Is the developer's commitment to free property fees effective?

A property company asked Ms. Wang to pay the property fee, but Ms. Wang refused to pay the property fee on the grounds that the developer promised her that she could be exempted from paying the property fee for life when buying a house. Recently, the court held a public hearing on a property service contract dispute case, and sentenced Ms. Wang to pay a property fee of 7395.36 yuan to the property company.

On June 5438+1 October1day, 2005, Ms. Wang signed a house purchase contract with a real estate developer to purchase 4 houses in a garden community. The plaintiff is a property management company in Garden Community, and signed a property management service with the community owners' committee.

Contract. During the period from 20 12 10 10 to 20 1 412312, Ms. Wang only paid the property fee for one house, but failed to pay the property fee for the other three houses. Ms. Wang argued that she bought four sets.

House, one for self-occupation, and three kindergartens. Because there is a plan to open a kindergarten, it is agreed with the real estate developer that these three houses will be built according to the pattern of kindergartens, and the purchase price is higher than that of ordinary houses in the community.

Price. Because the developer promised himself in the annex to the purchase contract that the property fee would be "four lives in one set", he decided to buy these three houses, otherwise he would not buy them. Therefore, Ms. Wang refused to pay again.

Property fees for three houses outside.

After trial, the court held that the agreement that "four sets are collected as one set for life" in the annex to the house purchase contract is not binding on the property management company, so Ms. Wang, the defendant, cannot claim to be exempted from the property fees of the other three houses. The court finally ruled that Wang

The lady needs to pay the property management fee of 7395.36 yuan to the property management company. The judge said that the developer's commitment belongs to unauthorized agency behavior.

The focus of the dispute in this case lies in whether the promise made by the developer to the owner about reducing the property fee when selling the house is binding on the property company, and whether the property company needs to perform it unconditionally.

The judge in charge of the case said that real estate development companies and property management companies have independent legal personality and are two different legal subjects. What is formed between Ms. Wang and the real estate development company is the housing sales contract relationship, and

What is formed between property companies is the property service contract relationship, which is two completely different civil legal relationships. Without the authorization of the property company, the real estate development company has no right to dispose of the rights of the property company without authorization.

The right to make a commitment to the defendant on the collection of property fees in the annex to the house purchase contract, and the commitment to reduce property fees is beyond the scope of the rights that real estate development companies should have in the legal relationship of house sale, which can be understood as real estate development companies.

When selling a house, urging the defendant to buy a house successfully is a means of commercial promotion. This kind of commitment is an unauthorized agency behavior. According to the contract law, unauthorized agency is not recognized by the principal.

The agency has no legal effect. In fact, it is obviously unfair for real estate development companies to make ultra vires commitments to gain their own interests, if they need to be unconditionally implemented by property companies.

The judge also pointed out that in order to impress buyers when selling houses, real estate developers often vigorously publicize the advantages of real estate, and false or illegal propaganda is common: some make some promises that are not within their rights.

For example, in the above case, the right to charge the property company without authorization; Some make some illegal commitments, such as after-sales charter commitments, that is, developers promise to lease or rent commercial housing purchased by property buyers and pay for it.

Fixed annual return; Others make false propaganda about the location, environment and surrounding facilities of the houses sold. After developers induce owners to buy houses through these false propaganda, they often ignore the promises made at the time of sales, resulting in losses for the owners.

Lost. Therefore, consumers should keep their eyes open when buying a house, and don't buy a house because of misleading, and suffer the same distress as Ms. Wang.

(The above answers were published on 20 15-07-23. Please refer to the actual situation for the current purchase policy. )

For more real estate information, policy interpretation and expert interpretation, click to view.