General meeting of owners of premises in an apartment building. Appeal (cancellation). Judicial practice - you cannot challenge the results of the meeting without notifying all owners. Can the general meeting of the microdistrict builder cancel its own customs decision?

The question of the right of owners to cancel the decision they made earlier at the OSS is more complicated than it seems. The practice has developed contradictory. Let's analyze how courts deal with such cases.

Owners can cancel a previously made decision

Here is one of the latest court cases. Owners of premises in apartment building decided at the general meeting to refuse the services of their management organization and chose a new one. A month later they changed their minds, organized a new meeting and canceled the decision of the previous one.

The old management organization received the decision and notified the current management organization about it. But then a group of owners, who were in favor of changing the management organization, contacted the GZHI with a complaint that the old management organization did not transfer to the current technical documentation to the house.

An inspection began, as a result of which the State Housing Inspectorate issued an order to the old MA to transfer technical documentation. The UO did not agree with the order and went to court. The Arbitration Court supported management organization. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation agreed with his arguments.

The general meeting of owners, by its legal nature, is the management body of an apartment building. The OSS has the right to make certain decisions and then change or cancel them.

The competence of the general meeting can be limited by law or by agreement of the owners. Chapter 9.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not limit the competence of the general meeting, and Article 44 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the competence of the meeting, does not prohibit the cancellation of previously held decisions.

You can change or terminate the house management agreement in the manner permitted by civil law (Part 8 of Article 162 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation). admits unilateral change and termination of the contract.

The Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Perm Regional Court came to such conclusions when examining a case about changing the management organization in an apartment building. The Board indicated that the current legislation does not provide for the possibility for the OSS to make decisions on:

confirmation and recognition of the management agreement as valid;
cancellation of previously adopted decisions of the OSS on the choice of method of managing an apartment building and the choice of a management organization.

The listed issues do not fall within the competence of the general meeting of owners of premises in the apartment building. At the same time, there is no provision for including such issues on the agenda of the general meeting.

Only a court can overturn a decision of the OSS

The Sverdlovsk Regional Court heard a case on invalidating the decision of one meeting. The agenda of the meeting included an issue with the following wording: “cancellation of the decision of the extraordinary general meeting of owners<...>at the discretion of the management organization."

The court of first instance indicated that the issue of canceling the previous decision of the OSS on choosing a management organization is not within the competence of the meeting, therefore the controversial decision in this part is illegal (Articles 44, 46 of the RF Housing Code, Part 3 of Article 181.5 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) . This is an important clarification - not the entire decision is invalidated, but only part of it.

Issues within the competence of the OSS are listed in Part 2 of Art. 44 Housing Code of the Russian Federation. The interpretation of part 5 of the article allows us to assert that general meeting cannot make decisions that are not directly within the jurisdiction of the RF LC.

The Sverdlovsk Regional Court agreed with the conclusions of the court of first instance, therefore, within the meaning of Article 46 of the RF Housing Code, only the court recognizes the decision of the general meeting as invalid; the OSS is not endowed with such a right.

Conclusion

Whether the owners can cancel the decision they previously made at the OSS is decided ambiguously by the courts. Some say that Art. 44 of the RF Housing Code does not directly prohibit a meeting from canceling previously adopted decisions.

Others refer to clause 5, part 2, art. 44 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation and interpret it literally: the OSS does not have the right to consider issues that are not directly within its competence by the Housing Code of the Russian Federation. Therefore, only a court can invalidate a decision of the OSS.

What do you think about this?

Can owners cancel a decision they previously made at the OSS?

Owners can cancel a previously made decision

Here is one of the latest court cases. The owners of premises in an apartment building decided at a general meeting to refuse the services of their management organization and chose a new one. A month later they changed their minds, organized a new meeting and canceled the decision of the previous one.

The old management organization received the decision and notified the current management organization about it. But then a group of owners, who were in favor of changing the management organization, contacted the State Housing Property Inspectorate with a complaint that the old management organization did not transfer the technical documentation for the house to the current one.

An inspection began, as a result of which the State Housing Inspectorate issued an order to the old MA to transfer technical documentation. The UO did not agree with the order and went to court. Arbitration Court supported the management organization. Supreme Court The Russian Federation agreed with his arguments.

The general meeting of owners, by its legal nature, is the management body of an apartment building. The OSS has the right to make certain decisions and then change or cancel them.

You can change or terminate the house management agreement in the manner permitted by civil law (Part 8 of Article 162 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation). Article 450 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation allows for unilateral amendment and termination of the contract.

The Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, in its resolution No. 7677/11 dated November 22, 2011, as well as in its resolution No. 17635/11 dated June 5, 2012, refers to part 8.2 of Article 162 of the RF Housing Code, according to which the owners of premises in the house may unilaterally refuse to fulfill the management agreement, if the management organization does not fulfill such an agreement and if they have decided to choose another management organization or change the way the house is managed.

The OCC cannot cancel a decision that is not within its competence

However, there is another point of view on this issue. Its supporters say that directly in Part 2 of Art. 44 of the RF Housing Code, which lists issues within the competence of the general meeting of owners, does not stipulate the right of owners to cancel decisions previously made by them at general meetings.

Resolution of questions about the legality of a previously made decision, confirmation of the validity of the previous decision of the meeting on the election of a management organization is also not within the competence of the OSS. If we interpret the provision of clause 5, part 2, art. 44 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation literally, we can conclude that the OSS does not have the right to consider issues that are not directly within its competence by the Housing Code of the Russian Federation.

Meanwhile, Article 46 of the RF Housing Code provides for a judicial procedure for challenging decisions of the general meeting. The decision of the general meeting is void if it was made on an issue not within the competence of the meeting (Part 3 of Article 181.5 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

The panel of judges came to these conclusions civil cases Permsky regional court, examining the case of changing the management organization in an apartment building. The Board indicated that the current legislation does not provide for the possibility for the OSS to make decisions on:

confirmation and recognition of the management agreement as valid;

cancellation of previously adopted decisions of the OSS on the choice of method of managing an apartment building and the choice of a management organization.

Only a court can overturn a decision of the OSS

Issues within the competence of the OSS are listed in Part 2 of Art. 44 Housing Code of the Russian Federation. The interpretation of part 5 of the article allows us to assert that the general meeting cannot make decisions that are not directly within the competence of the RF Housing Code.

Conclusion

What do you think about this?

Apartment owners in our country often think that they can make any decisions at their general meeting of owners (hereinafter referred to as the GSM) of apartment buildings. And the minutes of the meeting are born, at the sight of which employees of management organizations (MA) clutch their heads. And having suffered with such a house, where dreamer residents live and thrive, for several years (some for a year, and some for more than one year), they simply abandon it.

And the house, like that citizen with a “black” credit history, begins to have a bad reputation and no management organization with sensible management wants to take it over. Since there are more problems from 1-2 inadequate activists than from 10 other houses combined. After all, all ridiculous decisions of meetings must be appealed to judicial procedure, and our courts are not all distinguished by their desire for a fair, common sense and literal interpretation of the current norms of legislation due to the notorious “inner conviction”. And the qualifications of a certain part of the representatives of the judicial branch of government are far from those necessary for such a high title of “arbiter of justice.”

Although there are also such managers and founders as those mice who cried, injected themselves, but continued to eat the cactus... Probably, there are some very serious reasons for continuing to manage such an MKD “from the black list”, or the patience of the management of the management organization is limitless and they “caught ZEN" in the field of MKD management.

And no matter how ridiculous the decision of the OSS may be, no matter how it contradicts the law, and even if the decision of the OSS is made outside the competence of the OSS, the authorities state supervision(GZHN) may still consider such decisions to be binding.

However, such smart residents, and along with them the GZhN body, forget that the competence of the OSS is limited by the limits of individual articles of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Housing Code of the Russian Federation). In this regard, the question arises: Do the owners at the general meeting have the right to decide to cancel the previous decision of the general meeting?

In some cases, owners try to overturn the decision to establish a new fee. I even know a case where such a cancellation was carried out at a meeting after more than 2 years. And the reason for the cancellation was stated in the agenda: the initiator of the OSS is not the owner of the premises in this apartment building. It’s complete nonsense, but the UO will have to go to court and overturn this decision. Otherwise, the State Housing Authority may easily consider that it must also be fulfilled, and what’s more, it will also force you to recalculate the entire payment for 2 years. Miracles are possible with our supervisors and courts...

Other owners are trying to cancel the OSS decision to switch to direct contracts with resource supply organizations (RSO). Although there is little logic in such a decision, except that it is more convenient for residents to have the management organization, which is nearby, understand the charges for utility services, and not the RSO, which are usually not within walking distance of 3 km, as the rules now require for a municipal authority. And for the owners, the accrual procedure will not change depending on whether direct contracts have been concluded or not concluded between the owners and the RSO for the provision of utility services.

The third group of the smartest ones do not want to pay for utility resources for the maintenance of common property (hereinafter referred to as CPSOI) in accordance with the previously made decision to pay according to the actual readings of common house metering devices (CDPU) for utilities (CU) and want to again pay only the standard. It is clear that no one wants to pay for themselves and for that guy (read: their neighbor). Well, the management organization is no stranger to this: let him pay, since he wants to manage our house... But such power of the general meeting is also not contained in the RF Housing Code.

However, if we assume such a possibility of canceling the previous decision of the meeting, then how should relations be built regarding the period from the adoption of the decision to its cancellation? After all, fees for the maintenance of common property (SOI) were accrued, work was carried out, reports were submitted, taxes were paid...

Moreover, the payment for SOI, for example, was approved for a reason, but is supported by a certain list of works and services that were performed for a certain time. That is, the owners, when canceling the previous fee for SOI, without asking the management, practically force the management organization to fulfill the management agreement on terms that are not favorable to it. It is also assumed that the approved fee is economically justified and calculated based on inspections of the OI MKD. Thus, the cancellation of the previous decision of the OSS will lead to a violation of the Civil Code norms on freedom of contract for the management company and a violation of the existing norms of rules for establishing fees for SOI and the list of works.

As you know, the main powers are spelled out in Art. 44 of the RF LC, and the powers of the OSS are also specified in some other norms of the LC. Such a power of the general meeting of owners of apartment building premises as “cancellation of the previous decision of the meeting is not spelled out in the specified norms of the law.

The Housing Code of the Russian Federation, as well as Civil code RF (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) in relation to general meetings does not provide for the possibility of canceling the previous decision. Since every decision made at the meeting gives rise to certain legal consequences both for participants and other persons: creditors, owners, etc.

Also Housing Code does not contain the right of owners to decide on the transition again to the standard for CRSOI. The Housing Code clearly states: KRSOI is accrued according to the standard, if the owners of the OSS do not make a decision to accrue it based on the actual indications of the capital gains income or according to the average monthly indications of the capital gains income. And nothing is written about the right to make a contrary decision. That is, such authority is again not within the competence of the OSS.

Upon the transition to direct contracts, the Housing Code also does not have the authority to again force the management organization to conclude terminated contracts with RSO for the supply of utilities. The grounds for terminating a direct agreement between the RSO and the owners are prescribed by law and are not subject to a broad interpretation, and also do not contain grounds: the owner’s refusal to enter into an agreement with the RSO due to the cancellation of the OSS decision.

Moreover, the decision made to switch to direct contracts also gives rise to consequences for the management company, which terminates the contract in terms of providing CG to the owners and concludes additional agreement, and for RSO, which becomes the executor public services and is obliged to accrue and collect cash for CU, check and collect evidence from the IPU and much more in accordance with the current provisions of the law.

By virtue of paragraph 2 of Art. 181.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the decision of the meeting, with which the law associates civil consequences, gives rise to legal consequences, to which the decision of the meeting is directed, d For all persons who had the right to participate in this meeting (participants legal entity, co-owners, creditors in bankruptcy and others - participants in the civil law community), as well as for other persons, if established by law or follows from the essence of the relationship.

Clause 1 of Art. 46 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation establishes that decisions and minutes of the general meeting of owners of premises in an apartment building are official documents as documents certifying facts entailing legal consequences in the form of imposing responsibilities on the owners of premises in an apartment building in relation to the common property in this building, changes in the scope of rights and obligations or release of these owners from obligations, and are subject to placement in the system by the person who initiated the general meeting.

It seems that it is not for nothing that the law states this way. And the decision of the meeting is not just a piece of paper in the form of minutes and other documents, but the will of individual citizens and (or) civil law communities officially recognized at the level of law, which gives rise to legal consequences not only for the citizens who made the decision themselves. And the logical conclusion suggests itself that such a community cannot cancel its decisions, unless this power is expressly stated in the law. Otherwise, there will simply be bedlam and anarchy going on everywhere... After all, we have owners in the MKD, they are such owners...

Therefore, the only possibility of canceling the decision of the OSS, if it is not made in accordance with the law and violates someone’s rights (in the subjective opinion of some individuals), remains only the right to appeal such decisions in court, as is stated in both the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and in the Housing Code of the Russian Federation. Because the law does not contain any other way to cancel the decision of the meeting, just as it does not contain such a way as canceling its previous decision.

In accordance with Art. 181.5 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, unless otherwise provided by law, the decision of the meeting is void if it:

adopted on an issue not included in the agenda, except if all participants of the relevant civil law community took part in the meeting;

adopted in the absence of the required quorum;

adopted on an issue not within the competence of the meeting;

contrary to the principles of law and order or morality.

But in paragraph 2 of Art. 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes that a decision of a meeting cannot be declared invalid by a court on grounds related to a violation of the procedure for making a decision, if it is confirmed by a decision of a subsequent meeting adopted in the prescribed manner before the court’s decision.

That is, the law clearly states the right of a subsequent meeting to confirm the decision of the previous meeting, but there is no way to cancel it.

Thus, the decision of the general meeting of owners of MKD premises to cancel the previous decision of the OSS MKD is void due to the above article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as adopted on an issue not within the competence of the meeting.

However, in any case, if such a decision of the meeting, carried out on the initiative of the inventor-owners, is brought to the management organization, you will have to go to court and appeal it in order to not give the GZHN bodies a chance to impose its implementation with their order. And then, you never know...

The good news is that I did not find any judicial practice on disputes regarding the invalidation of OSS decisions to cancel the decision of the previous OSS (maybe I didn’t look well, of course). Apparently, there are not so many dreamers and inventors in our country, since there are practically no court decisions on this category of disputes.

Sincerely, Ilmira Nosik.

Using the “automation of general meetings” service from the company “Burmistr.ru”, you can easily conduct an OCC. Our service allows you to prepare documents for a meeting in 10-15 minutes, replicate meetings (copy the agenda from one house to another with one mouse click), download information about owners from Rosreestr and MS Excel, add owners manually and using previously requested extracts, and also copy previously made registers of owners between meetings within the same house. More detailed information about the service.

You can discuss the article and ask questions on our page or use the form below.

Lack of proper notice.

No item on the meeting agenda. Putting to a vote an issue that was not included in the notification is strictly prohibited by law. Residents should be able to know in advance what will be discussed and decide whether or not to attend the discussion. On this basis, the protocol will be declared invalid in 100% of cases.

ATTENTION! Changing the agenda is prohibited. If the discussion includes issues that were not included in the notice, be aware that such a meeting is already considered unlawful.

Cancellation of the minutes of the general meeting of owners

It was decided: To notify the owners of the premises about holding an absentee meeting to cancel the previously made decision, against signature, by walking around the apartments by the senior staff at the entrance or representatives of the initiative group for holding the meeting. 4. On the fourth question: . Instruct the senior staff (or the initiative group for holding the meeting) to draw up and sign the Minutes of the General Meeting. Voted: for - % of votes; against — %, votes; abstained - % of votes.
The decision was made: To assign the minutes of the general meeting to be drawn up and signed by the senior people at the entrances (or the initiative group for holding the meeting). 5. Regarding the fifth question: O the decision taken of this General Meeting, notify the owners of apartments in the building by posting a copy of the minutes of the meeting at each entrance of the house and through the senior residents or representatives of the initiative group.

Russian legislation

Therefore, if you categorically disagree with the decision, but it does not cause you significant losses, then you should not engage in this matter. How long will the case take? It depends on the defendant and the complexity of the case. According to the law, this process seems quite simple and quick, but in practice this is not entirely true.
Many cases take months to resolve even though there is concrete evidence, so be patient and be prepared for a lengthy trial. Useful video To challenge the decision of the general meeting of homeowners, you must collect the available evidence and file an application in court.

Legal services in Kursk

Therefore, it is worth preparing well and collecting all available evidence. During the validity of the Housing Code in Russian courts have accumulated extensive judicial practice on this type of claims. A competent lawyer in this area will be able to easily find court decisions that suit your case.

And you yourself, after spending a week or two studying the entire volume of information on the Internet, can become an expert on legal proceedings in this area. Who can challenge and what is the deadline for going to court? Who can argue? Taking advantage of this opportunity is the right of any owner who is not satisfied with the final results. It is important to note that you can only file a complaint if you voted against or were not present at the discussion at all.

The last example shows one very important detail: if you do not file a complaint, the decision will be considered valid. Even if it was adopted with serious violations. And this is due to the fact that to determine misconduct Only meeting participants can. Controlling authorities recognize a document as invalid only when errors are made in the design itself.

How will housing supervision know that the owners signed the protocol not at the meeting, but near their apartments? Only the owners are aware of such violations. IMPORTANT! If the decision made violates your rights or your vote was not taken into account, then you must personally challenge it. Collect facts of violations and go to court. Supervisory authorities rarely meddle in internal affairs, so decisions on their initiative are practically never overturned.

Attention

In addition, the court may leave the residents’ decision in force even if the meeting itself was convened and held in violation of the procedure established by the Housing Code, if the votes belonging to this owner could somehow influence the voting results. Lawyer Evgeniy Karpunin This means that in order to make any decision in the interests of all residents, at least half of all residents of a given apartment building must vote for this decision. Previously, this norm was very, very vague. Often organs local government Taking advantage of the imperfection of the law, they made decisions in a narrow circle and made decisions for everyone.

Early norms of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation (and the powers and order of meetings were regulated only there) allowed for the legality of a general meeting if more than half of those present at this meeting voted “FOR”.

Blog

At the same time, the RF Housing Code does not contain any rules regulating the procedure for such an appeal. In connection with this, a reasonable question often arises: who should act as a defendant in the case? As follows from the analysis of judicial practice, the proper defendants in this category of cases are both the initiators of the meeting individually and together with the owners who took part in the meeting and voted “for” the decision. If, on the basis of contested decisions of general meetings, management agreements were concluded, the courts, in some cases, also involved the management organizations that entered into such agreements as co-defendants.

In other words, persons who, by their actions or inactions, directly violated the rights and interests of the plaintiff owner may be brought as defendants.
Send one copy of the Protocol by registered mail to the address of the Management Company (its name), the second copy to the District Administration, the third copy to the DEZ. To conduct absentee voting, it is necessary, with the help of the senior members of the building or the initiative group, to issue to all owners, against signature, in addition to the notice of the meeting, a form for the decision of the absentee meeting, in which all these questions and columns for voting will be entered in the table (see appendix below). After the end of the period allotted in accordance with the requirements of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation for conducting absentee voting, conduct a vote count using the elected counting commission, draw up a protocol and send it to the Management Company and the District Administration.
The decision of your meeting will be considered adopted if the required number of votes votes for it.

How to cancel decisions of the minutes of the general meeting of owners

Important

If a person who could influence the adoption of a decision entailing adverse consequences for such a person filed a claim to invalidate the decision on grounds related to the procedure for its adoption, then if the contested decision is confirmed under the rules of paragraph 2 of Article 181.4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the filed claim cannot be satisfied. Thus, the more seriously the initiator has prepared for the general meeting of owners of apartment building premises and the preparation of documents, the more difficult it is to challenge the results of such a meeting. Our “Preparation for General Meetings of Owners” service will help you save time and avoid costly mistakes for only 250 rubles.

You can discuss the article and ask questions here.
On the second issue: Cancel the decision of the general meeting from (indicate the date of the previous meeting) at the choice of the management company (Indicate its name) and continue servicing the house by the district DEZ. Voting: for - % of votes; against — %, votes; abstained - % of votes. A decision was made: To cancel the decision of the general meeting from (indicate the date of the previous meeting) at the choice of the management company (Indicate its name) and continue servicing the house by the DEZ of district 3.

On the third issue: Notify the owners of the premises about holding an absentee meeting to cancel a previously made decision against signature by walking around the apartments by the senior staff at the entrance or representatives of the initiative group for holding the meeting. Voting: for - % of votes; against — %, votes; abstained - % of votes.

If the documents were not falsified, but were drawn up in violation of the requirements of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, you have the right to contact the housing supervision service with a request to conduct an inspection. If the housing supervision service refuses you, you can appeal this refusal through the prosecutor's office or court. 4) Very often, previous decisions of meetings of owners or a management agreement provide for a simplified procedure for notifying owners about a new general meeting of owners. In this case, it is easier to hold a new meeting of owners and make a more correct decision at it than to challenge the results of the meeting in court.

To do this, it is enough to place the relevant information in places of free access.

Decisions of the meeting we are considering can be adopted both by in-person voting and in other forms established by law (in-person and in absentia). It should be noted that clear instructions are also provided for the procedures for holding a general meeting in the specified forms.

MKD management

organizational events

Forum burmistr.ru - forum about housing and communal services (management of apartment buildings)

On the second issue: Cancel the decision of the general meeting from (indicate the date of the previous meeting) at the choice of the management company (Indicate its name) and continue servicing the house by the district DEZ. Voting: for - % of votes; against — %, votes; abstained - % of votes.

A decision was made: To cancel the decision of the general meeting from (indicate the date of the previous meeting) at the choice of the management company (Indicate its name) and continue servicing the house by the DEZ of district 3. On the third issue: Notify the owners of the premises about holding an absentee meeting to cancel the previously adopted decision under painting using the method of walking around the apartments by the senior people at the entrance or by representatives of the initiative group for holding the meeting.
Voting: for - % of votes; against — %, votes; abstained - % of votes.

Legal services in Kursk

Attention

So, for example, in order to enforce the decision, the management company has already entered into an agreement with a third-party organization, then it is recommended to indicate the parties to such an agreement as the defendant. It is assumed that it is correct to indicate as co-defendants all the persons listed above, in order to avoid the need to subsequently resume legal proceedings.

In this case, already during the consideration of the case in the first instance, it is possible for the plaintiff to petition to replace the inappropriate defendant. Otherwise, the court considers the case based on the filed claim and the declared defendant.
Consequences of an appeal In a case of challenging the minutes of a general meeting, the courts make a decision to cancel the said minutes if the rules for carrying out procedural measures for organizing the meeting are violated.

Important

Previously, it was like this - if out of 100 (one hundred) residents, 3 were present at the meeting and 2 of them were “FOR”, then the meeting was recognized as having taken place, and the decisions made were binding on all residents of the house. Application to challenge the decision of the general meeting on the creation of a HOA to the district court. At this meeting, a decision was made to establish a Home Owners Association in an apartment building - hereinafter referred to as the HOA. I consider this decision of the general meeting to be unfounded, illegal and subject to cancellation according to the following reasons: 1) The contested decision was made in violation of the procedure established by Articles 45-48 of the RF Housing Code (specific violations should be indicated, for example, lack of quorum at the general meeting; violation of the procedure for holding the general meeting, incorrect vote counting, etc.

Housing and communal services in Russia 1.

Challenging the minutes of the general meeting of owners of an apartment building

Start of accepting decisions of premises owners: from " " 2007, from hours to hours. Last day for receiving completed decisions of premises owners: " " 2007.

until 22:00 The decisions made by the general meeting and the voting results will be announced in 2007. Agenda: 1. Approval of the composition of the counting commission of the general meeting. 2. On the cancellation of the decision of the general meeting of the house on the choice of management method adopted in 2006. 3. Choosing a method of notifying premises owners 4.

Approval of the procedure for drawing up the minutes of the general meeting 5. Approval of the method for reporting voting results at general meetings 6.

Approval of the location, conditions for storing protocols and decisions of the owners, as well as the person responsible for storage. You can familiarize yourself with the materials that will be presented at this meeting at: from " " 2007 from to hour.

At the first stage, the owners had to choose one of the possible forms home management. Vedeneeva house 2 Citizen P. filed a lawsuit against the defendant Housing Fund Management Company LLC in the city of Pionersky, in which he asks the court to: invalidate the protocol of April 2008 of the general meeting of owners of the premises of an apartment building in the city of Pionersky, on the basis of which LLC “Housing Fund Management Company” in Pionersky provides management services and performs the necessary work and services for the maintenance and servicing of the house, which must be paid in accordance with the tariffs approved by the local government.

In support, the plaintiff points out that for several months he tried to bring his relations with Housing Fund Management Company LLC into compliance with the requirements of housing legislation.

Can the general meeting of the MKD cancel its own customs decision?

Info

Date of submission of the decision signature Approximate text of the minutes of the meeting: MINUTES N of the general meeting of premises owners on choosing a method of managing an apartment building at the address: in the form of absentee voting, Moscow date Start of accepting decisions of premises owners: from " " 2007, from o'clock to o'clock . Last day for receiving completed decisions of premises owners: " " 2007.

until 22:00 The following people took part in absentee voting: - residential premises - % of votes; — non-residential premises — % of votes. Representative of the owner for residential premises owned by the city of Moscow (full name, full name), according to a power of attorney issued by "" 2007.

Owner's representative non-residential premises, owned by the city of Moscow (full name), under a power of attorney issued by "" 2007. In total, there were owners present with % of votes from the total number of votes.

Can the general meeting of the MKD reverse its own decision?

Viktor Fedoruk (expert of the Movement “For Human Rights”) answers the question of residents (the telephone number of the reception in Moscow can be found in the ICD). Question: In our apartment building in November 2006, a hasty meeting was held in absentia to choose a form of management of the building. At the same meeting, by the same decision, a management company was elected.
At the meeting, the head of the Administration convinced us that this management company is the same DEZ that is now serving us. But when, after the meeting, a representative of our house committee received a copy of the Charter of this management company for review, it was clear from it that the company had nothing to do with DEZ.
We feel deceived. How to write correctly statement of claim to cancel the decision of the meeting? Answer: The meeting in your house did not go quite correctly.
Among the violations of procedure, the following can most often be found (information taken from reviews of the judicial practice of some courts):

violation of deadlines for notifying meeting participants;
failure to comply with the notification form and failure to provide participants with the necessary information;
lack of quorum of participants;
violation of vote counting of participants;
the agenda was not followed;
minutes of the meeting were not kept or were kept in violation of the established rules;
The owners were not notified of the decision.

Important! Cancellation of a decision only on formal grounds will not be carried out, i.e. the court will leave the decision unchanged if the plaintiff did not suffer losses as a result of its implementation, and also if the plaintiff’s participation in voting would not lead to a change in the decision.

General meeting of owners of premises in an apartment building. Appeal (cancellation). Judicial practice - you cannot challenge the results of the meeting without notifying all owners. Can the general meeting of the microdistrict builder cancel its own customs decision?

Owners can cancel a previously made decision

Only a court can overturn a decision of the OSS

Conclusion

Owners can cancel a previously made decision

The OCC cannot cancel a decision that is not within its competence

Only a court can overturn a decision of the OSS

Conclusion

Cancellation of the minutes of the general meeting of owners

Russian legislation

Legal services in Kursk

Post navigation

Blog

How to cancel decisions of the minutes of the general meeting of owners

Forum burmistr.ru - forum about housing and communal services (management of apartment buildings)

Legal services in Kursk

Post navigation

Challenging the minutes of the general meeting of owners of an apartment building

Can the general meeting of the MKD cancel its own customs decision?

Can the general meeting of the MKD reverse its own decision?