Does the owner of the garage and the ground have the right to use it?

The draft property law was submitted to the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) for deliberation for the fifth time, which made it clear that parking spaces and roads in residential areas were owned by owners. Let's talk about the ground parking space in the community first, and look at the real estate license. There is a column of "land use area". If all the properties of a residential area are sold, it means that the land use area of the residential area has been completely divided by the developer to the owners, that is, the land use right of the residential area has been eliminated, and all the land use rights of the residential area belong to all the owners. Then, of course, the ground parking spaces in the community can only be shared by all owners. What's there to say? If the developer does not sell all the properties, he will also enjoy the corresponding owner's rights share of the land in the community according to the proportion of the land use right area of the property. Owners feel that there are not enough parking spaces on the ground after obtaining all the land use rights of the community, and can change the green space into a parking lot. That's their own business. If the owner uses the land in violation of national laws and regulations, it should also be managed by the government-because the ownership of the land belongs to the state and the developer has no right to ask-because the developer has lost the ownership of the residential property and the right to use the land. The purpose of developers' development is to lose these rights as soon as possible in order to obtain legal profits, otherwise the profits will be illegal income, and the income from the sale of residential ground parking spaces will be illegal income, which is equivalent to re-selling the land use right area belonging to the owners. If the government intends to rectify the real estate market, this is the current situation. In addition, the property management company has nothing to do with the ownership of the ground parking space in the community, because the community has no ownership or use right to the property and land except several property management offices and equipment rooms authorized by the owners, only the right to exercise the management obligations entrusted by the owners. Therefore, property management companies can only charge management service fees, not rent, and the amount of service fees is determined by the owners according to market prices or bidding. Many of them are not like this now for the following reasons. Second, in addition, the area of land use right on the ground of residential parking lot has been divided, but there is still a garage buried underground or under the building, which has no property right, that is, it does not enjoy the area of land use right on the ground of residential area. It is in the government's various mandatory planning requirements, developers can not build. Neither can it be allocated to houses with property rights on the ground-the right to use the garage belongs to the developer. The government does not force the owners to rent at a price that developers are satisfied with, so it usually becomes a worry for developers-how to make another profit with it or use it as a long-term cash cow, which is the root of all parking space problems. Of course, no one has the right to ask developers to accept underground garages as the necessary price for development. The developer has the right to dispose of the underground garage with the right to use at will: it is nothing more than renting or selling the right to use. What's the rental price? Who should I rent it to or sell it to? This is the power of developers. However, unless the developer has made arrangements in the early planning and design, vehicles entering and leaving the underground garage generally have to twist the land in the community where the right to use already belongs to the owner. How much is this "toll"? That's the owner's right. This means that the way out of the underground garage is theoretically controlled by the owner. Owners can park the yard without cars and enough three-dimensional parking racks, cut off the road leading to the underground garage and let it sit on the wax; But in this way, the owners will have to pay the corresponding price, so we might as well use this as a bargaining chip and ask the developers to rent out the underground garage and sell it to the owners. However, the reality is just the opposite. Developers often control the rental price of underground garages by restricting parking spaces in residential areas. In addition, there is an underground garage that was rebuilt by combining civil defense with peacetime and wartime, and the ownership belongs to the Civil Defense Office. If the owner wants to rent, he should go to the civil air defense office-this is the dialogue between the lessor and the owner of the leased property, unless the developer holds the agency authorization certificate issued by the civil air defense office, and the owner's disposal method is the same as above. Third, the property law of parking spaces The above is the parking space ownership relationship between the two types of residential parking spaces under typical circumstances. In fact, there is no so-called parking space problem at all, only the ownership of land use rights or underground property use rights is entangled. Parking spaces, like "mistresses", have no clear legal status and are not complete legal concepts, so they should not be involved in the property law. The Marriage Law does not involve "Little Three" because the drafters are familiar with "Little Three". The parking space was dragged into the property law, which shows that the drafters are not familiar with real estate affairs, and also shows that the so-called real estate lawyers in China are not familiar with real estate. Therefore, they can watch the property law change parking spaces, but they are always dragging their feet, which conflicts with many existing laws. Article 75 of the fifth deliberation stated that "the ownership of parking spaces and garages planned for parking cars within the building division is in accordance with the agreement; If there is no agreement or the agreement is unclear, it belongs to the owner. " -I don't know what to say at all: whether the parking spaces and garages on the ground are agreed to be owned by the owners, otherwise the delivery of land use rights in the community is meaningless; And the underground garage won't be sold to you, that's an agreement, and it's for free. How can it be owned by the owner? I'm fooling the shopkeeper. But this can only cover the surface of the problem, and the specific situation is more complicated. If the property law really wants to contribute to the parking space problem, it is better to deal with the land use right of the community first, and the parking space problem is still expected to be solved. However, as far as parking spaces are concerned, it is meaningless to demand too much from the property law. Even if the property law is as expected, it will not make much practical changes to the overall situation of parking spaces in commercial residential quarters at present, unless the real estate lawyers do not make progress. Good economics can explain this truth, but the owners are unwilling to accept it, but it is not easy to understand. Lawyers should be deaf and dumb when they figure it out, and people in China's so-called real estate industry-mainly those who specialize in marketing planning-can understand my explanation at most: As mentioned earlier, parking spaces are like "mistresses", and if the Property Law has no intention of disturbing the existing laws, it can only be said to the extent mentioned in this article. That is to say, all parking spaces in the community can become owners, but this is equivalent to saying that all mistresses in captivity can become wives-how can this nonsense change the overall social status of mistresses?