Plaintiff: Li.
Defendant: Fan.
In the case of a dispute over compensation for property damage between the plaintiff Li and the defendant Fan, after the case was filed, this court applied the ordinary procedures in accordance with the law and conducted a trial in public. Plaintiff Li and defendant Fan attended court to participate in the lawsuit. The case is now closed.
Mr. Li filed a lawsuit with this court: 1. Order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for the repair costs of the roof and wallpaper caused by rainwater leakage in Room C3-201 (hereinafter referred to as Room 201) in a garden in Beijing, totaling 47,280 yuan; 2. Order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for the repair costs of the roof and wallpaper caused by the leakage of heating in Room 201 in the total amount of 56,374 yuan; 3. The defendant was ordered to compensate the plaintiff for the repair costs of 4,000 yuan for the damage and loss of the two laminated tempered glass roofs in Room 201; 4. Order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for the loss of rent of RMB 40,000 from August 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019; 5. The defendant shall bear the litigation costs. Facts and reasons: From 2018 to 2019, the defendant built a house on the north balcony of Room C3-202 (hereinafter referred to as Room 202) in Beijing, and after the urban management ordered the demolition, the terrace was too waterlogged, resulting in water leakage in many places of the plaintiff's house in Room 201, damage and falling off of the walls and wallpaper, and disconnection of the circuit; The awning that the defendant had built privately in front of the door fell due to disrepair and corrosion, smashing two laminated tempered glass roofs in Room 201; In the winter of 2021, due to the water leakage of the heating of the defendant's house, the plaintiff's house was seriously damaged in many places, such as the wallpaper on the back of the third floor, the wallpaper on the south side, the ceiling in the small living room, the ceiling in the stairwell, the ceiling in the garage, the ceiling in the corridor and the compulsory. In response to the above-mentioned losses, the plaintiff negotiated with the defendant several times, but the defendant did not agree to repair, and the plaintiff later repaired the damaged part of room 201 in 2020. In 2019, due to damage to the house, the plaintiff's tenant stored the goods in the house, which caused the plaintiff to terminate the lease contract with the tenant 5 months in advance, resulting in the plaintiff being unable to rent the house normally.
Fan argued that he did not agree with the plaintiff's claim. 1. The plaintiff was dishonest in providing leakage materials. The defendant did not agree. The reasons are as follows:1Time issue: According to the ** materials provided by the plaintiff, there are black traces of aging, which are inconsistent with the time of water leakage at the radiator claimed by the plaintiff; 2.Point issue: From the ** provided by the plaintiff, it seems that it is at the staircase of the living room, and the defendant here is also the same situation caused by the rain and water leakage at the top of the house due to cracking, which is inconsistent with the water leakage at the radiator in the north house claimed by the plaintiff. 2. The decoration certificate provided by the plaintiff cannot be recognized by the defendant. The plaintiff's claim that the house was decorated due to water leakage and radiator leakage, and the decoration area and standard were not negotiated with the defendant, so the defendant's unilateral decoration was unable to be recognized by the defendant. 3. The property certificate provided by the plaintiff is inconsistent with the facts, and the defendant does not recognize it. The reasons are as follows:1Water leakage in the house: The water leakage in the house is caused by the quality problem of the house builder, and is not negligent or malicious in the defendant's behavior; 2.Radiator leakage: The defendant did not replace the heating supplied by the builder, which was the original equipment, and if there was a leakage of the radiator, it also needed to be certified; 3.Glass damage: The plaintiff's claim for compensation for glass damage has no factual basis and the defendant cannot admit it; 4.Illegal construction of houses: Because of the quality problems of the builder, all the owners of the top floor at that time were forced to build simple sheds to prevent rain and leakage (and I only built the north balcony part, and the south part was not built due to the plaintiff's solar energy occupation), which was not the exclusive act of the defendant, and it was also a last resort to take this measure at that time, and it also had a relieving effect on preventing water leakage in the downstairs house, a fact that the property knew and recognized at that time; 5.The water leakage problem was not caused by the defendant's negligence, and the defendant was also a victim of water leakage in the construction quality of the house, and the defendant was also unable to move in or rent normally due to the water leakage problem in the quality of the house. The defendant has consulted with the property on several occasions to provide feedback, but despite the property's cooperation, it has not been able to resolve the problem well. Later, because of the relatively long time, the simple shed was damaged again, and the defendant had informed the plaintiff and the property in advance when it was repaired and updated, but after the defendant restored the reinforcement, the plaintiff reported the intervention of the urban management, resulting in the demolition of the simple shed, which not only caused the defendant's economic damage, but also inevitably caused water leakage as long as it rained. Therefore, the defendant could not recognize the plaintiff's claim that violated the objective reality. 4. The defendant requested the plaintiff to dismantle the improper equipment: 1requiring the plaintiff to dismantle the solar equipment that occupied the top floor of the defendant; 2.The plaintiff was required to remove the glass scaffolding that had been erected in the defendant's position.
After trial, this court found the following facts: Li and Fan were neighbors who went up and down the stairs. Li is the owner of room 201, and Fan's son Fan Zikun is the owner of room 202, but he has been in the field for a long time, and Fan is the user of room 202.
In August 2020, Li found that rainwater leaked into the master bedroom, second bedroom and small hall on the second floor of his house, covering the entire ceiling on the second floor; In November 2021, the heating of room 202 leaked in many places, resulting in damage to the wallpaper on three sides of the north bedroom on the second floor of room 201, the wallpaper on two sides of the south bedroom, and the ceiling and wallpaper of the small living room. Therefore, Li asked the property to report for repair, and provided multiple repair reports from 2018 to 2022 and water leakage**.
On February 28, 2022, the property management company issued a statement: Since 2018, the company has repeatedly received water leakage repair reports from the owners of C3-201 in Jinhuayuan Community**, and it was later verified that because the owners of C3-202 in Jinhuayuan Community illegally built a house on the north balcony of their house, the urban management demolished the illegal building in accordance with the law, resulting in too deep water accumulation on the terrace and water leakage downstairs, resulting in water leakage in many places and damage and wallpaper of the owner of C3-201; The awning built by the owner of C3-202 in front of the door fell due to disrepair and corrosion, and smashed 2 pieces of the glass roof of the owner of C3-201, and after many negotiations between the three parties, the owner of C3-202 did not repair the damage to the owner of C3-201 downstairs, and the owner of C3-201 repaired the damaged part of the house by himself. In the winter of 2021, due to the leakage of the radiator of the owner of C3-202 in Jinhuayuan Community, the wallpaper on the north side of the second floor of the owner of C3-201 downstairs, the wallpaper on the south side of the second floor, the ceiling and wallpaper of the small living room were seriously damaged, and from the winter of 2021 to February 2022, the owner of C3-201 found the owner of C3-202 and our company many times, and our company also contacted the owners of C3-202 many times to negotiate repair matters, and the owners of C3-202 did not agree to repair the damaged parts downstairs. In view of the above situation, our company hereby explains.
Upon inquiry, Fan admitted that the illegal building was forcibly demolished by the urban management, but said that there was no moving waterproof layer, and the reason for the water leakage was the leakage of the quality of the house itself. Since August 2020, Fan has repaired the waterproof layer and no longer leaks. Fan recognized that the heating in the north bedroom was leaking. Upon inquiry, Li said that he would not apply for appraisal for the loss caused by water leakage in the house.
During the trial, Li claimed that the rain shelter fell and smashed two pieces of ceiling glass in Room 201, and spent 4,000 yuan to repair the ceiling glass. According to the 202 room rain shelter ** and chat records provided by Li, the iron frame of the rain shelter has been corroded, and the property said that it knew about this situation and communicated with Fan to compensate Li for the loss, but Fan ignored it, and Fan said he did not approve. Li did not submit the proof of repair expenses, and he claimed that the court could make a discretionary decision in accordance with the law. According to the scene**, room 202 rain shelter still exists. Room 202** submitted by Fan shows that there are many places in house 202 where the wall skin is peeling off, corroding and rusting.
Li submitted a number of water leakage sites to prove that the heavy rain in August 2020 leaked water and caused losses to the house, and after verification, there were multiple water leaks on the plaintiff's roof and wall, resulting in some of the wallpaper being watery and the wall skin falling off. Upon inquiry, Li said that the house was renovated in 2002 and renovated in 2013.
On September 12, 2015, Li signed the "Wallpaper Supply Cooperation Agreement", and the contract price was 32,220 yuan. Receipts were provided, 20,000 yuan were paid on September 12, 2015, and 12,220 yuan were paid on September 30, 2015. The plaintiff claimed that after the water leakage, due to the repair of the leaky parts of the house, it signed the "Beijing Decoration Project Construction Contract" with the decoration company, and the project cost a total of 25,060 yuan for the top surface repair and painting, wall repair and polishing, roof, nanny room to ensure the ceiling, painting the roof of the living room on the second floor, stair stickers, garage ceiling, material handling and garbage cleaning projects. After the wallpaper was damaged due to rain leakage, Li reinstalled the wallpaper and signed the "Wallpaper Supply Cooperation Agreement" on September 18, 2019, with a contract price of 21,090 yuan. During the trial, Li provided a receipt for wallpaper, proving that the wallpaper was repaired in Room 201 on September 18, 2019, at a total cost of 21,090 yuan. Fan did not approve of this. Upon inquiry, the decoration wallpaper** is the same as before.
On December 10, 2022, Li signed the "Personal Housing Decoration Contract" with Tiankun Fengyuan Construction Company, the total price of the contract is 61,990 yuan, and the decoration project includes the ceiling painting and wall wallpaper of the bedroom on the first floor of Room 201, the living room and the north bedroom and the south bedroom on the second floor, as well as the living room, the garage and balcony paint on the first floor, the wallpaper of the nanny room on the first floor, and the wall painting project of the toilet on the second floor, of which Li does not advocate the amount of painting the garage, the amount is 56,374 yuan. Upon inquiry, Li's decoration parts were only repaired for the leakage parts, and the repair costs for the damage to the house caused by the leakage had been actually paid. During the trial, Fan did not recognize the maintenance costs, believing that they were too high.
Regarding the loss of rent, on October 8, 2015, Li rented Room 201 to Zhu Ziye, and the contract stipulated that the lease period was from October 15, 2015 to October 14, 2017, and the lease was renewed until October 14, 2020, with a rent of 7,500 yuan per month. On March 6, 2022, Mr. Li, as the lessor, Xuzhou Suliao Construction Company as the lessee, and Beijing Lianzhong Xingju Real Estate Company as the intermediary party, signed the "Beijing Housing Lease Contract", which stipulated that Room 201 would be leased to Xuzhou Suliao Construction Company for a rent of 8,330 yuan per month and a lease period of 1 year. During the trial, Li claimed that in August 2020, due to rainwater leakage, the circuit of room 201 was damaged as a whole and could not be rented normally, and the tenant's goods were flooded, resulting in a refund of 40,000 yuan of the tenant's 5-month rent. Upon inquiry, Li claimed that he had not found evidence such as the termination agreement and the lease surrender record for the time being, and that the request was not asserted for the time being, and the right to file a separate lawsuit was reserved. In addition, Li said that since the defendant repaired the waterproof layer in 2020, there is no water leakage now.
This court holds that if the property of others is damaged as a result of the tortious act, the court shall bear the corresponding liability for compensation according to the degree of fault. In this case, Fan, as the actual user of the house, suffered a water leak during his use of the house, resulting in the flooding of the plaintiff's house, and should bear the corresponding liability for compensation. In this regard, the defendant recognized the fact that the installation of the sun room was demolished and the heating leakage, and the plaintiff submitted the water leakage**, the property repair record, and the property management company's certificate to confirm it, and this court affirmed it. With regard to the specific amount of compensation, this court mainly considers the following factors: first, because after the water leakage, the two parties failed to reach an agreement, and the plaintiff entrusted the renovation by himself, which is also a necessary means to reduce the loss, and the court does not object; Secondly, the second water leakage of the plaintiff's house was caused by the leakage of the roof and the leakage of the heating, and the extent and area of the water leakage could not be completely restored due to the redecoration, and this court considered the factors such as the depreciation factor of the plaintiff's house and the necessity of the degree of repair of the original decoration, combined with the actual expenses of the plaintiff, and at the same time considered that the plaintiff's first cost due to the roof leakage involved fewer items, and the second heating leakage cost involved more items. Combined with the circumstances of the defendant's long-term negligent management of the house and the fact that it had been demolished due to violations, considering the loss of the house and the loss of glass, it was appropriate for the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for the loss of 50,000 yuan. With regard to the plaintiff's claim for a refund of the tenant's rent loss, the court has no objection to the plaintiff's claim that it can be temporarily disposed of and reserves the right to resolve it separately.
In summary, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 1167 and 1184 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, the judgment is as follows:
1. Within seven days after this judgment takes effect, Fan X shall compensate Li for the cost of repairing the roof, wallpaper, and tempered glass of Li's house for a total of 50,000 yuan;
2. Reject Li's other litigation claims.
If the defendant fails to fulfill its obligation to pay money within the period specified in this judgment, it shall pay double the interest on the debt for the period of delayed performance in accordance with the provisions of Article 260 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.
The case acceptance fee is 325308 yuan, 700 by Li08 yuan (paid); Fan will bear 2,553 yuan (to be paid to Li within 7 days after the judgment takes effect).