[Direct answer]The principle must be followed. Elevators are common facilities owned by all owners. Owners have rights to the common areas but also bear obligations. They cannot evade their obligations by claiming that they never use the elevator. "I have never used the elevator" is not a defense. Exceptions depend on agreements and local regulations: If the property service contract explicitly stipulates a discount for the first floor, it shall be implemented according to the agreement. In some cities, the starting floor of the elevator is exempted from the running fee if it is a residential floor, and the exemption is only applicable if the conditions are met.

I. Problem background and typical scenarios

A typical defense from first-floor owners: I take the stairs every day and never use the elevator; the elevator breakdown has nothing to do with me; I chose the first floor precisely because I didn't want to use the elevator when I bought the house. The property management's position: The elevator operation and maintenance fees are apportioned according to the common areas, and the shortage of funds from the first floor will be shared by all floors. The essence of the conflict lies in the misperception of "optional rights" and "unwaivable obligations".

II. Key points of contention

First, common property is tied to obligations. Elevators, external facades, and fire safety facilities are all common areas, with rights and obligations being inseparable. Giving up use does not exempt one from the obligation to share costs. Second, the effectiveness of agreed upon reductions and exemptions. If the preliminary property agreement or owners' meeting resolution explicitly stipulates first-floor exemptions, they shall be implemented in accordance with the agreement. Third, the applicability of local regulations. The rules for determining the starting floor of elevators vary from place to place, and exemptions are only granted if certain conditions are met. Fourth, the litigability of cost allocation methods. Whether costs are allocated by area or by household, and whether operating and maintenance fees are separated, owners have the right to be informed and to raise objections.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

The adjudication standards for elevator fee disputes are illustrated by two public cases: - In a case in Tongzhou Court of Beijing, Tian Yong, a first-floor owner, refused to pay property fees on the grounds of "never using the elevator". The court ruled that elevators are common areas owned by all owners. While owners enjoy rights to common areas, they also bear obligations and cannot evade responsibilities by renouncing rights. The pre-sale property agreement explicitly included elevator operation fees in the property fees and did not stipulate first-floor exemptions. The court ordered him to pay over 7,000 yuan in arrears. - In a case in Qingdao, Shandong, Li * also refused to pay elevator fees on the grounds of "never using the elevator". However, the court found that the building directly connected to the underground parking lot on the first floor, and the elevator's starting floor was the underground parking lot rather than the first-floor residential area—which did not meet the local condition requiring the starting floor to be residential to exempt first-floor owners from elevator fees. The court ruled in favor of the property management company. These two cases outline clear adjudication frameworks: - At the principle level, common area cost allocation is a statutory obligation for co-owners, and "non-use" is not a defense—this aligns with the legal principle that "owners must pay property fees even if they don't live in the property". - At the exception level, exemptions must be based on contractual provisions (pre-sale agreements or owners' assembly resolutions) or local regulations (starting floor rules). Local regulations must be strictly fact-checked—the Qingdao case lost because the "starting floor was actually the underground parking lot", demonstrating that first-floor residential units do benefit from elevator use. Action checklist for first-floor owners: 1. Review contracts: Check if pre-sale agreements or property service contracts include first-floor exemptions. 2. Verify local regulations: Investigate whether the city has elevator starting floor exemption rules and the building's starting floor location, confirming with planning maps and property ownership documents. 3. If none exist, negotiate allocation methods (separating operation and maintenance fees, implementing tiered reductions in some communities via owners' assemblies) and follow legal channels to adjust allocation rules through owners' assemblies. Reminder for property management: - Publicly disclose fee components. - Clearly list elevator operation and maintenance costs to provide a basis for owner objections. Beijing courts consistently apply the principle that "renouncing rights does not exempt obligations", leaving first-floor owners' success largely dependent on contractual exemptions or local regulations.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The first step is contract verification: Check whether there is an agreement on the first-floor discount or exemption in the preliminary agreement and the property contract. The second step is regulation verification: Compare the local elevator starting floor exemption rules with the actual situation of the building. The third step is owners' meeting: If there are no agreements or regulations, adjust the apportionment plan through the owners' meeting. The fourth step is payment record retention: Communicate normally during the objection period and keep records to avoid the escalation of the breach of contract penalty. Main legal basis: Article 273 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (owners' rights and obligations to the common parts) and Article 944 (obligation to pay property management fees); relevant provisions of the Property Management Regulations and local property management and elevator management measures; the specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws and regulations.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

"I don't use the elevator" is not a reason for exemption from payment, but the contractual provisions and local regulations do provide genuine exceptions: first check the contract, then the rules, and finally discuss adjustments—don't reverse the order. Unilateral refusal to pay won't withstand litigation, and consultation with the homeowners' association is the proper path to changing the rules. For disputes involving property fees, you can seek resolution through legal channels.Property sales and construction projectsYou can refer to it when interpreting the contract terms to obtain a comprehensive solution for the serviceBusiness and contract disputes in enterprisesFor reference, you can refer to the section on how to deal with lawsuits involving unpaid feesCreditor's rights and debts, and enforcement casesFor the plates, those related to case solutions can be combined togetherSpecialised legal servicesPlate consultation.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: The contract stipulates a discount or exemption for the first floor, but the property management company refuses to acknowledge it. What should I do?

According to the contract, if the buyer refuses to accept the cash and leaves evidence before lodging a complaint or filing a lawsuit, the validity of the agreed terms shall take precedence.

Q2: What is the standard for apportioning elevator fees?

It shall be determined by the owners' assembly according to the area or the number of households, or as agreed in the contract, and the composition and breakdown shall be publicly disclosed.

Q3: Can the first floor request to split the operating costs?

Proposals can be put forward, and the apportionment adjustments approved by the owners' meeting are legal and effective.

Q4: Will my elevator card be suspended if I don't pay the elevator fee?

No, it's illegal to restrict the use of shared facilities. You can file a complaint to protect your rights.

Q5: Can the second and third floors claim to pay less rent?

It also depends on the agreement and local rules. In most areas, lower-level tax exemptions or reductions require an agreement or a resolution to support them.

This article is written based on the common judicial interpretations in the Beijing area. If the case occurs in other regions, it is recommended to consult local lawyers to verify the regional differences.

VII. Related public cases (for reference, not handled by our firm)

The following cases are all sourced from the official websites of courts at all levels, judicial authorities, and authoritative media outlets, and are unrelated to the cases handled by our firm. They are provided solely for reference in understanding relevant adjudication rules and do not constitute opinions on specific cases.

[Case No.]The case number has not been made public.
[Trial Court]The People's Court of Tongzhou District, Beijing City
[Judicial Summary]On the grounds that he "never used the elevator," first-floor owner Tian Yong refused to pay the property management fees. The court held that the elevator is a common area shared by all owners, and owners have rights to the common area while also bearing corresponding obligations. They cannot evade their obligations by renouncing their rights. The "Pre-sale Property Management Service Agreement" clearly stipulates that the property management fees include elevator operating costs and does not provide for any discounts or exemptions for first-floor owners. The court ordered the owner to pay the arrears in property management fees of 7,387.63 yuan.
[Source]China Court Network, April 2010 (2010-04)

[Case No.]The case number has not been made public.
[Trial Court]Qingdao City, Shandong Province (Cases announced by the Shandong High Court)
[Judicial Summary]The first-floor owner, Li * , refused to pay the elevator fee on the grounds that he did not use the elevator. The court found that the building where his house is located directly connects to the underground parking garage on the first floor. The starting floor of the elevator is the underground parking garage, not the first-floor residence, which does not meet the condition of the local regulations that "the starting floor of the elevator is the residence, and the elevator running fee of the starting floor owner is exempted". The court ordered Li * to pay the elevator fee in accordance with the provisions of the property service contract.
[Source]The Shandong High Court's official WeChat account announced that the 2023-06 session (2023-06) will be held in June 2023.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Legal services for the purchase and sale of real estate·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on current effective laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is provided 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 a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in a timely manner.