[Direct answer]Generally, it's not considered a force majeure, but it can be claimed as a change of circumstances. According to Article 180 of the Civil Code (effective January 1, 2021), force majeure refers to an objective situation that cannot be foreseen, avoided, or overcome. The adjustment of purchase restrictions is usually not completely unforeseeable, so it is not generally recognized as force majeure. However, if the sudden change in policy results in a significant change in the basic conditions of the contract and it is obviously unfair to continue to perform the contract, the party may request renegotiation in accordance with Article 533 of the Civil Code. If the renegotiation fails, the party may request to modify or terminate the contract. After losing the eligibility to purchase a house, the party should promptly notify the other party in writing, keep the policy documents and payment receipts, and consult a lawyer to determine the solution of terminating the contract, refunding the payment, or modifying the contract. For more details, please refer to the following link:Legal services for real estate transactions and construction projectsAndBeijing Henglue Law Firm.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

Changes in purchase restrictions and loan conditions often lead to stalemates in signed sales contracts: after signing the contract, new purchase restrictions come into effect, and the buyer's social security or tax payment period is not long enough, resulting in the loss of purchasing eligibility and the inability to complete online signing and transfer of ownership; credit policies are tightened, with increased down payment ratios and insufficient loan amounts, leaving buyers unable to raise the remaining payment; if either the seller or the buyer is included in the purchase restriction scope by new planning, the transaction is forced to be suspended. At this point, one party wants to terminate the contract and retrieve the deposit, while the other party insists on continuing to perform the contract or confiscating the deposit, leading to disputes. What buyers care most about is: whether policy changes constitute force majeure and can exempt them from liability for breach of contract; whether they can retrieve the deposit and payments already made; and whether they need to pay the other party's agency fees and the difference in the transaction price.

II. Key points of contention

  • The legal nature of the policy change—whether it constitutes force majeure, a change in circumstances, or commercial risk—directly determines the scope of exemption from liability and the right to rescind the contract. The court will make a comprehensive judgment based on the timing of the policy's introduction and the signing of the contract, as well as the severity of the changes.
  • Resolving the consequences and sharing the costs: How to return and share the deposit, the paid housing price, the agency fee, and the taxes after the contract is terminated needs to be determined based on the fault of both parties and the principle of fairness. Improper handling of this matter may easily lead to secondary litigation.
  • Notification and obligation to stop losses: If the party fails to notify the other party in time after the policy changes, or if they delay the process passively, they may be held responsible for the majority of the losses and this could affect the subsequent refunds and the scope of claims.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

When handling housing purchase disputes caused by purchase restrictions, Henglue Lawyers usually organize their claims from three aspects. 1. **Legal Qualification**: If the purchase restriction policy was introduced or announced clearly before the contract was signed, the buyer's claim of force majeure or change of circumstances is unlikely to be supported, as the buyer should have assessed their own eligibility and the policy trends at the time of signing. However, if the policy was suddenly tightened after signing and the changes significantly exceeded normal levels (e.g., sudden increase in eligibility thresholds or significant reduction in loan ratios), this would more closely align with the application scenario of Article 533 on change of circumstances. 2. **Evidence Collection**: It is necessary to prepare online signing contracts, policy documents, social security and tax payment records, loan approval materials, and communication records between the parties to prove that the inability to perform the contract was caused by the policy rather than the buyer's own delay. 3. **Solution Proposal**: Prioritize negotiating changes to the payment method, replacing the buyer, or postponing the transfer of ownership. If there is no possibility of performance, initiate the termination procedure through a written letter, clarifying the scope and timeframe of returns to avoid a stalemate and further losses for both parties. For complex arrangements such as corporate purchases or holding on behalf of others, additional legal assistance may be required.Business and contract dispute services for enterprisesTeam collaborative evaluation.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

At the legal basis level: Article 180 of the Civil Code (effective January 1, 2021) defines force majeure; Article 533 establishes the rule of change of circumstances, allowing parties to renegotiate or request to modify or terminate the contract when major changes that were unforeseeable at the time of contract conclusion and do not constitute commercial risks occur; Paragraph 1 of Article 563 stipulates that the contract may be terminated if the contractual purpose cannot be achieved due to force majeure; Article 590 requires that parties who are unable to perform due to force majeure shall notify the other party in a timely manner and provide proof within a reasonable period. If the failure to notify in a timely manner results in the expansion of losses, the expanded portion cannot be exempted from liability; Articles 586 and 587 stipulate the rules on deposits. If the contract cannot be performed due to reasons not attributable to either party, the party receiving the deposit shall return the deposit. At the practical advice level: After the policy is implemented, notify the other party in writing and attach the policy document as soon as possible; sort out the evidence of payment, online signing, and approval at each node; during the negotiation of termination, clarify and incorporate into the written agreement the sharing of deposits, down payments, agency fees, and taxes; if the other party refuses to perform after the judgment is issued, it can be combined with other legal remedies to enforce the judgment.Creditor-debtor relations and enforcement case servicesApply for enforcement.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

The changes in the purchase restriction policies are unlikely to constitute force majeure, but that doesn't mean buyers can only accept the losses. Under the path of changing circumstances, renegotiating, amending or terminating the contract is a more feasible approach in practice. Buyers should avoid passively delaying or leaving without notice when policies change. The obligation to notify, negotiation records, and loss-mitigation actions will all affect the final allocation of responsibilities. Before signing the contract, please verify your own purchase eligibility and loan conditions, and include the termination and refund mechanism in the contract when the eligibility does not meet the requirements. This is the lowest-cost risk arrangement. If you have already been involved in a dispute, you can seek legal help through the court system to protect your rights and interests.Beijing Henglu Law FirmMake an appointment for an assessment to determine the best path for terminating, modifying, or continuing the contract as soon as possible.

Q1: After being subject to purchase restrictions and losing the eligibility to buy a house, can I get my deposit back if I fail to purchase the house?

In most cases, this is possible. Changes in the purchase restrictions policy are circumstances beyond the control of both parties. If the contract cannot be registered online and transferred, the buyer can claim to terminate the contract and return the deposit and the paid purchase price. According to Article 587 of the Civil Code, the penalty for the deposit applies to the breaching party, and policy changes do not constitute a breach of contract, so the seller has no right to confiscate the deposit. However, if the buyer knew before signing the contract that they did not meet the qualifications but still promised to resolve the issue, or if they delayed the online registration and missed the grace period, the court may reduce the refund or determine that the buyer was at fault. The key evidence includes the signing date, policy documents, records of online registration being rejected, and communication records between the parties. It is recommended to assert claims in writing immediately after the policy takes effect, rather than delaying verbally.

Q2: If you want to terminate the contract due to the purchase restriction, what evidence do you need to prepare?

The chain of evidence should cover four stages: "signing the contract—policy announcement—blockage—damage control". Evidence of the signing time (contract, down payment receipt) proves that the policy was announced after the signing; the purchase restriction policy document and local implementation rules; the results of the purchase eligibility verification, social security or tax payment records, which prove that the buyer indeed belongs to the group subject to purchase restrictions; notifications or approval records of failed online signing or loan rejection; and letters and chat records of timely informing the other party after the policy announcement and negotiating termination. For cases involving insufficient loan quota, the bank's approval opinion and proof of down payment should also be submitted. The more complete the evidence is, the faster the court will determine that it is "not attributable to either party", and the scope of refund will be clearer as well.

Q3: How much does it cost to litigate to terminate the purchase restriction agreement?

The main expenses include three parts: case acceptance fees, preservation fees, and attorney's fees. According to Article 13 of the "Measures for the Payment of Litigation Costs" (implemented on April 1, 2007), the case acceptance fees are paid in stages according to the amount of the claim. For a claim of returning a deposit of 100,000 yuan, the acceptance fee is about 2,300 yuan; for a claim of returning a down payment of 1 million yuan, it is about 13,800 yuan, and the winning party shall bear the costs; the preservation fees shall be paid according to the amount of the preserved property; and the attorney's fees shall be determined through negotiation based on the difficulty and stage of the case. Such cases usually focus on the amount of the return rather than the ownership of the house. The amount of the claim is relatively small, and the costs are relatively controllable. It is recommended to consult a lawyer before suing to estimate the scope of the return and the proportion of the costs, and if necessary, to negotiate with the other party before suing.

Q4: How long do I have to assert my rights after the policy changes?

Both the right of rescission and the request for return are subject to time limits. According to Article 564 of the Civil Code, if the law does not stipulate or the parties do not agree on the time limit for exercising the right of rescission, and the right of rescission is not exercised within one year from the date when the right holder knows or should have known the grounds for rescission, the right of rescission shall be extinguished; the right to request the return of the purchase price shall be subject to the three-year statute of limitations stipulated in Article 188. In practice, it is more urgent to take measures to stop losses: after the policy is implemented, the other party should be notified in time and start negotiations. During the delay, changes such as fluctuations in housing prices and the other party selling the house to others will lead to increased losses. It is recommended to complete the notification and letter confirmation within one month after the policy is issued, and to determine the rescission or modification plan within three months. Don't waste time waiting for the other party's response.

Q5: What should buyers and sellers do after the changes in the purchase restrictions?

The process can be divided into three steps: 1. **Identify the facts**: Compare the contract signing date with the effective date of the policy to confirm your eligibility and loan conditions under the policy, and determine whether the problem lies with the other party or with yourself. 2. **Choose a solution**: If there's still a possibility of fulfilling the contract, negotiate to change the payment method, adjust the online signing entity, or postpone the transfer of ownership, and sign a supplementary agreement to formalize the arrangements. If this is not possible, send a letter to terminate the contract and clearly specify the return and division of the deposit, purchase price, agency fees, and taxes to avoid only discussing the termination without addressing the consequences. 3. **Prevent delays**: If the other party refuses to return the funds, claim restitution, compensation for losses, and initiate legal proceedings in accordance with Article 566 of the Civil Code. Maintain written records throughout the process and formalize verbal agreements into written agreements as soon as possible.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence, so as to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Legal services for real estate transactions·Beijing Henglue Law Firm