Because of the epidemic, people were charged 696 yuan for parking at the railway station for 28 days. Is this charge reasonable?

Parking charges are common, but it is unusual to charge too much.

Recently, a citizen of Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province parked his car at the railway station for 28 days because of the epidemic. 65438 Shijiazhuang1After the opening on October 30th, I entrusted my friend Mr. Wang to help me drive the car back. As a result, I was charged 696 yuan when I left the parking lot. ?

Such charges are obviously unreasonable.

According to the parking fee standard

The local governments respectively formulate parking fee standards applicable to the management of parking fees in their respective regions. The charging standards are mainly based on time, period and region. Residential parking fees are different from non-residential parking fees, and parking fees for different models are different.

In the "Regulations on Property Management"

Article 40

Property service charges should follow the principles of reasonableness, openness and adaptability between charges and service levels, and distinguish the nature and characteristics of different properties. Owners and property service enterprises shall, according to the measures for charging property services formulated by the competent price department of the State Council in conjunction with the competent construction administrative department of the State Council, stipulate in the property service contract.

Article 40

The owner shall pay the property service fee in accordance with the provisions of the property service contract. If the owner and the user of the property agree that the user of the property shall pay the property service fee, the owner shall bear joint and several liability from the agreement.

Property that has been completed but has not been sold or handed over to the property buyer shall be paid by the construction unit. ?

To sum up, first of all, it is a last resort for the citizen to park his car at the train station, not out of personal will, and the train station has no right to levy a 28-day parking fee.

In my opinion, the judgment time of the case lies in the release time of the epidemic prevention and control order. The railway station can charge parking fees before the epidemic prevention and control order is issued, but the parking fees after the epidemic prevention and control order is issued should not be charged. The citizen also parked his car at the railway station to cooperate with the epidemic prevention and control work.

At present, the relevant personnel of the railway station have refunded their fees.