Based on the results of work in the first half of 2018, a rating of organizations managing multi-apartment housing stock in the Moscow region was compiled, voting was carried out on the Dobrodel portal and took into account 13 criteria for assessing the work of management companies, similar to the rating of hotels according to the star system, reports the press service of the Ministry of Housing municipal services of the Moscow region.
“The rating included about a thousand management companies, but only a third of them received three or more stars. The most “star” management companies (MCs) service 131 apartment buildings, about 1 million square meters of living space (in total, the multi-apartment housing stock in the Moscow region is about 197 million square meters). According to the rating, four-star companies service some houses located in Podolsk, Serpukhov, Ivanteevka, Domodedovo, Krasnogorsk, Ramensky and Shchelkovsky municipal districts,” the press release notes.
As the press service recalled, in the spring of this year, Governor of the Moscow Region Andrei Vorobyov instructed the regional Ministry of Housing and Communal Services, in cooperation with the heads of municipalities, to create a rating of management companies (MCs) that manage the common property of multi-apartment housing stock that is understandable to residents of the Moscow region.
To achieve this task, the Ministry of Housing and Communal Services of the Moscow Region, together with the regional State Housing Inspectorate, Gosadmtekhnadzor and the Association of Chairmen of Councils of Apartment Buildings (APSD), developed a new methodology for assessing management companies, according to which in the Moscow region the classification of management companies was carried out by analogy with the assessment of hotels according to the system stars, is explained in the material.
“In total, the regional rating included 928 enterprises, of which eight enterprises received the highest rating - four stars, including MUZHRP No. 12 in Podolsk, City Communal Company LLC in Serpukhov, two organizations in Ivanteevka - Pionerskaya LLC 11" and LLC "Stroyregister", LLC "Zhilservis-A" in the Shchelkovsky district, LLC "DomExKom" in Domodedovo, LLC "Vesta-Service" in the Ramensky municipal district, LLC "Service Dom" operates in Krasnogorsk and the Shchelkovsky municipal district. In addition, 346 enterprise managers received three stars, 507 received two stars, and 67 “managers” received one star each,” the message clarifies.
It explains that about 20 thousand residents cast their votes for the criteria. Management companies were assessed according to such criteria as the quality of interaction with the councils of apartment buildings (MKD), the quality of maintenance of entrances and courtyard areas, the presence of high payment discipline in settlements with resource supply organizations, the organization of dispatch services for the population through the unified dispatch services (UDS) of municipalities, the implementation repair of entrances, uninterrupted supply of utilities, including heat supply, hot and cold water supply, electricity supply to residents. In total, 13 criteria for assessing management companies were taken into account when calculating the rating. The data that significantly influenced the calculation of the rating was collected and processed through an extensive network of chairmen of the Association of Chairmen of Boards of Apartment Buildings.
“The rating turned out to be truly popular, since residents chose the list of all evaluation criteria themselves, by online voting on the Dobrodel portal, which took place in the spring of this year,” said Minister of Housing and Communal Services of the Moscow Region Evgeny Khromushin.
According to him, everyone was able to choose or propose their own criteria for evaluating management companies, which made it relevant and absolutely transparent, giving apartment owners the opportunity to form a correct understanding of what makes up the management company rating. Based on this rating, the administration of the municipality can initiate the process of re-election of management companies that do not perform their work in good faith and received a low rating based on the results of the rating, and apartment owners will be able to be guided by the presence of stars when deciding at a meeting on extending the services of the previous management company or choosing a new management company.
“The new rating of management organizations will now be clear to residents. Its criteria are exactly what is important to residents: high-quality uninterrupted resources, so that the houses are warm, light, clean, openness of the management organization and timely response to requests, absence of debts and proper management of the house in the interests of the owners! In relation to those management organizations that have two or fewer stars, we, together with local authorities, within two months from the date of publication of this rating, will initiate a general meeting of apartment owners to select a new management organization from among those that have three stars or more, – said the chairman of the coordinating council of the Association of Chairmen of Councils of Apartment Buildings of the Moscow Region, Yulia Belekhova, whose words are quoted in the press release.
Transparency in the activities of management companies has been talked about for a long time, during which time many unscrupulous organizations managed to enrich themselves and leave. There are also many statements about the need to improve the management and maintenance of the housing stock. However, this work is moving slowly. Although one can argue: not slowly, but gradually. In housing and communal services, there really is no need for haste. But the efficiency of management companies, for example, in eliminating emergency situations, is necessary. Not just residents. If there is no quick response or other claims from the owners arise, then the rating of Russian management companies will not hide this.
Necessity and benefit
The rating of housing and communal services management companies should be popular. Social activists and housing inspectors think so. Then he will be objective. It will become an effective method for monitoring the quality of work on servicing houses and surrounding areas.
Public inspectors of housing and communal services are often asked which management company to choose, which one is better to replace the previous one with, and so on. However, public housing and communal services councils cannot make recommendations.
The rating of management companies in the housing and communal services sector is an indicator of the population’s satisfaction with the service, whether residents are satisfied with their company. That is, people vote themselves. The mechanism is simple: exchange of opinions, experience of cooperation with a certain company and subjective assessments.
Some management companies greeted the rating system with caution, fearing bias, bribery and bureaucracy. But there is no one assessment determined by someone; there is a set of criteria by which the work of the management company is assessed. The management company and residents were invited to develop them. For example, the efficiency of eliminating accidents, how they communicate with you, how aware the residents are of the work of the management company, how accessible the information is, whether the management company reports, etc.
Each criterion will be accompanied by a specific score. This way you can track the best and worst companies both overall and by specific indicators.
Management companies that are interested in having their homes just arrived will look at the criteria by which their work is unsatisfactory and correct the situation in a timely manner. You can also find out which house gave a low rating. This will allow us to understand the specific problems that arise at residential facilities. The rating of management companies is a tool for managers to evaluate the work of their employees at home.
What are the criteria for assessing management company
The system of criteria helps to almost accurately determine how well and conscientiously the organization operates, whether it copes with the housing stock that is under management, and whether the company manages to avoid accumulating debts and conduct effective financial activities. This assessment is given by the public. What do management companies get? If the rating participants are objective, then the organization will be able to easily understand its mistakes and identify violations. This will benefit both the management company and the owners, and will help further increase the rating score.
As a rule, management companies are assessed according to six main criteria:
- Overdue payments by management companies to resource supply organizations or debts to them.
- The consistency and validity of residents' complaints.
- Ignoring the instructions of the State Housing Inspectorate.
- Fines issued by the administrative commission for various violations during the maintenance of the house.
- Registration of a single utility receipt.
- Publication of reports on the activities of the management company on its website and on other resources proposed for posting.
Who chooses the criteria
They are introduced in agreement with public inspectors and residents. This list may be expanded. For example, in Tula this year they introduced a new assessment parameter - “financial stability of the management company”. It allows you to separate companies with operational experience and a positive business and economic reputation from companies that are not able to conduct long and productive activities or are motivated only by quick income to the detriment of the interests of people.
Among the new criteria is the presence of double receipts.
The system of criteria should be publicly discussed, social activists believe. This way you can achieve greater objectivity when developing indicators. They need to be discussed with experts and management companies, local governments and the state housing inspection.
All companies - by groups
- green - well-functioning management companies that have earned high praise from the owners and have no complaints from regulatory organizations;
- yellow - average criminal codes;
- red - the worst management companies, which may stop working in the housing and communal services market if they do not adjust their activities.
Each group was given motivating suggestions. For well-performing management companies - assistance, for companies operating satisfactorily - stimulation, for unsatisfactorily operating companies - recommendations to eliminate shortcomings.
The management company rating is compiled to protect the interests of residents - consumers of housing and communal services. Typically, regions and regions take into account each other's experience so that the structure for assessing the work of the management company, which will be in public form, is developed and implemented effectively. The opinion of public inspectors of the housing and communal services sector, the municipality, management companies and organizations that monitor them is also involved.
Who won't be assessed?
- Management companies with “zero licenses”;
- have been servicing the housing stock for less than three months;
- carry out bankruptcy proceedings at any stage of the process;
- Management companies, whose economic activities law enforcement officers have questions about, for example, are conducting investigative measures to find out violations in the maintenance of an apartment building.
Solvent discipline is very important when assessing a management company.
A unified regional standard for housing and communal services must be accepted by all market participants as the basis for their activities.
Openness is an important criterion
Special attention is paid to the conditions of information openness and public control. These are the tools that allow you to control, adjust, and implement transformations in the housing and communal services sector.
Efforts are aimed at ensuring that there is not only a social and economic effect, but also the attractiveness of the housing and communal services market of other companies.
Violations
Russian legislation requires openness and transparency from management companies. But the fulfillment of this criterion remains at a low level. Disclosure standards have been introduced, but not all companies follow them.
The activities of management companies should be regulated by regional and municipal authorities. And only some cities have managed to achieve good results in the openness of management information, but the majority remain opaque. Public inspectors often encounter the management company publishing outdated information, the absence of necessary items on activities, or the indication of inaccurate parameters.
Often the websites of management companies are minimally filled out and have nothing to do with compliance with the requirements of the law on openness.
Moreover, it is mostly small management organizations that hide it. Large management companies with a large housing stock, as a rule, demonstrate greater openness of data about their work.
However, sometimes the “secrecy” of small management companies is associated with the fact that it is easier for these organizations to communicate with residents directly and not waste resources on filling out the website.
Management companies also use the federal portal “Housing and Communal Services Reform” as a platform for disclosing information.
How to find out the rating of your management company
In general, regions and regions themselves try to post the results of assessments of management companies that operate on their territory. But if you did not find it on the website of the State Housing Inspectorate of your region, the regional Ministry of Housing and Communal Services or municipal portals, then you can look at the results of assessing the effectiveness of your management company at the Ministry of Housing and Communal Services.
The rating of housing and communal services management companies 2017 is also presented on the website. It is easy to use. Companies can be searched by region or city. You can also use the “Information Search” by entering the names of the required region or city in the boxes. However, if the search engine of your computer’s Internet browser is configured by geolocation, then the portal itself will offer you management companies in your city or regional capital.
Today, in the Ministry of Housing and Public Utilities database there are 42 thousand management companies and homeowners associations, 15 thousand settlements, 82 regions and 987 thousand houses.
The project was created to help apartment owners achieve greater openness from their management company, from the housing and communal services system and municipal authorities. Through systematization and information, the project organizers hope to increase citizens' awareness of how the management company operates, how successfully it optimizes its costs and whether accountability is transparent.
The Ministry of Housing and Communal Services, by the way, is a non-profit public project, and any owner can get involved in its work. To collaborate with the project, just leave a message on the website, indicating your email address.
Rating of Moscow management companies
There are 469 management companies operating in the capital. The rating is headed by the Guzhf company. The company manages almost seven and a half thousand houses. The organization operates not only in Moscow; 36 branches and 354 subscriber points have been created in different regions of the country.
The top six management companies have no debt, judging by the ranking table. However, they are not the only ones working without debt, but debtors are also included in the assessment system. By the way, many of them are not among the laggards.
On the sixteenth line of the rating is the Management Company "Zhilishchnik of the Kuzminki District", debt 142,103,000, followed by the Management Company "Zhilishchnik of the Fili-Davydkovo District", debt of 173,546,000. Twenty-ninth place belongs to the Management Company "Zhilishchnik of the Khamovniki District", debt 2,386,450,000.
The 2017 rating of management companies on the portal of the Ministry of Housing and Public Utilities was compiled taking into account information on the number of houses managed by organizations, the number of employees on staff, as well as financial indicators: income, expenses and debt.
May have your license revoked
The ranking of management companies in the Moscow region is completed by organizations from Khimki, Balashikha and Krasnogorsk. Khimki "UK RV-Service", Balashikha "Lux Engineering Group" and "KEU Krasnogorskoye". These companies receive the most complaints, concluded the State Housing Inspectorate of the Moscow Region. Although these organizations are not the only ones in the “red” group of the rating. However, over the six months their number decreased to 14 from 26 companies.
If organizations fail to leave the group, a process may begin to revoke their license. However, when companies leave the housing and communal services market, others, more effective ones, will take their place, the regional State Housing Inspectorate hopes.
There is already such an example in the region. In 2016, one Moscow region management company, Housing and Communal Services P from Krasnogorsk, lost its license. The same situation could happen to one company in Orekhovo-Zuevo and one in Khimki.
In total, 896 criminal companies are registered in the Moscow region. By the way, the change in complaints is interesting: in 2016, apartment owners more often complained due to unsatisfactorily organized cleaning of the territories, and also because management companies did not change the light bulbs in the entrances on time; in 2017, dissatisfaction was mainly due to the accrual of payments.
Rating of management companies in St. Petersburg
The city's housing stock consists of more than eighteen thousand houses, served by 284 organizations.
The management company “ZhKS No. 3 of the Central District” works most effectively. The license was issued in 2015 by the State Housing Inspectorate of St. Petersburg. The company serves 820 homes.
Management Company "ZhKS No. 1 of the Admiralteysky District" is in third place. Housing stock - 725 houses, license - since 2015.
- Management Company "ZhKS No. 1 Nevsky District";
- Management Company "ZhKS No. 1 of the Kirovsky District";
- Management Company "ZhKS 1 CR";
- Management Company "ZhKS No. 2 Petrogradsky District";
- Management Company "Zhilkomservice No. 3 of Kalininsky District";
- Management Company "ZhKS No. 1 of the Krasnogvardeisky District";
- Management Company "ZhKS No. 2 Nevsky District".
To change or not to change
It is difficult to find a house where the owners of the apartments would be completely satisfied with the work of their management company. However, complaints and proposals to change the Criminal Code are common. But not everyone decides to take this step. It is often abandoned at a meeting of owners dedicated to this topic, at which the required number of votes is not obtained to begin the procedure for changing the management organization.
When residents cannot tolerate the ineffective work of the management company or its neglect of its responsibilities, the process of abandoning the company must be formalized legally.
But before that, the owners and management company are usually advised to find a way of constructive cooperation. If this attempt is unsuccessful, then you can look for another company or create an HOA.
An HOA is a higher form of self-organization and it may not work for every home. Residents must understand that they take full responsibility for their home. There will be no one to blame except the residents themselves. The HOA board and the chairman of the board who will work must be selected. But the HOA does not have professional specialists, and this makes it difficult to effectively resolve some maintenance-related issues.
Year of foundation: 2005
Headquarters: Moscow
Management: Oksana Kuchura (pictured) and Dmitry Klenov
Offices abroad: Cyprus, Luxembourg
Entry threshold:$10 million
UFG Wealth Management calls itself the first independent family office in Russia. It was created by Oksana Kuchura in 2005 as an independent division for family capital management as part of UFG Asset Management. A year later, partner Dmitry Klenov, responsible for legal practice, joined the company. Currently, she manages and advises the assets of several dozen clients worth $750 million. In 2014, services for the acquisition and management of real estate were separated into a separate area in the form of funds, through which clients invested $250 million in European and Russian real estate. In addition to Kuchura and Klenov The company's co-owner is Florian Fenner. German manager Fenner became a partner of UFG in 2002 at the invitation of the brand’s founders, Charles Ryan and former Finance Minister Boris Fedorov, who died in 2008.
Year of foundation: 1991
Headquarters: Moscow
Management: Andrey Zvezdochkin
Offices abroad: Switzerland, Cyprus, Netherlands
Entry threshold:$0.5 million
Aton is one of the oldest Russian investment companies. In 2000, she launched an asset management business, which is now the main activity. In 2006, the founder and owner of the company, Evgeny Yuryev, sold the institutional business Aton to Unicredit Bank for $424 million, and in 2010 he revived the company under the same name. The direction of working with large private capital has existed since 2009. Target clients - owners of assets up to $20 million - can receive advice on organizing funds, international taxation and inheritance issues. By 2015, the size of the group’s client assets exceeded $2 billion.
3. Oracle Capital Group/"Third Rome"
Year of foundation: 2002
Headquarters: Luxembourg
Management: Yuri Gantman
Offices abroad: Switzerland, UK, Cyprus, Bahamas
Entry threshold:$1 million
The multi-family office serves clients from Russia and the CIS countries, including through offices in Moscow and Almaty. The company does not disclose its founders; it has Russian-Kazakh roots and a European board of directors, which includes seven Englishmen. Among them are a former minister in the Tony Blair government, a former head of KPMG for the CIS and a former director of the alternative investments sector of the London Stock Exchange. In 2013, the company entered into a strategic alliance with the Russian company Third Rome, purchasing a blocking stake from its founder Andrei Movchan and the Alexander Smuzikov Foundation. Third Rome, created in 2009 by people from Renaissance Investment Management, continues to operate under its own brand.
Year of foundation: 2003
Headquarters: Moscow
Management: Rustam Iseev
Offices abroad: Great Britain
Entry threshold:$1 million
GHP Group has two key partners: co-founder of Fleming Family & Partners Mark Garber and former head of JP Morgan Capital Markets Ian Hannam. They have known each other since the 1990s, when they organized a deal to sell the Russian investment bank UCB, owned by Garber and Hans-Jörg Rudloff, to the Fleming family. In 2012, they bought the Russian FF&P business from the Fleming family to jointly engage in private wealth management and private equity investments in emerging markets. GHP Group owns about 20% of the shares of the FESCO transport holding, controlled by the Summa group of Ziyaudin Magomedov.
Year of foundation: 2008
Headquarters: Moscow
Management: Andrey Gaek
Offices abroad: Cyprus
Entry threshold:$1 million
The group of companies was founded by top managers of the investment division of Nomos Bank together with the ICT group of billionaire Alexander Nesis. Later, his share was bought by Andrey Gaek, who became the controlling shareholder. He calls the group an investment boutique for private and institutional clients. Specializes in brokerage, bond strategies and private equity. It manages $1.2 billion in private client funds. The group’s clients are conservative investors, business owners in Russia and abroad, says the conclusion of the international rating agency Standard & Poor's.
Year of foundation: 2009
Headquarters: Moscow
Management: Andrey Nikityuk
Offices abroad: Switzerland, UK, Italy
Entry threshold: not disclosed
The company's founder, Vincenzo Trani, came to Russia in 2001 to develop small business lending at KMB Bank, established at the initiative of the EBRD. He is still involved in supporting small businesses through a small fund, Mikro Capital. However, its main business is General Invest. The company provides wealth management, family office and brokerage services on international platforms. Trani is the honorary consul of the Republic of Belarus in his native Naples. According to Trani, he is well acquainted with Silvio Berlusconi, but the circumstances of his acquaintance are kept secret.
Year of foundation: 2003
Headquarters: Zurich, Switzerland
Management: Sinan Bodmer
Offices abroad: Switzerland, UK, Cyprus, Singapore, New Zealand
Entry threshold: not disclosed
Marcuard Heritage, which manages $3 billion in assets for wealthy clients, has close ties to Russia. Its two founders, Sinan Bodmer and Adrian Guldener, worked with Russian clients at UBS. The third partner, former head of Credit Suisse First Boston Hans-Jörg Rudloff, was a pioneer of investment banking in Russia, where he co-founded UCB Bank in the early 1990s. The Financial Times characterizes him as one of the few Western investment bankers trusted by President Vladimir Putin. As chairman of Barclays Capital, the investment banker served as an independent director of Rosneft from 2006 to 2013. Rudloff is a relative of the Marcuard family, whose ancestor founded the family banking house of the same name in Switzerland back in 1746.
Year of foundation: 2007
Headquarters: Moscow
Management: Alexey Golubovich
Offices abroad: UK, Latvia
Entry threshold: not disclosed
Arbat Capital emerged from the small family office of Alexey Golubovich, the former head of the investment department of Menatep Bank and director of strategic planning and corporate finance at Yukos. In 1997-2007, the company was called “Russian Investors” and since then has retained most of its partners and clients. In 2011, the company abandoned its brokerage business and trust asset management. Arbat Capital currently develops investment strategies for high net worth individuals and hedge funds in the markets of Europe, America and developing countries. Advisory assets exceed $500 million.
Year founded: 1995
Headquarters: Moscow
Management: Dmitry Bugaenko, Alexey Gnedovsky
Offices abroad: Cyprus
Entry threshold:$0.1 million
Veles Capital is one of the oldest investment groups in Russia, controlled by Dmitry Bugaenko and Alexey Gnedovsky. The total volume of assets under management is 21 billion rubles. She specializes in brokerage operations, the organization of promissory notes programs and direct investments. The group invested in the industry of Tatarstan and Ukraine, as well as in rental real estate, including shopping mall"Atruim" in Moscow. The company's private wealth management department has existed since 2006. The company offers its key clients with assets from $500,000 to $20 million a mix of brokerage services, asset management and additional services from legal and tax advice, as well as trust and fiduciary services.
Year of foundation: 2009
Headquarters: Zurich, Switzerland
Management: Joseph Meyer
Offices abroad: Switzerland
Entry threshold: not disclosed
In the Swiss Axioma Wealth Management, only the founder Josef Meyer, whose activities are mainly related to Russia, is Swiss. In the mid-1990s, his company began advising regional businesses on export finance, and at the same time private clients began trusting him with asset management. In 2008, he began working in the Swiss subsidiary of the management company Alliance Continental of Elena Baturina. Later he bought this company together with his partner Igor Vasiliev from Alfa Bank, who headed the direction of operations in the money markets there. From its foundation, Axioma grew, which manages private wealth totaling up to $500 million and provides family office services to clients.
Where heating, gas, water, light are provided, of course, they are very comfortable compared to your own home, where you have to think about everything. But at the same time, in order for the pleasure to be complete, the services provided need to be monitored and managed competently. For this purpose, apartment owners have the right to choose the most convenient form of government for them. In our article today we will try to find out: HOA or management company - which is better.
Management Company
This organization is a legal entity or individual entrepreneur that manages the apartment building. This is an entrepreneurial organization, which means its goal is to make a profit.
The main document according to which activities are carried out is the management agreement concluded with more than 50% of the owners of the house. The percentage is determined by calculating the area, not the number of owners.
The functions of the management company are to ensure the repair and maintenance of houses in accordance with the requirements of technical regulations. In this case, owners have the right:
- to receive the information they are interested in within five working days after applying;
- information on the volume, list and quality of services provided;
- check the progress of work;
- demand elimination of defects and monitor the completeness of the service provided;
- from the first quarter, receive a report on the work performed from the management organization.
On the other hand, the management company does not intend to reduce the cost of maintaining the house. In addition, its financial activities are not always transparent to residents, although the latter are rarely interested in this. Moreover, this company employs many more employees than the HOA. Accordingly, they will spend more on wages. Therefore, residents have a legitimate question about what is more profitable - the HOA or the management company.
HOA
There can only be one HOA per building. But one HOA can unite several houses. So, let’s figure it out, HOA or management company: what’s the difference?
Let's start with the fact that an HOA is non-profit organization, created in accordance with the norms of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation. At the meeting, the governing bodies are approved - these are members of the board (who are elected for a term of no more than two years) and the general meeting. The financial plan for the year can only be approved at a general meeting. A report on its implementation is provided to the audit commission. And the management of the HOA reports at the general meeting.
If costs are distributed correctly, funds will be collected when needed. The financial activities of the HOA are more transparent. After all, every resident can influence decisions on improvement. Without intermediaries between residents and the contractor, deficiencies will be eliminated at a lower cost. On the other hand, some one-time jobs may cost more. Therefore, apartment owners will benefit only if the management of the HOA consists of truly competent and caring people.
Management company or HOA: pros and cons
Supporters of management companies believe that the main advantage of their work is that they take into account the opinion of all owners living in the house. That’s what the management companies themselves say, at least, although it’s hard to believe. At the same time, experts clearly speak in favor of management companies in the sense that their services can be refused at any time if there are complaints about poor quality service. But it will take more time.
On the other hand, it can be problematic for residents to obtain specific information about the organizations themselves, although the law prescribes such an obligation for the latter. Taking into account the fact that the management company is a commercial organization, that is, one whose main goal is to make a profit, it can be unprofitable to give them full control.
So what to choose - an HOA or a management company?
Optimal form of government
Most experts agree that the best form of government today is a mixed form of government. That is, this is not a HOA or a management company, but a HOA and a management company. enters into a service agreement with the management company. Then all residents will know where the funds are going. Moreover, each of them has the right to ask the chairman for a report, and the latter must report. The HOA can also dispose of building property at its own discretion, as well as place advertising billboards on the facades of the building.
We create a homeowners association
So, if you were faced with a choice: an HOA or a management company, and you decided to create an HOA, to organize it you need to take a number of the following steps.
An initiative group is being created from among the owners of residential premises in an apartment building. Any resident can become an initiator. But in order for information, organizational and propaganda activities to be successful, you need to recruit a number of people that will carry out all the work.
Informing people about the essence of HOAs
Next comes the legal and information education of people by the initiative group. At this stage, you need to be able to clearly answer the question of whether an HOA or a management company is better. And also convince everyone of the benefits of the first option.
The answer here is already contained in the organizational and legal form of the company: if the management company is a commercial organization, then the HOA is a non-profit. It turns out that the goals of the first are, first of all, to make a profit, and the other is to solve social, legal, managerial and similar problems.
In addition, the management company distributes incoming funds according to the established procedure. But in the HOA - by decision of the meeting of its members.
An HOA can also engage in entrepreneurial activity, but in a management company it is the main type.
The profit received is distributed among the founders in the management company, and in the HOA it is used to implement the statutory goals.
Working with people and recruiting
The next stage is preparatory work to create an organization. For this:
- a register of owners is compiled;
- the HOA address is determined;
- The Charter is being prepared;
- looking for candidates for the chairman, members of the board, audit and counting commissions, chairman and secretary of the meeting;
- prepare ballots;
- notify of the meeting at least 10 days in advance;
- within the same period, this notification is sent to the compulsory medical insurance.
Meeting on the creation of an HOA
- selection of the chairman and secretary of the meeting;
- counting commission;
- about the method of management;
- the Charter is approved;
- select the chairman and other persons;
- a representative of the owners for registration of the HOA is appointed;
- choose the place where the information will be posted;
- choose a storage location for documents.
Other issues can also be addressed, depending on the needs of the home. However, if it was not possible to gather the residents of the house at the general meeting, then absentee voting is announced. For this purpose, ballots are prepared, and each of the owners votes.
Final organizational work
- list of owners;
- protocol of the counting commission;
- minutes of the general meeting.
The HOA is registered. To do this, an application is submitted to the tax office with attachments of the charter, information about voters, a receipt with paid state duty).
You must register with the statistical authorities, the Pension Fund, the Social Insurance Fund, the Medical Fund and have a stamp made.
After this, you can begin work, notifying interested parties about its start. To organize you need:
- obtain technical documentation;
- draw up a register of property, examine it and draw up a corresponding act;
- study the rules for providing for the population;
- study the rules for the provision of housing services;
- when directly managing an HOA, it is necessary to conclude agreements with resource supply organizations, as well as decide on the organization with which the receipt of funds will be kept track of;
- and if management is carried out through the management company, then the HOA enters into an agreement with them.
And yet: HOA or management company - which is better?
It is up to the residents to decide which form of management to choose. But recently, more and more people are leaning towards a joint form of government. On the one hand, there are often cases when in a directly managed HOA the opinion of the residents is replaced by the opinion of one chairman.
On the other hand, it is not always the case that a person competent in technical matters is elected as chairman. But management companies employ specialists who often know better what is needed for a home at one time or another.
Conclusion
Having considered the question (HOA or management company - which is better?) and having made a decision in favor of one option or another, residents must understand that neither form of organization can be truly effective if the residents themselves do not take part in the management process. When they remain indifferent, do not attend meetings and are not interested in current issues, the HOA organization often falls into disrepair, and the management company sometimes inflates the cost of its services.
Therefore, for the better functioning of the house, caring owners are primarily important, who must understand that management comes from them, regardless of the chosen form, be it an HOA or a management company. It is then that business in the house will flourish, and the residents will be satisfied and happy to live in it.