Does the property company have the right to break into the owner's house?

Miss Wang on the second floor of Futian Community and her neighbors on the third floor went out during the National Day. One day, Miss Wang found that the ceiling began to drip and realized that the neighbor's house on the third floor might be leaking. She reported the situation to the property management company in the building. The property management company said that the residents on the third floor were not at home and could not enter the house for inspection. As a result, the situation is getting worse. It seems that it is going to rain at teacher Wang's house. Ceiling, furniture, clothes, bedding, etc. There are different degrees of damage, some serious damage, but the property management company still does not come to repair. Miss Lei had no choice but to dial 1 10. At the request of the patrolman, the property management company broke into the third floor for maintenance and found that the things in the house were also soaked.

In this regard, Miss Wang was extremely dissatisfied and reprimanded the property management company for not fulfilling its responsibilities. The property management company said that the tenant was not at home and the company had no right to break into houses. After the residents on the third floor came back, they were annoyed at their behavior of breaking into houses, and there was a great contradiction among the three parties.

This is a typical problem, the essence of which is the emergency avoidance and exemption of property management companies. Due to the lack of legal adjustment, it is difficult for all parties concerned to reach an understanding.

What is emergency hedging? It is the injury to the person or property of others that has to be taken to protect the person or property of a third person or himself or the public interest from the ongoing and actual danger. Take this case as an example, the third floor leaked water, which damaged the property of Miss Lei who lived on the second floor. When there is no one at home on the third floor, in order to reduce losses, it is necessary to break into houses to repair the water pipes and waterways on the third floor, but objectively it will cause damage to the doors, windows, glass and other property of the residents on the third floor. Such behavior is an emergency hedging behavior.

On the issue of liability, Article 156 of the Supreme People's Court's Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the General Principles of the Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) (for Trial Implementation) stipulates: "If the danger is caused by natural causes and the measures taken by the actor are not improper, the actor will not bear civil liability. If the victim requests compensation, he may order the beneficiary to give appropriate compensation. "

As can be seen from the above legal provisions, when serious situations such as water leakage occur, emergency actions can be taken to avoid risks. In the case of proper measures, neither the property management company nor the residents on the second floor should bear civil liability. In this case, the residents on the third floor suffered some property losses. As the beneficiary, Miss Lei should give them appropriate compensation. However, this kind of emergency action has reduced the damage to the furniture of the residents on the third floor, so the residents are actually one of the beneficiaries, so the residents on the third floor have to bear part of the losses.

On the other hand, we can see that for property management companies, in their work, due to special reasons, it will inevitably cause certain damage to the owners, and they should not bear civil liability, otherwise no one can do it.

No matter now or in the future, property management companies should engage in property management in accordance with the provisions of the property management contract, which forces property management companies to write the relevant exemption clauses as detailed as possible.

Property management contract

Please note that Article 53 of China's Contract Law stipulates that "the following exemption clauses in the contract are invalid: (1) causing personal injury to the other party; (2) The property loss of the other party is caused by intentional or gross negligence ",that is, the personal injury of the owner or user cannot be exempted under any circumstances.

We suggest that the exemption clauses in the property management convention be agreed as follows:

When the property manager carries out the following property management activities, he may not bear civil liability for property losses caused to the owners:

1. Necessary property losses caused by saving people (for example, someone tried to commit suicide in the room, and the property manager had to break into the door and smash the window to save people);

2. In order to avoid the necessary property losses caused by the property losses or possible damages of the owners or users (such as water leakage, fire, and no one in the owner's room, in order not to cause huge losses, the property manager forcibly enters the room for treatment);

3. Necessary property losses caused by catching criminals and stopping illegal infringement;

4. Other situations similar to the above.