[Direct answer]It's illegal. According to Article 27 of the "Regulations on the Acquisition and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land" (promulgated and implemented on January 21, 2011), the implementation of house acquisition should be carried out in the order of compensation first and then relocation. No unit or individual may use violence, threats, or illegal methods such as interrupting water, heating, gas, and electricity supplies or blocking road traffic to force the relocation of the acquired persons. It is prohibited for construction units to participate in relocation activities. At the same time, Article 243 of the "Civil Code of the People's Republic of China" (adopted on May 28, 2020 and implemented on January 1, 2021) requires that the acquiring party pay the compensation fees in full and on time in accordance with the law. In the face of the requirement of relocation first and then negotiation, you can refuse in writing and fix the evidence.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

One of the most common tactics at the scene of expropriation is to first remove the residents and then discuss compensation. Other related tactics include signing an agreement before paying, offering rewards only after moving out, and conducting appraisals after the residents have vacated the premises. The risks are as follows: once the house is vacated and handed over, the negotiating position of the residents will significantly weaken, the reward fees may be diluted by subsequent clauses, and the original compensation agreement may be taken away under the pretext of verification. In similar cases in Beijing, recurring disputes include compensation amounts that do not match the agreed upon amounts, agreements not being in the hands of the parties involved, and no follow-up on compensation after the residents have moved out, which makes it increasingly difficult to gather evidence as time passes.

II. Key points of contention

First, the mandatory effect of compensating before relocating. Article 27 of the "Regulations on the Acquisition and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land" stipulates that compensation and resettlement must be implemented, which is a legal obligation; the acquisition of collective land also requires the implementation of compensation and resettlement as a prerequisite. Second, the legal effect of oral promises. It is difficult to provide evidence for the compensation standards and incentive conditions promised orally. In principle, written agreements should prevail, and promises not included in the agreement are not binding. Third, the relationship between incentive fees and statutory compensation. Incentives are incentives given in addition to statutory compensation, and incentives cannot be used to offset or replace statutory items such as the value of the house, relocation fees, and losses from production and business suspension. Fourth, the difficulty of providing evidence after the compensation agreement is confiscated, which requires using government information disclosure to restore the true agreement. Fifth, coercive eviction behaviors such as cutting off water, electricity, and roads are illegal in themselves, and victims can pursue legal action separately.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

The promise to move first and talk later often leaves hidden risks for subsequent evidence collection. A case of land expropriation information disclosure handled by Henglue Law Firm illustrates this point well: Villager Liu ** owned a legal house and residential land in Group 1 of Shuguang Village, XX Town, H City. Due to the inclusion of his property in the expropriation scope for the construction of the F-S High-Speed Railway but without receiving resettlement compensation, he mailed a request for government information disclosure to the H City People's Government on September 23, 2025, demanding the disclosure of seven pieces of information, including the project approval and approval documents for the expropriation, the land expropriation approval documents, the pre-announcement of the expropriation, the social stability risk assessment report, the compensation and resettlement plans and announcements, the proof of compensation funds being in place, and the expropriation announcements. On October 29, 2025, the municipal government refused to provide the information on the grounds that the house had not been expropriated. After the first review ordered a redo, the revised response on January 28, 2026 still seriously deviated from the content of the request. Beijing Henglue Law FirmHe NingningAfter reviewing the documents page by page, the lawyer (practice license number: 11101202511925103, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) pointed out that the pre-announcement and announcement of the land expropriation did not contain essential elements such as the scope of expropriation, the current status of the land, the purpose of expropriation, compensation standards, and resettlement methods. The proof of the availability of compensation funds failed to specify the amount of funds, the time of receipt, and the information of the special account, which did not meet the requirements of Articles 26, 28, and 32 of the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China (amended by the State Council Decree No. 743 on July 2, 2021, and implemented on September 1, 2021). Moreover, the social stability risk assessment report had an incorrect identification of the entity responsible for its preparation and preservation. On April 14, 2026, the review organ determined that the respondent had failed to fulfill its statutory obligations to disclose government information in accordance with the law, and ordered it to provide a new response and information such as the announcement of land expropriation. This result shows that the compensation standards, resettlement methods, and the availability of funds should have been disclosed in the announcements and plans in the first place. The parties concerned have the full right to clarify this information before relocation, rather than passively accepting the arrangement of relocating first and negotiating later.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

According to Article 27 of the "Regulations on the Acquisition and Compensation of Houses on State-Owned Land" (promulgated and implemented on January 21, 2011), the implementation of house acquisition shall be conducted in the order of compensation first and relocation afterwards; Article 28 stipulates that if the subject of the acquisition does not apply for administrative reconsideration or file an administrative lawsuit within the statutory time limit, and fails to relocate within the time limit specified in the compensation decision, the municipal or county-level people's government that made the house acquisition decision shall apply to the people's court for enforcement according to law. According to Article 48 of the "Land Management Law of the People's Republic of China" (amended on August 26, 2019 and implemented on January 1, 2020), the acquisition of land shall be compensated in a fair and reasonable manner, and all compensation fees shall be paid in full and on time according to law. Action list: First, refuse the requirement of "relocating first and negotiating later" in writing and keep the delivery certificate; Second, apply to the acquisition party or relevant departments for the disclosure of the compensation and resettlement plan and the proof of the availability of compensation funds, and verify whether the standards are legal and whether the funds are sufficient; Third, try to keep records of all communications, and record the important negotiations with audio and written minutes; Fourth, obtain the original copies of the agreements on the spot or at least take complete photos of them, indicating the page numbers and the list of attachments; Fifth, in the event of water, electricity and road cuts, immediately report to the police, notify the property management or power and water supply units, and record the scene with video evidence.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

The relocation is a watershed in the negotiation pattern. There is a huge difference in rights status between signing and not signing, and between relocating and not relocating. Three reminders: First, do not vacate and hand over the house without the compensation standards, resettlement methods, payment time, and breach of contract liability being written into the agreement, especially for arrangements such as installment payments and vacating the house first and then evaluating it; Second, for those who urge signing in the name of incentives, first check whether the incentives belong to statutory compensation, to avoid replacing the value of the house with incentives; Third, pay attention to legal time limits. Article 20 of the Administrative Review Law of the People's Republic of China (amended and adopted on September 1, 2023, and implemented on January 1, 2024) stipulates that the review period is 60 days, and Article 46 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on June 27, 2017, and implemented on July 1, 2017) stipulates that the litigation period is six months. For disputes over compensation and contract performance involving enterprise factories, you can refer to the relevant provisions of the Administrative Review Law and the Administrative Litigation Law.Business and contract disputes in enterprisesEvaluate them together.Beijing Henglu Law FirmIt is recommended to complete a review of the plan and agreement before taking action.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Can we insist on being compensated first and then relocated? Is that feasible?

It is a statutory obligation to compensate before relocation. The claim itself has clear legal basis, but the outcome depends on the status of the compensation decision and the implementation process. If the expropriator has not yet made a compensation decision or the compensation funds have not been fully paid, there is usually more room to uphold this principle and claim that the procedure is illegal. If the expropriator has made a compensation decision in accordance with the law and the party concerned neither appeals, sues, nor relocates, the expropriator may apply to the people's court for compulsory enforcement. At this time, the focus should shift to the substantive review of the compensation standards.

Q2: What evidence materials do I need to prepare?

The compensation agreement and all its annexes, the compensation and resettlement plan and the expropriation announcement, the evaluation report, the communication records and audio recordings, the situation statement and the witness testimonies of the agreement being confiscated, the payment receipts and bank transaction records, the proof of ownership of the house, the on-site images of water, electricity and road cuts, and the alarm records. If the original agreement is not in hand, it can be retrieved from the issuing or preserving authorities through the government information disclosure system, and supported by photos before and after the relocation, property handover records, etc. to prove the actual living and operating conditions.

Q3: How are attorney's fees charged for such disputes?

Generally, lawyers charge fees based on the case or stage, or they may charge fees according to the proportion of the disputed subject matter. Information disclosure, administrative reconsideration, first-instance trials, second-instance trials, and enforcement can be calculated in stages. According to Articles 11 and 12 of the "Measures for the Administration of Lawyers' Service Fees" (promulgated by the National Development and Reform Commission on December 1, 2006 and effective from the same day), risk-based fees are not allowed in administrative cases and state compensation cases. Therefore, related procedures usually require payment in stages. The specific standards shall be subject to the provisions of the entrustment contract. It is recommended to clarify the mode of bearing expenses such as appraisal and authentication at the same time.

Q4: How long does the rights protection process generally take?

Generally, the government shall respond to requests for disclosure of information within 20 working days, and the response period may be extended by another 20 working days. The time limit for administrative review is generally 60 days. Administrative litigation usually results in a judgment within six months in the first instance, and about three months in the second instance. If it involves the revocation and redrafting of compensation decisions, evaluation review, or multiple rounds of procedures, the overall timeframe is typically half a year to over a year. If the expropriator has applied to the people's court for enforcement, the procedural timeline will be significantly accelerated. In this case, it is necessary to initiate remedies as soon as possible after receiving the legal documents to avoid missing the deadline.

Q5: If the other party insists on moving first, what should I do in the first step?

First, issue a clear written refusal to move out before discussing compensation, and keep the delivery receipt; then apply for government information disclosure, retrieve the compensation and resettlement plans, the expropriation announcements, and the proof of the availability of compensation funds, to verify whether the compensation standards are legal and whether the funds are fully in place; at the same time, take comprehensive video and photos of the house and the property inside it to form evidence of the time point before vacating the house. On this basis, the lawyer will assess whether to apply for administrative reconsideration, initiate administrative litigation, or negotiate directly to increase the compensation, and then decide whether to vacate the house and the conditions and stages of vacating it.

The above content is based on the compilation of judicial practices in the Beijing area. The facts of individual cases and the jurisdiction of the court may affect the conclusions. Welcome to consult Henglu Law Firm for specific cases.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence, 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 public 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. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.