The parking price of Shanghai residential tenants is ten times that of the owners, which leads to discussion. Is it more reasonable for residential residents to park than owners?

Recently, some netizens broke the news that there is a difference between owner parking and tenant parking in a residential area in Shanghai. In this community, car owners can pay monthly, and the charge for a car is about 150 yuan for one month. However, the tenant needs to pay a temporary parking fee of five yuan per hour, with a daily limit of about 50 yuan. For tenants, the parking fee is greatly increased. Careful netizens have counted the tenants. If you want to park your car every day, the parking fee will be as high as 60 yuan.

First of all, I think the practice of this residential property in Shanghai is completely wrong. Both the tenant and the owner have paid the money and have the right to live in this community. This price is very unreasonable for tenants. Although most tenants are relatively mobile, since tenants have paid a corresponding price, they should get corresponding services. In essence, tenants and owners have equal status in real estate.

Secondly, if, according to the property, the parking space in the community is relatively tight and such a price will be set, then this is the property problem. Property must find ways to expand parking spaces or take some other measures to ensure the safety of residents and their basic rights and interests. Property can't squeeze tenants' money in this way, so it is very inappropriate to discriminate against tenants, and property has no right to do such things. Now the property only manages the safety of this community. Why do tenants want to?

And if this community does this for a long time in the past, it will lose many people who rent houses in the community, which is very unfavorable to the development of this community. And this kind of property management practice will also lose a lot of talents. At the same time, people in the society will not be very friendly to the community, so the property in this community will lose the public's favor because of a little petty profit. This is very irrational.

Moreover, this practice is also very unfair. This phenomenon of differential treatment in a community requires the supervision department to intervene in the investigation. At the same time, I also think that the relevant departments should protect the rights and interests of every consumer as soon as possible.