Why do we always feel that the owners don't understand us?

Contradictions and disputes between property companies and owners have become increasingly prominent, and the number of property disputes has increased greatly, most of which are disputes in which property companies sue owners for defaulting on property fees. Let's analyze the causes of disputes between property and owners.

First, there is a lack of real publicity and effective communication, and the owners do not understand the property management industry. Understanding can generate trust. The standard of property service content is opaque, the charging basis is unclear, and the liability for breach of contract is vague, which makes people incomprehensible, leading most people to choose to refuse to pay. In China, after a residential community is completed, the developer will first designate a property company to enter the community, which is called "pre-property", and the pre-property company will enter the community before the owner. According to the normal procedure, the owner should buy a house and move in, and then negotiate with the previous property company to sign a contract. But the reality is that almost all owners will be required to sign a property contract when they move in, and at the same time, they must pay the property fee in full for at least one year before they can get the house key. For the property company, it saves the trouble of negotiating with the owner, but at the same time it also loses the opportunity for the owner to understand the property service and property charges through the negotiation and signing process. At this time, most owners pay fees not to enjoy property services at all, but to get the key to the house. This led to the lack of real communication, exchange and understanding between the owners and the property management company, and they were in mutual suspicion and suspicion from the beginning, which laid a hidden danger for the bigger disputes between the two sides in the future. In addition, the developer's behavior of handing over the key to the property company makes the owner form the concept that the two are one, and then of course, he thinks that some problems left by the developer should be solved by the property company, which adds more contradictions to the owner and the property company.

Second, the property company has poor service consciousness, ignores the legitimate rights and reasonable requirements of the owners, simplifies the handling of problems, and is prone to friction in the interaction with the owners. There are many and miscellaneous property services, and problems in one link may lead to contradictions. But in reality, when the owners need help, many property managers take the attitude of shirking or ignoring it; When the property management company requires the owners to fulfill their obligations, many property management personnel work in a simple and rude way, without considering the feelings of the owners at all, which causes the owners' resentment. For the purpose of profit, some property companies only pay attention to charging and fail to perform any agreed service behavior, and arbitrarily raise the charging standard, squander the property service fee, and even threaten to cut off power and water when the owners have different opinions, or restrict the owners from entering and leaving the property area, which seriously infringes on the owners' rights and interests, virtually intensifying the contradictions between the two sides and making the owners more determined to join the ranks of arrears. At the same time, many owners refuse to pay property fees because they have doubts about the content and standards of property services. Many property companies did not actively communicate with the owners through effective publicity to find out their own problems and improve their working methods. Instead, they directly went to litigation to solve the problems, and the contradictions escalated rapidly. The result of solving the problem of arrears only by litigation is a vicious circle: there is a lack of communication and mutual trust between the property management company and the owners, and the owners are dissatisfied with the property and refuse to pay the property fees; the property management company charges insufficient fees, and the service quality declines; more owners are dissatisfied, and the scale of arrears is larger; the property management company further puts a lot of energy into the property fee litigation in order to collect the property fees as soon as possible; and litigation can only solve the problem of arrears. Other reasonable demands put forward by the owner can't be solved. The owner refuses to implement because of dissatisfaction with the referee and continues to owe money ... The final result is to widen the gap between the owner and the property management company.

Third, the ideological concept is misplaced, and neither the owner nor the property company can put their positions right and solve the problem through consultation. There is a service contract relationship between the property company and the owner, and their legal status is equal. But in reality, the property management company thinks that it is the manager of the community and the owner is the object of management; The owner thinks he is the master and the property management company is the servant hired by himself. Owners and property management companies have different understandings of the legal relationship between them, which leads to different understandings of rights and obligations. This great difference in concept has led to a great obstacle to mutual communication between the two sides. In fact, this is also the ideological source that it is difficult for property management companies and owners to solve problems through consultation. If we want to solve the problem through consultation, we must straighten out the positions of all parties and straighten out the legal relationship.

Fourthly, the dispersion and individualization of owners' groups, as well as the integrity and publicity of property services, increase the difficulty of negotiation between owners and property companies. The owners' groups are huge and scattered, each owner's ideas and practices are inconsistent, and the services provided by the property management company are aimed at all owners, so it is almost impossible for the property management company to reach an agreement with each owner, which further increases the difficulty of negotiation.

Fifth, most owners have a low level of self-government, lack awareness of public responsibility, lack a correct understanding of their rights, and do not know how to exercise their rights correctly. Under the distribution mode of public housing under the planned economy system, people have already firmly established the concept of not paying for housing and do not care about the maintenance of housing and related facilities. Anyway, the "public" is responsible, and they don't have to worry about it. Although the rise of commercial housing has made many people become the owners of the house, in concept, many people do not think that this is essentially different from the previous allocation of public housing in living. In the face of property fees, many owners think that they should not pay if they have not paid them before. Property services are for all owners, and many owners evaluate their services entirely on the basis of their personal subjective feelings. Once they are dissatisfied with the services, they refuse to pay. More owners regard themselves as bystanders and don't know how to express their wishes for property services and fees through collective decision-making. Instead, we wait and see the development of the situation with herd mentality and do not take the initiative to pay fees, which leads to the prevalence of arrears.