Chinese Homebuyers Find Their Home Was Mortgaged By Developer

Some developers have sold encumbered homes to unsuspecting buyers.

iFeng: 开发商涉嫌假购房 回迁户20年办不成房产证
Sogou: Developers Suspected of Fake House Purchase

The original question: why did it take 20 years for the reporter to go to Guangzhou Haizhu district to carry out an interview and survey on the returned households?Property ownership certificate(Letter Investigation)

Editorial comrade:

We live in Guangzhou Haizhu District Baogang Avenue Sui Long Garden's resettlement households. At the beginning of this century, we were resettled here, but we found that the real estate had already been mortgaged and pre-sold by the developers before moving in, and could not be handled.Property ownership certificate. This has greatly affected our daily life. Over the years, we have repeatedly reflected our demands through various channels, but the problem has not been solved.

Some returned households

On May 21, the reporter drove to Baogang Avenue in Haizhu District of Guangzhou City and walked along a path. He was confronted by an 11-story high-rise building, which is what the reader called Sui Long Garden Community. Why can't the move-back households be delayed?Property ownership certificate? The reporter immediately launched an interview investigation.

Returned households reflect:

Before moving in, the real estate has been mortgaged and pre-sold for mortgage.

Suilong Garden Community and ItsPeripheral area, originally belonged to Longtian Zhijie, Baogang Avenue, Haizhu District, Guangzhou City. In 1995, with the approval of relevant departments of Guangzhou City, the plot was requisitioned for construction of commercial and residential buildings. Among them, some are developed and constructed by Guangzhou Beijing Company and some by Shengping Company. Guangzhou Beijing Company immediately set up a project company, Baoshan Company, to carry out demolition and reconstruction on the Guangzhou Beijing plot, and built an 11-storey commercial and residential building in 2000, which is the Guangzhou Long Garden residential area seen by the reporter.

Li Jiang (not his real name) is 78 years old this year. I still remember vividly the experience of moving back to China and running a license in these years and feel quite helpless. He agreed to demolish the house in October 1997 and moved into Suilong Garden Community in October 2000 according to the agreement with Suijing Company. "I stayed there for seven or eight years.Property ownership certificateNo one has been interested in this matter. We have repeatedly asked Sui Jing Company for assistance in handling the certificate, but we can't find Wu Shangping, then the head of the company. It was not until 2010 that the general office of Guangzhou municipal government forwarded the Guangzhou municipal land and resources bureau's handling of solving the problems left over from the city's history.Property ownership certificateNotice of Several Opinions on the Issue ",we began to reflect our demands to government departments and seek solutions to the problem. The result was that our relocated house was sealed up by the court due to the debt problem of Guangzhou Beijing Company. "Li Jiang said.

After judicial proceedings, the relocated house in Li Jiang was successfully unsealed in 2014. In November of that year, Li Jiang came to Guangzhou Real Estate Transaction Registration Center with great expectation and applied for handling.Property ownership certificate. However, on January 20, 2015, Li Jiang was blindsided by a "Notice of Supplementary Certificate Data" issued by Guangzhou Real Estate Transaction Registration Center. The notice stated that the relocated house in Li Jiang had been mortgaged to the business department of Guangdong Branch of Agricultural Bank of China in 1999. Only after the mortgage cancellation certificate was submitted can it be handled.Property ownership certificate.

"When I checked in, I didn't know the property was mortgaged." Li Jiang took out the receipt for the purchase of the same year and said, "His previous house was small, and when he moved back, he changed to a larger one, making up the difference of 25 square meters. Sui Jing Company obviously has mortgaged the house, why do you still charge me? " According to reports from Li Jiang, there are 28 returned households that "mortgage first and move in later".

During the interview, the reporter met Yang Yuan (pseudonym) who moved back to his home. He said that his house might be "sold two times for one room". Yang Yuan signed a relocation agreement with Sui Jing Company in January 1998, then moved into Sui Long Garden Community. In 2014, Sui Jing Company also issued a relocation certificate to Yang Yuan. Even so, Yang Yuan'sProperty ownership certificateIt has never been possible.

The mystery was solved by Yang Yuan after he inadvertently noticed a real estate sales contract dispute in Guangzhou's court system in 2018. He is very strange to the plaintiff and the defendant, but the real estate in dispute is his relocated house. What surprised Yang Yuan even more was that according to some information introduced in the second instance civil judgment of Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court, his relocated house had already been pre-sold and mortgaged by others.

Yang Yuanshun found that at least 22 households in Suilong Garden District had already been pre-sold by Baoshan Company, and the relevant buyers had already gone through mortgage formalities in the bank.

Functional response:

Developers are suspected of buying fake houses and mortgages and taking bank funds.

According to the clues provided by the relocated households, the reporter learned that in 1999, Xiao Sui Company borrowed 6.5 million yuan from the bank, and Baoshan Company, as a guarantee, mortgaged 28 properties in Sui Long Garden Community, that is, the relocated houses of Li Jiang and others to the bank. At the same time, according to the report of the returned households, the person in charge of Sui Jing Company at that time was Wu Shangping, and the person in charge of Xiao Sui Company at that time was Wu Suiyi, the son of Wu Shangping. "Guangzhou Beijing Company was a subsidiary of Guangzhou Beijing Office at that time. Baoshan Company, the project company established by Guangzhou Beijing Office, undertook the government-led demolition and renovation project. How can public interests be used to pay for private enterprises?" Li Jiang said.

Due to various factors, Guangzhou Haizhu District Court enforced the auction according to law. Zhonghui Company successfully auctioned in 2005. The auction proceeds of more than 82 million yuan were managed by the Executive Board of Guangzhou Haizhu District Court.

In this regard, some functional departments have proposed to allocate part of the money to solve the bank mortgage problem, thus helping the relocated households to run their certificates smoothly. However, Haizhu District Court clearly pointed out that the auction proceeds should be used for compensation and resettlement in priority and should be earmarked for special purposes. "It can only be used to solve the problems on the Guangzhou-Beijing plot, and cannot help other enterprises and plots to repay debts." The problem of 28 households such as Li Jiang has not been solved so far.

According to reports from Li Jiang, Yang Yuan and others, many of the "home buyers" in the relocated houses suspected of "selling one house for two" are Wu Shangping's relatives and company employees. This has been confirmed by Guangzhou's housing construction and planning departments.

Huang Chengjun, deputy director of Guangzhou's Housing and Urban-Rural Construction Bureau, said: "This problem is not limited to this building. When money is tight, some developers will use fake house purchase and mortgage to get bank funds and continue to develop with bank money. "

Huang Wenyu, deputy researcher of Guangzhou Real Estate Registration Center, said: "Most of the real estate registration was in 1998 and 1999. At that time, our information management system was not perfect. Developers were only required to register the real estate directly. At that time, they did not check the identity information of the buyers and did not check the purchase price."

Returned households reflect:

There is a dispute over the "floor covering clause" for land transfer. Developers are wrangling and the interests of returned households are affected.

In the interview and investigation, another group, 32 returned households from Shengping plot, were resettled in Suilong Garden plot on Suijing plot. Later, the two plots of land were merged into one, and were successively recovered by the government free of charge, then auctioned and auctioned by judicial auction, both of which were developed and constructed by Zhonghui Company. In the process of such changes and transfers, who should the 32 returned households claim their rights to? has become "a mess".

According to Bi Zhao (pseudonym) of the returned households, in May 1995, the Guangzhou municipal authorities approved the first phase of the Shengping plot project, involving the relocation of 75 households. Among them, 32 households chose property rights replacement and moved back to Suilong Garden Community in 2000. Since then, the Shengping plot has not been demolished. The whole plot has been identified as idle land. The Guangzhou municipal government has taken it back free of charge and listed it for sale in the municipal real estate transaction registration center.

In February 2006, Zhonghui Company successfully won the land parcel. Guangzhou Municipal Bureau of Planning and Natural Resources (known as Guangzhou Municipal Bureau of Land Resources and Housing) signed a land transfer contract with Zhonghui Company, which stated a special clause: "Under this contract, Party B shall be responsible for the compensation and resettlement of the land parcel, and the area of the land parcel to be demolished shall be about 9885 square meters. This area is the statistical data of file search, not the actual compensation and resettlement data. Party B shall be responsible for all compensation and resettlement according to the actual situation in the demolition process. " In response, Li Yuehua, a staff member of Guangzhou Planning and Natural Resources Bureau, said that this is a "bottom-covering clause" to ensure that the historical problems left over from the plot are solved.

However, different subjects have different opinions on this "bottom-covering clause", and developers are also pushing each other. According to Bi Zhao, they once looked for Shengping Company, only to find that their license had been "revoked". Looking for Sui Jing Company, the latter has always said that it should be based on the assignment contract and its special terms and conditions, and Zhonghui Company should be "responsible for all compensation and resettlement". Besides, its Sui Jing plot has been auctioned by the judiciary and should seek help from the court and the land department to solve the problem.

Since 2017, 32 relocated households have repeatedly sued Zhonghui Company, which was rejected one by one by the court, believing that Shengping Company has been resettled and "should handle the property right registration formalities for its houses". At the same time, the company also cited the scope of demolition permit in the demolition permit no 40 of 2006 as the reason that 32 relocated households were not within the "actual scope" stipulated in the special terms of the contract. On the grounds of the demolition settlement certificate issued by Guangzhou City Housing Demolition and Relocation Office in 2011, it is believed that the "settlement" proves that it is not necessary to be responsible for 32 relocated households ...

However, a judgment of Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court showed that Mo Moumou was a relocated family in Shengping plot and agreed that Shengping Company would pay the temporary relocation subsidy on a regular basis. Later Shengping Company would not pay any more. Mo so-and-so took Zhonghui Company to court and asked Zhonghui Company to continue to pay and settle the property. The court finally ruled in favor of Mo so-and-so. "Our houses were demolished by Shengping Company. Why did the verdict differ?" Bi Zhao said.

During the interview and investigation, several relocated households raised objections to the "Demolition Settlement Certificate" issued by the Guangzhou Demolition Office. At the same time, they hoped that the relevant departments would give an authoritative explanation of the "actual scope" and "full compensation and resettlement" in the special terms of the transfer contract as soon as possible, clarifying the main responsibility, "and" don't let us and the developers fall into endless verbal battles. "

Functional response:

Zhonghui Company should bear the responsibility. Its 20 houses have been restricted from sale.

With the doubts of the returned households, the reporter further verified with the relevant departments. First of all, regarding the reason why the relocated households in charge of Shengping Company will be relocated to the relocated buildings constructed by Suijing Company, the relevant responsible person of Guangzhou State-owned Land Housing Expropriation Office, Mai Huimin, gave an explanation: Shengping Company is actually a project company established by Suijing Company, and the business connection between them is normal, and the relevant departments are also informed.

It is understood that Guangzhou Municipal Planning and Natural Resources Bureau (known as Guangzhou Municipal Bureau of Land, Resources and Housing) restricted the sale of 20 units of Zhonghui Yayuan Phase I, a real estate developed by Zhonghui Company, in May 2014. In response, both Li Yuehua and Maihuimin explained in an interview with reporters that the 32 returned households did not fall within the actual scope of the assignment contract, which stated that "the area to be demolished for the plot is about 9,885 square meters". However, as long as the plot is in Shengping, Zhonghui Company should bear the responsibility according to the contract.

Since then, Zhonghui Company has submitted an administrative reconsideration to the Guangdong Provincial Housing and Construction Department, requesting to unlock 20 houses, and the appeal has been rejected. In addition, the "decision to reject the application for administrative reconsideration" issued by the Guangdong provincial housing and construction department also contains the reply opinions of Guangzhou municipal planning and natural resources bureau (known as Guangzhou municipal land and resources and planning Committee): since the land parcel has been sold twice before and after, the compensation agreement has been signed or the owners who have not handled the property rights have been resettled, which cannot be reflected in the scope of the demolition permit no 40 of 2006. Therefore, in addition to completing the compensation and resettlement of all houses within the scope of the demolition notice, the compensation and resettlement of other owners within the whole plot should also be solved.

Recent developments:

The municipal government said that the relocated households were innocent, and it was necessary to draw inferences from one instance and promote the resolution of similar problems.

During the interview, some relocated households introduced that they had reported their demands through various channels for more than 100 times, but there was still no result. "I have spent my whole life on this house, but in the end I still can't get it."Property ownership certificateMing. "

Because it cannot be done all the year round.Property ownership certificateThe daily life of the relocated households is also greatly affected: children cannot go to school nearby, traveling abroad is difficult, and even water and electricity meters cannot be installed normally. Due to the unclear property rights of the houses, the hearts of the relocated households have always been uncertain: the court system often conducts on-site investigations and claims to seal them up; The houses suspected of "selling one house for two" are often harassed and demanded to vacate.

"In any case, the relocated households are innocent and really victims." On May 29, when reporters came to Guangzhou again to exchange information with relevant leaders and departments in Guangzhou and Haizhu District, Xing Xiang, Deputy Secretary General of Guangzhou Municipal Government, said that the above-mentioned series of problems were often caused by developers taking advantage of some loopholes in the system and supervision. The next step is to try hard to solve the problems, and draw inferences from other examples to push forward the solution of a series of similar problems left over from history.

According to reports, Guangzhou municipal party Committee and municipal government attach great importance to the resettlement of sui long garden. municipal leaders in charge of the city held special meetings to organize the municipal housing construction, planning, public security, judicial administration and other departments and the municipal intermediate people's court, Haizhu district government and Haizhu district court to set up special working groups. At present, the ad hoc working group is paying close attention to checking the basic situation of the companies and real estate involved in the case, earnestly listening to the opinions of the relocated households, and sorting out and studying the solutions. Xing Xiang also made it clear that the next step would be to adopt a two-pronged approach of administration and justice. According to different situations such as seizure, mortgage, mortgage, etc., policies would be implemented in different categories and comprehensive treatment would be adopted to solve the problem as soon as possible. At present, all kinds of work are under way.

This newspaper will continue to pay attention to when the returned households can obtain the real estate certificate.

■ After editing

Effectively safeguard the interests of the masses

Dozens of relocated households have moved into new houses, but in the past 20 years, the real estate certificate has not been provided. The "sequelae" caused by the demolition and reconstruction have damaged the interests of the masses.

It should be said that the demolition and reconstruction is a good thing led by the government, improving the living environment, improving the city's appearance, the fundamental purpose is to let the masses live a better life. In order to do a good job, it is necessary to ensure that the demolition and reconstruction work is carried forward along the track of the rule of law and that the legitimate interests of the masses in the demolition and resettlement are respected and protected. For example, we should strengthen the supervision of the whole process of demolition and reconstruction, and resolutely say "no" to all acts that developers may do to harm the interests of the masses, resolutely stop them, and resolutely put an end to negligence, shielding and connivance. Another example is that once the masses' real estate disputes and interests are infringed upon, they should study and solve the problems in time and take active actions in the face of difficulties and contradictions in their work.

Adhering to the people-centered development idea, effectively protecting the interests of the masses, and solving problems for the masses are the obligatory duties and missions of the Party committee and government. I hope that the relevant local departments will have a unified understanding, form a joint force, and grasp it to the end so that these dozens of returned households can get their property certificates as soon as possible.