[Direct answer]The identification of dangerous buildings is a technical appraisal of the structural safety of buildings, which is not necessarily related to demolition. The real management of dangerous buildings is a safety project, aiming to eliminate residential risks. However, in the practice of expropriation, some projects use the identification of dangerous buildings as a tool to bypass the expropriation compensation procedures, and carry out demolition under the guise of "removing dangerous buildings" to reduce or evade compensation. The relationship between the two can be summarized as follows: legal expropriation must be compensated according to law and compensation must be paid before relocation (Article 27 of the Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Buildings on State-Owned Land); demolishing legal buildings under the guise of dangerous buildings and evading compensation is illegal, and the party concerned may request the revocation of the identification of dangerous buildings or the confirmation of the illegality of the demolition. To determine the nature of the demolition, the party concerned may first apply for the disclosure of expropriation documents in accordance with the Regulations on the Openness of Government Information of the People's Republic of China (effective May 15, 2019) to verify the authenticity of the documents. For more information, please consult the relevant departments.Legal services for land expropriation and demolition, and administrative litigation.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

A house that was being lived in comfortably received a notice of dangerous housing assessment right after the announcement of expropriation, requiring the occupants to move out within a specified timeframe and agree to demolition—this kind of "using demolition of dangerous buildings to replace expropriation" is not uncommon in practice. Typical scenarios include: after the house is included in the expropriation scope, the relevant department entrusts an agency to conduct a C-level or D-level dangerous housing assessment, and then organizes demolition based on the assessment results; after the demolition in the name of hazard removal, the compensation is handled at a level significantly lower than the expropriation standard; the assessment process is not transparent, and the homeowners do not know who commissioned the assessment, nor do they participate in the selection of the agency or receive a complete report. Dangerous housing management and housing expropriation are two separate procedures with different purposes. The result of their misuse is often the failure of compensation, which is the most critical aspect that the expropriated people need to be vigilant about. For difficult issues such as appraisal and assessment, which involve multiple professional fields, you can learn more about them.Special services and other case-related services.

II. Key points of contention

  • Verifying the legality of the appraisal process: Who commissioned the appraisal, whether the institution is qualified, whether the report was delivered, and whether the right to request a review was guaranteed. Procedural flaws are a common loophole for revoking the identification of dangerous buildings.
  • Determination of the nature of demolition: Whether the demolition belongs to the management of dangerous buildings or the implementation of expropriation determines whether it is possible to claim compensation for expropriation; if the demolition of dangerous buildings is used to evade the expropriation process, the party concerned may claim compensation according to the expropriation standards.
  • The connection of relief pathways: How to combine and advance the lawsuit to revoke the identification of dangerous buildings, the lawsuit to confirm the illegal demolition, and the lawsuit for administrative compensation directly affects whether the compensation equivalent to the expropriation can be obtained in the end.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

To determine the true nature of the demolition, the first step is to investigate the details of the project, and information disclosure is the most direct tool. In a case handled by Henglue Law Firm, villager Liu *'s house was included in the expropriation scope due to the high-speed rail construction project, but he did not receive any compensation or resettlement for a long time. To verify the legality of the expropriation, the lawyer on his behalf applied to the municipal government for disclosure of seven pieces of information, including the project approval for expropriation, the land 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 any information on the grounds that "the house had not been expropriated and the information did not exist", so the lawyer immediately filed an administrative review on his behalf. After the first review ordered a retrial, the reply made by the municipal government still did not conform to the application content. The lawyer reviewed the reply page by page, pointed out that the announcement lacked key elements, and filed another review. In the end, the review authority determined that the municipal government failed to provide the expropriation announcement in accordance with the law, which constituted a failure to fulfill its statutory duty of government information disclosure, and ordered the municipal government to make a new reply. The value of this tug-of-war lies in: verifying the legality of the expropriation project item by item, so that the negotiation on demolition and compensation has a basis to rely on; conversely, if even the expropriation decision and announcement do not exist, the so-called legality of the demolition action will not withstand scrutiny.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

At the legal basis level: In terms of the management of dangerous buildings, the "Regulations on the Management of Urban Dangerous Buildings" establish a house safety appraisal system, and the appraisal of dangerous buildings should be carried out by professional appraisal institutions, and the appraisal conclusion is the premise of management measures; In terms of expropriation, Article 27 of the "Regulations on the Expropriation and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land" (implemented on January 21, 2011) clearly stipulates that compensation shall be provided first and then relocation shall be carried out, and it is prohibited to force relocation by illegal means such as interrupting water and electricity supply; Article 13 of the "Administrative Enforcement Law of the People's Republic of China" (implemented on January 1, 2012) stipulates that administrative organs without enforcement powers shall apply to the people's courts for enforcement; The "Regulations on the Disclosure of Government Information of the People's Republic of China" (implemented on May 15, 2019) guarantees the rights of citizens and legal persons to apply for access to government information. At the practical suggestion level: Upon receiving the notice of dangerous building appraisal, first check the qualifications of the entrusting subject and the appraisal institution and the delivery of the report. If you have any objections to the conclusion, apply for a review or initiate litigation according to law; For houses within the scope of expropriation, insist on compensation according to the expropriation procedures before relocation; If the house is demolished under the name of dangerous building, promptly sue to confirm the illegality and claim compensation. For disputes over the valuation of the house, you can refer to the relevant provisions of the "Regulations on the Disclosure of Government Information of the People's Republic of China".Real estate sales and construction project servicesEvaluation.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Is the identification of dangerous buildings just a ploy to achieve other goals? Three points can help make a basic judgment: First, whether there are prior decisions on expropriation, announcements, and compensation plans; Second, whether the appraisal is conducted by a formal institution independently and whether the procedures are complete; Third, whether the compensation offered after demolition is significantly lower than the expropriation compensation. Any abnormality in any of the three points should prompt vigilance and prompt evidence collection. The above information was disclosed in a public review case handled by Beijing Henglue Law Firm.He NingningThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101202511925103, subject to the documents issued by the judicial administrative organ) acted on behalf of the client. After two rounds of review, the administrative organ was ultimately ordered to provide the expropriation information in accordance with the law. If you also encounter a situation where your house is appraised as a dangerous building before the compensation negotiations have even started, it is recommended that you take action as soon as possible.Beijing Henglu Law FirmConsult with them to identify any legal violations in the program as soon as possible.

Q1: If a house is identified as a dangerous building, does it necessarily have to be demolished?

Not necessarily. The appraisal conclusions of dangerous buildings are divided into different levels. Only those buildings that are identified as dangerous in their entirety need to be considered for demolition. Buildings with partial hazards can be eliminated through reinforcement and repair. Even if demolition is necessary, the client should follow the corresponding procedures in accordance with the "Regulations on the Management of Urban Dangerous Buildings" to safeguard the owner's right to know and right to review. After receiving the appraisal report, the client should first verify the subject of the commission, the qualifications of the institution, and the basis of the conclusions. If necessary, the client should apply for a re-appraisal or initiate legal proceedings, rather than passively accepting the demolition arrangements.

Q2: If a house within the scope of expropriation is identified as a dangerous building, can the owner still receive compensation?

The houses within the scope of expropriation shall be handled in accordance with the expropriation compensation procedures, including appraisal, signing contracts or making compensation decisions, and relocating after compensation. If the expropriator bypasses the expropriation procedures and evades compensation under the guise of demolishing dangerous houses, the expropriated person may sue to revoke the determination of dangerous houses or confirm that the demolition is illegal, and claim compensation for the loss of houses and items in accordance with the expropriation compensation standards. In practice, the court will review the relationship between the subject of the appraisal commission, the appraisal procedures and the demolition time, and the progress of the expropriation. If the appraisal is made precisely at the stage of stalemate in the expropriation negotiations and the compensation standards are significantly reduced after the demolition, the suspicion of replacing demolition with demolition of dangerous houses will be more prominent.

Q3: If the report on the identification of dangerous buildings is not recognized, how can it be refuted?

It can be reviewed from three aspects: the principal's right to organize appraisals, the appraisal institution's qualifications, and the appraisers' qualifications; whether the owner was notified to attend the appraisal, whether the report was delivered in accordance with the law, and whether the owner was informed of the review and relief channels; whether the test data and evaluation methods on which the conclusion is based are objective. If there are procedural violations or insufficient evidence, the party concerned may apply for a re-appraisal or file a lawsuit to request the revocation of the appraisal; in the lawsuit, the party concerned may also apply to a qualified institution for re-testing and evaluation to form evidence in their favor.

Q4: How to determine whether it's "demolishing dangerous buildings instead of conducting demolition and relocation"?

The key lies in the order of procedures and the scope of compensation: First, investigate the details of the project and verify whether the expropriation decision, expropriation notice, and compensation and resettlement plan exist and what their contents are by applying for government information disclosure; Second, check the timeline to see if the dangerous housing appraisal occurred during the expropriation negotiations and whether the demolition followed immediately; Third, examine the compensation results to see if the compensation offered after the demolition is significantly lower than the surrounding expropriation standards. If there are no expropriation documents before the demolition, and the compensation after the demolition does not meet the expropriation standards, or the appraisal process is obviously not standardized, it is necessary to be vigilant against evading the expropriation process under the guise of disaster relief and promptly engage a lawyer to intervene.

Q5: If the house is forcibly demolished under the pretext of being a dangerous building, can I demand compensation?

Yes. If illegal houses are demolished under the guise of dangerous buildings to evade expropriation compensation, the demolition action can usually be confirmed as illegal. After confirming the illegality, the applicant can apply for administrative compensation from the compensation-liable organ, which includes direct losses such as the loss of the house value, the loss of items in the house, and the expenses of relocation and temporary resettlement. The compensation amount can be determined by referring to the market price of similar houses in the surrounding area or the expropriation compensation plan. When claiming compensation, the applicant should submit evidence such as ownership certificates, photos of the original state of the house, item lists, and purchase receipts. If necessary, an appraisal can be applied for to support the compensation request with the appraisal conclusion.

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