Does the owner of the community modify the entrance gate without permission to bring safety hazards to the neighbors? A lawsuit over the exhaustion of a neighborhood dispute has not been settled. The procuratorial organs supervised the success of the counter-prosecution in accordance with the law, the peak of the case turned around, and the two families shook hands and made peace.
The "in-house" entrance door of the house was changed to the "open-outside", which caused dissatisfaction among the next-door neighbors. A "small matter" that occurred between neighbors has caused the two sides to be entangled in lawsuits for four years, and the two families have been in "tearing each other apart", and the neighborhood relationship has reached an impasse and the resentment has deepened. In the end, after the Shandong Provincial Procuratorate raised a protest, the court retried and changed the judgment, and the parties shook hands and made peace.
Neighbors change their doors to "add blockage" to their own homes
In the early autumn of 2016, Liu Fengyuan, a resident of Tianqiao District, Jinan City, Shandong Province, purchased room 1404 of a residential building in a residential area that was completed and delivered after completion and acceptance, and then entered the decoration period. Although the house purchased by Liu Fengyuan is in his name, the actual funder and occupant are his parents. The old couple is about to move into a new house, which is a happy event, but the next scene that happens, Liu Fengyuan feels that he has added a "blockage" to his home.
One day at the end of November of the same year, Liu Fengyuan found that the owner of room 1403 next door wanted to change the entrance door that was originally designed to open inwards to open outward. Liu Fengyuan's eyes immediately appeared a picture: the elderly parents must go through the door of room 1403 to take the elevator, if the door is changed to open, not only occupies the public passage, but also the old two are facing the hidden danger of being hit by the door at any time.
"My parents took out their life savings to buy this house, and I hope that the second elder will live conveniently and with peace of mind." Liu Fengyuan said. Therefore, he immediately found the head of the household, Xu Wen, to state his position: the public passage is shared by the owners, and the design cannot be changed without authorization. "What's wrong with me changing my own door to get in your way?" Once a fire occurs, the indoor air expands, the fireproof entrance door cannot be opened inside, and the design of the inner door will directly affect our escape channel, can you bear this responsibility? Xu Wen's attitude was resolute and gave the reason that "the door must be changed".
Liu Feng foresight could not negotiate, so he reflected the situation to the residential property. After the staff of the property company went to the scene to inspect, the two families negotiated a solution together, but the two sides never reached an agreement. In desperation, the property company had to issue a rectification notice to Xu Wen, but Xu Wen refused to sign it. After that, the property company consulted the local fire and urban management departments and received a reply: this behavior is the owner's indoor behavior, and the law enforcement department has no right to interfere.
On the one hand, there is no door for complaints, and on the other hand, the renovation of Room 1403 is still in an orderly manner. Liu Fengyuan also did not dare to let the two elderly people live in the new house because their elderly parents' eyesight and leg joints were not as good as before.
In October 2017, Liu Fengyuan sued Xu Wen to the court, requesting the court to order the defendant Xu Wen to restore the inner door of the original design drawing plan, and to order the property company to bear joint and several liability for Xu Wen's inaction in the modification.
Exhausted litigation, the case is not closed
In November 2017, the Tianqiao District Court of Jinan City heard the case.
"Your door is also open, why can't I change it to an outside door?" Xu Wen argued that the change of his own door is a legitimate act, which shows the necessity of his family's escape safe passage, and presented evidence in court to prove that after the door change, Liu Fengyuan's home and their family's entrance door are still about 5 meters apart at the same time, and there will be no collision, and the staircase is between the two families, when an emergency occurs, it will not affect the two families to escape through the staircase, and the fireproof entrance door will be changed, which will not have an actual impact on Liu Fengyuan's family.
"The house was designed with safety factors in mind, and since your door is open inside, it should be used according to the design purpose." Liu Fengyuan argued on the basis of reason.
The property company argued that since the plaintiff came to the property to reflect that the defendant had changed the originally open entrance door to the outside, the property company immediately went to the scene to check and asked the two parties to negotiate with the property company to resolve the matter, but the two sides never reached an agreement. Later, the property company issued a rectification notice to the defendant, but the defendant refused to sign for it. The property company consulted the fire and urban management departments on this matter, and all said that this behavior was an indoor behavior of the owner, and the law enforcement department had no right to interfere.
On December 12, 2017, the Tianqiao District Court of Jinan City rendered a civil judgment: defendant Xu Wen changed the entrance door from opening inward to opening outward, which was a transformation of his exclusive property, did not change its use as a residence, and did not violate the provisions of the Provisional Management Statute. From the perspective of the use of the entrance door, it did not affect the passage of other owners in the public corridor of the stairwell, and the judgment rejected the plaintiff Liu Fengyuan's litigation claim.
Liu Fengyuan appealed against the first-instance judgment to the Jinan Intermediate Court. The Jinan Intermediate People's Court held that "being kind to one's neighbor and being a companion to one's neighbor" is a traditional virtue of the Chinese nation. The harmonious and harmonious environment and atmosphere between the neighbors is a living state that every owner hopes to achieve, and mutual understanding and tolerance are the premise of creating a good community culture. Xu Wen's behavior of changing the direction of opening the entrance door will indeed cause certain inconvenience to Liu Fengyuan's residence and life, so Xu Wen should be more careful and cautious when opening the entrance door, avoid collisions, and close the door in time so as not to cause inconvenience to others. Liu Fengyuan should also have more understanding and tolerance for Xu Wen's behavior of changing the direction of opening the entrance door.
In May 2018, the Jinan Intermediate People's Court rejected Liu Fengyuan's appeal request and upheld the original judgment in accordance with the first paragraph of article 170 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.
Subsequently, Liu Fengyuan applied to the Shandong Provincial High Court for a retrial, and the two parties debated whether Xu Wen's change of the entrance door from the inside door to the outside door violated the state's mandatory regulations, whether it violated the management statute of the community, and whether it caused actual damage to Liu Fengyuan. In May 2019, the Shandong Provincial High Court upheld the original judgment on the grounds that Liu Fengyuan's claims had no factual and legal basis.
After the final judgment took effect, the contradictions between the two sides have not been completely resolved, and neighborhood relations have continued to be rigid. In this case, in November 2020, Liu Fengyuan applied to the Jinan Municipal Procuratorate for supervision.
The case was subject to a change of judgment after applying for supervision
After accepting the application, the procurator handling the case of the Jinan Municipal Procuratorate went to the parties' homes several times to communicate and exchange, listen to the opinions of both sides, and go to the property company to understand the relevant situation. The procurator conducted an investigation of the scene to confirm: on the one hand, Liu Fengyuan, who lives in 1404, must go through the corridor in front of Xu Wen's house in 1403 if he wants to take the elevator, the width of the corridor is about 125 cm, and after the door of Xu Wen's home is opened outward, the corridor is only about 35 cm of traffic space, adults obviously cannot pass normally, and it is easy to collide, which does cause inconvenience to Liu Fengyuan and his family; on the other hand, there are two fire passages on the floor, once a dangerous situation occurs, The opening of the 1403 entrance door will affect the 1404 residents to choose the escape channel, and the fire fighting equipment room on this floor is located outside the 1403 door, once the fire may hinder the rescue, there is a greater safety hazard. The prosecutor eventually found that the basic facts identified in the civil judgment in the case lacked evidence to prove that the application of the law was indeed wrong. However, if the contradiction between the two parties cannot be substantively resolved through a protest and a judgment, it may further intensify the contradictions between the neighbors and make property management more difficult.
In view of the above situation, the undertaking procurator tried to mediate between the two parties, but the applicant Liu Fengyuan insisted on supervising the original judgment, and Xu Wen also insisted on enforcing the judgment result. In view of this, the Jinan Municipal Procuratorate believed that the case met the conditions for a prosecutorial protest, so it submitted a protest to the Shandong Provincial Procuratorate in accordance with the law.
The Shandong Provincial Procuratorate's review found that, according to the provisions of the original General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China and the Residential Design Code, the basic facts determined by the civil judgment of the Jinan Intermediate Court lacked evidence to prove that the application of law was indeed wrong. In January 2021, the Shandong Provincial Procuratorate protested against the case in accordance with the law.
The Shandong Provincial High Court held that the procuratorial organ's counter-prosecution opinion was established and should be adopted, and that the original judgment had made an error in applying the law and should be corrected. In July 2021, the Shandong Provincial High Court rendered a final judgment, revoking the civil judgments of the Jinan Intermediate Court and the Jinan Tianqiao District Court, and ordered Xu Wen to restore the door of room 1403 to an inner door within 20 days after the judgment took effect. Liu Fengyuan's other claims were dismissed.
The procuratorate and the law work together to do a good job in the "second half" of the article
"It is not common for small things like this to be prosecuted one after another in the neighborhood, and we believe that doing a good job of the 'second half' of the protest article can completely resolve the contradictions and disputes between the two sides." The procurator of the Sixth Procuratorial Department of the Shandong Provincial Procuratorate, who undertook the case, said.
In order to help the two sides open their hearts and truly turn the quarrel into a jade vessel, the procurator handling the case took the initiative to coordinate and dock with the presiding judge, hoping that the two sides would cooperate to jointly promote the settlement of the parties to the case and completely resolve the dispute.
"I am firmly dissatisfied with the verdict" "The court's judgment is clear and clear, and we respect the verdict"... At the beginning of the mediation, both sides refused to give in, and the hope of mediation was about to be disappointed, but the case-handling personnel were not discouraged.
In order to enable the two sides to reconcile as soon as possible and establish harmonious neighborhood relations, the case-handling personnel have communicated with the two sides many times to explain the law and reason. The determination and sincerity of the two sides to solve this matter once and for all made the two sides gradually change their tough attitude. "Because of this case, the procurators of the Shandong Provincial Procuratorate, the Jinan Municipal Procuratorate, and the judge who undertook the case have come to us many times to mediate, and I am willing to settle." Liu Fengyuan said. Xu Wen also said that in order to facilitate the change of the entrance door from the inside to the outside, it did cause trouble to the neighbors, and he would take the initiative to communicate with the neighbors in the future to create a friendly neighborhood relationship.
Under the joint witness of the procurator and the judge, Xu Wen took the initiative to perform the judgment and changed the way his own door was opened to inward, and the parties shook hands and made peace. Since then, the lawsuit that has entangled the two families for four years has finally been settled. The two sides laughed and hated each other and returned to normal life.
(All parties in the article are pseudonyms)
Prosecutors say: "Small cases" are not underestimated
This is a typical "small case" that occurs between neighbors. In the past four years, the parties' hearts have not been solved, and they have been suing for a long time, and both parties have been burdened by the litigation, and their happiness in life has been lost. The root cause is the lack of communication between the two sides at the beginning of the contradiction, so that the small ones become large and the grievances become deep. As the saying goes, "distant relatives are not as good as close neighbors", good at communication, in order to negotiate a consensus, if the two sides communicate more in advance, many contradictions may be solved. Neighborhoods are small groups that have lived together for a long time, and neighborhood harmony is to promote community harmony and lay the foundation for consolidating social harmony.
As a property company, we should also strengthen service management, build a bridge of neighborhood communication, and gradually guide residents in the community to form a living environment in which small things do not go out and major matters are discussed together, and jointly create a harmonious and friendly neighborhood atmosphere.
The new era advocates a new type of neighborhood relationship, which puts forward higher requirements for procuratorial organs to deeply participate in social governance, protect the legitimate rights and interests of the people, and enhance their sense of happiness and security. In this regard, we must actively practice the work concept of "people first", adhere to the judicial service for the people, put the "people's livelihood procuratorate" in a more prominent position, handle the "small cases" around the masses with heart and soul, highlight the procuratorial temperature, and use high-quality supervision to let the people have more sense of judicial gain.
In this case, the procurator handling the case always insisted that the "small case" was not underestimated, and the "small case" was handled as a big case, visiting the parties on both sides many times, rushing to the scene many times to investigate and verify, and correcting the erroneous judgment according to law with solid evidence. At the same time, he joined hands with the court's judge to explain the law and reason to the parties, weigh the advantages and disadvantages of both sides, and organically combine law, feeling and reason, and finally untie the knots between the two parties to the dispute, repair the broken neighborhood relationship, and truly realize the conclusion of the case.
(Source: Procuratorial Daily Author: Lu Jinzeng, Sun Xiao)
![A civil dispute led to a fugitive suspect[fig]]()