Fine for solar water operation performance

Our building is multi-storey, with the highest six floors, and one staircase with two households, so each unit has 12 households. The building is the dormitory of the provincial government, so solar water heaters will be installed collectively after completion, of course, all on the roof. The upper and lower pipes all go down from the toilet.

A few years ago, everyone lived in peace, but ten years later, someone sold the house and moved away, and the new residents became neighbors, one after another. But the solar energy on the roof has become more and more problematic with the passage of time, and some have begun to run.

My home is on the fourth floor, so all the pipes below the fourth floor pass through my toilet. Suddenly one day, the pipeline on the second floor leaked, but the leaking joint was on the fifth floor, so my home became water curtain cave and I found the third floor. Finally, the second floor connected the pipe from the outside.

Now the water pipes on the first floor and the second floor are leaking into my house, but the impact is not great, so we told the first floor that it was not his house, and the second floor said that the water pipes in my house came from the outside and were not mine. So let's hurry up and see if ours is missing, and it isn't. Later, residents on the sixth floor said that, like water curtain cave, the solar water heater on their roof must be broken, and they couldn't find the owner after searching for a long time. There is no solar water heater on the third floor and no one lives on the fifth floor. It may be from another unit. I only see a puddle seeping down from it every day. Anyway, it's just rented and the furniture is not my own. There's nothing in the main toilet, so that's it.

He once asked about the property and didn't reply. I guess nobody cares, so he simply doesn't think about it himself. First, who owns the solar energy and who will repair it. In addition, the waterproof layer of the roof is obviously not done well, otherwise this kind of thing will not happen.

Is the public part of the property maintenance fund or the money shared by the owners? Nobody wants to get into this trouble.

I work in the Housing Authority, and I should have a say in this issue. Whether the top floor of the residential area belongs to the owner or the owner of the top floor is really uncertain. It should be discussed in two situations.

1, shared by all owners. When we buy a house, in most cases, the top floor of the community is included in the owner's pool area. In this way, the property right of the top floor belongs to all owners, and no owner can possess it privately, nor can developers dispose of it at will. So we can see that in many residential quarters, clothes racks are installed, which is a convenient facility for all owners. All the owners of this building can hang clothes on the top floor and enjoy the cool scenery on the roof in summer.

The owner of the top floor is private. In this case, in order to sell the top floor, the developer did not include the top floor in the pool area. At this time, the property right of the roof belongs to the developer, who has the right to dispose of it, such as giving it away or selling it to the owner of the top floor, and other owners have no right to interfere. This happened in our community. The owner of the top floor built a sun room on the roof, which is privately owned. Many owners are dissatisfied with this and report to the urban management department. Later, the urban management department came to the scene to check and found relevant materials. Knowing that the top floor is not in the swimming pool, the owner of the top floor can take it for himself and put his personal belongings.

So in the final analysis, is the top floor owned by everyone or the owner of the top floor? Just ask the developer if the roof is included in the pool area. If it is included in the pool, the owner will have it, but it is not a pool, and the developer (or the top floor owner) will be privately owned.

Answer this question. Theoretically speaking, the roof of residential area must belong to public space, but in reality, it will easily become the personal space of the top residents.

When the roof is of use value.

Some young people like to buy penthouses for two main reasons. One is that the top floor is cheap, and the other is that the top floor provides more space.

Because it is most convenient for users who live on the top floor to go to the top floor, they certainly go the most, and over time the top floor has become their private space.

A defective roof

Many people don't like buying a penthouse. In addition to the cold or hot top floor, there is another very important reason that the top floor is prone to water leakage. When the roof leaks and there is no way to activate the property maintenance fund, the top-level residents will definitely hope that everyone will chip in to share the maintenance costs.

But it is difficult to collect money from other residents when they really want to collect money, because the rain on the top floor has no effect on them, and they feel that the top floor has nothing to do with them.

Whose roof is it?

In fact, the roof belongs to * * *, because it is an indispensable part of their building, so the top floor belongs to everyone * * *, and every household has the right to use the top floor and the responsibility of maintenance. For example, the top floor belongs to the top floor, so people on other floors have no right to install solar water heaters on the top floor. In addition, it is precisely because the top floor belongs to * * *, so the maintenance of the top floor can enable the property maintenance fund.

However, in real life, few people will compete for the right to use the roof. Generally speaking, the passage on the roof is property management, and not everyone can go up casually, which is also for safety reasons.

Of course, the roof of the community belongs to the owner of the whole building. In addition to the functions of wind, rain and heat insulation, the roof of the top floor has another function, that is, to give the owners an escape route when the ground floor building is in fire. The roof of a building is an integral part of the whole building. Of course it's the whole building, not the top floor.

But in real life, disputes arising from the use of building roofs are also the most. If the roof of a building is regarded as * * *, can all owners move on it? Obviously, this is impossible. If the roof is regarded as the whole building, it will inevitably affect the life of the top residents. The roof is a part of the whole building, and the owner must undertake the obligation of roof maintenance, conservation and management. However, the use of owners in the building must be restricted, which will easily lead to disputes between owners in the building.

The function of building roof is to prevent wind, rain and heatstroke. So roof design usually has waterproof layer, insulation layer and protective layer. The service life of waterproof layer and thermal insulation layer is only 20 years without artificial damage. In other words, the waterproof layer and insulation layer of the roof must be updated after 20 years of use. Renovation requires the use of residential special maintenance funds, and the use of residential special maintenance funds must be approved by the owners whose exclusive area accounts for 2/3 of the total construction area and the number of people accounts for 2/3 of the total number. Usually, the owners of other floors of the building will not agree to use the special maintenance funds of the house to update and transform the roof insulation layer and waterproof layer. This is also a very distressing thing for the owners who live on the top floor of the building.

As a part of the whole building, the roof of the building belongs to all owners, and the owners should fulfill the obligations of maintenance, conservation and management. However, when using the roof, it is necessary to limit the influence of the owners on the life of the top-level owners, which requires the owners of the whole building to be broad-minded, understand each other and create harmony.

Thank you for inviting me. I am engaged in moving bricks in the real estate industry. I am honored to answer this question. I see that dozens of people have answered this question. I was not prepared to answer, but when I saw that the answer was incomplete or one-sided, I couldn't help but vomit a few words.

First of all, the problem involved in this question is generally the contradiction that a person can go to the top. Other sloping roofs and uninhabited roofs generally do not have such disputes over ownership.

Secondly, this kind of dispute is very common, and most communities have this kind of dispute. The key issue of the dispute is that the ownership of the roof is unclear or illegal.

Finally, let's see who owns the roof.

According to the surveying and mapping rules related to real estate, pool and public area, unless otherwise agreed, it is generally shared by all owners by default; If there are other agreements on public use, such agreements shall prevail. So, whoever owns it is invited to see the contract. At the same time, not only the top floor tenants, some developers only agreed that the roof belongs to the top floor for the top floor tenants, but did not make the same agreement for the entire owner, resulting in more contradictions!

By way of digression, if the roof has no other purpose, it is suggested that it can be used for the top floor. In this case, there will never be an embarrassing situation that "maintenance is difficult to sign and everyone can use it".

Is the roof of the community owned by everyone or by top private families?

The author believes that commercial housing is real estate, and the roof of commercial housing, as a part of the house, should be owned by all owners.

First of all, when different people buy a commercial house, the ownership of the roof of the commercial house does not belong exclusively to the owner of the top-floor house, but belongs to the owner of each unit of the commercial house, and the use and income of the roof are determined by all the building owners.

Secondly, according to Article 2 of the Supreme Court's interpretation and Chapter 6 of the Property Law, the ownership of the roof should be shared by the owners. If the pre-sale contract or the sales contract does not stipulate the ownership of the commercial house, it shall be presumed to be owned by the owner, which is a legal part to distinguish all buildings. It is not allowed to register the roof platform as an independent real estate, leave it for the developer's own use, or sell it to others as the subject matter of sale. It can only be owned by the owners in the area that distinguishes all buildings.

Third, in practice, many real estate development companies claim that after selling the whole unit of commercial housing, they still retain and enjoy the right to use and benefit from the roof of commercial housing, or take the balcony as a preferential condition for purchasing the roof of commercial housing. These practices are against the law.

Fourth, the use of the roof should comply with Article 7 of the Supreme Court Interpretation and Article 76 (7) of the Property Law. If the * * * part is used for business activities, it shall be agreed by other owners and the use fee shall be paid to the * * * owner as agreed.

Fifth, the ownership of the roof of commercial housing belongs to all owners, and it cannot be exclusively owned by the top owners without the consent of all owners. Sticking it on the roof is illegal, especially illegal construction, and the relevant government departments should take effective measures to stop it in time.

-This answer was compiled by digital currency Intelligent Quantization Automatic Coin-frying Robot (diachronic revenue, data checking, live broadcast) company in Andinggang, Xi.

First of all, the problem involved in this question is generally the contradiction that a person can go to the top. Other sloping roofs and uninhabited roofs generally do not have such disputes over ownership.

Secondly, this kind of dispute is very common, and most communities have this kind of dispute. The key issue of the dispute is that the ownership of the roof is unclear or illegal.

Finally, let's see who owns the roof.

According to the surveying and mapping rules related to real estate, pool and public area, unless otherwise agreed, it is generally shared by all owners by default; If there are other agreements on public use, such agreements shall prevail. So, whoever owns it is invited to see the contract. At the same time, not only the top floor tenants, some developers only agreed that the roof belongs to the top floor for the top floor tenants, but did not make the same agreement for the entire owner, resulting in more contradictions!

By way of digression, if the roof has no other purpose, it is suggested that it can be used for the top floor. In this case, there will never be an embarrassing situation that "maintenance is difficult to sign and everyone can use it".

I also live on the top floor. I agree that the top floor should be used by the top floor residents. The reasons are: first, we must sign an agreement with the owner and the property. If I use it, I'll fix it myself if it leaks. Of course, force majeure factors, such as war, earthquake and flying saucer, should be excluded. Without the contribution of anyone else. The advantage of this is that we won't have to argue about maintenance fees in the future. Plant some flowers and plants upstairs, never plant tall trees, never build a sunshade beyond the guardrail, and never let others interfere in order to achieve the best peace. I have a relative who lives on the top floor. There is heavy rain outside and light rain inside all the year round. It has been like this for many years, and the cost is tens of thousands. I want to find property management, saying that it is none of their business to find a developer, saying that the house has been delivered for more than ten years, and asking the residents in the same building to use overhaul fund without signing. And the top floor is full of solar water heaters, and there are always people building, installing and repairing them. There is a problem and it can't be solved. If my house and the top floor are used by everyone, they should be maintained. If I don't maintain it, I'll find someone to remove the things on it and sue to the court for a ruling. The viewpoint is not necessarily correct, and it can be discussed.

The seventh floor I bought that year is the top floor. When I bought it, the developer clearly told me that the top floor belongs to the fire escape and cannot be closed. Besides, its shelf life is only five years. After five years, it will be out of the scope of maintenance. The top floor of my house belongs to the owner of the seventh floor. After living for 10 years, I found that the insulation layer had weathered+aged+leaked, so I turned it over and redone the secondary waterproofing. Didn't let the owners of the same building chip in (more than 20 thousand). Personally, I think that since the roof is their own maintenance place, of course, they have to pay for it themselves, so until now, other owners have not come up to raise flowers, vegetables and dogs. Instead, I built an 80 square stainless steel scaffold and planted several climbing vines. Drying fish and bacon on the roof is also very good. Walking at night is also very comfortable, so I have a lot of room to apply for a maintenance fund.