Russians are obliged to pay for the vandalism of their driveway hooligans: management companies wash their hands of it

It is assumed that the perpetrators themselves will compensate for the damage, but they will still have to be found

Vandals who break and set fire to doors in apartment buildings, break windows, cause pogroms in the entrance and set fire to buttons in the elevator must pay for the repair of common property themselves. The corresponding change to the Civil Code on payment for housing and communal services came into force in October. If previously breakdowns were repaired at the expense of the management company (MC), now money for repairs will be taken directly from those who caused such damage. But who will look for the violator and will it turn out that no one will clear the blockage in the sewer until the vandal is found?

Amendments to the Civil Code impose costs for vandalism on the offender, and not on the management company. From now on, if mailboxes are broken in the house or the walls are painted, the management company will assess the damage caused and in the next month’s receipt will increase the expense item for the maintenance of common property for all residents.

Finding the violator is a separate process, which, apparently, will be difficult, because video cameras are not installed everywhere in Russia, and there are not always eyewitnesses to the act of vandalism. But if it turns out that one of the neighbors did this, then this person will have to write a statement to the police, where the case will be considered in the prescribed manner.

This rule came into effect in October. But management companies will not switch to the new scheme all over the country at once, says Popular Front expert, member of the Public Council of the federal project “School of Literate Consumers” Pavel Sklyanchuk. The amount in payments will change upward based on actual violations. In the meantime, residents pay monthly money for maintenance of the apartment building. Previously, all breakdowns were eliminated through collected payments.

“Housing law is derived from the norms of civil legislation. Therefore, from a legal point of view, with this approach, liability attaches to the perpetrators, and the management company (MC) may directly be innocent of acts of vandalism,” says the expert.

According to Sklyanchuk, on the one hand, this is legally correct. But there is another side to the issue. Let’s call it everyday life. The fact is that this innovation will lead to the fact that the condition of common property will deteriorate if the vandal who broke the mailboxes or set fire to the elevator button is not found. In this case, the management company declines all responsibility, and if residents start asking questions, the answer will be something like this: “This is not for us. Look for the culprit and demand compensation from him. We won’t do anything.”

Therefore, this is an ambiguous norm, which in practice can lead to adverse consequences for residents. But for management companies this event was long-awaited. Today, management companies, according to the norms of the housing code, are responsible for the condition of common property. The amounts that are billed to residents in receipts must be used to eliminate defects in the house, and only then can the management company file lawsuits and look for the vandal himself. Now the situation is changing 180 degrees.

“It is difficult to predict the average monthly payment after the introduction of this norm. In general, there is a problem that the receipt does not detail the line “for common property.” Accordingly, it is not disclosed what exactly these or those funds collected from residents were used for. There is no confirmation of the elimination of breakdowns, acts of payment for work done, or expenses for materials. There remains room for manipulation on the part of management companies. Many management companies abuse this because they do not want to work at a loss,” notes Sklyanchuk.

It can be stated that October began for Russians with yet another negative housing news. And from now on, management companies will have to be monitored even more closely so that they do not withdraw from their direct responsibilities with the words “this is not for us!” We can only hope that they will continue to adhere to the principle of repairing first, and only then finding the culprit and deducting money from him.