最高法发布典型案例,回应物业领域群众关注的问题

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court has released five typical cases regarding property service contract disputes, addressing common issues between property owners and service providers, aiming to guide lower courts and resolve civil disputes effectively [1][2]. Group 1: Property Fee Collection - Property service providers cannot restrict access to essential services like elevators and entry systems as a means to collect overdue property fees, as this violates legal rights of property owners [2][3]. - The court ruled that property service providers must use reasonable and lawful methods for fee collection, and if owners fail to pay after notification, providers can seek legal remedies without disrupting owners' daily lives [2][3]. Group 2: Termination of Property Service Contracts - Property service providers are not entitled to charge fees after the termination of their service contract if they fail to vacate the property and complete the handover to the new service provider [3][4]. - The court emphasized that original service providers must comply with handover obligations and cannot demand payment for services not rendered post-termination [3][4]. Group 3: Authority of Owners' Assembly - Property service providers lack the legal standing to challenge decisions made by the owners' assembly regarding the appointment of new service providers, as these decisions are binding only on property owners [4][5]. - The ruling reinforces the authority of owners' assemblies in managing property services and ensures that service providers cannot disrupt the decision-making process of property owners [5].