"Remove" hype to reduce grievances

Over the past time there have been many instabilities leading to the situation of people in many apartment projects hanging banners and slogans against investors. What is the cause of this situation, sir?

Through surveys of apartments with signs of unsafe areas, areas which are not suitable with the dossiers, the Management Board's regulations which are unsuitable for daily-life activities or mistakes in procedures, the fire protection equipment which is not guaranteed... there are some basic causes. First, the conflict comes from interests between the seller and the buyer, the user and the manager, here, the buyer and the user are usually one, but the seller and manager are rarely one. The rules set out in the purchase process and the rules set out after the purchase are not uniform, leading to conflict. Secondly, the public project information is not the same with the information in the sales contract. Thirdly, there is a right regulation but the process of managing the operation is not done properly, including the cause from the user... then leading to conflict in transactional relations, management and use.

In addition, the condominiums are a new type of products. Regulations on management of condominiums are newly set out, so the regulations do not cover all the problems arising in reality. Therefore, state management agencies are responsible for summarizing, evaluating and making amendment and supplement to these regulations.

However, I think that the form of fighting by hanging banners, slogans is not appropriate. These acts cause public disorder and are not a means of resolving the problem, as all issues are resolved in the legal order. I share with residents when their problems are not fully resolved by the owner resulting in objectionable or excessive motions. I hope that people who file for petition or who are filed, learn from the experience.

What do you think when many argue that the cause of the dispute is due to the buyer’s lack of prudence and the uncertainty of the seller?

On the side of residents, in their performance of rights and obligations, I think there are a lot of users who do not really care about the legal issues in the process of product access, buying subjectively and only satisfying their immediate needs, while the purchase process needs to be take considerations carefully to avoid effecting buyer’s interests.

For example, a project has publicized some utilities, but they may be only in the future, which is not mentioned in the approval file. Besides, much information is just advertising, not legal information in the purchase. Buyers do not update completely to know what is advertising information, what is the legal information that we need to ask to be expressed in the contract. So most sales contracts only refer to the sale of apartments, very few investors set up sales contracts referring to the utility that the project will be specifically entitled. For example, if a contract mentions a garage, but the area of a parking lot and how many cars for each home... is mentioned little, then it easily leads to conflict.

However, I think that the arising issues, affecting consumers, whether subjective or objective are the responsibility of the owner and management agencies, who have not done well, causing misunderstandings to the user, need to be adjusted to exclude complaints and fighting. On the other hand, as I have said above, the struggle by hanging banners with slogans has partly alerted the public, making people access housing products with more caution and thought when approaching products. But this form of struggle should not be maintained, this is not the right approach.

When having problems, the need is to reflect, and people should meet those responsible. The law clearly regulates this process and matters of civil responsibility, matters of criminal responsibility and acts of law regulating behavior. In addition, this struggle can be easily exploited by the bad guys, causing instability. Therefore, we should take full advantage of the tool of “live and work in accordance with the Constitution and the law" in life. If legitimate petitions are not properly resolved, residents can sue the owner to court.

Photo: ST.

What do you think about the fact that many apartments do not guarantee the firefighting system when putting the project into use?

I think that if the equipment in the apartment is not secured, if the investor is wise, they should solve it immediately, because the longer the time is, the heavier the crime is, reducing their reputation; the investor cannot ignore responsibility. I am disappointed as many investors are trying to invest in equipment, but the process of exploitation is very indifferent. According to the regulations, all projects must be fully equipped with fire prevention and fighting equipment, which are controlled from design, appraisal, acceptance and no projects are allowed to let people live without acceptance of fire prevention and fighting equipment.

However, this provision is not always guaranteed. Second, the equipment which is installed with a fire prevention system is able to be used, but because the equipment has a useful life and if a irresponsible owner does not want to pay more money in replacing with new equipment, it could result in the equipment not being functional when a problem arises. Thus, this comes from the low awareness of the investors in fire protection, damaging human life. Over recent incidents, it is necessary to intensify inspections and determine the quality of available equipment, and must regularly inspect the equipment to ensure the capability and effectiveness to deal with an incident.

What is the responsibility of the investor when there are disputes related to the utility of the project that was not guaranteed by the investor?

I think the investor must be serious when selling products. Investors have the right to PR, communication, advertising products with values not governed by legal elements, but they should respect the principle of not PR, but the legal elements. However, many investors take advantage of the legal elements as PR for the product. For example, a planned road is 17 m but advertised to be 25-30m... This is false information, wrong legality. In the advertising process, the investor can say good things, but does not say the bad things that would affect the value of the product. Thus, in order to limit conflicts and petitions, it requires us to be serious in the process of advertising, sales and customer service, and we must put the interests of the community, the customer, as top priority. By doing this, we will eliminate many mistakes. If taking the target profit of investors to the top, it means that we have partly infringed the interests of the people.

Thank you, Sir!