All apartments in the house have been privatized. Risks of buying a privatized apartment. Price for privatization of the attic above the apartment

Some citizens are provided with state or municipal housing, which can be registered as their own. After some time, the question may arise whether it is possible to deprivatize the apartment. This procedure is carried out, you just need to know its main nuances.

Concept

Deprivatization of an apartment is a procedure for transferring ownership from a private person to government agencies. From the owner of the premises, the citizen becomes an employer. There are 2 options for alienating an object:

• By the tribunal's decision;
• voluntary consent.

The law does not contain the term deprivatization, but the alienation process is specified in many documents. You should rely on them when performing it.

Why is the procedure needed?

Repairs are fully compensated by the owner of the living space. Deprivatization of an apartment involves getting rid of payments for maintaining the territory. There is also no need to pay property taxes. A specific number of people can live in a government building, and if the family is large, then a larger area is provided.

In a privatized apartment, it is required to pay for all living residents. There is also a drawback - if the house is in emergency condition, only the owners of the privatized premises can get housing in another house.

Conditions

To complete the procedure, several conditions must be met:

• submit an application, only the one who privatized the housing must do this;
• the premises cannot be listed as collateral;
• there should be no debts for utilities;
• Only a single place of residence can be deprivatized;
• the procedure is available in the absence of obligations of the premises to other persons.

Previously, recognition of the homeowner as low-income was required. Only if these conditions are met can an application for deprivatization be submitted.

The difference between deprivatization and deprivatization

These are two ways to terminate ownership of registered housing. Upon deprivatization, the contract for obtaining an apartment is declared invalid. This happens on the basis of a court decision. According to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, this possibility is provided for in case of violation of privatization rules, for example, in case of infringement of the interests of disabled people or children under 18 years of age. Then the right to a single procedure for obtaining housing will not be realized.

Another way to transfer an apartment to the state is deprivatization. It involves the voluntary transfer of housing by the owner. A citizen can transfer an object to the municipality free of charge by drawing up a social tenancy agreement. After deprivatization, the right to privatization will not be realized.

How is the procedure performed?

The question of whether can be answered positively. It is necessary to use some nuances of the procedure. How to deprivatize an apartment? For this, 2 methods are used. The first step is to go to court. The plaintiff needs to prepare arguments as to why deprivatization is required. This process will be long and difficult.

Sometimes there are refusals. With the help of the court, it is possible to invalidate the registration of private property. Termination of a privatization agreement and declaring it invalid are two different things. The reasons for decisions and consequences may vary.

Another variant

How to deprivatize an apartment in another way? There is a law according to which the owner has the right to enter into an agreement with the state. This document indicates the fact of providing housing into state ownership. This is approved by Article 9.1 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation.

Local government has the right to refuse a citizen. Then a social tenancy agreement is concluded. If you are wondering whether it is possible to deprivatize an apartment, then you should make sure that the decision is made. It will not be possible to re-register ownership of the property.

What objects are suitable for the procedure?

Is it possible to deprivatize an apartment if it was inherited? The procedure can be carried out if privatization has previously been carried out. This cannot be done with objects that:

• were passed on as inheritance;
• purchased;
• donated.

The premises must be the only place for living. If people are registered in another apartment, the request may be rejected. Is it possible to deprivatize a purchased apartment if it is encumbered? The procedure cannot be performed if persons other than the owner are registered in the apartment. The premises should not be collateral. It will not be possible to complete the procedure if the house is intended for demolition. You need to carefully prepare for this. Such living space cannot be sold or donated or used as collateral.

Where to contact?

How to deprivatize a share in an apartment or the entire area? You should first contact the housing department of the administration. All homeowners must be present at the time of application. If the premises are not encumbered, and government officials provide a refusal, then you need to go to court. The following documents must be prepared:

• owner passports;
• housing papers;
• certificate of ownership;
• explication and floor plan;
• certificate from the address register;
• statement;
• personal account;
• extract from the house register;
• tax payment certificate.

Originals can be replaced with duplicates, but not copies. How to deprivatize an apartment with a minor? The procedure is carried out in the same way, only you need to obtain an agreement on the alienation of housing from the guardianship and trusteeship authorities. You should contact the City Property Department with the collected documents. The application will be considered on the day it is submitted.

Owners must be at least 14 years old for this procedure. If someone cannot attend, then a trusted person is invited instead. The contract is drawn up no later than 2 months later. It must be signed by all owners over 14 years of age or authorized representatives. The document is submitted to Rosreestr for registration. This completes the procedure.

Nuances of transferring an apartment

All legal procedures have many subtleties that must be taken into account. How to deprivatize a room in a communal apartment? The legislation provides that then you need to obtain permission from the owner of each part, otherwise the application will be refused.

Otherwise, the procedure does not differ from the standard one. Is it possible to deprivatize an apartment without the consent of the owner? This procedure is considered invalid. If this is done, then the transaction will be declared invalid, and the housing will be transferred to the owner on the same basis.

In what cases can an apartment be deprivatized? This is done in all situations except:

• encumbered housing;
• transferred premises by inheritance or gift;
• in case of unauthorized redevelopment;
• sold apartment;
• departmental housing.

Advantages and disadvantages

Deprivatization is carried out due to the inability to pay property taxes. Now its basis is the cadastral value of the property. Therefore the tax became much higher. Previously, it was subtracted from and amounted to a small amount.

Since 2015, many began to return housing to state ownership. For many, the reason was the expensive maintenance of housing and major repairs. Many people use the refund to obtain housing under social programs. In the event of an emergency, such as a fire or flood, the state will pay for the damage.

This procedure also has disadvantages. When residents are not owners, they do not have the opportunity to sell, donate, or bequeath the property. During deprivatization, it will not be possible to re-register the premises as your own. State property cannot be left as collateral, for example, to obtain a loan. Renting out a social apartment is more difficult.

Deprivatization of share

To perform this procedure, you must obtain permission from other owners. Without this, it is impossible to transfer housing into municipal ownership. And no one can oblige anyone to provide consent either.

Therefore, if even one owner is against it, deprivatization cannot be carried out. If permits are available, the procedure is carried out according to the standard rules prescribed by law.

Deprivatization with a minor

Many people face this situation. It is necessary to determine whether the child is considered the owner, or whether he is only registered in the housing. If you have registration, you must contact the guardianship and trusteeship authorities, providing a list of documents. There you need to submit an application and then receive a conclusion. All documentation must be provided to complete the standard procedure.

If the child is the owner, then this process will be difficult, since the guardianship authorities protect the rights of children. Therefore, obtaining permission will not be so easy. In this case, you need to consult a lawyer who will help solve the problem. For a positive decision, additional documents will be required confirming the benefits of the procedure for a minor child.

Price

How much does this procedure cost? You must pay a state fee. In addition, funds are needed for the work of a notary and preparation of documentation. The amount of the state fee changes regularly. Her size is for individuals less compared to legal ones. You can find out the exact amount in the administration.

Voluntary termination

The consequences of a voluntary procedure are different compared to those carried out through a court. After confirming the completion of deprivatization, a social rental agreement is concluded with the residents. Otherwise, no changes occur.

The disadvantage of this procedure is the impossibility of re-privatization, since the citizen used his right and then abandoned it. Even if one of the owners does not give permission for this, it will not be possible to do this administratively. You can go to court, but in practice the chances of positive result small.

How is deprivatization beneficial to the authorities?

Using this procedure, city authorities can return municipal property previously granted possession. Deprivatization transfers housing free of charge into city property. When a tenant dies or moves to another place, the housing is transferred to the others in turn.

The procedure returns housing to the housing stock. But it will not be possible to fulfill it after inheritance or purchase. After deprivatization, you need to live in an apartment under the terms of social rent. Local authorities can initiate it if the housing is not used for its intended purpose.

After this procedure, the owner bears a lot of costs. The apartment must be insured, and this service is paid. But without it, restoring housing after any factors will be even more difficult. You also need to pay large sums for major repairs and taxes. Thanks to deprivatization, many issues are being resolved. Therefore, before performing this procedure, you need to carefully weigh the pros and cons so as not to regret it in the future.

Good evening. We live in a 17-apartment building. The house is very old. Of the 17 apartments in the building, only our apartment has been privatized. I would like to know if something happens to the house: a collapse, a fire or something else, we cannot count on getting other housing (that’s what the city administration told us). Is it true that if the house is declared unsafe, everyone except us will be provided with housing, and we will only be paid money according to the assessment of our apartment. I would be grateful for a written response.

Answer

Hello, Oksana.

If a collapse or fire occurs, then in accordance with Article 95 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, as citizens whose residential premises have become unsuitable for living as a result of emergency circumstances, you must be provided with residential premises of a maneuverable fund. However, this is temporary housing provided until settlements with you are completed, or until residential premises are provided by the state or municipal fund, in the manner prescribed by law. If you are registered as in need of residential premises, then you, as citizens whose residential premises are recognized as unsuitable for habitation, will be provided with housing under a social tenancy agreement out of turn. If you are not registered, then you will not be provided with housing. It is also worth noting that payment of compensation from federal or local budget funds is not provided for by law. If your apartment is insured, then after the insurance payment, you will have to vacate the occupied residential premises of the maneuverable fund. Thus, in order not to be left with nothing, you need the house to be recognized as unsafe and subject to demolition. In accordance with paragraph 42 of the Government of the Russian Federation of January 28, 2006 N 47 (as amended on April 8, 2013) “On approval of the Regulations on recognizing premises as residential premises, residential premises unsuitable for habitation and an apartment building as unsafe and subject to demolition or reconstruction,” the initiator of this may the owners and tenants of residential premises in this building will speak out. An apartment building is recognized as unsafe and subject to demolition by an interdepartmental commission. The commission is created by a local government body, where you need to submit an application to recognize an apartment building as unsafe and subject to demolition.

If the house is recognized as unsafe and subject to demolition, you, as the owner of privatized housing in a dilapidated house, will be paid monetary compensation, however, by agreement with the administration, the possibility of obtaining other housing is provided.

Let's look at the procedure for a more likely option, namely, buying out your apartment. You, as the owner of the apartment, must be notified in writing one year in advance about the demolition of the house. The purchase price of the apartment and other terms of purchase are determined by an agreement between the owners of the apartment and the subject of the Russian Federation. The redemption price includes the market value of the apartment and all losses that you will incur in connection with the seizure of the residential premises. Losses associated with moving, searching for other housing, registering ownership, renting housing until you acquire ownership of another residential property will also be compensated. However, you will have to look for a new apartment yourself. If you are offered another housing to replace the one being demolished and you are not satisfied with it, then you have the right to refuse it and take monetary compensation.

An apartment building is a complex consisting of two parts. One part provides comfort to residents; at the same time, it brings them income or is capable of generating income. It includes residential premises, which are usually used for the residence of the owners. But residential premises can also generate commercial income for owners if they are sold or rented out. Non-residential premises can also generate commercial income. If the owner of a house (not apartments) rents out so-called built-in premises, for example, for retail outlets or to house institutions, then he usually derives income from his property.
The other part of the apartment building, which is designed to serve the first, has a completely different economic role. This second part includes all those elements of the house that are not directly used by residents and tenants, but without which the operation of residential and other user premises is impossible. Household equipment and household equipment by themselves are not capable of generating income for the owner of the house, but without them it is impossible to use residential and other premises, i.e. what the house was built for.
Both considered parts of a residential building are not equivalent not only economically, but also legally. If we consider apartments as the main thing in a complex called a “residential building”, then all its non-apartment structures, devices, as well as land plot it is justifiable to consider them as belonging to residential premises; It is precisely this circumstance that allows them to be recognized under certain circumstances as either the common or public property of the residents. Who owns the ownership of a household in an apartment building with privatized apartments before the organization of the HOA is a special question, since it allows not one, but two answers.
According to one option, until the residents have united in a HOA, the rights and obligations in part of this household should belong to the previous owner - be it the local government, the Russian Federation as a whole (represented by a federal department) or a subject of the Federation represented by a department subordinate to it. Once an HOA is created and registered, ownership and related responsibilities for the home are transferred to the partnership.
According to another option, residents of privatized apartments should initially be recognized as common joint (indivisible) owners in relation to the household (Article 253 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). If the residents organize a HOA, then this partnership becomes the owner of the household as a corporation, i.e. legal entity. In this case, common property disappears; it is permissible to say that it becomes public property.
The second option seems logical. It seems that this is what the Housing Code of the Russian Federation adheres to, because it does not contain any mention of the transfer of household management from housing offices to the disposal and ownership of the HOA. However, if this option were adopted, it would turn out to be unviable, because the residents of a large house usually do not take part in its maintenance and operation; many have only a vague idea of ​​their household management. It is useless to recognize them as joint common owners of the household; this is tantamount to dooming him to neglect. The first option looks more correct and practical, namely, before the creation of an HOA, recognize as the owner of the household (or the owner’s representative) the housing organization that took care of it earlier, before the privatization of the apartments.
Common “shared” ownership (as stated in Article 290 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) must contain the supporting structures of an apartment building, as well as mechanical, electrical, sanitary and other equipment serving more than one apartment. To the list of items of common (and after the organization of the HOA - public) property, one should add the roof, attic, basement, foundation, staircases and flights, elevator shafts and halls, as well as a plot of land near the house and under the house. It must be borne in mind that none of the residents have any shares in the load-bearing and enclosing structures, the roof, the attic, or shares in the form of square meters in the city yard - neither before the creation of the HOA, nor (even more so) after its creation. See: Sheinin L.B. Housekeeping and home ownership // Trade unions and economics. 2008. N 1. P. 59 - 68.
One should proceed from the fact that the ownership of the residents of the household is not legal at all. Ownership of a household arises from a group of residents only when they unite in a HOA; Moreover, the right of ownership will belong not to them, but to the HOA, which is ready to take responsibility for the household management. (By the way, when residents in large houses privatized apartments, in the haste of privatization no one warned them about whose ownership the household was or should be.) Common ownership of the household should not have been recognized for members of housing cooperatives either, since housing cooperatives were initially accepted take responsibility for this business.
Currently, the issue of tenants' rights to home property has turned out to be confusing. The Housing Code of the Russian Federation does not mention the ownership of the HOA in the household. Instead, he talks about common ownership of the residents. Meanwhile, the common ownership of the residents of the house property (even if it existed) should disappear after the formation of the partnership, because it will be transformed into the public property of a legal entity.
Ownership of HOAs for households, as formulated in the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, has its own pitfalls. Its clause 6 art. 135 states that the HOA is liable for its obligations “with all its property.” Whether the authors of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation took into account what is hidden behind this formula or not, but, judging by the exact meaning of the words given, the creditor of the HOA can foreclose on a household owned by the HOA or any part of it. But this result is unacceptable. After all, if the HOA is deprived of ownership of the household, then the meaning of the HOA’s existence is lost. The condition of privatized apartments will certainly suffer. Therefore, the law must indicate that the HOA is liable for its debts with all its assets, with the exception of the household assets it owns and the minimum working capital that is necessary to maintain it.
The law resolves the issue differently if the insolvent debtor turns out to be a housing cooperative. Since housing cooperatives are equated to consumer cooperatives, their losses must be covered by additional contributions from members of the cooperative, as required by Part 4 of Art. 116 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The authors of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation were not satisfied with the status of housing cooperatives as consumer cooperatives. Article 122 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation allows and encourages their transformation into HOAs. However, the status of the HOA, as presented in the Housing Code of the Russian Federation (see above), turned out to be no better. Obviously, this status requires additional development.
From the above analysis of the status of HOAs, some obvious gaps are visible not only in the Housing Code, but also in the Civil Code, which has passed over in silence many issues of debt collection with which individuals and legal entities. It has long been known that when collecting debts from an enterprise, economic organization, an individual producer cannot be deprived of a certain minimum of working capital from the debtor, as well as those fixed assets with the help of which his economy is run and production is supported. In the presence of such an entry in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, it is unlikely that the ill-conceived norm of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation in question could have appeared.
Otherwise, it is impossible to exclude cases when, for the debts of, say, an agricultural enterprise, its milking herd is confiscated and goes under the knife.
The Housing Code of the Russian Federation avoids the term “housekeeping”; instead he uses the expression "common property". But this last expression is far from accurate. No law or guideline contains any full list those items and devices that should be classified as common property. The Housing Code of the Russian Federation avoids the separation of private and public in an apartment building; at the same time, he creates the (false) impression that such a task does not exist, since everything is already clear. But in fact the situation is different.
For some reason, the Housing Code of the Russian Federation does not apply the long-established concept of “homeownership”. In relation to an apartment building, home ownership means a complex consisting of residential and non-residential (usually rented by outsiders) premises, as well as household facilities, including load-bearing and enclosing structures of the house, its internal equipment, a yard, ancillary buildings, and underground communications.
For example, there is no such list in the 2003 Rosstroi document, Rules and Standards for the Technical Operation of Housing Stock. It appears that the authors of this document themselves were inconvenienced by the absence of such a list or lists. For example, regarding electrical devices and appliances, this document contains a note that the maintenance of electric stoves lies with the “owner of the housing stock” - without specifying who is considered this owner. It is said about electric meters that in different cases their “balance sheet may be different” (clauses 5.6.3, 5.6.10).
Each apartment contains items whose legal affiliation is not well defined. Questions often arise as to who owns the central heating radiators, the gas stove in the kitchen (or the stove and kitchen hearth), the ventilation duct, doors and partitions (including between apartments), window frames, floors, some pipes (the so-called risers), sanitary technical equipment, balconies, as well as hallways, if the latter are located outside the apartment. It is not clear whose ownership the barns (or cellars for coal and firewood) should remain or become after the house is converted to gas fuel.
The separation of individual and collective property, as well as the establishment of justified restrictions on the use of the former, is not an academic issue. The clarity of the relationship between the owner of the residential premises and the owner of the household depends on his decision. After all, a tenant can remodel his apartment in such a way that the strength of load-bearing structures, the aesthetics of the facade, fire prevention, sound insulation and ventilation of neighboring apartments will suffer, and complications will arise with their heating. Disputes sometimes arise between the owner of the household and the owners of the apartments, for example on the following issues: who should eliminate construction defects in an apartment in a newly built building; who will strengthen the crumbling balcony, repair appliances and pipes serving the apartment: its owner or the owner of the household; who is responsible for leaks and breakdowns in these items; to what extent the indicated items can be disposed of (remove, replace, remodel, rebuild) by the owner of the apartment, and to what extent - by the owner of the household. If there is no agreement on these issues, then cases cannot be ruled out (as sometimes happens) when a private owner invades objects and equipment that do not belong to him. At the same time, he is engaged in the alteration of household objects, to which he does not have the right.
Currently (2010) the state is allocating large funds for major renovations of many old residential buildings. These funds should be spent on putting the household property (household) in order, but not on repairing apartments. Meanwhile, many items related to home property are located within the apartments. This applies not only to external walls, but also to other main walls, transit pipes (so-called risers), ventilation ducts, etc. The presence of such devices and objects in apartments requires a clear division of them in kind into what belongs to the owner of the apartment, and then that doesn't belong to him. The Housing Code of the Russian Federation completely avoided this problem.
The division between private and public affects not only the major renovation of a house or apartment. For example, such accessories of a private apartment as balconies have considerable social significance. The aesthetic perception of the house depends on their appearance. Regardless of aesthetics, different requirements are placed on them. Special fire regulations apply to balconies. Balconies as a whole and their parts must be strong enough so as not to pose a threat to people and objects located on or under them. Thus, the routine maintenance of balconies, their repairs and capital improvements are beyond the scope of private law. Balconies should be in the field of view of housing organizations responsible for the house, as well as relevant supervisory authorities.
In some situations, housing organizations (together with the communal organizations servicing the houses) also have to deal with other “stuffing” of private apartments: heat supply devices, sanitary equipment, etc. If these devices and equipment fail, then sometimes they create an emergency situation for the whole house. From the legal side, the issues that arise when identifying the actual culprits of accidents that have occurred can be very difficult, since networks, household appliances, and household equipment are not always clearly divided between residents, housing organizations, and utility services.
Given the special danger of gas, gas pipes and gas appliances in private apartments are traditionally handled by specialized gas offices. But who owns the gas appliances remains an open question.
The Housing Code of the Russian Federation prefers not to notice (passes in silence) a number of difficult issues, such as those listed. To some extent, his position has a rational explanation. After all, people live in houses of different series with different housekeeping and different apartment layouts.
One must think that the materials and designs of houses, for example, built in the North and South of the country, are not the same. The rights and obligations of apartment owners should be different in different buildings; Accordingly, the rights and obligations of organizations that maintain and operate households must differ.
The Housing Code of the Russian Federation, intended for all of Russia as a whole, is not able to cover the entire variety of situations encountered. The conclusion from this is this: you cannot get by with one code for the whole country. Regions should be given the right (and recommended) to adopt their own housing codes in the development of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation. It is advisable to make such an entry in the current Housing Code of the Russian Federation. Model codes for large regions of the country could be recommended by lawyers - specialists in the field of housing law.

Each of these citizens wants to privatize the apartment in which they live and become its full owner.

But very often, it turns out that rented housing does not meet security requirements.

Housing may be considered unsafe or dilapidated. Can it be privatized?

We will try to understand these issues within the framework of the article.

What is emergency and dilapidated housing?

Each of us wants to live in a decent place. In this case, it does not matter whether the premises are owned or rented under a social tenancy agreement from the state.

Every citizen wants to feel safe, and see proper conditions for your stay. But, unfortunately, sometimes municipal authorities cannot provide these requests due to the lack of residential premises on their balance sheet. But, you see, owning a residential property, even in poor condition, is still better than nothing at all.

Quite different situations often occur. While collecting documents for the implementation of the privatization procedure, a citizen is suddenly faced with the fact that it turns out that his apartment is currently in dilapidated or emergency status.

This becomes a problem when formalizing privatization. Let's look at the conceptual apparatus.

We are accustomed to the fact that the concept of emergency housing is often used in legislation and in practice to describe the condition of real estate that does not meet safety requirements.

But there is another, clearer description of this term, which is assigned to it by law.
Emergency means a condition of a building in which the structures and communications of the building pose a danger to the lives of everyone living in the house.

As a rule, the poor condition of a house cannot be corrected even by carrying out a high-quality overhaul of the building.

Inconsistencies with the specified norms of the housing code, as well as the urban planning code, classify the building as emergency housing.

There is no concept of dilapidated housing in our legislation.

But it is very often used in practice, and has already become firmly established in housing legislation.

Generally accepted jurisprudence under dilapidated apartment means buildings that have a total wear and tear of more than 70%. At the same time, this condition of the building does not threaten the life and safety of its residents.

Both concepts are actually very similar. In both cases, questions arise that can either positively or negatively affect the privatization procedure and its results.

Is it possible to privatize?

By general rules, the basic procedure for the privatization of objects that belong to the housing stock of our country is determined by one single law.

This . This article says that specific types of apartments can be registered as personal property, but the same procedure cannot be carried out with the following objects.

In the first case, these are dorm rooms that cannot be legally privatized.

The second property is service apartments, which are on the balance sheet of certain government bodies.

The law says that it cannot be privatized. Article 4 of Law 1541 recalls that emergency housing is in an unsuitable technical condition, even if it has not yet been recognized as such.

If the inspection reveals that there are irreparable problems in the structures, communications and other elements of the building that threaten safety, then the privatization procedure will be canceled.

Dilapidated

As we said above, the concept of dilapidated housing does not exist in our legislation. by law Russian Federation It is not prohibited, but it is also not allowed to register such premises as personal possession.

The status of dilapidated is assigned to a building if its wear and tear is about 70% or more. But wear and tear does not mean that such housing threatens the safety of citizens.

Despite the fact that the room long time was in operation, subject to wear and tear, nevertheless, there is no threat to the life and health of citizens living in it, which means that no one has the right to prohibit the privatization of such real estate from going through the procedure.

However, although there is no reference to this in the legislation, in accordance with the norms of judicial practice, citizens who have privatized dilapidated real estate are obliged to maintain it in good condition and, if possible, correct defects.

This is important so that the building is not recognized as unsafe.

If we turn to the laws, then there is no mention of how to register ownership of such a building, which means that no one has the right to prohibit the initiation of the privatization procedure.

Advantages and disadvantages

The privatization of this type of living space has both a number of significant advantages and several noticeable disadvantages. Let's look at the weight of each of these arguments.

The undoubted advantage of privatization is the fact that you become the full owner of any real estate. You have the right to use, manage and otherwise influence the fate of the living space.

You can donate real estate, register in it and register others. As you can see, those who managed to register such real estate have quite a few privileges.

The downside is the fact that the property is still dilapidated or in disrepair, which means that sooner or later it may somehow become a threat to your safety.

Also, the downside is the fact that having participated in privatization once, you will not be able to repeat this procedure again, especially if you come across a good and decent real estate option.

Well, such a residential premises, unsafe for life, can simply be taken away from you, but at the same time, however, by providing other real estate in return.

This can happen if the building is legally subject to demolition due to defects.

The first step is to remove the emergency status from the property.

1. You are going to court.
2. In court, you seek to remove the status of emergency housing if the living space is recognized as dilapidated; the first two points do not apply to your case.

The status of emergency real estate is assigned by a specially convened commission. When making a decision, she is guided by the following data:

• change technical characteristics home in view external factors(natural phenomena);
• changing the sanitary and hygienic conditions of the home;
• total wear and tear of the building as a percentage.

Sometimes the commission deliberately assigns the status of emergency housing, which does not yet pose a threat to residents, but its wear and tear is already approaching a critical level.

With this action members of the commission decline responsibility if an accident occurs.

Since this practice occurs frequently - You can try to remove the emergency status from the living space in court:

1. Collect the necessary package of documents.
2. Take permission from those living with you to carry out the procedure.
3. Make a corresponding application. You pay the state fee.
4. Heading to Rosreestr.
5. Register the procedure.
6. Two months later, you pick up documents proving that you have privatized the living space - and therefore the rightful owner.

Answers to frequently asked questions

What to do if the house is declared unsafe and is being demolished?

If a privatized apartment in a building for demolition is a big problem. Many residents are worried about this and are afraid that they will not be provided with any living space in return. It turns out that the right to privatization has been spent, and in fact, the resulting property has disappeared due to demolition.

But not everything is so bad. Within a few months after demolition the administration must allocate real estate in proportion to the demolition in order to resettle citizens.

Those who managed to register their living space and lost it due to the poor condition of the house will also receive ownership documents.

If the living space was not privatized, the local administration will provide a new apartment under a social rental agreement.

The family will be able to live in it under the same conditions as in the demolished one, and in the near future hope that someday they will go through the privatization procedure and become full owners of the property.

How long does it take to privatize an apartment?

The resettlement of residents during the demolition of a house must begin exactly one year in advance. It is one year before the immediate liquidation of the building that the tenant loses the right to register ownership of this particular housing.

Each tenant is duly notified of what will happen after 12 months; otherwise, the procedure performed will be declared invalid.

What can residents expect when a house is demolished?

If the building is to be demolished and the living space is privatized, then tenants must be provided with property on the right of ownership. It should, if possible, be located in the same area, be the same size as its predecessor, and have a market value no less than the previous one.

However, due to the lack of a suitable apartment, the administration may offer to wait for the desired option or agree to the existing conditions.

If the living space has not been privatized, then residents can count on the fact that the administration will find them housing in the same area, as before.

However, there are no clear rules and legal guidelines on these issues.

Do they provide equal housing upon relocation?

If the house is declared unsafe, and the apartment is privatized, local authorities must provide equivalent living space upon relocation.

If this is not available, owners will be asked to wait until the required option becomes available, or they will be offered compensation in exchange for the missing amenities.

Which of the above options to choose is up to you.

Conclusion

Registration of real estate in personal ownership is a significant event, you need to be prepared for it. You will have your own property, and if your safety is threatened, it can be changed.

Therefore, do not lose the opportunity to become the full owner of your own corner. We, in turn, wish you good luck in this difficult matter.

If you find an error, please highlight a piece of text and click Ctrl+Enter.