[Case Summary]This case involves a dispute over a housing sales contract. In June 2020, Wang Ping signed a "Housing Sales Contract" with Zhang Dashan and Zhao Wenwu (employees of Company B) to sell a 322-square-meter house and residential land for 1.45 million yuan, with the payment to be completed in 48 monthly installments. After the defendant paid 957,500 yuan, he still owed 130,000 yuan. Company B claimed that 30,000 yuan was a relocation transitional fee and 100,000 yuan was a relocation deposit, which should be offset against the housing price, and invoked the "uncertain defense" to refuse to pay. Wang Ping entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Shang RuichaoThe lawyer filed a lawsuit, and the court adopted some of the opinions, determining that 30,000 yuan was the purchase price of the house and 100,000 yuan was the deposit, which could not be offset. The court ruled that Company B should pay the remaining 100,000 yuan of the purchase price and interest. The core disputes are the nature of the payment, the offset of the deposit, and the right of defense against the performance of the contract; the applicable legal provisions are the provisions on the offset of creditor's rights and the right of defense against the performance of the contract.

I. Review of the case

After selling the house, the other party used various excuses to withhold the final payment. What should I do? This is a common dispute in the performance of house sales. In June 2020, the plaintiff, Wang Ping, and the defendants, Zhang Dashan and Zhao Wenwu (employees of B Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.), signed a "House Sale Contract", selling a 322-square-meter house and residential land at a total price of 1.45 million yuan and requiring the payment to be completed in installments over 48 months. The defendants successively paid 957,500 yuan, but the remaining 130,000 yuan was delayed for a long time. What's more troublesome is that Wang Ping's ex-wife, Xu Xiufen, sued the relevant parties in court for housing rights, which the defendants used as an excuse for the delay in payment; B Company claimed that it had paid in full and accused the plaintiff of breaching the contract. Helplessly, Wang Ping sought legal help.Shang RuichaoThe lawyer filed a lawsuit to recover the remaining housing payment.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: The nature of the 30,000 yuan transfer.The defendant transferred 30,000 yuan on April 27, 2023. Was it the purchase price of the house or the transitional compensation for demolition?
  • Focus II: Can the 100,000 yuan demolition deposit be offset against the housing price?In 2017, the plaintiff received the demolition deposit from Company C. Whether this deposit would be transferred along with the house rights and whether it could be used to offset the purchase price of the house.
  • Focus 3: Whether the defense of duress is valid.The defendant refuses to pay on the grounds of a dispute over ownership caused by his ex-wife's lawsuit to assert ownership rights. Can the payment be suspended in this case?

III. Professional intervention by Hengluo Law Firm

The plaintiff (Wang Ping) alleges that:The plaintiff claims that the defendant still owes 130,000 yuan in housing payments, and that 30,000 yuan in housing payments and 100,000 yuan in deposits have already been owned by the plaintiff and should not be offset. The plaintiff requests the defendant to pay the remaining housing payments and the interest for breach of contract.

The position of the defendant (Company B, etc.):Claiming that 30,000 yuan is a transitional fee and the 100,000 yuan deposit, which should be offset against the purchase price upon the transfer of rights and interests, and citing the uncertainties of ownership disputes raised by the plaintiff's ex-wife in the lawsuit as a defense to refuse payment.

Legal Opinion by Hengluo Law Firm:Attorney Shang refuted each item in turn: The 30,000 yuan, according to the transfer notes, was a relocation transitional fee, and the defendant's internal records also classified it as a transitional fee. Directly paying it to the plaintiff should also be considered a transitional fee, not a housing payment. The 100,000 yuan was the relocation deposit paid by Company C to the plaintiff in 2017, which had long been owned by the plaintiff. It was not a similar claim and had not been notified to the plaintiff, thus failing to meet the statutory conditions for offsetting. The effective judgment had already confirmed that the plaintiff had fulfilled its obligations to deliver the house and cooperate with the cancellation process, and the defendant had no right to refuse payment on the grounds of extrajudicial disputes. The attorney clarified the legal nature of the three sums of money, thereby strengthening the plaintiff's claim.

  • The transfer memo and the internal accounting voucher for 30,000 yuan are for the transition fee, not the down payment for the house
  • The amount of 100,000 yuan cannot be offset because the ownership of the deposit does not match the type of creditor's rights
  • It is confirmed by the effective judgment that the obligation to deliver the house has been fulfilled, and the defense of uncertainty about the other party's performance of the contract is not tenable

IV. Outcome of the case

The court adopted some of Attorney Shang's opinions and concluded that: the 30,000 yuan is in the nature of a house payment (the plaintiff's receipt states "house payment", and the note "transitional fee" is just an internal accounting note that does not affect the nature of the payment); the 100,000 yuan deposit cannot be offset (the plaintiff's claim is for the purchase price, while the defendant claims it is for the return of the deposit, which is not a similar claim and was not notified. In this case, it cannot be determined that the rights and interests include the transfer of the deposit). Therefore, Company B should pay the remaining house payment of 100,000 yuan; some interest is supported (calculated from the date of filing the lawsuit, and no interest was supported before that due to the defense of uncertainty). Finally, the court ruled that Company B should pay the remaining house payment of 100,000 yuan and interest within ten days, and dismissed the plaintiff's other claims. The acceptance fee shall be mainly borne by the defendant.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law FirmShang RuichaoThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202211560090, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent. Attorney's advice: The house purchase contract should clearly specify the nature of the payment, the ownership of rights and interests such as the demolition deposit, and the conditions for set-off; different types of claims cannot be set off without notice. If one party fails to perform its obligations, the other party may demand that it bear the breach of contract liability, but may not refuse to pay at will due to disputes outside the case. When signing the contract, attention should be paid to the provisions on property rights and rights, and if there are disputes, professional lawyers should be consulted in time.

VI. Common Questions About Housing Sale and Purchase Disputes FAQ

  1. Q: After selling the house, if the buyer withholds the balance payment, what should I do?
    A:The plaintiff can sue for the payment of the remaining housing price. In this case, the lawyer clarified the nature of the payment, and the court ruled that the defendant should pay 100,000 yuan and the interest thereon.
  2. Q: Can the demolition deposit be used to offset the purchase price of a house?
    A:Generally, this is not allowed. If the claims are not of the same type and the debtor fails to notify the creditor of the non-compliance with the conditions for set-off, the 100,000 yuan deposit in this case will be deemed ineligible for set-off.
  3. Q: Can I not pay if the other party says there's a dispute over the house?
    A:No. The third-party confirmation of rights litigation does not necessarily preclude the obligation to make payments. In this case, the defense of uncertainties is only partially established, and the previous interest will not be supported.
  4. Q: Is the transfer fee mentioned in the transfer note considered part of the total purchase price of the house?
    A:Refer to the written determination. The plaintiff's receipt stated "housing payment", and the note was just an internal remark. The court ruled that 30,000 yuan was the housing payment.
  5. Q: How is the default interest calculated in a real estate transaction?
    A:According to the contract and the time of breach of contract, the court in this case supported the interest from the date of filing the lawsuit, and the interest before that was not supported due to the defense of uncertainty.