Ms. Zhou is one of the 12 wounded, injured in the fire in order to claim, Ms. Zhou is the residential property company to court.

On the court, the property company argues, Ms. Zhou is not the small owners, but from the owner hands housing in the area of residential, so there is no property management contract, the original, she sued property companies lack the basis.

Court after hearing that, the plaintiff is not small owners, there is no property service contract relationship with the defendant, but the plaintiff through leasing act as residential property to use, the defendant as a small property management companies, property and property for residential use should be cautious, diligent management duty. The property company will area overhead layer out to others as a garage, the contractor with combustible material settings, changing the location using the function partition behavior in the elevated level of combat ineffective, not to property management human obligations, resulting in serious consequences who use the property injured, shall bear the liability for breach of contract and compensation for the damage finally, the court, the property company compensation for medical expenses, loss of working time Ms. Zhou fee total more than 10.5 yuan.

The interpretation of the case

Liaoning Dingtai law firm Shi Mingxin lawyers said, in this case, there are three main aspects to the owners of learning.

Firstly, we need to be clear, why the property company to bear the losses caused by fire of a part of the indirect responsibility?

According to the "property management regulations" article second, article forty-eighth, article thirty-eighth, property used in the property management activities in the rights and obligations of the main property owners and use of written or oral agreement between the property owners and the use, people should be in accordance with the contract to perform their respective rights and obligations. Specific to the case, who use the property Ms. Zhou according to between it and the owners agreed, to fulfill the corresponding obligations, the property company should be performed according to its should do property management obligations between its contract with the owners, but in this case, the property company without the consent of the owners of the general assembly, the unauthorized use of common parts of overhead layer residential contracts to others as a garage, their behavior has violated the stipulations of the realty service contract, therefore, the property company should bear corresponding civil liability for compensation.

Two, the plaintiff MS Zhou, not owners, why can also sued the property company rights?

According to the "property management regulations" article forty-eighth, property used in the property management activities in the rights and obligations by the owners and property use people agreed, but shall not violate the relevant provisions of laws, regulations and management rules.

Specific to the case, who use the property as the actual lessee agreed in the contract, enjoy the rights and obligations between it and the owners, and property companies as property management services enterprises, owners, the property for security who actually uses the security obligations, the house is not the existence of security risks to harm other people the right to life and health, and has the elimination of hidden trouble of safety responsibility. When the property company in violation of the contract agreement, who use the property has the right to sue for property owners and the company shall bear joint and several liability for breach of contract. Therefore, in this case, the provisions of article forty-eight weeks as women who use the property right on the basis of "property management regulations", the property company sued directly in their own name, should bear corresponding civil liability.

Three, now in the area of rental housing is already widespread phenomenon, so these tenants and owners to enjoy the same rights?

Whether residential rental personnel enjoy the same rights with the owners, mainly to see the contents of the contract between the owners and, if the contract is between owners and property companies contract contents are consistent, who use the property and the owners to enjoy equal rights, that is to say the owners rights, property the use of others.

Nowadays more and more projects will be one or two story building along the street for the commercial network. These sites are within the scope of the property security service, if the theft,Property companyWhether to assume responsibility?
       In 2009 October, Wei Qiang to buy rental shops to lease the shops after Zhang Shun, Zhang Shun has been engaged in cable sales. In April 20th this year, Zhang found his shop door was broken, the cable shop 89849.92 yuan worth of stolen, then report to the public security organs, the case is currently in the process of investigation.
      At the same time, Zhang Shun believe that the property company failed to fulfill security obligations, is the main cause of cases, it shall be liable for breach of any property company, full compensation for the loss of their own, then the property company to court.
         The court verdict, the property company property loss compensation for CIS 269S4.97 yuan, on the amount of compensation, property companies access to the property right of recovery against the perpetrators.
Comment
   The first: the Lessee Not owners, whether it can be prosecuted property company?
   Shanghai property lawyer thinks, the case involved three focus. "Provisions on several issues of specific application of law in the trial of condominium ownership dispute cases the interpretation of" the sixteenth Supreme People's Court: Buildings ownership dispute involving the exclusive part of the lessee, borrower, who use the property, according to this interpretation. The proprietary part of the lessee, borrower, who use the property, according to the laws, regulations, management of the statute, the owners' assembly or the owners' committee shall make a decision, and it agreed with the owners, and enjoy the corresponding rights, assume corresponding obligations.
     Zhang to produce the "property management services contract" and "owners Convention" stipulated: the contract for the actual use of people continue to be effective. Zhang Chengzu Wei Qiang's shops, the shops in actual use, in accordance with the provisions of the judicial interpretation and the terms of the contract, the two contract for practical use Zhang Shun continue to be effective. Namely, the property company to Zhang Shun's shop for security obligations, although Zhang Shun is not the owner, but have the right to lodge a claim on the property company in accordance with the law.
   Second: whether the property company to do the security obligations?
   Agreed the "property management services contract": the property company to provide security services to the property within the region, to assist the public security organs to do security work. In addition, the property company promised in its security responsibilities: the main entrance, 24 hours must be someone on duty; time, closed the entrance, there must be handing over records, each of not less than 8 hours to set up guard, patrol system, patrol every 30 minutes.
   "Regulations on several issues of specific application of law in the trial of the property service dispute cases the interpretation of" the third Supreme People's Court: the property service enterprise do not perform or do not completely fulfill the provisions of property service contract or laws, regulations and relevant industry standards to determine the maintenance, conservation, management and maintenance obligations, the owners request the realty service enterprise liability for breach of contract continue to perform, to take remedial measures, or to compensate for losses, the people's court shall support. The realty service enterprise make public service commitment and the formulation of the service rules, shall be determined as part of the realty service contract.
   Visible, the property company security responsibilities should be regarded as the property contract, did not try to security obligations, should bear the corresponding liability.
   Third: property companies should bear all the liabilities for compensation?
   In case of theft unsolved cases, liability for compensation the court judgement property companies bear 30%, also illustrates the property company priority right of recourse, embodies the principle of fairness. Property companies although the existence of the fault management, but it is not a direct cause of the case.