ST 105 Housing Code of the Russian Federation. Provision of living quarters in dormitories

Living area of ​​an honest hostel

1. Helpful information

When choosing a hostel, you should pay attention not only to its location and cost of living, but also to the size of the rooms.
Often, dishonest management companies, in pursuit of profit, try to accommodate as many people as possible in their premises, violating all norms and requirements. And in order not to find yourself in a disadvantageous position, you need to figure out what minimum living space in a hostel you are entitled to by law. To understand how the size of a room corresponds to the standards, you must first understand what is included in the concept of living space. Living space

- This is a space suitable for habitation, the same as a living space. Its definition is given to us by clause 2 of Article 15 of the RF Housing Code:

Residential premises are recognized as isolated premises, which are real estate and are suitable for permanent residence of citizens (meets established sanitary and technical rules and regulations, and other legal requirements).

Neither the corridor, nor the rest room, nor the bathrooms meet the requirements, and therefore are not residential premises. They are included in the common area, but not in the living area.

In the case of living in a dormitory, one living space can be divided between several residents, as a result of which each of them will receive not only a bed, but also a certain area, the size of which is regulated by law.

How many square meters are allotted to a hostel guest? Many people are trying to find out the answer to this question on the Internet, where the first few links quote us Article 105 of the RF Housing Code:

Living quarters in dormitories are provided at a rate of at least six square meters of living space per person.

The same figure – 6 sq. m per person

– we are also given the general requirements for tourist accommodation facilities (GOST R 51185-2008), which include dormitories for workers and hotel-type dormitories.
But they clarify that residents of double and multi-bed rooms should expect this area, but a single room should be at least 9 square meters.
m .

If you feel like your new room is a bit cramped, look at the contract and ask about its area. Simple mathematical calculations will help you calculate how many neighbors can share one room with you: the area of ​​a dorm room for 2 people is from 12 square meters. m;

• for 4 people – from 24 sq.m. m;
• for 6 people – from 48 sq.m. m;
• for 12 people – from 72 sq. m;
• for 18 people – from 108 sq. m.

24.01.2020

Comment

Comments on the article:

There are no comments for this news yet

Common property in former dormitories subject to maintenance by management organizations

Colleagues! I would like to bring up for discussion the issue of former dormitories and the delimitation of the area of ​​responsibility in such dormitories between the owners and management organizations.

I take the management organization as a synonym for the other party in legal relations, however, for housing cooperatives, HOAs, direct management, everything that I will talk about below also applies.

Let's start with the fact that in the 90s and early 2000s, the departmental, service fund, consisting of dormitories, began to become municipal property.

The same fund began to be quite actively privatized by citizens and lost its status as hostels, becoming apartment buildings - with all that it entails.

In fact, such newly formed apartment buildings, commonly referred to as “dormitories,” have two features, two types that are important for management organizations.

In my opinion, a good “definition” is given for them in paragraphs. 51, 52 Rules for the provision of public services, approved. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated May 6, 2011 N 354.

I will quote:

"51. The calculation of the amount of payment for utility services provided to consumers in residential premises in corridor, hotel and sectional type dormitories (with the presence of common kitchens, toilets or shower blocks on the floors) is carried out in the manner established for calculating the amount of payment for utility services for consumers living in a communal apartment."

"52. The calculation of the amount of payment for utility services provided to consumers in residential premises in apartment-type dormitories is carried out in the manner established for calculating the amount of payment for utility services for consumers living in residential premises in an apartment building.”

That is, we have two types of dormitories, one is block-type, where we have amenities in blocks or, in the worst case, on the floor (though I haven’t seen any of those).

And the second option, where we have amenities in the rooms, but have some element in common. For example, I lived in a dorm where everything was in the room: kitchenette, toilet, shower; however, the shower was not there to begin with. Therefore, in a five-story building, on its first floor, there was a fairly large shower room “for everyone.”

And in this, in my opinion, there is a pressing question - what in such dorms is common property in the understanding of Part 1 of Article 36 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation and Government Resolution No. 491? Because by answering this question we will answer where the zone of responsibility of residents for the maintenance of their property ends and the zone of responsibility of the management organization for the maintenance of the common property of all owners begins.

I would like to immediately distinguish this issue from the issues of maintaining the elevator and the concierge, as non-debatable, since we have a clear position in relation to them of the legislator and the Supreme Court, expressed by the Plenum.

I see it this way in two ways.

Option #1. If you live in a dormitory where amenities in the form of kitchens, toilets, showers are located on your floor (block), you should perceive this removed property as the property only of those citizens who live next to you on the floor or block (as in a communal apartment), i.e. You cannot demand anything from the management organizations for this property (and passages to it).

Option #2. If you live in a dormitory where you and your “floor” neighbors are connected only by corridors, and you are all connected, for example, by a shower on the first floor, then all this is the common property of all residents of the dormitory. Such property must be maintained by a management organization.

Further, to substantiate the position, I will cite the rules of law (except for paragraphs 51, 52 of the above rules).

1. The owner of a residential premises bears the burden of maintaining this premises and, if this premises is an apartment, the common property of the owners of the premises in the corresponding apartment building, and the owner of a room in a communal apartment also bears the burden of maintaining the common property of the owners of the rooms in such an apartment, unless otherwise provided by the federal by law or agreement (Part 3 of Article 30 of the RF Housing Code).

2. The owners of rooms in a communal apartment own by right of common shared ownership the premises in this apartment used to service more than one room (hereinafter referred to as the common property in a communal apartment) - Part 1 of Article 41 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation.

3. The share in the right of common ownership of common property in a communal apartment of the owner of a room in this apartment is proportional to the size of the total area of ​​​​the specified room (Part 1 of Article 42 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation).

4. The share in the right of common ownership of common property in an apartment building of the owner of a room in a communal apartment located in this house is proportional to the sum of the dimensions of the total area of ​​the specified room and determined in accordance with the share in the right of common ownership of common property in the communal apartment of this owner of the area premises constituting the common property in this apartment (Part 2 of Article 42 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation).

5. The share in the right of common ownership of common property in a communal apartment of the owner of a room in this apartment follows the fate of the right of ownership of the specified room (Part 3 of Article 42 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation).

6. The owners of rooms in a communal apartment bear the burden of expenses for maintaining the common property in this apartment (Part 1 of Article 43 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation).

7. The share of mandatory expenses for the maintenance of common property in a communal apartment, the burden of which is borne by the owner of the room in this apartment, is determined by the share in the right of common ownership of the common property in this apartment of the specified owner (Part 2 of Article 43 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation).

8. An apartment is recognized as a structurally separate room in an apartment building, providing direct access to common areas in such a house and consisting of one or more rooms, as well as premises for auxiliary use, intended to satisfy citizens’ household and other needs related to their residence in such a separate room (Part 3 of Article 16 of the RF Housing Code).

9. A room is recognized as a part of a residential building or apartment intended for use as a place of direct residence of citizens in a residential building or apartment (Part 4 of Article 16 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation).

But here is a norm that, at first glance, can be put into contraposition.

The owners of premises in an apartment building own, by right of common shared ownership, the common property in the apartment building, namely:

premises in this house that are not parts of apartments and are intended to serve more than one room in this house, including inter-apartment landings, stairs, elevators, elevator and other shafts, corridors, technical floors, attics, basements in which there are utilities , other equipment serving more than one room in a given house (technical basements) - clause 1, part 1, article 36 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation.

In fact, everything I quoted is one indivisible norm. It does not contradict itself and fully determines the legal relations of owners of rooms in dormitories. Also, all this is consistent with Government Decree No. 491.

As a result, I propose to consider the newly formed dormitories as apartment buildings of two types:

- apartment buildings in the classical sense, where small apartments have everything (or almost everything) for self-service, and the common property of the house is everything that does not fit into these apartments;

- multi-apartment buildings of a communal type, where blocks or floors are apartments, and the common property is staircases, stairs, attics, basements, etc.

Please criticize!

How many square meters of living space are allowed per person?

Rationing of living space began in our country since the times of the USSR. And many of the rules in force at that time are still applicable to practice today. Even after changes, they are simply transferred to new documents. Only the government bodies responsible for editing in a given case change.

These are citizens who live in apartments that do not comply with current standards. The norm is set by municipalities. They necessarily take into account the actual condition and current structure of the housing stock. The same applies to the number of premises that can be included in the housing stock to increase it.

Registration norm of living space per person

How much is the standard living space per person? It is important for every citizen to know this information, since otherwise it will not be possible to resolve the issue regarding the division of living space, determining the order of resettlement, resolving a conflict situation regarding the division of an object, etc.

1. The minimum standard is established for living space located in dormitories or foundations owned by municipal authorities.
2. The provision rate is the smallest amount of space required for living. The allocation of such a minimum is allowed if a social rental agreement is signed with a citizen.
3. An accounting norm is the square footage on the basis of which certain authorities calculate whether a citizen or family needs to be allocated additional square meters for living. In accordance with the law, this norm cannot be less than the provision norm.

We recommend reading: Child support up to how many years

How much does it cost to rent an apartment for a student?

A student should rent an apartment if he is ready to work at the same time as studying. Usually this method suits part-time students from other cities.

Full-time students who cannot afford to earn money on their own are forced to ask their parents for money. In this case, we recommend getting together with your classmates or friends so that, while living in the same apartment, you pay in half.

Let's look at how much each of these options will cost.

How can one student rent an apartment?

Renting an apartment for one student will cost at least 20 thousand rubles, depending on the region.

Prices for living space vary, but we calculated this amount along with other necessities.

1. In different regions, for a minimum price of 10 thousand rubles, you can rent a one-room apartment, or 1 room in a three-room apartment or a two-room apartment. Then it will resemble a hostel, but there will be much fewer neighbors.
2. A student can spend a minimum of 5-6 thousand rubles a month on food
3. Travel expenses will cost about 1000 rubles per month
4. Sometimes a student wants to have fun, so a weekend can cost up to 3-4 thousand.

In total, the minimum cost for renting an apartment in the city for one student is 20 thousand rubles. Moreover, the conditions will also be minimal.

How can several students rent an apartment?

Several students can rent one apartment. Not every landlord is ready to provide living space to several people at the same time, except for married couples. After all, there are stereotypes that young people cause mayhem and destruction in rented apartments.

However, we do not recommend lying to landlords. Some people rent an apartment for just one person and then invite several people to stay. Neighbors may notice that not one person lives, but several. Then problems may arise for the one who rented the apartment for himself.

Separate payment for an apartment may also apply to paying for food.

For example, if all students cook at home, then a common grocery list will suit them. You can create a general budget.

Will such accommodation be cheaper? Of course yes. Unless the neighborhood leads to scandals and disputes.

Therefore, you should only rent an apartment with people whom you have known for a long time and who are similar to you in habits.

What is the standard living area per person in a dormitory and what regulations regulate this?

I work on a rotational basis in the Far North. Accommodation is organized in a dormitory. Currently, the area per resident is approximately 6.5 - 7 square meters. m. The administration has begun to double the number of residents in the rooms. When implementing these actions, the area per resident will be 3 - 3.5 square meters. m.

We recommend reading: Is It Possible to Renovate an Apartment Using Maternity Capital in 2019

When moving into a dormitory, the standard for providing living quarters for each person must be met. The provision norm is established by the normative legal act of the municipality on whose territory the specialized residential premises (dormitory) are located.

Purchase of a hostel building and problems with residents

Arthur Davydov, practicing lawyer, Moscow.

The right of private property is protected by law (Part 1 of Article 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation)

Everyone has the right to housing. No one can be arbitrarily deprived of their home (Part 1, Article 40 of the Constitution)

The last two decades of the 20th century and the first decade of the 21st century are a period of fundamental changes not only in civil legislation, but also in housing legislation. This is the time of reorganization (privatization) of state enterprises, which contain on their balance sheet a huge number of dormitories in which tens of thousands of workers of these enterprises lived and live. As a rule, during the privatization of state-owned enterprises, dormitories were necessarily transferred to the balance sheet of municipalities.

The exceptions are railway transport and nuclear energy enterprises. In accordance with paragraph 6 of Art. 9 of the Federal Law of February 27, 2003 No. 29-FZ “On the peculiarities of management and disposal of railway transport property”, paragraph 15 of Art. 43 of the Federal Law “On the privatization of state and municipal property” and paragraph 5 of Art. 18 of the Federal Law “On the Peculiarities of Management and Disposal of Property and Shares of Organizations Operating in the Field of Nuclear Energy Use, and on Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation,” these enterprises privatized dormitories as part of their property.

It should be noted that there are cases when, in violation of the current legislation, after the privatization of state-owned enterprises, dormitories ended up being owned by private commercial organizations - successors of state-owned enterprises, not related to railway transport and nuclear energy enterprises.

The difficult economic situation in the country forced the newly formed private owners of these hostels - the legal successors of state-owned enterprises - to save themselves as best they could, for example, for a fee, to move into the hostel citizens who have nothing to do with their activities.

However, in most cases, these dormitories are inhabited by citizens who were temporarily (for the period of their work) moved into the dormitories in order to create conditions for them to perform their labor (official) duties.

But in practice, it turns out that there is nothing more permanent than temporary.

Thus, the overwhelming majority of citizens, after dismissal, continued and continue to live in the residential premises of hostels temporarily provided to them, although they have long lost contact with enterprises and organizations, work or training in which was the basis for their moving into these premises. Moreover, sometimes a situation arises where, without the consent of the owners of the hostels (possibly also with their connivance), relatives and friends of the citizens living there were moved into the living quarters of the hostels.

In addition, at present, the majority of residents of hostels and those who no longer live in them, but continue to keep these premises, are trying to privatize these premises.

When transferring (selling) hostels to a new owner, the question of the legality of residence of previously moved-in citizens is raised. In this case, the initiator is often the new owner of the hostel.

At the same time, the new “happy” owner should expect scandals, pickets, hysterical materials in the media about the evil hostel owner who throws people out onto the street, and, of course, legal proceedings with the residents.

In practice, there are often cases when the new owner of a dormitory building did not even imagine in advance what kind of litigation he would have to fight in order to exercise the right to own, use and dispose of his property, because when purchasing a building, it may be written in the documents “in black and white” that there are no restrictions (encumbrances) are not registered on the hostel building.

As a result, hostel owners are in a dual position: on the one hand, they have a legally protected property right, and on the other, everyone’s constitutional right to housing. This is a problem that most hostel owners are currently facing. So, according to Part 1 of Art. 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the right to private property is protected by law.

At the same time Art. 40 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes that everyone has the right to housing. No one can be arbitrarily deprived of their home. The above fundamental norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation often appear in the reasoning part of court decisions related to cases of hostels. So, part 1. Art. 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation is usually indicated when satisfying the owner’s claims for the eviction of illegally residing citizens from a hostel, in turn, Art. 40 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation is mentioned in court decisions when refusing to satisfy the above requirements of the owner. Let's look at just a few of the problems that the owner of a dormitory building may encounter when purchasing it.

1. Recognition of the transaction for the alienation (sale) of a hostel as void

By virtue of the provisions of Art. 168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a transaction that does not comply with the requirements of the law or other legal acts is void unless the law establishes that such a transaction is contestable or does not provide for other consequences of the violation. An invalid (void) transaction does not entail legal consequences (Article 167 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), and therefore all subsequent transactions with property will become invalid (void).

In accordance with Part 2 of Art. 166 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a requirement to apply the consequences of the invalidity of a void transaction can be presented by any interested party.

It should be noted that in most cases, in cases related to dormitories, it is the local government bodies and the prosecutor's office that are the initiators of going to court with claims to declare transactions invalid (void) and apply the consequences of its invalidity. The reason for such requests is most often complaints from citizens living in dormitories.

An example is case A50-39252/2009, considered by the Federal Arbitration Court of the Ural District.

Thus, the Deputy Prosecutor of the Perm Territory, as well as the administration of Perm, appealed to the Arbitration Court of the Perm Territory with claims against the open joint-stock company “Shipbuilding” (hereinafter referred to as the “Sudostroitelny” company), limited liability company “February” (hereinafter referred to as the “February” company), limited liability company "Capital Invest Center" (hereinafter referred to as the "Capital Invest Center" company), private limited liability company "Livelist Limited" (hereinafter -), the company "Verkhnekamsk Shipbuilding Complex" on recognition of the right of municipal ownership of a 5-story building dormitories located in Perm; on invalidating the record of state registration of ownership of this building for the Verkhnekamsk Shipbuilding Complex company; on reclaiming it from the illegal possession of the Verkhnekamsk Shipbuilding Complex company.

According to the case materials, according to the privatization plan of the Perm Shipbuilding Company (hereinafter referred to as the privatization plan), the Perm Shipbuilding Company was transformed into the Shipbuilding Company. The privatized property includes a hostel building located in Perm among social, cultural and social amenities. Based on the privatization plan, the shipbuilding company has registered ownership of the specified dormitory building.

On January 27, 2006, the Board of Directors of the “Shipbuilding” company decided to create the “February” company and make the above-mentioned dormitory building as a property contribution to its authorized capital.

On January 10, 2007, the “February” society registered ownership of the above-mentioned dormitory building. According to the purchase and sale agreement dated February 28, 2007, the February company sold the specified dormitory building to the Capital Invest Center company. The transfer of ownership of the dormitory building to the Capital Investment Center company was registered on March 28, 2007.

Subsequently, on the basis of the specified real estate purchase and sale agreement, the Capital Invest Center company transferred the disputed dormitory building. The transfer of ownership was registered on December 16, 2009.

made a contribution to the authorized capital of the Verkhnekamsk Shipbuilding Complex company in the form of real estate, including the disputed dormitory building. On January 21, 2010, an entry was made about the transfer of ownership of the dormitory building to the Verkhnekamsk Shipbuilding Complex company.

A lease agreement dated January 21, 2010 was concluded between the Verkhnekamsk Shipbuilding Complex company and the February company, according to which 87 living rooms and 2 rooms for an office with utility rooms were leased to the February company for a period until December 31, 2010 , located in the controversial dormitory building.

According to the technical passports for the disputed dormitory building, the disputed building is a dormitory; the indicated status of the disputed building did not change. In addition, in 2009, the decision of the Kirovsky District Court of Perm satisfied the demands of the residents of the dormitory O. S. Povarnitsina and A. S. Khodyrev to the Capital Invest Center company for recognition of ownership of part of the residential premises of the disputed dormitory. The said court decision was executed, the ownership rights of O. S. Povarnitsina and A. S. Khodyrev to the named premises were registered on August 10, 2010 in the Unified State Register of Rights to Real Estate and Transactions with It.

By the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Perm Territory dated November 26, 2010, the claims in this case were partially satisfied. The ownership right of the Perm municipality to the hostel building has been recognized, with the exception of the premises for which the decision of the Kirovsky District Court of Perm in 2009 recognized the ownership of citizens.

By the decision of the Seventeenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated February 3, 2011, the decision of the trial court was left unchanged.

By the resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Ural District dated June 3, 2011, the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Perm Territory dated November 26, 2010 and the decision of the Seventeenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated February 3, 2011 in the same case were left unchanged.

It should be noted that the courts, when making their decisions in the above-mentioned case, took into account Art. Art. 167–168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, indicating the invalidity of all subsequent transactions with the disputed property, in connection with which it was recognized that the company “February”, the company “Capital Invest” and the company “Verkhnekamsk Shipbuilding Complex” did not have rights based on the law to the dormitory building.

Thus, from the case materials it is clear that when receiving ownership of a dormitory building, the new owner of the building is not insured against loss of ownership rights to it.

2. Eviction of persons who arbitrarily occupied residential premises in dormitories and living in them

As noted above, in practice a situation arises that without the consent of the owners of the hostel buildings (and possibly with their connivance), relatives and friends of the citizens living there can be moved into the living quarters of the hostels.

It should be noted that according to Art. 10 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, housing rights and obligations arise from the grounds provided for by this Code, other federal laws and other legal acts, as well as from the actions of participants in housing relations, which, although not provided for by such acts, but due to the general principles and meaning of housing legislation give rise to housing rights and obligations. In accordance with this, housing rights and obligations arise:

1) from contracts and other transactions provided for by federal law, as well as from contracts and other transactions, although not provided for by federal law, but not contradicting it;

2) from acts of state bodies and acts of local government bodies, which are provided for by housing legislation as the basis for the emergence of housing rights and obligations;

3) from court decisions establishing housing rights and obligations;

4) as a result of the acquisition of ownership of residential premises on the grounds permitted by federal law;

5) from membership in housing or housing construction cooperatives;

6) as a result of actions (inaction) of participants in housing relations or the occurrence of events with which a federal law or other regulatory legal act connects the emergence of housing rights and obligations.

Thus, moving into residential premises, including dormitory premises, outside the established procedure, without established legal grounds, is arbitrary.

Guided by Art. 304 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the owner has the right to demand the elimination of any violations of his rights, even if these violations were not associated with deprivation of possession. That is, the owner of the hostel building - an individual or legal entity, a state authority, a local government authority, as well as a person who owns the premises with the right of economic management, operational management, etc. (Article 305 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) - has the right to file a claim for eviction without providing other residential premises to the person who arbitrarily occupied the residential premises.

As an example, we can cite case No. 2-2319/11, considered by the Istra City Court of the Moscow Region

Thus, OJSC “Recreation and Sports Center OLenKur” filed a claim against A. M. Melnikova, T. V. Kholodkova for recognition as having not acquired the right to use residential premises, eviction without provision of other residential premises.

The court found that OJSC "Recreation and Sports Center OLenKur" is the owner of the disputed residential premises located in the building of the Dormitory building, originally built as a dormitory and which is currently used by the plaintiff as a dormitory for its employees. The specified building was previously assigned under the right of economic management to the Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Health Center of the Ministry of Atomic Energy of Russia”, which, as a result of privatization, was transformed into OJSC “OlenKur Recreation and Sports Center”. The Dormitory Building building was included in the privatization plan and included in the plaintiff’s authorized capital.

The court also found that A.M. Melnikova and T.V. Kholodkova actually live in the disputed premises, which was confirmed by the inspection report of the State Housing Inspectorate for the Moscow Region and the explanations of the representative of the defendants.

At the same time, the defendants never had an employment relationship with either OJSC Center for Recreation and Sports OLenKur, or with its legal predecessor FSUE Health Center of the Ministry of Atomic Energy of Russia, and were not brought in as family members of the plaintiff’s employees. The court found that the defendants were moved into the disputed premises with the oral consent of the former director of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Health Center of the Ministry of Atomic Energy of Russia” - the legal predecessor of OJSC “OlenKur Recreation and Sports Center”.

By decision of the Istra Court of the Moscow Region dated October 5, 2011, the defendants were evicted from the disputed residential premises without providing another residential premises. This court decision was not appealed.

Thus, as can be seen from this case, arbitrary occupation is the basis for satisfying the claim of the property owner to remove obstacles in the possession, use and disposal of his property in court.

However, it must be remembered that in order to satisfy this type of claim, the owner of the hostel must prove the unauthorized entry into the premises of the hostel, as well as the fact of residence in it.

3. Collection of fees for the use of living space and utilities provided to residents of the hostel

As a rule, the expenses of the owner of a dormitory building for the maintenance of the dormitory and payment of utilities to suppliers significantly exceed the income received from consumers (tenants) living in the dormitories. The reason for this is the chronic insolvency of citizens living in hostels. By virtue of clause 5, part 3, art. 67 Housing Code of the Russian Federation, Part 3, Art. 678 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the tenant is obliged to make monthly payments for residential premises and utilities. In case of improper fulfillment by citizens of this obligation within six months, the current legislation (Article 687 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) provides for the possibility of terminating the rental agreement for residential premises at the request of the landlord.

As an example, we can cite case No. 33-16862/11, considered by the judicial panel for civil cases of the St. Petersburg City Court.

The OJSC filed a claim with the Sestroretsky District Court of St. Petersburg against E.I. for the collection of arrears from the defendant for payment for residential premises and utilities, along with payment of a penalty for late payment.

In support of the stated requirements, the plaintiff indicated that the defendant, under a residential rental agreement, occupies a room in a dormitory owned by the plaintiff.

However, the defendant does not properly fulfill her obligations to pay for housing and utilities, as a result of which a debt has arisen.

As established by the court of first instance and as follows from the case materials, the defendant, on the basis of a rental agreement for residential premises concluded with the owner - OJSC, is registered and lives in the occupied room of the hostel.

In accordance with paragraphs. 3.1, 3.2. of the above rental agreement, the fee for using the room is paid no later than the 1st day of the month following the month to be paid; the amount of payment is approved by order of the landlord annually; The fee also includes payment for utilities. The fee for using the room can be revised by the landlord unilaterally in case of changes in prices for maintenance and supply of utilities.

Tariffs for housing and utilities during the disputed period were approved by the OJSC. The fact that the plaintiff incurred expenses for repairs and maintenance of the common property of the hostel located at the specified address is confirmed by the contracts and payment documents and invoices presented in the case materials. Disputing the amount of the debt, the defendant did not provide evidence to substantiate her arguments about the improper provision of services.

By decision of the Sestroretsky District Court of St. Petersburg dated August 29, 2011, the defendant was charged in favor of the OJSC for arrears of payment for residential premises, utility bills and penalties.

Disagreeing with the decision, the defendant appeals it in cassation and asks to send the case for a new trial, citing its groundlessness.

By the ruling of the St. Petersburg City Court dated November 14, 2011, in this case, the decision of the Sestroretsky District Court of St. Petersburg dated August 29, 2011 was left unchanged, and the defendant’s cassation appeal was not satisfied. At the same time, the judicial panel for civil cases of the St. Petersburg City Court indicated that the court of first instance correctly applied the rules of substantive law governing the legal relations of the parties, namely Part 1 of Art. 671, as well as Art. Art. 676, 678, 681 Civil Code of the Russian Federation and Art. Art. 156, 157 Housing Code of the Russian Federation.

As can be seen from the above case, the plaintiff did not demand to evict the defendant from the dormitory rooms provided by him. However, if there are conditions provided for in the law for terminating the rental agreement, namely, the tenant’s failure to pay for residential premises and utilities for more than six months in a row, the landlord has the right to demand the eviction of the tenant from the premises provided to him (Clause 2 of Article 687 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Art. 90 Housing Code of the Russian Federation). At the same time, eviction does not relieve the tenant and his family members from repaying the resulting debt for payment of housing and utilities, along with payment of late fees accrued in accordance with Part 14 of Art. 155 LCD.

Thus, simultaneously with eviction, the tenant may be required to pay the entire amount of the debt and the accrued penalty for late payment, and eviction does not exempt from payment of these payments for the entire period of residence until the moment of eviction from the premises.

Mikhail Kyurdzhev, lawyer, partner of DS Law :

Difficulties with the acquisition of hostel buildings begin at the stage of its purchase. The main problem with purchasing hostels is that it is not always clear who exactly has the right to act as the seller. In our practice, there have been several cases when clients purchased dormitory buildings. In almost all cases, dormitories during the period of their construction (and this is the Soviet period of Russian history) were on the balance sheet of enterprises. Most enterprises either ceased operations or were reorganized many times. During such perturbations of the balance holders, the dormitories, as a rule, were “suspended in the air.”

Often, the municipal administration does not take responsibility for such a sale and asks the potential buyer to conduct an independent study of the right of the local administration to privatize the hostel (with receipt of all the necessary archival documents and responses from authorized government bodies). In such cases, the Ministry of Property Relations is involved in the issue, and sometimes other ministries, which were in charge of the enterprises that were the balance holders of the hostels.

Another difficulty is the status of the hostels. As you know, dormitories belong to the category of non-residential premises. However, the vast majority of dormitories are used by the citizens living there as a place of permanent residence. And the migration registration authorities register citizen tenants and members of their families in hostels as a place of permanent residence. This makes it very difficult to evict citizens from the hostel (especially for minors).

The presence of citizens registered at their place of permanent residence in a dormitory entails the need for the municipal administration to resettle tenants and members of their families into other municipal housing. And this, as you know, is not at all included in the plans of local authorities. Thus, the need for resettlement falls on the shoulders of the potential buyer, to whom the administration sets the appropriate condition before the sale.

Sources:

Russian newspaper. No. 42. 03/05/2003.

Federal Law of 05.02.2007 No. 13-FZ “On the peculiarities of management and disposal of property and shares of organizations operating in the field of atomic energy use, and on introducing amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation” // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. No. 4291. 02/09/2007.

Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Ural District dated June 3, 2011 No. Ф09-1635/11-С6 in case No. A50-39252/2009 // Access from the reference and legal system “ConsultantPlus”.

Decision of the Istrinsky City Court of the Moscow Region dated October 5, 2011 in case No. 2-2319/11. Source: official website of the Istra City Court of the Moscow Region www.istra.mo.sudrf.ru // publication date 10/20/2011.

Determination of the St. Petersburg City Court dated November 14, 2011 No. 33-16862/11 // Access from the ConsultantPlus legal reference system.

Where should a student live?

It is impossible to unequivocally answer the question of where it is better for a student to live, in a rented apartment or in a dormitory. Each home has its own advantages and disadvantages. When choosing a place of residence, try to rely on the specifics of the university, as well as on your capabilities and wishes.

Most often, parents worry about the living conditions in the hostel, remembering their student life. Much has changed since the days when hostels were noisy, dirty, and had alcoholic neighbors.

Before we start comparing, we need to talk about the price. Unfortunately, there is no such “magic formula” that could calculate which type of housing will be cheaper. But most often it is more expensive to live in a rented apartment than in a hostel. You can ask how much it costs to rent an apartment in the vicinity of the university. To this amount, do not forget to add the cost of utilities and agent fees. In a hostel you can often pay for 10-15 days, which is much more convenient. If you plan to study at Moscow universities, then it will certainly be more profitable for you to live in a dormitory. Since, on average, renting an apartment in Moscow costs 30 thousand, and renting a room starts from 15 thousand.

Advantages of living in a dormitory:

1. Student atmosphere. Naturally, life is much more interesting among the same students. This way you can truly experience student life. It is very useful to “move” in your own circles, that is, with your comrades. Before entering adult life, students learn to find a common language with fellow students. In addition, if you need to find some textbook or additional material, you can simply contact the residents of the next room and borrow it from them. Living together among students promotes learning.
2. Less responsibility. When living in a hostel, you will not have to worry about paying for utilities.
3. Saving in summer. A hostel is the most ideal option for those who go home in the summer. During the summer period, students are moved out of the dormitory, and you do not have to pay for this time.
4. Saving on transport. Often, hostels are located close to universities, so you won't have to spend money on a car or transportation.

Disadvantages of living in a hostel:

1. “Personal space” is shrinking. The student will have to share his room with someone else. There will be no opportunity to be in silence and privacy.
2. Limited space. Dorm rooms are small, so you won't be able to store a lot of stuff in the room. You will have to periodically go home and drop off things.
3. Negative influence. The neighbors may be boisterous, and this will interfere with your studies.
4. Can't live in summer. Many students who have nowhere to go have to look for other housing and a place to leave their belongings for the summer.

If you are from the outback of Russia planning to study in Moscow, then it will be easier for you to move into a dormitory for the first time. It will be very difficult to immediately find an apartment once you arrive in Moscow.

Question

: I am settled in a student dormitory.
I have a place assigned there. But I don't actually live there. Checked in to get temporary registration. Can I be evicted from the hostel on the grounds that I do not physically live there? Answer:
Residential premises in dormitories are provided under rental agreements for specialized residential premises. According to Part 1 of Art. 100 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, under a contract for the rental of specialized residential premises, one party - the owner of the specialized residential premises (an authorized state authority or an authorized local government body acting on his behalf) or a person authorized by him (the lessor) undertakes to transfer this residential property to the other party - the citizen (tenant). premises for a fee for possession and use for temporary residence in it. In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 103 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, eviction of citizens from premises occupied by them under specialized rental agreements for specialized residential premises is possible in the event of termination or termination of the rental agreement. Article 83 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation provides for the possibility of terminating the contract if the tenant leaves for another place of residence. In this case, the rental agreement for residential premises is considered terminated from the date of departure. The meaning of this norm was explained by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the Resolution of the Plenum of July 2, 2009 No. 14 “On some issues that arose in judicial practice when applying the Housing Code of the Russian Federation.” In accordance with this Resolution, if the absence from residential premises is not temporary, then interested parties (including the landlord) have the right to demand in court that they have lost the right to residential premises on the basis of Part 3 of Article 83 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation in connection with leaving for another place of residence and thereby terminating the rental agreement. We draw your attention to the fact that, in accordance with Part 4 of Art. 3 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, the establishment in the rental agreement of specialized residential premises of any additional grounds or procedure for its termination (for example, conditions for termination of the contract out of court in the event of temporary absence from the residential premises), not provided for by the Housing Code of the Russian Federation or other federal laws, not allowed. Thus, if you are constantly absent from the specified residential premises, on the basis of Articles 103, 83 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, the landlord can apply to the court with demands to terminate the rental agreement with you for a specialized residential premises, and, accordingly, eviction.

What is the standard square meters per person?

The size of the accounting norm is also left to the discretion of local authorities. The only condition set by federal legislation is that the accounting norm cannot be greater than the provision norm. This is logical: otherwise, a citizen who has just moved into a new apartment would automatically find himself in need of housing.

The social norm is now used to calculate the cost of maintaining a house. In particular, in Moscow, for persons living in an area equal to the social size, the fee is charged at a minimum amount. If the area per resident exceeds the social norm by more than 7 square meters. m per person, payments are already calculated at an increased rate.