Buyers of real estate in new buildings are often faced with a choice - what to buy, an apartment or a housing cooperative. For those ignorant of the topic of primary real estate, it may seem that these are just different ways of completing a transaction - in fact. The first option seems more secure for the shareholder, the second – more profitable. Let's figure out what the difference is.

What is the difference between preschool and housing cooperative?

The differences between housing cooperatives and housing cooperatives lie in the legal plane. Thus, work with shared participation agreements is regulated by Federal Law-214 “On shared participation in the construction of apartment buildings...”, and work with housing construction cooperatives is regulated by Federal Law-215 “Law on Housing Construction Cooperatives”. In addition, to understand the work of housing cooperatives, we recommend studying section five of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation before purchasing.

• Equity Participation Agreements (EPA) is a scheme in which future apartments in new buildings are sold through document registration with the Rosreestr authorities. When you register the agreement, you become an investor in shared construction, a shareholder.
• Housing construction cooperative (HCC) agreements is a scheme for selling square meters that have not yet been built using so-called shares, or share contributions. In fact, we are talking about joining a community of people who are going to build a residential building. When you enter into an agreement with a housing cooperative, you become a member of the housing cooperative, or a shareholder.

There are still a lot of controversial issues that may influence the choice of a shareholder between a pre-employment building and a housing cooperative. What's better? Let's look at each scheme in more detail.

Advantages and disadvantages

In order to choose between a residential building or a housing cooperative, a future investor needs to understand the main differences in the rights and responsibilities of one or another form of interaction with a developer. Especially after January 1, 2017, when significant changes were made to 214-FZ.

DDU

If we consider buying an apartment under 214FZ and choosing a housing cooperative or a residential building, then the answer to the question of which is better can be given as follows:

Pros of buying by DD:

• There are permitting documents, there is a project declaration - all this is spelled out in the contract.
• The contract specifies the cost; it will not increase during the process. And you don’t care about the problems of builders who suffer from rising prices for mortar.
• The house will not suddenly become several floors larger
• The house will not have extensions and other strange buildings that were not in the advertising brochures
• A transparent scheme for terminating the contract and paying compensation for losses to shareholders
• There are clear terms of the developer’s warranty for different types of work

Unfortunately, there are also disadvantages:

• The cost is usually higher. And in new facilities it will increase by another 1-1.5%. After all, the law introduced the creation of a compensation fund, which will be formed from contributions from builders from each apartment sold. Naturally, these costs will be added to the price of the property.
• The process of registering a contract is quite long.
• The prescribed grounds for terminating the contract - if they are not followed, it is quite difficult to terminate the contract and return all the money
• There are problems with obtaining installment plans from the developer, which means that the price of the property will increase significantly due to obtaining a mortgage, if necessary.

Housing cooperative

The scheme for purchasing an apartment from a housing cooperative also has its pros and cons:

• The positive thing is that there are good discounts on not very popular apartments
• The price differs from DDU on a smaller side due to a small number of additional fees
• De jure, the shareholder takes part in housing cooperative meetings and decides how the house will be built

Negative points:

• You will have to pay an additional fee for joining the housing cooperative - usually 1-3% of the cost of the apartment
• There is a danger of double sales
• In fact, the shareholder has fewer rights to housing than the buyer under the DD
• You cannot resell an apartment to anyone, even by assignment. The buyer will have to join the housing cooperative
• There is a risk of an increase in apartment prices
• There is no responsibility of the developer for failure to meet deadlines

Important! You purchased an apartment under a shared participation agreement, the house has been completed and you are planning a new renovation. But before obtaining ownership of the property, the developer carries out mandatory measurements of your apartment with the help of BTI employees. And it turns out that the housing is actually larger. The developer offers you to pay for additional meters. Now the authorities are preparing changes to the law that will regulate this process in favor of the shareholder, but until they come into force, you have several options for interacting with the developer:

• You can simply refuse to receive a certificate for the apartment and demand money and a penalty
• You can pay the difference and receive a penalty
• You can find flaws in construction and demand from the developer a discount on the amount of the difference (the most popular option in practice)

In the case of housing cooperatives, you will have to pay for additional meters.

Management agreements and agreements with housing cooperatives

When concluding an equity participation agreement (), pay attention to some of its mandatory clauses:

• All details of the developer's company must be indicated. Check whether the company actually exists using online tax identification number verification services. Read the company's charter, find out the size of the authorized capital and founders
• The DDU should be called that way, and not “investment agreement” or “preliminary equity participation agreement”
• In a residential building, unlike a housing cooperative, there should be information about delivery dates up to a month - that is, for example, “until November 2018”
• The contract contains all the characteristics of the property - its number of floors, the area of ​​the house, the area of ​​your apartment
• Developer's warranty obligations - terms
• Amount in numbers and words

Lawyer at the Legal Defense Board. Specializes in handling cases related to appealing illegal actions of officials, housing disputes, and collecting penalties from developers. Extensive experience in working under 214 Federal Laws.

DDU and housing cooperative: differences and pitfalls

The share of projects implemented through housing cooperatives is today 10% in the mass segment market and 7.3% in the business class of Moscow. Over the past five years, this share has remained stable, while the number of pre-purchase agreements has halved. The most popular sales scheme is still by DDU – 64% in the mass segment and 65% in business class. Company analysts "Metrium Group" We compared the pros and cons of purchasing through housing cooperatives and DDUs, finding out all the pitfalls.

According to the Housing Code, a housing cooperative is an association into which buyers join for the construction or purchase of housing. The idea of ​​a building cooperative is to pool the funds of buyers to solve the housing problem. Housing cooperatives actively worked under this scheme in Soviet times and in the 1990s, when enterprises organized a cooperative from among their own employees, built apartments and then received contributions from members of the cooperative. Thus, housing cooperative participants could purchase housing at cost. However, this was only possible if there was a powerful external financial resource that went towards construction (the budget of an enterprise or state).

“Nowadays, only developers have the necessary resources for construction, because no voluntary association of housing shareholders is able to afford the construction of a large facility,” says MariaLitinetskaya, managing partner of Metrium Group. – Neither membership nor share fees will be able to cover the costs of the initial stage of construction (purchase of land, design, etc.). Therefore, today housing cooperatives are created by developers, but not in the interests of home buyers, but in their own interests to raise funds. It is beneficial for the developer to start attracting funds from apartment buyers as early as possible. However, under DDU agreements, they have this opportunity only after registering ownership or lease of land, obtaining a construction permit, and publishing a project declaration. This is not required to attract funds from housing cooperative participants. Thus, the role of the housing cooperative has completely changed: now the construction cooperative enters into an investment agreement (i.e. acts as an investor in the project) with the developer.”

However, it cannot be said that this sales scheme is very popular among developers, despite its advantages. Currently, in the Moscow market of new buildings in the mass segment, the purchase scheme through housing cooperatives is offered in only 10% of projects. Approximately the same share of projects with housing cooperatives is observed in the business class of Moscow - 7.3%. At the same time, out of five projects with housing cooperatives in the mass segment of Moscow, only three are being implemented entirely within the framework of this scheme. In one of the remaining residential complexes, the developer plans to switch to DDU, and in another, only one of the buildings is being sold through the housing cooperative. In other words, most often housing cooperatives for developers are a temporary measure, which they prefer not to use widely. However, there are many buyers who purchase an apartment using this scheme. In this case, the purchase will be associated with O a greater number of risks, although it also has certain advantages.

Having analyzed all the pros and cons of buying an apartment through DDU and housing cooperatives, it becomes obvious that the main difference between the sale of apartments under these two schemes lies in the legal side of the matter. Relations between the members of the housing cooperative and the cooperative itself are built on the basis of the Charter of the housing cooperative and the Participation Agreement, which is concluded by the buyer.

“Since relations between members of the housing cooperative are built on the basis of internal documents of the cooperative, for which there are no strict requirements, a member of the cooperative can only rely on his own prudence and care when choosing a housing cooperative,” summarizes MariaLitinetskaya. – The interests of buyers of apartments through housing cooperatives are much less protected, since it is beneficial for the developer, who actually sells his property through a “pocket” cooperative, to have minimum obligations written into the charter. This is precisely the main disadvantage and risk of such a purchase scheme.

In addition, there is no difference between the prices of apartments sold through DDU and housing cooperatives. If at the dawn of the development of housing cooperatives it was possible to purchase housing in them at the cost of construction, now all residential complexes in which sales are carried out through housing cooperatives are sold at market prices.

As for the initial expenses of buyers, they are commensurate with the expenses of members of the housing cooperative: the former pay an agent commission and a registration fee, the latter pay a membership fee. Other purchase conditions - down payment and installment period - also do not differ. The only exception is the Etalon City residential complex, where the down payment is 10% and the installment period is seven years (until 2023). However, the rate is 1% per month or 12% per year, which is comparable to average mortgage rates in projects implemented under DDU. Thus, if we compare the financial benefits in the context of possible risks, then purchasing through a housing cooperative is a very risky enterprise for the buyer.”

What are housing cooperatives and preschool educational institutions? ZhSK is a housing construction cooperative, that is, an association of individuals or legal entities formed for the joint construction of apartment buildings.

The concept of a housing construction cooperative is defined in the Housing Code (Article 110). The Civil Code defines housing cooperatives as a non-profit organization whose purpose of existence is not related to making a profit.

In some cases legislation allows non-profit organizations to have commercial activities, however, this must be related to the purpose of their creation (Article 50 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

This provision of law does not apply to housing cooperatives. In addition, the provisions of the Federal Law “On Non-Profit Organizations” cannot be applied to housing cooperatives.

Thus, the legal position of housing cooperatives looks strange - they are not non-profit organizations, but at the same time they are prohibited from engaging in commercial activities. This is something like a partnership that collects money, pays for construction, and then accepts the finished object.

Unlike housing cooperatives, DDU is not an organization, but a form of investment. The abbreviation stands for simply – equity participation agreement.

People simply invest their money in a residential building under construction in accordance with the cost of their apartment.

The agreement is concluded between the equity holder and the development company, that is, between a legal entity and an individual.

Reference. Legal relations between these persons are regulated in accordance with the provisions of Law N214-FZ, which is usually called “On participation in shared construction...”

And one more subtlety - when creating housing cooperatives and public housing cooperatives, such categories as developer and shareholder arise.

What is the fundamental difference?

How does one form of participation in housing construction differ from another? There are definitely differences. Not long ago, separate regulations are devoted to each of them.

It was said earlier that this is an official organization, a form of interaction between future residents and builders. DDU is the interaction of individuals (future residents) directly with developers.

This difference also affects contractual relations. Contracts for housing construction services and DDS have the following differences:

1. The share participation agreement must be registered with the Federal Registration Service in the same way as a real estate purchase and sale agreement. An agreement created in a housing construction cooperative does not need to be registered with the Federal Registration Service.
2. In the share agreement, the cost of housing is immediately specified in specific amounts; after the house is put into operation, this cost does not change. When interacting with housing cooperatives, developers have the right to change the price of apartments depending on rising costs.
3. Federal Law No. 214 clearly stipulates the time frame for completion of construction. The developer is financially responsible for violating the agreed terms. Construction based on relationships with housing cooperatives is not regulated by any deadlines, therefore the developer does not bear any responsibility for the timing of its activities.
4. If the developer decides to abandon construction and the contract, then he is obliged to return all the money invested to the shareholders. But no one gives such guarantees to the members of the cooperative. The developer may return part of the money invested, or may not return anything at all. The contract scheme does not provide for such actions.
5. have the right not to pay the entire amount at once.

   Shareholders do not have such rights. They are required to complete payment for their apartment by the construction completion date.

6. Installment plans under a shared construction agreement do not affect the price of the apartment in any way. If construction is carried out under an agreement with a cooperative, then if paid in installments, the amount paid increases.
7. A developer working under a shared construction agreement must send the entire range of permitting documentation to the Federal Tax Service before the start of the sale procedure. In the case of working with housing cooperatives, this is not necessary.

You can get acquainted with the fundamental differences between housing cooperatives and public housing cooperatives by watching the video:

Now you know the difference between housing cooperatives and preschool cooperatives.

Which agreement is preferable?

These types of apartment purchases are always associated with risks. There is no complete protection from problems in any type of contract.. For example, buyers-shareholders are insured against double sales, and buyers from a cooperative can move into an apartment that is already occupied by someone (recommendations on how to avoid risks when purchasing an apartment under a housing cooperative agreement are given in).

Finally, no one is immune from natural disasters, shocks in the building materials market, financial problems, and, finally, bankruptcy of the developer.

You need to choose the most beneficial contract option depending on the situation. However, the most the main thing in this choice is reliable information about the developer company.

Try to choose a company that has been on the housing market for a long time, has proven itself well, and most importantly, has built under contracts with shareholders and cooperative associations. A company that has avoided conflicts with its investors is worthy of you entering into an agreement with it.

If you don’t have enough money to start, you can join a cooperative, hoping that your financial affairs will improve during the construction of the house. If you have enough money for an initial share payment for cheap housing, then it is better to enter into a shared-share agreement.

What do Internet users say about this?

If you find an error, please highlight a piece of text and click Ctrl+Enter.

Thinking about improving their living conditions, many turn their attention not to secondary housing, but to new buildings. But an obstacle for many is the price of housing in new buildings, which can be several times higher than the cost of an apartment in an old building. Purchasing real estate by concluding a contract or joining a housing construction cooperative allows people to significantly reduce their costs. We’ll talk further about the pros and cons of these options and which is better to choose.

The concepts of an agreement of shared participation in construction and a housing construction cooperative

When choosing a method of purchasing a home, many people ask the following questions:
“What to choose - housing cooperative or preschool building?”
“At what point will they benefit financially?”
“Will they be protected from the actions or inactions of unscrupulous developers?”

In accordance with the Federal Law “On apartment buildings and other real estate objects and on amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation” agreement on shared participation in construction is an agreement between the developer and the participant in shared construction, within the framework of which the developer undertakes to put into operation an apartment building within a specified period of time and transfer to the construction participant a predetermined real estate object (apartment), the construction participant, in turn, undertakes to make payment in accordance with the terms of the agreement.

Housing and construction cooperative is a voluntary association of citizens who united for the purpose of pooling their capital for the construction of a residential building. Such an association, in accordance with Art. 50 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, are non-profit organizations, that is, legal entities.

Thus, in the first case, the relationship develops between an individual shareholder and the developer, and in the second, between people united by a common goal and the developer.

Differences between a housing construction cooperative and an agreement on shared participation in construction

When deciding which agreement to conclude, it is necessary to pay attention to their significant differences.

1. The moment of conclusion. Agreement on shared participation in construction, in accordance with Art. 4 of the Federal Law “On participation in shared construction” is considered concluded from the moment of its state registration, in contrast, an agreement with a housing construction cooperative comes into force from the moment it is signed. State registration gives more guarantees to the buyer of real estate, since it eliminates the possibility of re-selling the residential premises. After state registration, the real estate object is strictly defined, which will be transferred to the shareholder who entered into the agreement.
2. Cost of the purchased property. The cost of housing purchased under a housing construction cooperative agreement is usually lower than during shared construction, but it may change during construction due to additional costs of the developer that were not (or could not be) taken into account at the time of concluding the agreement. has a fixed amount, since the cost is calculated based on the area of ​​the purchased apartment and the cost of one square meter cannot be changed by the developer unilaterally under any circumstances. This indicates greater stability of the contract and the ability of construction participants to calculate their financial costs.
3. Determination of construction deadlines and responsibility for violating them. The contract for shared participation in construction clearly defines the deadline for the delivery of the object; for violation of these deadlines, the developer is liable in accordance with Art. 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Federal Law “On participation in shared construction” in the form of a penalty for each day of delay, as well as “On the protection of consumer rights”, which are expressed in the form of fines within the framework of this law, since construction participants are recognized as consumers. An agreement with a housing construction cooperative may not contain a clause defining the exact date for completion of construction. Even if such a clause is present, the legislation and judicial practice do not provide for the collection of such penalties as in shared construction. Thus, during shared construction, the developer will be more attentive to his responsibilities.
4. Making payments under these agreements. The contract for shared participation in construction requires the participant to contribute funds throughout the entire period of construction of the house. When concluding an agreement, the payment schedule is drawn up in such a way that the end of payments coincides with the end of construction and commissioning of the house. Exceeding this period, that is, violating the payment schedule is a violation on the part of the shareholder, unless otherwise provided by the contract or an additional agreement to it. Unlike shared construction, a housing construction cooperative can provide a longer payment period, but interest will be charged on the amount in the amount stipulated by the contract. In addition, each shareholder also pays regular contributions for membership in the cooperative, which are not included in the price of the purchased housing. Thus, by reducing the monthly payment by increasing the payment term, the apartment buyer can end up spending a larger amount of money.
5. Features of termination of the contract. In the event that the developer fails to comply with the terms of the contract, for example, delays in the delivery of the object, the participant in shared construction has the right to demand termination of the agreement for participation in shared construction and the return of not only the amount paid, but also all penalties, in accordance with the law. The housing construction cooperative does not give the shareholder such an opportunity; when leaving the cooperative, the shareholder can only demand the return of share payments to him, but the membership fees paid by each member of the cooperative are not refundable. It follows from this that termination of the contract for shared participation in construction allows you to receive additional monetary compensation, and leaving the cooperative in any case entails financial losses.

Should you look for a solution yourself or entrust the work to a lawyer?

It is better to entrust your real estate work to a lawyer or lawyer. Believe me, he knows the subtleties and nuances that will help you not only save time, but avoid critical mistakes. And you can find experienced lawyers from any city in Russia on YurProvodnik.

Simply by studying the differences in these legal relations, for many it will probably not be entirely clear for which aspects they choose one or another agreement. Next, let's look at the positive aspects of the agreements.

Positive aspects of a shared participation agreement in construction

• Agreement on participation in shared construction can be concluded only after the developer has received all the necessary permits. Thus, before signing the contract, a potential construction participant has the opportunity to familiarize himself with the design documentation, examinations, and title documents for the land plot. This allows a person to be sure that the construction has been approved by regulatory authorities, and the house itself, according to the project, meets all specified state standards.
• In addition, when deciding to purchase a home, a person, as a rule, has a certain amount of money and wants to immediately know how much the purchase will cost him. As stated above, the cost of real estate in this case will be determined based on its area. The contract for shared participation in construction does not allow the developer to make any changes to the cost of a meter of area. This is an undoubted advantage of the contract, since the construction participant sees his payment schedule calculated until the end of construction.
• Agreement on shared participation in construction, in accordance with the law, may be terminated at the initiative of the shareholder if the developer violates its terms. This is one of its most positive features. If the construction organization fails to fulfill its obligations, it will have to pay back all funds received, compensate for losses incurred and pay penalties. The legislator tried to protect the interests of shareholders in this matter as much as possible.

Positive aspects of concluding an agreement with a housing construction cooperative

• The main positive aspect of such an agreement is its financial side. The monthly payment in this case is significantly less than when concluding a share participation agreement in construction, since the shareholder can make payments after the house is put into operation. Thus, the positive side of the contract is the lower cost of the apartment.
• In addition, members of the cooperative easier to control its activities than shareholders with shared participation in construction. As a member of a housing construction cooperative, the shareholder has the right to demand from him a report on the work done and funds spent.

Conclusions:

1. Everyone chooses the method of purchasing real estate that suits them best, but a comparison shows that an agreement on shared participation in construction better protects the rights of shareholders and is therefore a more reliable way to purchase housing.
2. You should choose a housing construction cooperative for this only for the purpose of saving money, but often such savings can be an unreasonable risk for shareholders.
3. When choosing any method of purchasing real estate, you should not forget about the reputation of the developer, which has been developing over the years.