Dozens of residents of CT3 Co Nhue urban area (Bac Tu Liem, Hanoi) stayed up all night to guard the basement and utilities that had just been reclaimed from the investor.
The dispute related to the area, infrastructure, and utilities owned by CT3 residents and the investor - Nam Cuong Group, occurred after 9 years of operation of the apartment building. 540 apartment owners with more than 2,000 residents elected the Management Board (an organization representing apartment owners) through the apartment building conference. The Management Board then signed a contract with Nam Cuong Management and Services Company Limited (NCP), a subsidiary of Nam Cuong Group, to manage and operate 4 buildings.
Ms. Nguyen Thi Thanh Nga, the current head of the management board, said that at the end of 2022, residents discovered "hidden revenue and expenditure" in the parking service. NCP recorded 166 cars parked monthly, but according to residents, "there are over 300 cars with monthly tickets parked in the two basements B1 and B2 of the building". The investor did not pay the basement maintenance fee, while everything from replacing light bulbs to managing and maintaining the two basements was taken from residents' money.
The management board and residents then agreed to terminate the building management and operation contract with NCP, and at the same time required the investor to provide legal documents proving ownership of basement B2. May 31 is the date of asset handover. Although NCP agreed to terminate the management contract, it still did not sign the handover of equipment, destroyed all residents' vehicle card data, and occupied basement B2 and the management office on the first floor of building A.
NCP representative said that basement B2 and the first floor office of building A are privately owned by the investor - Nam Cuong Group. The legal basis is the minutes confirming that this basement is privately owned by the investor signed with the former Head of the Management Board of CT3 building since 2015. However, the resident representative affirmed that this basement is jointly owned according to the apartment sale contract.
The dispute reached its climax when a group of strangers hired by NCP appeared at House A. Residents quickly reported to the group calling for everyone to support the new Management Board. Only when the ward police and many residents appeared did the group leave.
On the night of May 31, dozens of residents stayed awake, keeping watch together for fear that the basement and first-floor office would be occupied. "We will protect our ownership of the two basements and send a petition to the authorities to clarify the violations of the NCP operator," said Ms. Nga.
3 km from CT3 Co Nhue urban area, Dreamland Bonanza apartment building at 23 Duy Tan (Nam Tu Liem, Hanoi) is also having a dispute between the investor and residents regarding the division of area and common and private ownership utilities.
According to the Housing Law, the private ownership in an apartment building includes the private area and the equipment system attached to the apartment. The common ownership is the remaining area outside of private ownership, including many works and utilities such as community activity houses, equipment, and shared technical infrastructure. Thus, the camera rooms and operation management rooms belong to the common ownership of the apartment building owners.
However, at Dreamland Bonanza with 378 apartments and more than 1,300 residents, the investor, Vinaland Real Estate Investment Joint Stock Company, claimed that the camera room and the operation management room belonged to it. The company appointed its subsidiary, MSC Vietnam, to manage this ownership. The residents did not agree, so they hired USEM Vietnam Company as the operation management unit.
Mr. Ngo Ngoc Linh, a resident here, said that while working at the office, he received a message from the Dreamland Bonanza residents group "the camera room was occupied again". Hundreds of people living in this apartment building took advantage of the weekend to gather in the building's lobby, fighting to regain management and operation rights from the investor's management board. "But just one day after the residents went to work, the building's management positions, including the camera room, were taken back by the investor", Mr. Linh said.
Dreamland Bonanza residents gathered in the building lobby to request a resolution to the dispute over management and operation rights. Photo: Provided by the Management Board.
In addition to the above dispute, this apartment building is also having a conflict over the division of basement area. According to regulations, the parking space for motorbikes and bicycles in the basement belongs to the common ownership of the apartment owners, while the parking space for cars belongs to the management of the investor and the investor is not allowed to include it in the selling price, rental price, or investment cost for the construction of this parking space. The arrangement of car parking space must ensure the principle of prioritizing the apartment owners first, then allocating public parking space.
Vinaland Real Estate Investment Joint Stock Company asserted that the entire area of the 3 basements, which were not included in the selling price, belonged to it, including the basement area for motorbikes, bicycles, and three-wheelers. However, the Management Board representing the residents said that "the investor could not provide supporting documents such as the final settlement of the basement construction costs, and there was no certificate of ownership."
The irreconcilable dispute has caused the Dreamland Bonanza apartment building to have two parallel management boards related to the common and private ownership of both the investor and the residents. The building has two reception desks, two security forces with two white and blue uniforms in the basement, camera room and many other areas. Every month, residents have to pay parking fees to the investor's management unit and pay service fees to the building's operating unit.
The Dreamland Bonanza apartment building management board recently sent a document to the People's Committee of Nam Tu Liem district requesting the district to request the investor to hand over technical infrastructure, equipment, camera room, operation management room..., because this is "commonly owned part of the apartment building according to the provisions of law".
Residents hold banners protesting the increase in parking fees at TNR Gold Season apartment building on April 19. Photo: Contributor
Apartment ownership disputes are common across the country. According to statistics from the Real Estate Association in 2022, Hanoi has 129/845, Ho Chi Minh City has 105/935 buildings and clusters of buildings with disputes and lawsuits. In Hanoi, in addition to the above cases, disputes also occurred at Viet Duc Complex apartment buildings; The Legacy, TNR Gold Season 47 Nguyen Tuan (Thanh Xuan district); Housinco Premium (Thanh Tri); Phu Thinh Green Park (Ha Dong); Kosmo Tay Ho...
Mr. Nguyen Manh Khoi, Deputy Director of the Department of Housing and Real Estate Market Management (Ministry of Construction), said that one of the common apartment disputes is related to the issue of common and private ownership; slow contribution and handover of maintenance funds for common ownership between investors and residents. "In some apartment buildings, investors and management boards representing residents cannot agree on the division of common and private areas and the area that investors retain for sale or have not sold or leased. This has led to failure to settle data and delays in handing over maintenance funds for 1-3 years," said Mr. Khoi.
Chief Inspector of the Ministry of Construction Nguyen Ngoc Tuan pointed out violations in many apartment buildings due to investors encroaching and using common space for their own purposes.
During 2021-2022, the Ministry of Construction Inspectorate inspected 37 investors and 36 management boards at 43 apartment buildings in 16 localities; administratively sanctioned 20 investors with more than 14 billion VND. The Inspectorate requested investors to agree with the Management Board on the area and equipment under common ownership of the apartment building; fully hand over the apartment building documents to the Management Board; and forced 5 investors to return more than 2,000 m2 of encroached area to residents.
Next article: Why are ownership disputes in apartments common?
Doan Loan - Viet An
Source link
Comment (0)