Бесплатные соцнормы коммуслуг Федерального значения скрываются Юрлицами. 1 часть

Discussion on Client Interaction and Documentation Issues

Initial Concerns and Authority Verification

• The speaker, Alexey Mikhailovich Lade, identifies himself as the director for client relations in the Moscow region and requests confirmation of authority due to a previous incident involving an employee named Andrey.

• There is a mention of a promised meeting with Kovalyev, indicating that the discussion should be held with higher management rather than lower-level staff.

Meeting Expectations and Documentation Requests

• The speaker emphasizes the importance of meeting with Kovalyev specifically, stating that decisions of significant nature cannot be made by the current representatives present.

• A request is made for identification verification (passport), highlighting a lack of trust in informal documentation presented by the company.

Discontent with Company Procedures

• The speaker expresses frustration over being asked to check documents online instead of receiving physical copies during their visit, labeling such practices as inadequate.

• There is a demand for official documents like the company's charter and license to be provided immediately, reflecting dissatisfaction with how information is currently managed.

Legal Compliance and Document Availability

• Discussion shifts towards legal compliance regarding licensing; it’s noted that licenses have not been updated since 2015, raising concerns about regulatory adherence.

• The speaker insists on receiving hard copies of necessary documents per Russian law, emphasizing that digital access does not suffice for formal business interactions.

Status Confirmation as Supplier

• Questions arise regarding the company's status as a guaranteed supplier since 2006; this indicates ongoing scrutiny into their operational legitimacy.

• The conversation concludes with inquiries about specific governmental registrations related to their supplier status, underscoring ongoing concerns about transparency and accountability.

Discussion on Energy Supply Status

Changes in Operational Boundaries

• The operational boundaries of the energy supply zone are not fixed and have undergone changes, with the latest updates occurring in July 2023. Evidence of this change is requested to validate claims about status.

Historical Context of Reorganization

• The previous organization was liquidated based on a reorganization stemming from reforms in the electricity sector conducted in 2005, specifically involving AO Mosenergo. This led to significant structural changes within the energy sector.

Legal Framework for Reorganization

• The discussion highlights two federal laws that guided the reorganization process, emphasizing that generation, transportation, and distribution were divided into separate entities post-reform. Currently, Mosenergo operates as a generation company while other entities handle network operations and supply guarantees.

Documentation Requirements

• There is a strong emphasis on needing official documentation to confirm the status of companies involved in energy supply. Participants express frustration over reliance on digital documents rather than physical copies with signatures and seals for validation purposes.

Public Accessibility of Information

• Concerns are raised regarding how ordinary citizens without internet access can verify information or documents related to their energy supplier's status. It is suggested that printed materials should be made available for those who cannot access online resources easily.

Discussion on Electricity Supply Contracts

Introduction to the Contractual Agreement

• The speaker mentions a voluntary agreement regarding an electricity supply contract, indicating that Alexey Mikhailovich should respond to inquiries about it.

• There is a reference to a decision made at a general meeting concerning direct contracts between residents and the resource supplying company.

Clarification of Responsibilities

• A question arises about the legitimacy of the resource supplying organization, with concerns over its role as merely a commercial entity reselling energy rather than being an actual supplier.

• The discussion highlights confusion regarding who has the authority to sell electricity, emphasizing that certain organizations (like Rosseti) cannot sell resources directly.

Consumer Rights and Decision-Making

• The speaker questions how decisions made in meetings can affect individual property owners without their consent or participation.

• It is argued that collective decisions should not override individual rights, especially concerning personal property matters.

Legal Framework and Accountability

• References are made to various legal codes (Civil Code, Housing Code), questioning their relevance in determining responsibilities for electricity payments.

• The conversation shifts towards accountability for assigning personal accounts and whether proper documentation was followed during this process.

Disputes Over Direct Contracts

• Concerns are raised about digitalization processes affecting individuals' rights regarding account assignments and payment obligations.

• The dialogue emphasizes that all residents were supposed to enter into direct contracts with suppliers but questions arise about the validity of these agreements.

Examination of Legal Provisions

• A critical examination of whether general meetings can dictate terms related to individual apartments versus common areas is discussed.

• The need for clarity on which laws govern electricity supply agreements is emphasized, particularly distinguishing between housing law and specialized energy legislation.

Conclusion on Energy Consumption Norms

• Discussion concludes with references to social norms for energy consumption set by the government, highlighting discrepancies in what consumers expect versus what they receive under current regulations.

Discussion on Social Norms and Energy Regulations

Overview of the Legal Framework

• The speaker questions the validity of social norms regarding electricity supply in Moscow, asserting that federal laws are not being upheld.

• There is a mention of a lack of approval for social norms in Moscow and its surrounding areas, indicating potential legal violations by local authorities.

• The speaker emphasizes that the Ministry of Housing and Utilities (ЖКХ) in Moscow has allegedly decided to violate energy regulations.

Clarification on Social Norms

• A request is made for clarification on how social consumption norms relate to current regulations, highlighting confusion over their establishment.

• The discussion points out that there seems to be no established social norm for energy consumption in Moscow, suggesting possible misinterpretation or miscommunication from officials.

Accountability and Responsibility

• The speaker demands evidence of regulatory documents supporting claims about energy consumption norms, questioning the authority behind these assertions.

• Concerns are raised about who bears responsibility if free electricity is guaranteed but not delivered according to set standards.

Examination of Regulatory Documents

• A call for specific references within legal texts regarding consumption norms indicates a need for transparency in regulatory practices.

• The conversation shifts towards identifying which governmental body has the authority to establish these social norms, revealing bureaucratic complexities.

Implications of Consumption Norm Changes

• Discussion arises around changes in consumer obligations regarding metering devices since 2020, hinting at evolving responsibilities under new regulations.

• The notion of "replacement calculation methods" suggests an attempt by authorities to circumvent traditional billing practices without clear justification.

Critique of Commercial Practices

• An assertion is made that every citizen should receive resources based on established social norms rather than commercial interests, emphasizing fairness in resource distribution.

• The speaker expresses frustration over perceived manipulation of terms related to energy contracts and insists on individual rights concerning agreements with utility providers.

Legal Obligations and Contractual Clarity

• Questions arise about the necessity for written contracts when engaging with utility services, challenging existing practices around verbal agreements.

• Reference is made to civil code stipulations requiring public contracts to be documented formally, advocating for adherence to legal standards.

This structured summary captures key discussions from the transcript while providing timestamps for easy reference.

Discussion on Article 44 and Personal Data Concerns

General Assembly and Electricity Issues

• The speaker references Article 44, Part A, questioning its relevance to the general assembly of property owners.

• There is a dismissal of discussions about the assembly, emphasizing that the focus should be on electricity provisions in housing law.

• The conversation shifts to issues regarding water supply and electricity, with a tone suggesting frustration over inadequate services.

Personal Data Inquiry

• A participant expresses confusion about how their personal data was accessed, indicating potential legal action regarding data theft.

• The discussion highlights the need for consent under Federal Law when processing personal data, raising questions about compliance.

Legal Framework and Decision-Making

• Participants discuss specific parts of legislation related to decision-making processes within property management.

• Clarification is sought on which part of Article 44 pertains to management decisions regarding repairs and service contracts.

Authority of General Assembly

• The role of the general assembly in empowering property managers to enter into contracts is emphasized as crucial for operational governance.

• It is noted that all property owners must agree to direct contracts with service providers, highlighting collective responsibility.

Communication Challenges

• Frustration arises over interruptions during discussions, stressing the importance of allowing each participant to express their views fully.

Contractual Obligations

• There’s an assertion that while owners can delegate authority through assemblies, they are not mandated to sign contracts with management companies unless agreed upon collectively.

• Reference is made to protocols from previous assemblies that outline obligations for contract agreements among homeowners.

Payment Documentation Disputes

• Discussion revolves around payment documents being classified as offers or invoices; clarity on this distinction is sought amidst confusion.

• Visual evidence presented shows discrepancies in documentation received versus what was expected by participants during discussions.

Final Clarifications Needed

• Questions arise about whether certain payment documents qualify as primary accounting records under existing regulations.

• Participants seek definitive answers regarding the status of payment documents based on government resolutions cited earlier in the discussion.

Payment Document Discussion

Definition and Nature of Payment Documents

• A payment document is defined as not being a primary accounting document, according to the official response from the Department of Housing and Communal Services.

• It merely accumulates information about charges from multiple service providers, serving primarily to inform consumers about their service usage and total amounts due.

Legal Framework Surrounding Payment Documents

• The speaker references Article 540 of the Civil Code regarding electricity supply contracts, questioning the legitimacy of how these documents are presented as offers.

• Emphasis is placed on understanding that residents are users rather than consumers under existing agreements, which complicates contractual obligations.

Obligations Under Electricity Supply Contracts

• The discussion highlights that organizations must provide services to subscribers through connected networks; however, there’s contention over whether residents qualify as subscribers or consumers.

• There is a call for clarity on communal property rights and responsibilities in relation to service provision.

Offer Acceptance and Contractual Requirements

• The speaker argues against the necessity of accepting an offer when no explicit agreement has been made by all parties involved.

• Reference is made to public contract laws requiring written documentation for agreements, stressing that verbal or informal agreements do not suffice legally.

Issues with Service Provision and Consumer Rights

• Concerns are raised about the lack of formal notification regarding acceptance or rejection of offers within stipulated timeframes (30 days).

• The conversation touches upon consumer rights concerning guaranteed service provisions versus commercial offerings, indicating a desire for social guarantees rather than mere transactional relationships.

Conclusion on Consumer Expectations

• Residents express frustration over perceived deception regarding their rights and obligations under current energy supply frameworks.

• Questions arise about where formal contracts have been published in accordance with legal requirements, highlighting gaps in communication between suppliers and consumers.

Contractual Obligations and Consumer Rights in Energy Supply

Understanding the Contract Formation

• The contract for household energy consumption is considered concluded from the moment of actual connection to the network, as per established procedures.

• If no other agreement is made, this contract is deemed indefinite and can be modified or terminated under specific conditions outlined in Article 546.

Legal Framework and Responsibilities

• Article 546 specifies that the electricity supply contract ends upon certain conditions being met, independent of either party's actions.

• According to housing legislation, various entities such as homeowners' associations or tenants may act as consumers but are not necessarily recognized as direct subscribers under energy contracts.

Clarification on Subscriber Status

• Tenants and property owners are not classified as subscribers under energy consumer agreements; clarification on who qualifies as a subscriber is sought.

• A question arises regarding when actual connection occurred and how ownership transfer impacts subscription status.

Disputes Over Documentation and Compliance

• There are ongoing disputes about whether necessary documents like statutes have been provided by the management company.

• Questions arise about compliance with Article 445 regarding timely delivery of contracts in paper form within a specified timeframe.

Regulatory Issues and Tariff Structures

• Discussion includes regulated tariffs approved by local authorities for different population groups living in multi-apartment buildings.

• Concerns are raised about how these tariffs apply to non-residential entities like gardening cooperatives, questioning their eligibility for regulated rates.

This structured summary captures key discussions around contractual obligations related to energy supply, legal frameworks governing consumer rights, subscriber definitions, documentation disputes, and regulatory tariff issues. Each point links back to specific timestamps for easy reference.

Discussion on Electricity Supply and Pricing

Issues with Electricity Losses and Pricing

• The speaker discusses the discrepancies in reported electricity losses, questioning the validity of a 60% loss claim when only 10% is normative.

• A conversation about the cost of electricity for residential consumers reveals different rates: 473 for rural areas and 671 for urban populations.

• The dialogue highlights confusion over regulatory documents that dictate pricing, referencing government resolutions as the basis for these tariffs.

Role of Management Companies

• There is a debate regarding the role of management companies in supplying electricity, with claims that they are merely intermediaries between suppliers and users.

• The speaker emphasizes that decisions made by general meetings do not necessarily reflect individual agreements or obligations to supply energy.

Decision-Making Processes

• Discussion centers around how general meetings determine energy suppliers, questioning the legitimacy of such decisions without proper representation from commercial entities.

• The speaker challenges how residents were informed about their energy supplier choices, suggesting a lack of transparency in communication.

Contractual Obligations

• Clarification is sought on contractual relationships between residents and energy suppliers, emphasizing that management companies should not act as barriers to direct contracts.

• Residents express frustration over being forced through intermediaries instead of having direct access to energy providers.

Accountability and Transparency

• Questions arise about who should establish relationships with commercial organizations—whether it’s up to the general assembly or individual homeowners.

• The need for representatives from commercial organizations to present documentation at general meetings is stressed, highlighting accountability issues within decision-making processes.