北京三中院案例揭住房租赁合同“名实不符”陷阱

Core Viewpoint - The Beijing Third Intermediate People's Court has ruled that certain contracts labeled as "asset management service contracts" are essentially housing rental contracts, which obligate rental companies to pay fixed rental income to property owners regardless of whether the properties are rented out or not [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Disputes and Contract Nature - From January 2022 to November 2025, the court has handled 566 cases related to housing rental contract disputes, with the number of cases increasing annually [1]. - A significant cause of disputes arises from companies using ambiguous contract texts that lead to legal nature controversies [1]. - The court found that a contract stipulating fixed rental income aligns with the basic attributes of a rental contract, rejecting the rental company's defense based on a supposed "agency contract" [1]. Group 2: Market Issues and Regulatory Response - 25% of the housing rental companies' properties are reported as unsuitable for rental, and 10% of disputes arise from unclear rental contract terms [2]. - The percentage of cases where housing rental companies are the appellants is 53% [2]. - In response to market irregularities, regulatory measures have been intensified, including the establishment of deposit management and rental supervision, with over 800 rental companies signing contracts with regulatory banks [2].