Expert Alexei Makrushin — on the proposal of the Ministry of justice to withdraw from the Dodgers only home
The Ministry of justice prepared a draft law allowing seizure only of property of debtors. The rule applies to any debts — loans, alimony, housing and communal services. You need to understand that the withdrawal of housing — an emergency measure, employed when all other options of debt repayment have been exhausted. Its use is permissible only by court order when the debtor has no other property, wages disproportionate to its obligations, and the size and the cost of housing clearly exceeds the level sufficient to ensure the reasonable needs of the debtor and his family in the home. However, the bill fundamentally changes the current practice and has already caused heated discussions in social networks and media.
Who should we protect: debtors or creditors? Maybe the debtor is the grandmother who took the near the loan of a thousand rubles and unable to pay. Maybe the neighbor is a drunk, and not paying for housing and communal services, or working man, deliberately does not return the loan or not paying child support, because he understands that no risk. Life situations are different, and to deal with all the circumstances to the court. It is important to understand who will pay for debtors.
If the person does not pay for housing and utilities, for him to pay other consumers. All irritate the payments for a block of flats, but they are formed mainly at the expense of those who do not pay or “twists” of meter readings. The result of management companies and resource supplying organizations are forced to lay in their prices to the underpayment of payments. Loans very similar — if the repayment of loans will grow by 1%, and lending rates for the population will begin to decline. No wonder the lowest rates in mortgage loans, on which housing can be removed for a much more simple procedure. Ultimately, debtors do not pay the Bank and not the government, and ourselves — when I come to get a loan or to make rent. We should realize that by encouraging non-payers, we harm primarily to those who pay in good faith, how hard he was.
What will happen to those people who are evicted from the only housing? If they do not have to live on the street? No, not necessary. Sale will be possible only if it makes sense: debt is more than 5% of its value, and the size of the apartment is more than double the norm of residence, components in different regions from 14 to 18 sq m per person. To be delivered to the debtor the amount received from the sale of the apartment should be sufficient to buy another house at the square. After the sale of the apartment the debtors transferred the proceeds and given three months to buy a new apartment. If the debtor could not or did not want to buy a new home, funds are transferred to the municipality, which is obliged no later than two months to provide the debtor and his family new housing.
This approach is consistent with the Constitution, article 40 which States that everyone has the right to housing and no one may be arbitrarily deprived of housing. The poor, otherwise specified by law to citizens in need of housing, it is provided free of charge or for a reasonable fee from state, municipal and other housing funds in accordance with the standards established by law.
I want to focus on the provision of “social” housing, because it need not only debtors, but also those who live in emergency and dilapidated houses or not have the ability to buy their own homes. The problem of resettlement of dilapidated houses is solved due to the budget, but no budget is not enough money to buy a new home all whose homes will become worthless, because soon the down will be massively out of Khrushchev, built in the 60-ies of the last century. Many people do live without a house, and renting it on the market — whether the state has obligations towards them? At the same time, the country has a huge number of “poor owners” — people who privatized expensive housing, but are not able to pay even its content. Do I have to help them pay for housing and communal services, if they have the opportunity to fetch good money from the sale of property and moving to a cheaper area? These are difficult questions that have no easy answers.
The government’s very cautious approach to the issue of changing the procedure of providing benefits and guarantees for the needy, the movement towards the system of housing, common in Western countries, it is inevitable. Together with the completion of the program of resettlement of citizens from emergency housing all the more urgent becomes the question of building “social” housing, which is available for rent at affordable “social” cost for all the needy and the relocation of social housing, and the same debtors, and just low-income citizens. It is important that this housing is not transferred to the ownership of and granted for a period of time until people will not be able to afford to buy their own apartment. This approach will allow to solve problems not by individual families, and in General all those who need shelter.
While the bill of the Ministry of justice — only project, and it will take a lot of discussion before the law is passed. However, the issues raised therein are very important and timely, because their decision will make life a little cheaper.
The author is head of the working group of the expert Council on development of housing and communal services under the government of the Russian Federation
The opinion of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial Board