The COP refused to accept contributions for the repair of a violation of the Constitution

On Tuesday, the constitutional court upheld contributions for capital repairs of apartment buildings. According to the judges, it is necessary to maintain buildings in safe condition.

“Assessment of contributions cannot be regarded as a violation of constitutional rights,” agreed the COP. The current procedure has already helped to renovate a large number of homes from old housing stock, the judge pointed out.

But the court found that the order of the transition from shared savings with all the homes in a “single pot” to a system of individual accounts at home, too drawn out in some regions it is several years old. According to the court, the owners of the apartments can hold a meeting and proceed from the General account to individual.

The judge also ruled that the state must develop a mechanism to protect occupants in case of a company regional operators that manage the shared account, will go bankrupt. In addition, the court indicated that the state should continue to assist the house owners and regional operators assistance and pay subsidies in case of accident or lack of funds.

The special account for the residents

A complaint to the court addressed state Duma deputies the Chairman of the Committee on housing policy Galina Khovanskaya just Russia and a member of the Communist party Vadim Soloviev. They are asked to recognize illegal the current procedure of collecting funds for the repair and stated that the additional fees are a hidden tax and violates the rights of residents.

After the amendments to the Housing code in 2012, all owners of privatized apartments make monthly deduction for future repairs of their house. The rates at which payments are made, establish regional authorities in the different fields they may vary by 5-7 times: in Moscow, the fees are paid at the rate of 15 rubles per square meter of housing in St. Petersburg is 2-3 rubles.

Accumulation of funds the law provides for two ways. In the first case they can be transferred to a special account at home and used for planned repairs and emergency breakdowns.

The second method provides that all occupants of the money accumulated in the account of the regional operator of the Fund, which is established by local authorities (e.g. in Moscow Department overhaul of the city). But the contributions from the different houses fall into the “common pot”, from where they are distributed to repair facilities.

The law provides that tenants, by default, fall under the management of the regional operators. In order to open a special account at home, owners must hold the meeting and to write the application. For logout “common pot” of different regions have established different time in some areas it reaches a few years after the writing of the application.

Hidden tax

Khovanskaya and Soloviev in court insisted that the majority of owners have fallen under the control of the regional operators do not understand the situation. If in the house there is an accident: break through the pipe or breaks a lift, residents will have to raise additional money for emergency repairs and at the same time continue to pay contributions for the overhaul.

“Regional operator might go bankrupt or the money may not be enough when the time comes to repair, was made by Khovanskaya. Need the pyramid to turn, put on the base: if the owners want to stay in a “common pot”, then let them stay, but let writing will Express their desire.”

Solovyov asked to recognize illegal the requirement to pay for the first overhaul in the house and indicated that the first major repairs in the house should generally be carried out at the expense of the state. And such deductions should be regarded as implicit tax, was referred to by the Deputy.

The applicants have asked to recognize unconstitutional the articles 169, 170 and 179 of the Housing code, which establish the current procedure.

The problem of the lower floors

Against satisfaction of the complaint at the meeting of the court was made by official representatives of the state Duma, the Federation Council, the President, the government and the Prosecutor General’s office. They insisted that the impugned order gives the owners the right to choose how to accumulate funds and not violate their rights.

Moreover, the systems a “common pot”, on the contrary, helps to carry out major repairs in the house even if the occupants are unable to accumulate the required amount, indicated the representative of the “lower house” Dmitry Vyatkin, the representative of the President Michael Krotov.

If we start from the position that each of us carries the burden of maintaining only your property, soon the residents of the house in which, for example, the roof leaked, will begin to say that this is a problem only the upper floors and will refuse to collect money for the restoration, pointed Vyatkin.

On the acceptance of the decisions of the highest judges took more than a month.