[Direct answer]It is generally illegal. Property service fees should follow the principles of reasonableness, openness, and the adaptation of fees to the level of service. The charging standards and adjustments belong to matters decided jointly by the owners. According to Article 278 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, the selection and dismissal of property service enterprises, and the adjustment of property service fees should be decided jointly by the owners; Article 944 stipulates that the owners shall pay the property service fees to the property service providers in accordance with the agreement, and the property service providers shall not use methods such as stopping the supply of electricity, water, heating, and gas to urge the payment of property service fees. If the property company unilaterally increases the fees beyond the contract, the owners have the right to refuse to pay the excess and require the property service provider to perform according to the agreed standards.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

The increase in property fees is a common source of conflict in residential communities. Typical situations include: property management companies directly raising prices on payment slips citing rising costs; announcing new standards without holding an owners' meeting; restricting access to security checkpoints and elevators, or even cutting off water and electricity supplies for non-payment; unilaterally invoking clauses in pre-existing property management contracts that stipulate "adjustments based on the consumer price index"; and confusion over fee standards during the transition between old and new property management companies. In Beijing, when handling such disputes, the focus is on reviewing the legality of the fee adjustment process and contractual basis, rather than simply assessing the amount of the increase. For related property service and real estate disputes, it's advisable to first gain a clear understanding of the situation.Real estate sales and construction project services.

II. Key points of contention

The focus of the dispute lies in four aspects. Firstly, whether the adjustment process is legal and whether the price increase was decided by all owners. According to Article 278 of the Civil Code, matters such as selecting a property management company and adjusting property service fees should be decided by owners through voting in accordance with the law. Secondly, whether the contractual basis is sufficient and whether the fee standard is stipulated in the contract or falls within the scope of the government's guidance prices. Thirdly, the relationship between fees and services. Whether the fees are commensurate with the level and content of services, and whether the property management company has fulfilled its obligation to make public announcements. Fourthly, whether the collection methods are legal. The property management company is not allowed to collect fees by cutting off water, electricity, or elevators, etc. Instead, it can only claim fees in accordance with the contract or through litigation and arbitration. If losses have been caused by water and electricity cuts, they can be claimed in conjunction with the above-mentioned aspects.Personal injury and medical dispute servicesEvaluate the claims for property damage.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

In practice, owners often fall into two misunderstandings: first, they refuse to pay all property fees, only to be ordered to bear breach of contract liability in litigation; second, they ignore price increases and tacitly accept the new standards. A more prudent approach is to "respond in a layered manner": for the parts covered by the contract or those within the scope of legally approved votes, owners should still pay according to the agreement; for the parts exceeding the agreement and not subject to voting, owners should explicitly refuse in writing and retain evidence. From the perspective of owners, the key points to verify include: whether the owners' assembly or the property management committee has made a legally approved resolution on price adjustment, whether the resolution process complies with the voting requirements of Article 278 of the Civil Code, whether the property management has fulfilled the procedures of public notice and consultation, and whether the fees exceed the government-guided price. From the perspective of the property management, it needs to prove the basis and procedures of the price adjustment, as well as the changes in service content and input. Procedural defects often become the key to the effectiveness of the fee adjustment. For disputes involving the effectiveness of the property management committee's resolution or disputes over common areas, reference can be made to relevant provisions.Creditor-debtor relations and enforcement case servicesUnderstand the litigation and enforcement process.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The legal basis is Article 278 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021) (Regarding matters to be jointly decided by owners and voting rules), Article 939 (Regarding the binding force of pre-service contracts for property management), Article 940 (Regarding the renewal and termination of property management contracts), and Article 944 (Regarding the payment of property fees and the prohibition of cutting off water and electricity to collect fees); Article 40 of the Property Management Regulations (amended on March 19, 2018) (Regarding the principles of property service fees), and the provisions on government-guided prices in local property service fee management regulations. Practical suggestions: First, verify whether the price adjustment has been voted on and announced by the owners' assembly in accordance with the law; Second, raise objections to the exceeded part in writing and retain payment receipts; Third, do not refuse to pay fees as a whole to avoid being liable for breach of contract penalties; Fourth, require the property management to publicly disclose its income and expenditure and service levels; Fifth, if illegal fee collection methods such as cutting off water and electricity are discovered, promptly collect evidence and file complaints or lawsuits. The overall solution can be implemented through the following steps:Special services and other case servicesCoordinate and plan everything in an organized and efficient way to ensure that all tasks are completed on schedule and with high quality.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, whether the price increase is legal depends on the process rather than the amount. The voting records jointly decided by the owners are the core evidence. Secondly, it's important to have a strategic approach when refusing to pay. Refuse to pay for the unjustified parts and pay for the justified parts to avoid being judged as breaching the contract if you refuse to pay altogether. Thirdly, it's illegal for the property management company to cut off water and electricity to collect fees. Owners can request the restoration of services and claim compensation for losses. Fourthly, establishing a homeowners' committee and exercising joint management rights in accordance with the law is a long-term mechanism to resolve fee disputes. If you're unsure about the effectiveness of the price adjustment resolution or the litigation strategy, you can seek professional help.Beijing Henglu Law FirmMake an appointment for a professional evaluation.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If the property management company unilaterally increases the property fees, can I refuse to pay them?

You can refuse to pay for the parts that exceed the agreement or are not decided by the owners jointly, but it is not recommended to refuse to pay in total. According to Article 278 of the Civil Code, adjusting the property service fees is a matter to be decided jointly by the owners; if the price increase exceeds the contractual agreement without being voted on in accordance with the law, the owners have the right to refuse to pay for that part. For the parts agreed upon in the contract or determined through legal procedures, owners should still pay according to the agreement. Otherwise, they may be held accountable for breach of contract and even be sued to pay the breach of contract damages and litigation costs.

Q2: To determine whether the increase in property fees is legal, what evidence should be considered?

Key evidence includes: the provisions on charging standards in the property service contract or the preliminary property service contract; the resolutions and voting records on price adjustment made by the owners' assembly or the property management committee; the publicity and notification materials for the price adjustment; the local property service charging management measures and government guidance price documents; and an explanation of the changes in the services provided and the resources invested by the property management company. If there are no legal voting procedures or the price adjustment significantly exceeds the government guidance price, the legality of the price adjustment will be questioned.

Q3: When handling property fee disputes, what are the approximate costs of litigation fees and attorney's fees?

The litigation fees shall be paid in accordance with the "Measures for the Payment of Litigation Fees" (implemented on April 1, 2007). For the amount of arrears involved, the fees shall be charged at the proportion of property cases; for non-property requests such as confirming the effectiveness of price adjustment, the fees shall be charged per case. The litigation fees shall be borne by the losing party or shared proportionally. The attorney's fees shall be determined by consultation on a per-case basis, according to the amount of the subject matter, or on an hourly basis, subject to the written power of attorney. For disputes over property fees with a relatively small amount, they can also be resolved at low cost through mediation, complaints, or small claims litigation procedures.

Q4: How long does it take for such disputes to go from being sued to reaching a resolution?

For cases subject to simplified procedures or small claims procedures, they are generally concluded within three months; for ordinary procedures, it usually takes six months. If one party appeals, the second instance usually takes about three months. If the core of the dispute is the validity of the owners' meeting resolution, it may involve the 60-day exclusionary period for revocation suits. Owners should claim their rights within the statutory time limit from the date they know or should have known about the resolution to avoid losing their rights.

Q5: Facing the property management company's unauthorized price increase, what should I do specifically now?

It is recommended to proceed in four steps: First, verify the basis. Retrieve the property service contract, the price adjustment resolution, and the public announcement materials to confirm whether it has been jointly decided by the owners; Second, raise written objections. Clearly refuse the parts that have not gone through the procedures and exceed the agreed terms, and keep the payment receipts; Third, communicate according to the law. Through the homeowners' committee or homeowners' representatives, negotiate with the property management company, and if necessary, file a complaint with the local government or housing management department; Fourth, protect legal rights. Collect evidence to sue for illegal water and electricity shutdowns, and, if there are disputes over the validity of the price adjustment, file a lawsuit to revoke it.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. The adjudication guidelines 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, to avoid missing the statutory time limit.Legal services for real estate transactions·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. In case of disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.