Is it effective to sell the resettlement fund?

Some families were either because of financial difficulties or because their jobs didn't need so much foundation. At that time, most of the prices ranged from 20,000 yuan to 40,000 yuan. I'm one of them. I bought a foundation on 1999 at a price of 28,000 yuan. In 2000, I built my own house on this basis and have lived in it since it was built. Recently, the property right certificate and land certificate of this house have been issued, but they are all in the other party's name. When I asked the other party to cooperate with the transfer, the other party asked for a "cooperation fee" of 500,000 yuan, otherwise it would not be given to me. What I can't accept is that I built the house, but the other party borrowed money with the property certificate of this house. There are still many such situations around me. Excuse me, whose house is this? What should I do? Yin Hang, lawyer of Zhejiang Zhilian Law Firm: Actually, we have received many similar consultations and handled many similar cases. We believe that it is undeniable that this is a controversial issue, but from the perspective of protecting contracts and transactions, as long as the intentions of both parties to the original contract are true and do not violate the mandatory laws and regulations of the state, the law should protect them. As far as we know, the land nature of the resettlement foundation is allocated by the state, and there are certain legal restrictions on the transfer of land of this nature. However, if the houses on these lands have been built and the land transfer fee has been paid at the time of transfer, you can go through the transfer procedures. The foundation of demolition and resettlement has its historical particularity, so in a large number of local judicial practices, the courts have recognized the effectiveness of similar contracts-guaranteed transactions. If the validity of the contract is denied by some administrative mandatory clauses, on the one hand, it is not conducive to the protection of "goodwill" and "integrity", on the other hand, the transfer of "cooperation fee" has no basis, which denies the validity of the contract and makes the seller enjoy the benefits brought by the skyrocketing housing prices, which is obviously unfair to the bona fide buyer. This may be another reason why the court supports the validity of the contract. Therefore, the dispute is a dispute, and we advocate that similar sales contracts are valid. The seller shall cooperate with the buyer to handle the transfer formalities, and while knowing that the foundation has been transferred and the house has been built by others, he still borrows money from the house for profit, which infringes on the interests of the buyer, and the buyer may claim compensation for the losses.