively dilute the current high housing prices, so that the housing prices will not look too outrageous.
Secondly, with the shared area, the developer can have the interface to ask buyers to charge higher, for example, our first floor is all made into a public area, so that the owner can rest, entertain, exercise, etc. In addition, the elevator hall in the community is larger and more spacious, and the corridor is wider, which can make the owner experience higher, and of course, the shared area is also larger.
For example, if a house of 100 square meters is only the construction area, the actual area used by the owner may only be 70 square meters, and yes, the remaining 30 square meters will be shared. It is the elevator room, the lobby on the first floor of the community, the corridor, etc., and then it is said that all this is to make the owner's life more comfortable, all taken from the owner, and then used for the owner.
Ah, I heard the sound of the developer's abacus in my hometown. Having said all that, developers just want to set higher prices and make bigger profits.
In the current property market environment, the issue of shared area has once again become the focus of heated discussions. The conflict between home buyers and developers has not subsided, and a recent positive move in Inner Mongolia has sparked renewed discussions about whether to abolish the shared area.
Not long ago, a home buyer in Qingdao found that the actual area of the house was much smaller than the area indicated in the purchase contract. This kind of problem has always been the focus of attention of home buyers, involving the publicity of sales personnel, the protection of the rights and interests of home buyers and other aspects. Buyers often rely too much on the salesperson's verbal promises when signing the contract, and do not read the contract carefully, which leads to conflicts in the later stage.
The debate over whether to abolish the pooled area remains fierce. One side believes that the cancellation can give buyers a clearer understanding of the actual usable area, while the other side is worried about whether the buyers will be able to really benefit after the cancellation, and at the same time, it involves the issue of subsequent property fees.
In addition, some objections believe that the existence of the shared area is to ensure the common areas in the community, such as leisure areas, corridors, elevator halls, etc., to enhance the living comfort of the owners. The abolition of the common area may lead to a reduction in the common area, which will ultimately affect the living experience of home buyers.
However, it is worth noting that the official "People" has made relevant comments on the "shared area": although the shared area has existed for a long time, it is not the same as reasonable. This shows that even if the shared area exists for a long time, it does not mean that it is reasonable, so in the long run, the abolition of the shared area is still the will of the people and the trend of the times.
What's more, Inner Mongolia has taken the first step towards abolishing the pooled area. They believe that using the area of the suite as the basis for pricing helps to avoid unnecessary disputes and contradictions, thus safeguarding the vital interests of home buyers. This suggestion has been submitted to the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development as a legislative project proposal.
However, the Inner Mongolia Department of Housing and Urban-Rural Development also pointed out that this reform requires adequate preparations, including revising the relevant system, clarifying the definition and valuation method of the floor area within the suite, conducting extensive publicity and popularization, and formulating a reasonable transition period to ensure a smooth transition.
This response was seen as a positive sign that the authorities were concerned about the issue of shared area. Experts said that the abolition of the shared area will help standardize the property market environment, and also have a positive effect on the future development of the property market.
However, despite this positive signal, experts call for a more complete regulatory system to ensure that the interests of all parties can be reasonably balanced in the process of promoting the abolition of shared area. What do you think about the abolition of the shared area?