The only housing - can they take it for debts? Explanations from the Russian Ministry of Justice. The Ministry of Justice will not take away the only housing for credit debts, the conditions for the confiscation of square meters from debtors have been named

“This is one of the working proposals, which is subject to detailed study both from a legal point of view and from the point of view of law enforcement,” explained presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov.

According to the Ministry of Justice, it will be possible to seize housing for debts, firstly, if its area is twice the social norm. It is set by the municipality from 14 to 18 square meters. meters per person. Secondly, if the price of the apartment is twice as high as the premises that must then be provided to the debtor. Third, the debt must be at least 5 percent of the cost of the home. And fourthly, the owner must not have funds or other property to repay the debt.

Now the only housing is inviolable. The only exceptions are apartments that are mortgaged and pledged to the bank.

The collection procedure assumes that the housing is put up for auction. The debt is repaid from the proceeds, the rest is given to the owner so that he can purchase real estate that meets the standard.

Human rights activist Maria Arbatova supported the idea of ​​the Ministry of Justice. “If you carefully read what is being proposed, it turns out that they are not going to evict anyone onto the street,” she says. People will be offered cheaper social housing. Even in my house in the center of Moscow, lists of people who do not pay rent are periodically posted. This makes me is amazing, because there are a huge number of expensive cars in the yard. I hope that this law will teach people not to live on a loan that they are not going to pay back. I have friends who have been living on loans for many years, taking out another one to pay off the previous one. And this chain reaction can no longer be stopped, because the person does not even understand that he is a debtor.”

“Still, in such a situation, everything needs to be spelled out very carefully so that there are no double interpretations in court, so that people don’t end up on the street,” insists the head of the State Duma Committee on Housing Policy and Housing and Communal Services Galina Khovanskaya. The deputy also noted that it is necessary to protect the rights of children and elderly people living in this housing.

You can't leave people homeless

Director of the Federal Bailiff Service Artur Parfenchikov emphasized that the proposed bill does not deprive debtors of the constitutional right to housing. This is a fundamental point.

“The Ministry of Justice is fulfilling the order of the Constitutional Court, which obliged several years ago to establish such a procedure,” Artur Parfenchikov said yesterday. “I would recommend carefully studying both the decision of the Constitutional Court and the bill itself. I believe that this is precisely the path to a balance of rights and obligations.”

It is assumed that they will come for excess square meters in the most extreme case: when the debtor has no other property, no savings, and the salary is clearly not enough to pay off the debts in the foreseeable future.

It will be possible to take away the “extra meters” only through the court. In this case, the court in its ruling will have to set the amount that is given to the debtor for the purchase of housing.

The Ministry of Justice emphasizes that the amount allocated by the court must be sufficient for the debtor to purchase other residential premises suitable for permanent residence for him and family members living with him. “The method of calculating the amount assumes the possibility of purchasing new housing in the same locality,” the Ministry of Justice explains. So if a person lived in Moscow, then the court should focus on capital prices.

Bailiffs will have the right to prohibit the debtor from registering anyone other than minor children in the apartment. Such a measure is necessary so that during the proceedings the debtor does not artificially increase the size of his family and is not able to save excess square meters using such cunning.

An important point: the introduced procedure will apply to relations that arose after the day the law entered into force. In other words, the majority of current debtors are not threatened with a reduction in living space. But there is an exception: for alimony workers, as well as debtors for claims for compensation for harm caused to life and health, the law is expected to have retroactive effect. That is, someone who owes money to their child today will be forced to sell part of their square meters tomorrow to pay off.

Be that as it may, the project caused heated debate. Chairman of the State Duma Committee on State Building and Legislation Pavel Krasheninnikov said that, in his opinion, the initiative of the Ministry of Justice will be difficult to implement. But this does not mean a categorical “no”; everything just needs to be carefully weighed and worked out in detail.

“Of course, it is impossible to take away housing and leave people without living space, you cannot leave people homeless,” he said. One of the questions is: where should debtors go when the apartment is already up for auction, but there is still no money to buy a new home? Leave it under the old roof for now? But won't this scare away buyers? “There are a lot of questions here, but the bill can be finalized by spelling out everything in great detail,” Krasheninnikov emphasized.

Taking into account all the complexities of the proposed procedure, Mikhail Fedotov, Chairman of the Presidential Council of the Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, in a conversation with a correspondent for the site, proposed conducting an experiment in one of the regions to evict debtors from the only housing.

Other experts noted that the courts have already begun to seize (but not sell) the only housing of debtors. “The judicial practice of individual courts developed in such a way that foreclosure was applied to the only housing, despite the direct legislative prohibition and the interests of minors living with the debtor,” lawyer Olesya Spiricheva told RG. “At the same time, the standard for providing housing that should be provided was not always taken into account debtor. In light of such enforcement, an attempt to resolve the problem at the legislative level seems positive." True, people were not evicted from private housing for debt; the arrest of the apartment in this case was more of a moral pressure.

At the moment, according to the norms of the Civil Procedure Code, the only housing is inviolable - it cannot be taken away from the debtor under any circumstances. However, the Ministry of Justice has developed and submitted for discussion a bill that abolishes this provision. Recently, the Russian Ministry of Justice provided clarifications in which cases it is permissible to confiscate the last apartment or housing from potential bankrupts.

Thus, housing may be subject to seizure if its cost and size clearly exceed the minimum established norms of square meters required for one person to live.

In each region of the Russian Federation, the minimum is set by local authorities. As can be seen from the table, in Moscow the norm is 18 square meters. m. for 1 person. This means that if three people live in the debtor’s apartment - a husband, wife and child, then they are entitled to 62 square meters. m. And if the apartment, for example, is 150 sq. m. m., then the court may decide to seize and exchange the living space in favor of the creditors’ claims.

Such explanations were provided by the Ministry of Justice after the Constitutional Court demanded to establish the limits of the proposed bill. During seizure, the rights of the debtor and his family to a normal existence must be preserved. That is, in fact, apartments and houses will be confiscated to be exchanged for other, cheaper housing that meets all the required square meters per person.

The opinions of lawyers and experts were divided. Some believe that the bill proposed by the Ministry of Justice significantly violates the rights and interests of potential debtors, while others approve of the amendments to the legislation, summing up their opinion by saying that the bill will actually reduce the risks of recognizing fictitious bankruptcy. There are cases when fairly wealthy citizens want to declare bankruptcy, and the adopted law will allow such cases to be reduced to a minimum.

In particular, Arthur Parfenchikov, director of the Federal Bailiff Service, expressed the opinion that the proposed bill in any case does not violate the rights of potential bankrupts to housing.

Another interesting point is that an apartment can be seized only if its dimensions are at least 2 times greater than the permissible norm. So, if 1 citizen lives in an apartment, and its size is 30 square meters. m., then such housing cannot be seized, since in this situation, in order to apply such measures, it is necessary that the size of the apartment be at least 36 square meters.

In addition, creditors will be able to file a justified request for repossession of housing only if the amount of debt exceeds 5% of the cost of the apartment. So, if your living space costs 20 million rubles, then the court will be able to seize your home only if the debt amount is at least 1 million rubles.

Do you have serious reasons for declaring yourself bankrupt, do you want to write off all your debts, and at the same time do you not want to lose your usual only home? There is no need to delay the procedure, since from the moment the bill comes into force, the concept of single housing will be abolished. At the moment, the law is at the stage of public discussion, and while there is time, you should think about drawing up a statement of claim for recognition of bankruptcy.

The Russian Ministry of Justice, at the request of State Duma deputies, finalized the bill on the confiscation of the only housing from debtors in order to avoid its double interpretation in the courts. This was announced by Deputy Director of the Department of Economic Legislation of the Ministry Denis Novak. The official assured that the bailiffs will not take away the only housing for debts on loans and housing and communal services. According to him, they will be able to deprive a person of a roof over their head only in socially significant enforcement proceedings initiated for alimony debts or in cases of compensation for damage to life and health.

“Many of the proposals made during the public discussion of the bill have been taken into account. This is, first of all, a reduction in the scope of its action only on demands for payment of alimony, causing harm to life and health and harm caused by a crime,” RIA Novosti quotes Novak as saying. He added that it would be impossible to repossess the last home for overdue loans or non-payment of housing and communal services.

The official also said that the revised bill took into account comments on the ratio of debt and the cost of residential real estate. “A differentiated scale was developed so that it would be impossible to repossess an apartment for a debt comparable to the cost of the TV,” he said. The updated document will be published in the coming days.

Let us recall that at the beginning of January of this year, Russia was literally “blown up” by the idea of ​​the Ministry of Justice that the only housing could be confiscated from debtors if it “clearly exceeds” their needs for housing in size and cost. According to the proposed procedure, by decision of the court, the debtor’s housing is put up for auction, debts are paid off from the proceeds, and the remaining money goes to the former debtor so that he can buy housing that meets social standards. If within three months after the sale of the old apartment the debtor has not bought a new one, the money goes to the municipal budget, and it provides something suitable for living. The ban on the seizure of a single dwelling is supposed to be maintained only for real estate that does not exceed twice the size of the standard square footage per person.

The bill was criticized not only by ordinary citizens, but also by relevant departments. Thus, Ombudsman Tatyana Moskalkova spoke out categorically against the draft law. According to her, in conditions of the economic crisis and declining household incomes, such an innovation will work in favor of bankers.

The Kremlin called for serious revision of the law. “This is one of the working proposals, which is subject to very detailed study, both from a legal point of view and from the point of view of law enforcement. It is necessary to collect the opinions of many departments,” said presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov.

The head of the State Duma Committee on Housing Policy and Housing and Communal Services, Galina Khovanskaya, in turn, said that the bill has the right to life, since it deals with excess housing, but this needs to be spelled out more clearly. After this, the Ministry of Justice announced that the document would be finalized.

Moscow, Svetlana Petrova

Moscow. Other news 05/18/17

© 2017, RIA “New Day”

Until 2017, debtors only feared the seizure of their housing. After all, some caring distant relative could pass on to another world and leave an old house as an inheritance. Then the debtor would be offered to urgently move to this inherited premises, and the comfortable apartment would be sold in order to pay off the debt.

Previously, the law did not allow the law to take away a Russian’s only home. There are already about 40 million such debtors among Russian citizens! However, in 2017 the situation may change dramatically. If you took out a loan and cannot pay it off, then your only housing under the new law (not yet adopted) will be:

• seized;
• put up for sale.

What conditions must be present for debt collection by selling an apartment to become legal?

The bill, which caused concern among millions of Russians, appeared on the website of the Ministry of Justice. It has not yet been adopted, but analysts believe that serious changes in Russian legislation should be expected this year.

1. We are talking specifically about the only housing in which they live:

• debtor;
• his family.

2. The apartment (house, cottage) must be:

• sole property of the debtor;
• family property.

3. The square footage of the apartment must exceed twice the norm that is provided for the residence of the debtor (his family) by law.

4. The cost of the seized housing must exceed the cost of a similar house (apartment) required by law by 2 times.

5. It is necessary to take into account the standard of living space, which is the minimum allocated for the residence of a citizen or his family in a specific municipality of the Russian Federation. The maximum standards from 14 to 18 square meters are taken into account. m. This means that the question of eviction will be raised only if the square footage of housing in this region exceeds double the norm (from 28 to 36 sq. m.).

6. Both conditions must be present at the same time:

• double excess quadrature;
• double the cost.

If the designated housing of the debtor meets the above indicators, it is put up for auction.

How real is the threat of apartment seizure?

Let's say the debtor has only one apartment to live in. Moreover, the amount of debt, when compared with the cost of the apartment, is less than 5%. In this situation, legislators believe, creditors can wait.

Collecting debts in this way is possible only as a last resort. That is, it will be necessary to prove that the debtor will never (at least in the near future) be able to fulfill loan obligations.

1. The debtor does not have any other property that could be sold to pay off the credit debt.

2. The debtor does not have enough available funds to allow him to pay.

3. The accumulated liabilities are clearly disproportionate:

• with the debtor's income;
• with his official salary.

That is, a citizen is obliged to leave the minimum funds required by law for a modest existence.

Who has the right to foreclose on the only home?

The creditor goes to court. The court ruling comes into force. The claimant (bank, other creditor) tries to sell the apartment on his own if the debtor does not object. However, housing can be put up for auction by a bailiff:

• if the debtor does not want the apartment to be sold (appraised and kept by the bank with payment of the remaining funds to the former owner);
• if the claimant does not want to bother with the sale of real estate, which is valued inexpensively.

Consequences of selling a home

1. The proceeds are used to pay off debt.

2. The ex-debtor is given the remaining funds. The remaining money should be enough to purchase housing with a square footage that meets the standards.

3. This is not the case here:

• about compaction;
• about accommodation;
• about moving to a communal apartment.

The debtor independently decides on the choice of new housing. Here legislators are allegedly trying to take the side of the debtor, although a competent legal scholar studying this issue is not sure of this.

The RF Supreme Court Resolution No. 50 has already considered the possibility of seizing the only home of a citizen who has arrears in payments. Clear conclusions were drawn:

• that such arrest is permitted;
• that the seizure of housing cannot be considered illegal.

However, at that time there was only talk of arrest. In Art. 446 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation states that it is prohibited to put up for sale the only housing if a citizen lives in it permanently and has no other residential premises.

In paragraph 43 of the above decree it is stated that after the seizure of housing, the owner does not have the right:

• register (add) other persons;
• rent out your living space;
• present;
• sell;
• exchange or otherwise freely dispose of residential real estate.

Such actions could cause damage to the claimant. At the same time, no one prohibits the debtor, as well as members of his family, from using this apartment (house).

What should the debtor do?

One of the ways to get rid of debts is. In this situation, a practicing lawyer with considerable experience will help the client prove in court that the debt was caused by unforeseen circumstances, and not by the borrower’s negligence in fulfilling obligations.

In this case, the amount intended for payment will not increase. There may be a partial write-off of the debt if it does not affect the principal amount. Also, the bank will not be able to charge penalties and fines in the future.

If you have problems with loan payments, contact a serious lawyer immediately! He will give practical advice on what you should do. Such issues are considered individually.

The bill on confiscation of housing from debtors has already caused a lot of noise, but apparently, this issue will still be resolved, and primarily in the interests of the budget, housing and communal services and monopolies. For several years in a row, real incomes have been falling. According to published data from Rosstat only for April 2017. real incomes of the population decreased by 7%. Housing and communal services and monopolies still eat up most of the income of most Russians.

The only housing - the Constitutional right to housing, which is still protected by law from seizure with the help of the coercive force of the state, will soon fall under the pressure of the Government. This is not the first attempt to change Article 446 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Before the scandalous bill of the Ministry of Justice, an attempt to remove immunity from the housing of debtors was made by State Duma deputy Galina Khovanskaya.

As has already happened, the initiators of the bill motivate its necessity by the interests of minors who are not paid alimony, but for some reason in the text there are no restrictions on the type of debt only in alimony. In addition, the need to change the law is again motivated by the implementation of the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated May 14, 2012 No. 11-P “In the case of verifying the constitutionality of the provisions of the second paragraph of the first part of Article 446 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in connection with complaints from citizens F.Kh. . Gumerova and Yu.A. Shikunov."

Let me remind you of the essence of this case - it is not related to the payment of alimony: F.Kh. Gumerova lent a friend a significant amount of money to build a house with an area of ​​300 square meters. m., but the borrower was in no hurry to return the money. Courts of various instances ordered the borrower to pay the lender monthly from his pension. But since the debtor received a regular pension, the loan repayment period could take half a century. The creditor discovered that the debtor owned a residential building worth about 10 million rubles. Trying to repay the debt, the borrower went through all the courts, right up to the Constitutional Court.

Considering the creditor's complaint, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation made a simple conclusion: the extension of property immunity to residential premises unreasonably and disproportionately limits the rights of the creditor.

According to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the court should consider the issue of foreclosure on housing, even if only the only one. At the same time, when foreclosure on housing, the court must establish that the housing exceeds the standards established by law, and the debtor’s income is disproportionate to his obligations. The limits of property immunity, by decision of the Constitutional Court, must be established by the State Duma.

We are currently seeing another attempt to abolish housing immunity.

It is known where the road is paved with good intentions. The middle class and the poor with low incomes will be the first to suffer from such an innovation.

Wealthy citizens, with the help of consultants, minimize risks in advance.

What the Government offers:

1. The only housing will be taken away to pay off any debts for which there are court decisions, and for debts for alimony and harm - even if the debt arose before this law came into force.
2. The amount of debt with which it will be possible to take away the only housing is 5% of the cost of housing. To be precise, even less (about 4%), since this 5% includes the remuneration of bailiffs (7% of the debt amount).

For example:

In the Moscow region, the cost of a one-room apartment is about 3 million rubles. accordingly, 4% is 120,000 rubles. (3,000,000 /100 x 4). Starting from this amount of debt, you need to worry that the bailiffs will not make you and your family homeless.

1. The only housing will be taken away only by a separate court ruling.
2. After selling the housing at auction and withholding the amount of the debt, enforcement fee and other expenses, the debtor must be paid an amount for the purchase of another housing based on the existing area norm for the debtor and family members living with him at a price based on the weighted average cadastral value for the cadastral quarter.
3. If the debtor has not bought an apartment on his own within 3 months, the money goes to the budget, and housing is provided to the citizen by local governments.

It raises more questions, for example, where will the debtor and his family live until they are provided with another apartment? According to the bill, the sale of the debtor's apartment may take several months, and the purchase will take 3. And if you fail to buy, another 2.

What kind of housing will the municipality provide?

And what will happen in Moscow, with the start of renovation, when affordable housing will be demolished throughout the city.

The Government's proposals were implemented through amendments:

1) in Article 446 of the Civil Procedure Code, allowing foreclosure on the only housing. Supplement the code with a new article 447, which discloses the procedure for foreclosure on a single dwelling.

2) in part 1 of Article 86 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, imposing on parents the obligation to bear additional costs in the form of providing housing for minors.

3) to the law “On Enforcement Proceedings” by adding Part 1 of Article 64 with clause 16.2, according to which the bailiff has the right to impose a ban on the debtor from registering persons in the only residential premises belonging to him, with the exception of minors.

And supplement the law with a new article 78.1 On foreclosure on a citizen’s only home.

It should be recognized that the Government’s actions are not just an attempt, but a repetition of the attempt made in 2013 to push through a simplified procedure for foreclosure on real estate for debts for housing and communal services.

Then, in 2013, the Ministry of Regional Development published draft amendments to the Housing and Civil Codes, according to which it was proposed to put up housing for auction if the amount of debt for utilities is 5% of the market value of the apartment. The author of this proposal was the NP Housing and Communal Services Development, headed by Andrei Chibis, who currently holds the post of the country’s chief housing inspector.

It was not possible to push through the bill - the proposal caused an angry reaction from many experts, and the ministry itself then came out with an explanation that it did not support this idea.

Since January 2017, the Ministry of Justice has repeatedly motivated the social significance of the changes: the bill will only affect those debtors whose housing conditions “clearly exceed” their reasonable housing needs.
A similar position was publicly expressed by State Duma deputy Pavel Krasheninnikov.

The website of draft regulations (go here) contains a draft law on amendments to existing regulations (Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Family Code of the Russian Federation, Law on Enforcement Proceedings).

The most significant part 2 of Article 4:

2. Articles 1 and 2 of this Federal Law apply only to relations related to the forced execution of claims for alimony, compensation for harm caused to health, compensation for harm in connection with the death of a breadwinner and compensation for damage caused by a crime, regardless of the time when these claims arose.

As we can see, the Government intends to lift immunity not for all claimants, as prescribed by the Constitutional Court, but for a certain part - for claimants of alimony, for claimants of health damage, compensation for the loss of a breadwinner and compensation for damage to victims of crimes.

For other claimants, the path is still closed.

At the same time, those who have encountered the realities of the Russian judicial system, the execution of court decisions, and local officials express concerns about the possibility of massive abuses in the implementation of this law.