Is there an industry committee for the debate?

Article 11 of the Regulations on Property Management shall be decided by the owners: (4) Selecting and hiring property service enterprises.

However, Article 15 of the Regulations stipulates that the owners' committee shall carry out the matters decided by the owners' meeting and perform the following duties: (2) Sign a property service contract with the property service enterprise selected by the owners' meeting on behalf of the owners.

It can be seen that it is illegal for the industry Committee to take the initiative to hire a property management company without the consent of the owners' meeting; At the same time, however, the law stipulates that the owners' meeting only has the right to hire property management companies, but cannot decide the specific content of the property management contract signed between the industry Committee and the property management company. It should be noted that if the owners' meeting has agreed that the property management contract must be approved by the owners' meeting, it should be agreed, because the rights of the industry Committee come from the authorization of the owners' meeting.

In addition, according to Articles 11 and 12 of the Regulations, the following contents can be adopted with the consent of half of the owners (half of the area and half of the number of people meet at the same time):

(a) to formulate and amend the rules of procedure of the owners' congress;

(2) Formulating and amending management regulations;

(three) to elect the owners' committee or replace the members of the owners' committee;

(four) the selection and dismissal of property services companies;

(seven) other major matters related to the management of * * * and * * *.

Therefore, if the property management company is hired by the property management committee without the consent of the owners' congress, or the property management committee stipulates that the property contract must be approved by the owners' congress, and the property management committee signs the contract with the property company privately, the property contract can be deemed invalid in procedure. However, since the property company is already providing property services, the key lies in whether there is a factual contractual relationship.

According to the contract law, one of the basic conditions for concluding a contract is the expression of the true will of both parties, equality and voluntariness, and no coercion. Therefore, in order to take the payment of property fees by most owners as evidence of consent, we must first determine whether the payment behavior is a sign of willingness to accept and affirm property services. Personally, the fact that most owners pay fees does not mean that they agree with the services of the property management company, because the owners may be disturbed by various factors, such as the asymmetry of knowledge and information, the "intimidation and inducement" of the dunners of the property management company, and the forced payment. As for whether the court will deny it, it depends on historical trial examples or clever court debates (for example, citing examples that cannot truly express hospital payment).