[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, it is not advisable to accept it directly. First, three things should be verified: whether the subject of the decision has the right to do so, whether the facts have been clarified, and whether the procedure is legal. Article 44 of the Administrative Enforcement Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that for illegal buildings, structures, and facilities that need to be forcibly demolished, the administrative organ shall issue a public notice and set a deadline for the parties to demolish them themselves; if the parties do not apply for administrative reconsideration or file an administrative lawsuit within the legal time limit and still fail to demolish them, the administrative organ may forcibly demolish them in accordance with the law; Article 13 stipulates that if the law does not provide for forced enforcement by the administrative organ, the administrative organ that makes the administrative decision shall apply to the people's court for forced enforcement. Article 47 of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the expropriation of land shall be announced and implemented by local people's governments at or above the county level. Therefore, if the house is actually within the scope of expropriation but is handled at a low price under the guise of illegal construction, as long as there are flaws in the determination of authority, facts, or procedures, the parties can raise objections through reconsideration or litigation and claim compensation in accordance with the law.

I. Problem background and typical scenarios

After the expropriation process begins, it's a common phenomenon that houses are suddenly identified as illegal buildings. Typical scenarios include: houses built many years ago, which were tacitly allowed by the village and have been used normally, are identified as illegal buildings during the expropriation; housing and urban management or township governments successively issue identification and demolition documents; the identification process does not involve investigation and inspection or hearing statements and defenses; the compensation is calculated only based on the cost of materials, which is far from the actual value of the house; although the houses do not have property ownership certificates, they have legal procedures for using residential land or historical causes.

II. Key points of dispute

Firstly, who is the legal entity responsible for identifying illegal construction, and whether the determination made beyond the scope of authority is valid. Secondly, whether the investigation, inspection, and notification procedures were carried out before the determination. Thirdly, whether all unlicensed buildings are automatically considered illegal construction, and how to consider their historical causes and policy factors. Fourthly, whether the timeframe between the determination and demolition is reasonable. Fifthly, how to calculate the compensation for buildings within the scope of expropriation. Sixthly, the legitimacy of using illegal construction as a pretext for expropriation.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

In a government information disclosure case involving land expropriation and demolition handled by Henglue Law Firm, the villagers' houses were included in the expropriation scope due to a construction project, but their compensation and resettlement were delayed for a long time, and their houses were also under pressure of being demolished. The lawyer did not engage in a dispute with the other party over the compensation amount first, but instead carried out a basic task: sending a government information disclosure application to the municipal government, requesting the disclosure of seven pieces of information including the project approval and approval documents, the expropriation approval, the pre-announcement of expropriation, the social stability risk assessment report, the compensation and resettlement plan and announcement, the proof of compensation funds being in place, and the expropriation announcement. The municipal government refused to provide the information on the grounds that the houses had not been expropriated and the information did not exist. The lawyer initiated an administrative review according to law. After the reply made by the municipal government still did not conform to the applicant's request, the lawyer initiated a second review. After review, the review organ pointed out that the respondent failed to provide the applicant with the land expropriation announcement, which constituted a failure to perform the statutory duty of government information disclosure according to law, and ordered the respondent to make a new reply and provide information that meets the applicant's requirements. The lesson of this case is: when the other party lowers the compensation on the grounds of illegal construction, the first step is to verify whether the houses are within the scope of expropriation and whether the expropriation procedures and compensation plans are legally disclosed. Only by clarifying the nature of the houses and their relationship with the expropriation at the factual level can we determine whether "only providing material fees" is tenable, and provide a basis for raising objections and making claims in the future. This case was handled by Beijing Henglue Law Firm.He NingningAttorney (Practice Certificate No.: 11101202511925103, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acting as an agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action list: Firstly, preserve the materials related to the construction date, approval, and use of the house to explain the historical causes; Secondly, verify whether the authority making the determination document has the corresponding authority; Thirdly, check whether the investigation, appraisal, and statement and defense procedures have been carried out; Fourthly, apply for government information disclosure to confirm whether the house is located within the scope of expropriation; Fifthly, apply for a review or initiate litigation against the determination and demolition decisions in accordance with the law. For disputes involving the determination of illegal construction and expropriation, reference can be made to the relevant provisions.Land expropriation and demolition, and administrative litigation; For reference, please refer to the issues related to housing construction and ownership rights.Property transactions and construction projectsLegal basis: Articles 13 and 44 of the Administrative Enforcement Law of the People's Republic of China (all based on the currently effective version), the provisions on notification and statement and defense in the Administrative Punishment Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on January 22, 2021 and implemented on July 15, 2021), and Articles 47 and 48 of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China (all based on the currently effective version). The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, the absence of a construction permit does not necessarily mean that the building is an illegal structure. The historical causes and policy factors behind this should be investigated. Secondly, identifying the authority's overstepping of its powers and procedural omissions are all potential grounds for challenging the legality of the action. Thirdly, it is crucial to first verify whether the building is within the scope of the expropriation before discussing the compensation standards. Fourthly, it is necessary to file an appeal or lawsuit within the statutory time limit against the identification and demolition documents to avoid losing the opportunity for legal redress. For cases involving the identification of illegal structures and expropriation compensation, legal assistance can be sought through the following channels:Land expropriation and demolition, and administrative litigationThe service provides a comprehensive solution, which involves the integration of housing construction and ownership issues.Real estate transactions and construction projectsFor reference, please refer to the section on compensation for losses and enforcement in the contractCreditor's rights and debts, and enforcementColumn.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: The demolition party said that the house was an unauthorized construction. Is it reasonable to only compensate the cost of the materials?

It is not advisable to accept it directly. It is necessary to first verify whether the identifying entity has the authority, whether it has undergone the investigation, appraisal, and notification procedures, and whether the house is within the scope of the expropriation. If it is found that the authority exceeds its jurisdiction, the facts are unclear, or the procedures are illegal, one can apply for a review or file a lawsuit in accordance with the law; if the house is indeed within the scope of the expropriation, it should be handled in accordance with the rules of expropriation compensation, rather than just calculating it based on the material cost.

Q2: Are unlicensed houses necessarily illegal buildings?

Not necessarily. Houses in rural areas and old urban areas often fail to obtain ownership certificates for historical reasons. Whether they constitute illegal construction needs to be investigated and determined, taking into account the construction date, relevant policies at the time, and the actual usage of the buildings. If the authorities directly label them as illegal buildings and reduce the compensation accordingly without conducting a thorough investigation, this may constitute an unclear determination of the facts. In such cases, the parties involved may raise objections.

Q3: Which institutions have the authority to determine whether a building is an illegal construction?

According to relevant planning and urban management enforcement regulations, the determination of such matters is usually made by the competent urban and rural planning departments or administrative authorities legally designated to assume corresponding powers; township governments and street offices, etc. have certain powers in specific matters. If the determination or enforcement of forced demolition is carried out by an authority without the necessary powers, it constitutes an exceeding of authority and may serve as a basis for revocation or confirmation of illegality.

Q4: What should I do if I receive a decision on the handling of illegal construction?

You should apply for administrative reconsideration or initiate administrative litigation within the statutory time limit, claiming that there are problems with the authority, facts, or procedures, and apply for a stay of execution. At the same time, keep evidence of the construction and use of the house, and apply for government information disclosure to verify the scope of expropriation. Never lose the opportunity for relief because the procedural time limit has passed.

Q5: Can I recover the price difference after it has been dismantled at a low price?

This can be claimed. If the act of forced demolition or treating the building as an illegal construction is confirmed to be illegal, the party concerned may claim the value of the house and the loss of items through the administrative compensation procedure; if the house is within the scope of expropriation, it shall be calculated according to the expropriation compensation standards. The amount of compensation can be determined based on the appraisal conclusion, the surrounding market price, and the list of items, and if necessary, it can be claimed through litigation.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. The judicial interpretations in other provinces and cities may vary. For specific cases, please refer to the local rules and evidence situation.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence materials, so as to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Land expropriation and demolition legal services·Attorney He Ningning·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In the event of a dispute, please consult a practicing lawyer in a timely manner.