Six months have passed since the president signed a law allowing homeowners in multi-apartment buildings (MKD) to refuse the intermediary services of management companies (MC) and conclude contracts for payment for water and heat directly with resource supply organizations (RSO). The first reaction of consumers is relief. Residents believed that direct payments would give them the opportunity to save on utility bills. In fact, it turned out that the law is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, the general house meeting had the opportunity to choose whether to terminate relations with the Criminal Code or not. On the other hand, it turned out that the main thing for the RSO is to sell the resource, and they don’t care what temperature the water enters the 10th floor of the house.

In March 2005, the Housing Code was adopted in Russia. From that moment, the procedure for paying for housing and communal services was carried out as follows: management companies collected money from all owners, which they later transferred to resource-supplying organizations. But in fact, this scheme did not work everywhere. The management companies took money for the "communal" from the residents, but did not redirect it to the accounts of resource-supplying organizations or transferred it, but untimely and not in full.

On April 3, 2018, Federal Law No. 59 was adopted, which amended the Housing Code. His goal was this: to remove the managing organizations from the financial chain. The purpose of the innovation was good: to shorten the chain of payments of the population and thereby reduce these payments themselves. What actually happened?

For whom the law is not written

From the moment the law came into force, narrow-profile forums appeared on the Internet with telling names like "Is there life without the Criminal Code" and "Switching to direct payments with RCO - what do you think?". A resident of Chelyabinsk, Maria Ivanova, wrote on one of them that she had long heard that when paying for utilities, you can do without an intermediate link in the form of a management company, to which her family had many complaints. “We called a general meeting of residents. We unanimously decided to switch to direct settlements with RSO,” she says. What was her surprise when, as a result, it turned out that the payment for the “communal apartment” had not decreased, despite the absence of an intermediary. If we talk about the convenience of direct payments, then a miracle did not happen here either. It turned out that paying for a resource directly does not guarantee that the service will be delivered of the proper quality.

“At every corner I hear: “It’s done! You got rid of the UK fraudsters and now you will pay directly!” But our laws are not perfect. The Criminal Code unites all owners and serves their interests, and after the conclusion of direct agreements with the North Ossetia, there will be no one and no one to ask, - a resident of Chelyabinsk shares a sore resident. - For example, if earlier a pipe burst in the entrance or a garbage chute was clogged, then we turned to the Criminal Code, and they already sorted out all the problems with the RSO. If something broke, the management company was responsible for replacing, restoring, and all this at the expense of the “manager”. Now the Criminal Code tells us: “This is not our area of ​​responsibility, since we terminated the contract with you, and you entered into direct contracts with the RSO, and contact them.” And the RNO replies to this: “This is not our concern, since the problem is on the common house territory, it has always been dealt with by the Criminal Code.”

Why did the law, which seemed so beneficial to the tenants, not work? Yes, because, being new in words, in reality it brought almost nothing new to the practice of paying housing and communal services. Recall that the adoption of the Housing Code in Russia obliged management companies to be responsible for all utilities in the house. But even then, despite the normative act, 80% of apartment buildings paid for electricity supply directly to the RSO, and gas supply - 90%. However, neither the prosecutor's office, nor housing inspections, nor any other authorities were interested in this. If we talk about cold and hot water, about 40% of MKDs received the service through direct contracts. The remaining 60% did not want to give up the services of an intermediary represented by management companies and switch to direct contracts.

“The adoption of the new law, in fact, only legalized what was already in effect. That is why no one expected a mass transition to direct contracts: those who wanted and could have already done it. It should also be noted that a by-law, a standard contract, has not yet been adopted, in accordance with which direct contracts should be concluded. It cannot be said that now the law is in full force, ”said Svetlana Razvorotneva, deputy chairman of the commission of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation on housing and communal services, construction and roads, in a conversation with MK.

If you ask the question, which is better - direct contracts or through the management company - there is no single answer even from resource-supplying organizations, said Dmitry Gordeev, an expert at the Institute for Urban Economics. “Take, for example, water utilities. Half of them want to switch to direct contracts, half do not. Both options have their pros and cons, he says. - The biggest achievement of the law adopted in April is that it enabled the owners of premises in an apartment building to switch to direct contracts by making a decision at a general house meeting. The law allowed to choose, this is a very big achievement.”

Direct payments - crooked result

There are situations when management companies, being contractors of utility services, collected payments from citizens, but did not pay off resource-supplying organizations in a timely manner. Such RNOs now have the right, in the presence of a certain level of debt, to unilaterally terminate contracts with the management company: to stop selling cold and hot water, and thermal energy to them. In some regions, this process has moved off the dead center: the RNO began to end relations with the "managers" at an accelerated pace. But there are also regions where the situation has not changed much.

“The RSO has this philosophy: the more you sell a resource, the better. When switching to direct contracts, they will not be interested in resource saving, Gordeev emphasized. - The management company, which manages the house, is responsible for the maintenance and repair of house property. The owners may ask them for answers to questions: why the house consumes too much heat energy, where do the water leaks in the basement come from ... RSO is not responsible for the common property in the house, for example, for engineering networks, for distributing cold and hot water. Their goal is for the house meter to show a large amount of resource consumption, after which they will make fabulous payments. They have no interest in saving and saving energy.”

In addition, the expert noted, RSO are local monopolists. For example, there is one water utility in the city. Like it or not, you will have to negotiate with him, since no one else can supply water to the houses of this city. Such monopoly organizations are quite powerful in economic terms, they have a good legal staff. For a simple consumer, if there are any proceedings on water quality or incorrectly charged fees for services, it will be more difficult to fight for their rights.

In theory, the regional state housing inspectorates are called to help the residents; they, as experts say, in many cases prefer not to get involved with strong and powerful RSOs. If there are many courts, the housing inspectorate will simply get stuck in them, and the RNO has a great economic potential that they can use to push through righteous and unrighteous solutions that are beneficial to them.

To whom to complain?

At the aforementioned forums devoted to problems in the field of housing and communal services, residents of apartment buildings actively complain that they cannot get an acceptable quality of service from resource workers. Here is a story from Peter Nikerichev from Yekaterinburg. The owner lives on the tenth floor of a relatively recent apartment building, and the water pressure in his apartment is so weak that even taking a shower is problematic: it barely drips from the tap. People living on the upper floors of the building, the forum member writes, regularly pay the RSO, with whom direct contracts were concluded. “Despite this, we understand that the service we paid for is not delivered properly: weak water pressure, low temperature. We addressed the relevant claims to the RSO, but we get something like this: the resource is supplied to the house regularly, and if you have any complaints, contact the authority that will check the pipes in the house or the pressure in the water supply. Thus, resource managers relieve themselves of all responsibility for the quality of the service provided. It is provided, and then figure it out as you wish! - the tenant is indignant.

Meanwhile, the law does not say anything about what the tenant should do in such a case. “When the document was at the adoption stage, the developers said that all complaints should be addressed to resource workers, and the management company should be responsible for the condition of the house engineering networks, which follows from the Housing Code and other regulations,” says Razvorotneva. “In fact, all these nuances are not spelled out anywhere.” Now, the representative of the Civic Chamber continues, in the next draft resolution they are trying to correct the situation and prescribe a clear procedure: on all issues related to the inadequate quality of the supply of a communal resource, the consumer applies to the management company, and she, in turn, must deal with resource workers. If it turns out that the problem arose before the resource was brought into the house, the responsibility should be borne by the RSO, if inside the house, then the management company is to blame.

Razvorotneva noted that it is not yet clear how this whole scheme will function in practice, because the Criminal Code has only one type of contractual relationship with the RSO: for the purchase of resources consumed for general house needs. Theoretically, it has nothing to do with the rest of the Criminal Code. It turns out a complex legal conflict: how to force the “manager” to legally protect the owners if she is not a party to the contract. So far, all complaints are forwarded to the Criminal Code, but everything works only “according to the rules”. However, according to the expert, if the case suddenly goes to court, the "managers" will have a great chance to challenge the complaints of the owners transferred to them.

If there is no water in the tap

“The scheme of indirect contracts is good because there is one management company and it alone is responsible for all utilities and common property,” says Gordeev. Sergey Astafiev, another member of the profile forum from Murmansk, writes: “If there is no water in the tap, the residents know that their management company is to blame for this and no matter what happens outside the house, for example, something broke at the water utility, this should also climb the managing organization. With direct contracts with the RSO, if there is no water in the apartment, you need to find out: the problem is in the internal communications of the house or outside the building and the water simply did not reach the building.

The problem lies in the fact that in the presence of direct contracts, the homeowner is left alone with the RSO. It is he who becomes, in fact, the buyer of water directly from the manufacturer. And the citizen will have to demand the proper quality of the service provided from the resource provider alone, while the management company had its own levers of influence on the RSO, for example, qualified lawyers.

Now, in order to smooth out all these shortcomings of the new law, by-laws are being adopted to it. But here, too, there are traps for residents. For example, RSOs want the quality parameters of the supplied communal resource to be checked not in the apartment itself, but at the entrance to the house. But for a specific consumer - for example, the one who lives on the tenth floor - this will not make it easier. “It turns out that RSO is not responsible for that pressure, for that pressure of water, which is on the tenth floor. They will say: the pressure at the entrance to the house is normal, and then it’s not our question. However, resource providers are not responsible for the chemical composition of water either. They can say that in the well, from where water is supplied to the house, it is of proper quality, and the fact that rusty flows directly from the tap is not their concern, ”Gordeev explains.

The expert is convinced that the one who is responsible for in-house engineering systems should be responsible for the quality of public services. And when switching to direct contracts, this principle of single responsibility turned out to be broken, and now the tenants have no one to complain to: the resource workers nod at the “managers”, and vice versa.

Six months of the law on direct payments for housing and communal services showed that nothing has changed for the better for residents. The “communal” did not cost less, and the fact that the payment path turned out to be somewhat shorter is more than offset by the fact that the organizations turned out to be much less responsible for the quality of the services provided.

To a direct question - what should a tenant of an apartment building do if his apartment is not heated enough in winter, and the heat supply organization refuses to answer for this, Dmitry Gordeev answered in monosyllables: "Butting."

Read US VKontakte

"The meaning of the amendments that have come into force is an attempt by the legislator to try to simplify the procedure for owners and tenants of residential premises to conclude contracts directly with resource-supplying organizations if the management company for some reason does not properly perform its duties and the quality of its services leaves much to be desired. At the same time, these changes objectively make the process of passing utility payments to the final recipient more transparent, exclude the intermediary - the management company from the chain of relations between consumers (owners and tenants of residential premises) and resource-supplying organizations.

"Direct contracts are some kind of attempt to introduce the institution of personal responsibility of consumers and resource providers to each other in the housing and communal services sector.

As a group of management companies, of course, we are in favor of switching to direct contracts and direct payments. This will save us from unnecessary intermediation in the control of consumer money that transits through our accounts to the accounts of resource providers. For us, this is an extra burden - we do not make any extra charges in excess of the established resource supply organizations, there is no benefit for us from this mediation. On the contrary, we are also in the red: after all, the collection of utility bills does not exceed 95% - and this is even in the best case. There are always those consumers who do not pay, and we pay the resource providers money for them.

On average, management companies pay extra to resource-supplying organizations for unscrupulous consumers from 5% to 30%. We are forced to "withdraw" this money from the planned costs for the current repair and maintenance of houses - and it turns out that instead of painting the entrances or replacing the windows on the stairs, we pay the bills of those who do not pay for the communal apartment themselves. And with large non-payments of the population, the management company becomes the eternal debtor of the resource supplying organization - is it up to improvement here?

In addition, direct contracts between consumers and resource providers remove from us about half of the problems associated with the improper provision of services by monopolists. After all, in this case, resource-supplying organizations are responsible for what happens on the way of the resource to the house - and we are responsible for what happens inside the house. Now something is a little wrong - consumers come to us, and we are forced to deal with resource providers. And so the areas of responsibility will be clearly delineated. And if, for example, a pipe breaks somewhere and heating is not supplied to the house, this is the problem of the resource supply organization. And if a pipe breaks in the basement, then yes, it’s already here, our area of ​​​​competence, and we are working with it.”

“With the transition to direct contracts, it will be possible to minimize the risks of bankruptcy of management companies and related consequences. Let me remind you that as a result of the bankruptcy of management organizations, residents of apartment buildings may face changes in tariffs, prices and quality of services provided under agreements concluded earlier.

Also, the transition will help to avoid the "so beloved" for managing organizations joint and several liability of all residents for non-payers - that is, when the debts of non-paying residents are scattered on conscientious neighbors. No matter how absurd it may seem, the managing organization has the right to distribute debts to neighbors in proportion to the size of their total area, however, all expenses for common house needs cannot exceed the standard established in the region, and the managing organization is forced to pay the difference.

Can you pay less utility bills?

Nikita Skornyakov, General Director of the GOST Group of Companies:

“No, the cost of services will not become cheaper at the same time - the tariffs for housing and communal services have grown by an average of 4% per year across the country and will continue to grow. But the consumer will have a firm confidence that his payments have gone to their destination. Direct contracts between residents and resource providers eliminate the intermediary in the face of the management company, making the supply of utility resources and their payment more transparent for everyone.

In addition, with poor-quality services, the consumer may not pay for them, having previously carried out the necessary measurements and informed the monopolist. If the payment goes through a common receipt, then it becomes more difficult to "isolate" a low-quality service from the payment."

How to make the transition?

Nikita Skornyakov, General Director of the GOST Group of Companies:

"In order to pay directly to the supplier for cold and hot water, electricity, gas, heating and sanitation, apartment owners must first meet at a general meeting, then make an appropriate decision at it, fix it in the minutes and transfer the document to the resource supply organization (Federal Law of April 3, 2018 No. 59-FZ "" (hereinafter - Law No. 59-FZ)."

Anna Slobozhaninova, head of the legal department of SK Outdoor Engineering Communications LLC:

"A direct contract is considered concluded from the date of adoption of the relevant decision by the general meeting. The term for the entry into force of the contract can be postponed by the resource supplying organization for no more than three months, of which it must notify the owners of the premises within five working days from the date of receipt by the resource supplying organization of the protocol and decision general meeting ()."

If the owners do not want to switch to direct contracts, is it possible to switch on the initiative of the management company?

Victoria Aptekina, Leading Associate at the European Legal Service:

"No, the managing organization does not have such powers."

And on the initiative of the resource supplying organization?

Nikita Skornyakov, General Director of the GOST Group of Companies:

"Yes, the resource supplying organization itself can become an indirect" culprit "of concluding direct contracts with consumers. This will happen when the managing organization has accumulated a two-month or more debt to resource suppliers. The procedure is regulated. In this case, the resource supplier can terminate the contract with the management company through the court - after which contracts for the supply of resources will automatically, with appropriate notification, be concluded directly with homeowners.According to our estimates, out of about 1.2 trillion rubles of the total Russian debt for housing and communal services, about 250-300 billion rubles are the debts of management companies to resource organizations."

Anna Slobozhaninova, head of the legal department of SK Outdoor Engineering Communications LLC:

"As already mentioned, the owners of the premises will be informed at the same time as the notice of withdrawal from the contract is sent by posting information in public places. After a 30-day period from the date of sending the notice to the management company, a direct agreement between the resource supplying organization and each owner of the premises in an apartment building will be considered enclosed ()."

What will happen to debtors?

Anna Slobozhaninova, head of the legal department of SK Outdoor Engineering Communications LLC:

"If this is technically possible, then the resource supplying organizations will first warn, and then limit or suspend the supply of utility resources, but only if this does not violate the rights of other subscribers (clause 121 of the Rules for the provision of utility services to owners and users of premises in apartment buildings and residential buildings, approved . ).

In the event that it is not possible to limit or suspend the supply of utility resources, and the debtor's demand is not voluntarily fulfilled, the next step will be to file a lawsuit with the service provider in court. If the amount of the debt does not exceed 500 thousand rubles, then the result of considering claims for the recovery of debts for payment of utility bills will be the issuance of a court order by the court, which is also an executive document (). The defendant in the claim will be directly the citizen-debtor.

And if there is a debt for common house consumption?

Victoria Aptekina, Leading Associate at the European Legal Service:

“If everything is clear with non-payers regarding their use of services in their apartment, then the problem of accumulating debts at home to resource supply organizations remains. And the legislator has not yet explained the principle of working with such debt. By the way, such debts can be shifted onto the shoulders of respectable owners, since in accordance with the responsibility to reduce the loss of a particular resource, as well as the need to combat illegal connections and actions to reduce debts, you can quite legally shift it onto the shoulders of residents. "

What to do if the transition to direct contracts with resource-supplying organizations has been made, and the management company continues to send receipts?

Anna Slobozhaninova, head of the legal department of SK Outdoor Engineering Communications LLC:

"The legislator made an attempt to prevent possible abuses on the part of the management company: in this case, it will be obliged to pay the owners a fine in the amount of twice the amount that the owner pays on such an account (). This rule works if the payment has been made. Funds can be claimed by citizens from the management company in a judicial proceeding. The fine will reimburse citizens for the costs of re-paying utility bills directly to the provider of utility resources."

What difficulties may owners face if they decide to switch to direct contracts with resource-supplying organizations?

Nikita Skornyakov, General Director of the GOST Group of Companies:

“As in any innovation, there are, of course, bottlenecks in concluding direct contracts. Consumers may find it inconvenient to have a large number of different receipts and bills. gas. It will technically become more difficult and longer to pay for services. In addition, for questions of payments or recalculations, you will have to contact the organizations that issued the invoices - and this is instead of contacting the accounting department of the management company. It was the management companies that until now were the responsible person for quality for residents services provided.Their staff monitored the timeliness of accruals and billing of utility resources.Management companies, in fact, are the same "one window" where residents send all their complaints about the quality of resources or their payment.

In the case of the conclusion of direct contracts, these functions of the "regulator" will fall directly on the shoulders of the tenants themselves. That is, to find out what, why, when and how much, they will be directly with the regional "energy ...", "water ...", "heat ...". And in the new law, the boundaries of the areas of responsibility between the resource-supplying organization and the management company remain not completely defined. Obviously, the provider of resources is responsible for what is "outside the house", and what is "inside the house" is on the conscience of the management company. But from a legal point of view, these concepts are still blurred, which leaves room for manipulation. I can foresee that in the future this will become a stumbling block in disputes between tenants, resource supplying organizations and management companies, and tenants' claims about, say, weak water pressure or insufficiently hot batteries will be "spread" between organizations. Resource-supplying organizations responsible for pipes "to the border of the house" will nod at the management companies whose pipes "inside the house" are rotten, broken, etc., and they, in turn, will appeal to the worn-out communications of the resource supplier. Of course, such stories often happen without direct contracts, but here the tenants have an extreme one - a management company, with which they have the right to demand.

A large number of new contracts, invoices, acts and other document flow will complicate the life of monopolists, more precisely, employees of lower and middle levels who will come face to face with this paper shaft. Indeed, in fact, such a law is already in force: the owners of non-residential premises have long had the right to conclude direct contracts with resource suppliers - this norm is enshrined. But in reality, the monopolists sabotage this under various pretexts - just because of their unwillingness to take on extra work."

Victoria Aptekina, Leading Associate at the European Legal Service:

"The increase in the number of receipts, and as a result, the corresponding calculations on a larger scale, as well as the need to collect from non-payers, should lead to an expansion of the staff of resource-supplying organizations, which means an increase in the costs of the enterprise. The question arises: how will compensation be made? Wouldn't it turn out that the money pledged for laying and repairing communications will be used for printing, producing receipts and paying lawyers?

The legislator also did not explain the procedure and did not indicate who will be responsible for the readiness of the domestic economy for the heating season, and this is the most important issue.

It can also be added that in the event of litigation, each consumer will have to independently resolve emerging issues with monopolists, while before innovations this is done by managing organizations.

What are the prospects for this innovation?

Nikita Skornyakov, General Director of the GOST Group of Companies:

"Since, according to our estimates, on average in Russia only one house out of three shows such activity, we can assume that only 30% of houses will switch to direct contracts with resource supply organizations on their own initiative in the foreseeable future."

Victoria Aptekina, Leading Associate at the European Legal Service:

"Potentially, the new system will be able to minimize the number of delinquencies in housing and communal services, as now the situation with debts in this area is considered catastrophic."

Anna Slobozhaninova, head of the legal department of SK Outdoor Engineering Communications LLC:

"As has been said repeatedly: payments for consumed communal resources in the housing and communal services sector should become more transparent."

Last year, a law was submitted to the State Duma for consideration, which in the near future will allow residents of houses and apartments to pay for utilities directly. resource-providing organizations, removing intermediaries in the form of management companies (MC). Now the owners enter into agreements with the management company, which collect money for a communal apartment (gas, electricity, water, heat) and transfer it to resource-supplying institutions.

But if the owners do not pay for the services in full, the missing funds are invested by the management offices, since the suppliers conclude the contract with them. The situation is considered when tenants regularly pay, and the management company does not transfer the received amounts to suppliers, spends them for other purposes, and later goes bankrupt, leaving residents without an intermediary and with unpaid bills.

Benefits of the Direct Settlement Bill

To reduce the debt of the population to resource providers institutions, the government decided on direct payments between suppliers and end-users. It is assumed that the payment of utilities to the resource-supplying organization will exclude the work of unscrupulous management companies, and debts will be reduced by 10-15%. When compared with the full volume of consumption, these amounts are large, since now the total debt of citizens for utilities is more than 1 trillion rubles.

The bill came into force on July 1, 2018. In cases where the management company has a debt to the supplier organization for more than 2 billing periods, there will be a redistribution and residents will directly settle accounts with suppliers. Owners can decide on their own to pay for utilities directly, bypassing intermediaries.

Paying bills today

Now the managing organization can either independently conduct accruals or use a third-party settlement center for invoicing. In this case, residents submit meter readings to the Criminal Code, and it already transmits the data to the settlement centers.


Resource-providing institutions invoice utility bills for funds used during a specified period to management entities that distribute consumption in an apartment building to residents.

Changes in the structure of housing and communal services

With the adoption of this draft, MCs will move away from account management, consumers will make direct payments for utilities and resource supply and pay directly supplier companies resources.

Settlement centers have been created in all regions, which will specialize in payments and settlements of housing and communal services, or an existing one is involved. Their main activities will be the collection of information on the consumption of resources, paperwork and billing.

Significance of the bill for apartment owners

After the transition to the new system, payments for housing and communal services will be charged, as before, only the recipient of funds will change. The receipt will contain the details of the direct suppliers of the consumed resources.

Important! With the introduction of the bill, the owners will be sure that the payment has reached the addressee and has not been lost among unscrupulous contractors.

The law has a significant plus: since the managing organization will not be responsible to suppliers for the debts of payers, the money received can be spent on the improvement of housing, repair of entrances, playgrounds and other needs.

At this stage, the issue of testimonies submitted by the apartment owners is being considered. The settlement organization is not a person interested in checking the testimony for correctness, they will charge fees according to the data provided by the residents. In a situation in which a difference in the readings is revealed, the amount of the discrepancy must be paid by the managing organizations. Those. the question returns to responsibility for unscrupulous payers - who will be responsible for them?

A big issue for the management office will be the process of splitting and distributing funds received from residents among all recipients in the receipt and the transparency of this distribution between the current participants in the process.

In the absence of a clear order in the distribution of payment from apartment owners, with incomplete payment of utility bills, tenants may experience debts. And there is no clarity on the distribution of these debts.

Important! So, if the receipt indicates the amount of 3 thousand rubles, and I pay only 2 thousand rubles, then what service will the debt go for? Or 3 thousand rubles were paid in full, but they went to pay for any one service from the list of suppliers. In this case, there will be a debt to a certain organization by the supplier of utility resources.

The significance of the law on a national scale

A significant reduction in debts for housing and communal services with the introduction of these measures is not expected, however, their growth will stop exponentially. The average figures for the collection of utility bills are 90%, and this is a good result. The indicators of charges in the North Caucasus are critical, where 60-65% of residents pay for a communal apartment.

Changes in the market of management companies

According to forecasts, after the introduction of direct settlements, about 30% of the management companies will go bankrupt or leave this area of ​​activity. Entry into force of the bill will oblige them to coordinate payment schedules with resource providers. In the event of the accumulation of multi-million dollar debts for a communal apartment, the activities of an insolvent organization will cease. There will be a cleansing of the services market from unscrupulous management offices.

How will debtors be dealt with?

Debt collection for non-payment of utility bills is the responsibility of the Criminal Code. Settlement centers, on the other hand, collect debts from the Criminal Code by sending statements of claim to the judicial authorities. After the adoption of the bill, debt collection from the population will be handled by settlement centers or directly by resource providers. For management offices, this will be a huge plus, because. will remove the obligation to pay the debts of non-payers from the company's funds.


Measures to prevent non-payment:

1. Increase in fines for non-payers.
2. Introduction of a simplified procedure for collecting debt through the courts.
3. A lifetime veto on the creation of a management company and HOA for the heads of already bankrupt companies endowed with these functions.
4. The introduction of a mandatory bank guarantee by the UK, HOA, settlement center or any other state institution in relation to the resource provider.

The introduction of these measures will reduce the growth of the ever-increasing debt on housing and communal services. Thus, huge debts for gas reduce the gasification in the country, because. new defaulters only increase the debt. Only after reducing the unprofitability of the housing and communal services system, it will be possible to plan the adjustment of the work of energy systems and say that significant changes are taking place in this area.

In December 2017, a draft law was adopted in Russia, according to which Russians can pay for housing and communal services directly to the supplier, namely, resource supply companies. Features of payment for utilities and residential premises are established in the Housing Code of the country.

Since 2018, owners and tenants of housing will be able to pay for utilities, bypassing the main managing organization. The authorities decided to pass this bill in order to reduce the debt of Russians for housing and communal services, as debtors are becoming more and more. The annual underpayment for water, electricity and other services is at least 15-20%. According to statistics, this year the debts of the population for housing and communal services exceeded 1 trillion rubles.

The law will come into force on July 1, 2018. From July, apartment owners and tenants will be able to switch to direct payments if they owe utility bills for more than 2 months. Owners of real estate can immediately switch to direct payment. Homeowners will be able to get all the necessary information from the housing and communal services of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Construction.

How do Russians now pay for housing and communal services?

Now citizens of the country pay for services in settlement centers. The owner or tenant takes readings from the meters and submits them to the management company, which independently redirects them to a specific settlement center.

Resource-saving organizations bill the management company for the total consumption of resources by the house, but do not distribute utility bills between apartments and people. Based on the results of 30 calendar days, suppliers look at how much water, electricity and other resources were used up by the house and issue an invoice to the parent company.

The main company independently distributes the volume of resources among the residents of the house.

To whom will people pay utility bills?

Management companies, according to the law, will be excluded from the system of payments for housing and communal services. Consumers will pay directly to resource-supplying organizations. The main company's account will receive only the money for paying for the accommodation.

In each district, a settlement center will be created in 2018 or existing organizations will be involved, which will subsequently issue invoices to owners. The centers will collect data from suppliers and major companies and issue invoices.

After the start of direct settlements, about 30-45% of parent companies will close or go bankrupt. If the organization has a debt of about 200 million rubles, it will not be able to pay it and will be forced to leave the market.

With the closure of many management companies, competitions will be held, as a result of which companies will be selected to manage residential buildings. It is also likely that the authorities will create a special commission for emergency situations, which will select a temporary management organization for the duration of the competition. From July 1, owners will be able to change the form of management of the house, for example, to a homeowners' association or a real estate owners' association.

Question: In our house, the tenants have decided to pay utility bills directly to the resource supplying organization. Please explain the procedure for concluding contracts between citizens and energy suppliers.

The prosecutor of the department for overseeing the legality of legal acts, observance of the rights and freedoms of citizens S.V. Papanov answers: The Housing Code of the Russian Federation (part 7.1 of article 155) provides that, based on the decision of the general meeting of owners of premises in an apartment building, owners of premises in an apartment building and tenants of residential premises under social rental contracts or contracts for the rental of residential premises of state or municipal housing stock in this house can pay for all or some utilities (with the exception of utilities consumed when using common property in an apartment building) to resource supply organizations.

At the same time, payment for utility services to resource-supplying organizations is recognized as the fulfillment by the owners of premises in an apartment building and tenants of residential premises under social rental agreements or contracts for the rental of residential premises of state or municipal housing stock in this house of their obligations to pay utility bills to the managing organization, which is responsible to such owners and tenants for the provision of public services of adequate quality.

From 09/01/2012, the Rules for the provision of utility services to owners and users of premises in apartment buildings and residential buildings are regulated by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 05/06/2011 No. 354 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). The specified legal act establishes the procedure for concluding an agreement containing provisions on the provision of public services, fixes the rights and obligations of the contractor (in this case, the utility service provider will be directly the resource supplying organization).

So, according to paragraph 25 of the Rules, in order to conclude a written contract for cold water supply, hot water supply, sanitation, electricity, gas supply, heating with a resource supply organization, the owner of a dwelling in an apartment building submits to a resource supply organization that sells the corresponding type (s) of communal resources, according to its location, by mail or in another way agreed with the resource supplying organization, signed by the owner (one of the co-owners) an application for concluding an agreement in 2 copies, containing the necessary information about the consumer.

The contractor who has received the application and the documents attached to it is obliged to register them on the day of receipt, make a note on the second copy of the application about the date of acceptance of the application and the documents attached to it and transfer them to the applicant. The contractor, no later than 10 working days from the date of acceptance of the application and the documents attached to it, is obliged to issue to the applicant at the location of the contractor, by mail or in another way agreed with the applicant, a draft agreement signed by the contractor containing provisions on the provision of public services, in 2 copies (paragraph 23 of the Rules ).

At the same time, according to clause 30 of the Rules, an agreement containing provisions on the provision of public services concluded by the consumer performing conclusive actions (actions indicating the tacit consent of the person performing the actions, his intention to make a transaction, conclude an agreement) is considered concluded by the consumer with the relevant contractor from the date the commencement of the provision of public services by such a contractor. An agreement containing provisions on the provision of public services, concluded by the consumer performing implicit actions, is considered concluded on the terms provided for by these Rules (clause 7 of the Rules).

Such a payment mechanism directly to the resource-supplying organization excludes the possibility of debts of managing organizations to the suppliers of utility resources, which directly affects the uninterrupted provision of utility services to consumer-citizens.

The prosecutor's office revealed facts of illegal spending by officials of managing organizations of funds received from the population as payment for housing and communal services.

In particular, only in the past period of 2014, at the initiative of the prosecutor of the city of Kursk, 2 criminal cases were initiated against Chisty Kursk LLC and UK Victoria LLC, with more than 3.3 million rubles received from citizens-consumers of housing and communal services were not transferred to resource supplying organizations, but were spent for other purposes.