Shenzhen's second-hand housing was shocked to see a record of 7.3 million yuan in liquidated damages.

What can 7.3 million yuan do? A Lamborghini calf, a big house in a good location in a first-tier city, or a home in a core location in a second-and third-tier city. In Shenzhen (real estate), this is only a second-hand house punishment.

"This liquidated damages set a new record for liquidated damages for second-hand houses in Shenzhen." Li Yaozhi, president of Zhongyuan Real Estate South China, said that he told the reporter of National Business Daily (blog, Weibo) that the second-hand house with the highest transaction price in Shenzhen's history was a villa in 20 17 Nanshan Overseas Chinese Town, with a transaction amount of about 300 million yuan, while the maximum fine for second-hand houses in Shenzhen was 500,000 yuan or 600,000 yuan.

5A scenic villa.

It is understood that the property involved is Guanlan Lake Golf Mansion, located in Guanlan Town, Baoan District, Shenzhen, which was built in 2005.

The National Business Daily reporter found that the villa is located in Guanlan Lake, a national 5A-level tourist attraction at the junction of Shenzhen and Dongguan (real estate). In the park, the exterior walls of many villas have been enclosed and the owners are still decorating. But at the same time, many villas are still in the state of rough houses, uninhabited and overgrown with weeds, which seems to have been idle for many years.

According to the agency, this villa with single-family houses, such as Mission Hills emerald bay, Mission Hills Golf Mansion and Jinling, is both rough and finely decorated. The average transaction price is about 70,000 ~ 1 1 10,000 yuan/square meter, and the total price varies from10/100 million yuan.

"Private swimming pool, garden with airplane parking lot, world-class mansion, and the house can see the lake halfway up the mountain ..." The intermediary gushed, "At present, the occupancy rate of villas is ok, about 50%, and the owners are mostly entrepreneurs or company executives. Some owners bought it for investment. At present, there is a set of rough house villas for sale. 10 was bought by customers about 40 million years ago, and now the listing price is 70 million. "

"Now there are many villas listed in this area, including more than 200 sets of single-family projects with relatively small area and low total price." Regarding the transaction volume, the intermediary said with a smile: "It is definitely not as good as an ordinary house. Too high-end project transactions are more like waiting for someone to appear. Sincere customers can clinch a deal at a glance. The market is not good this year. Just a few days ago, a villa of 1 100 million yuan was sold. The loan can be paid in full. If you pay in one lump sum, you can get a discount of about three or four million yuan. If you make an installment loan, the discount will be less. "

Judgment of first instance: the buyer breached the contract.

The reporter from the National Business Daily visited and found that the real estate involved was not top-notch in the region in terms of price or appearance, but why did the sky-high liquidated damages occur? According to the reporter's understanding, in June, 2065438+2008, Party A (seller) and Party B (buyer) agreed to make a one-time payment for the villa, and the transfer transaction price was 73 million yuan.

Recently, the People's Court of Longhua District, Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, which tried the case, made a first-instance judgment. The court found that the plaintiff (the buyer) was the breaching party and the defendant (the seller) was the observant party during the performance of the contract involved, and the plaintiff's request for the defendant to pay liquidated damages and compensate for the losses lacked factual basis, so the court did not support it. The defendant counterclaimed that the plaintiff had a contractual basis for paying compensation, and the court supported it.

In other words, the defendant finally won the plaintiff.

The reporter interviewed Song Xiaofeng, the chief lawyer of Xinrong (Shenyang) Real Estate Lawyers Team, the defendant's agent in this case. He told the National Business Daily that the plaintiff (buyer) and the defendant (seller) signed an intermediary contract on 20 18 15, and agreed to pay a deposit of 3.65 million yuan within 3 days from the date of signing the contract. Subsequently, the buyer paid 2 million yuan on February 13, 20 18, and the next day140,000 yuan, totaling19.65 million yuan, and never paid it again. Later, the seller repeatedly urged Party B to pay in the form of letters and WeChat, but they did not receive it.

2065438+In March 2008, the seller informed the buyer to terminate the contract. Subsequently, the seller sold the house to a third party after canceling the contract.

On April 27th, 20 18, the buyer filed a lawsuit with the People's Court of Longhua District, Shenzhen, demanding the seller to perform the contract and pay a penalty of RMB 6,543,800+046,000 (20% of the transaction amount). Subsequently, the buyer changed the litigation request, demanding that the buyer return the house payment of RMB 6,543,809,650, and pay the liquidated damages of RMB 6,543,800+046,000 and living expenses. The reason for the buyer's lawsuit is that Party A has constituted one room and two sales, and the merger has constituted a breach of contract.

Song Xiaofeng told reporters that after receiving the complaint, the seller filed a counterclaim, demanding that the buyer pay the seller a penalty of 6,543,804,600 yuan, on the grounds that Party B constituted a fundamental breach of contract and failed to pay the goods as agreed in the contract.

Zhang Maorong, another seller's attorney in charge of this case, told the National Business Daily that the buyer and the seller had differences on the issue of third-party collection, and then Party B refused to pay the remaining money on the grounds that the third-party collection was unsafe.

Song Xiaofeng told reporters that the buyer and the seller agreed in the contract that the money received would be collected by a third party, and the buyer would also appoint a third party to pay through the third party. In the process of paying the house purchase price, Party B requests to change the payment method, but Party A does not agree. However, in the actual payment process, Party B forcibly changed it, which was inconsistent with the contract, and eventually led to disagreement between Party A and Party B..

Zhang Maorong told reporters that it is in line with the agreement between the two sides to appoint a third party, payment collection. It is not illegal to entrust someone to collect money.

The court made it clear in the judgment that the plaintiff's reasons for refusing to pay the purchase price were not sufficient and the court refused to accept them.

Seller's lawyer: The buyer can appeal.

People familiar with the matter told the National Business Daily that Shenzhen courts generally awarded liquidated damages for second-hand housing transactions 10%. In the judgment, the court pointed out that this case is a dispute over a house sale contract. The contract and supplementary agreement on the sale of second-hand houses and intermediary services between the plaintiff and the defendant are the true intentions of both parties, and their contents do not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations. They are legal and valid, and both parties should abide by them.

According to the contract, the plaintiff should pay the down payment of 34.35 million yuan to the account designated by the defendant on February 3, 200018, but as of February 4, 200018, the plaintiff only paid the down payment of 2.65 million yuan and part of the down payment of160,000 yuan, which constitutes a breach of contract, and the defendant has the right to terminate the contract and ask the plaintiff to bear the liability for breach of contract.

The letter from the defendant to the plaintiff to terminate the contract conforms to the contract, and the letter involved in the contract is terminated when it is properly delivered. It is not illegal for the defendant to sell the property to a third party. The plaintiff's defense opinion on one room and two sales lacks factual basis, and the plan is not adopted.

Regarding the follow-up of the case, Zhang Maorong told the reporter of National Business Daily that the judgment of the case has not yet taken effect. If the other party refuses to accept the judgment, it can appeal to the higher court within 15 days, and the appeal period has not expired.

Zhang Maorong said that the other party may appeal or settle out of court, but he thought that the court is more likely to uphold the original judgment.

Subsequently, the reporter dialed the telephone number of the plaintiff's (buyer's) attorney, and the other party made it clear that it would not accept the interview. The reporter asked whether to appeal, and the lawyer said that it depends on the meaning of the client.

Zhang Maorong told reporters that he has not received the news of the other party's appeal.

In the follow-up, the National Business Daily will continue to pay attention to the final trial result of this incident.