Corrections should correct the situation: to free developers from some of the `` prohibitive duties. It is expected that as a result of `winged 'builders increasingly will take on the construction of new buildings, reduced the housing deficit, which in turn will lead to the development of the mortgage, and to reduce the growth of property prices.

One of the major innovations regards avoidance of participation in joint construction.

The Act had been completely on the side of citizens: just a little naughty developer - you can immediately declare the refusal of execution of the contract, to demand a full refund of all money made and compensation.

Will this:

1. Co-investors may reject the contract unilaterally (ie, the developer simply send a registered letter notice of `break 'relationships) only in the following cases:
company violates the terms of transfer of finished apartments;
firm does not meet the requirements of co-investors, presented in connection with the discovered defects new buildings;
house was built with substantial violations of quality requirements;
developer has violated the rules of design and operation of the guarantee (this is one way to ensure that the obligations of the company).

In such situations, citizens made them return the money, paid a fine for delay in implementation of the developer's obligations, as well as interest for the use of money-holders (Art. 6, 7 and 9 of the Act).

2. For a number of cases entered the court order terminating the contract, that is co-investors will `leave` with the developer and take their money, only if the court gives green light to terminate treaty relations. In particular, no court can not do, if:
suspended or terminated construction of the house and it becomes obvious that the apartment will not be given a citizen to contract time;
significantly changed the design documentation being built homes, including significantly changing the original specified size of the object construction.

Amendments made to the law a useful addition (update part 2 of article. 9): defines the procedure and terms of payment in the event of termination of contract.

When a unilateral refusal to co-investors to perform the contract (see), the developer must, within 20 working days to return the money and made a citizen to pay interest on this sum (its size is determined based on the so-called refinancing rate of Central Bank of Russia).

Upon the termination of the contract in the courts (see J) The developer is obliged to make the same payment within 10 working days.

If co-investors in time did not apply for benefits, these funds are credited to a special account - deposit with a notary at the location of the builder.

To co-investors, that time does not make the necessary payments, not to slow construction, firms are entitled to a simplified procedure to exclude such persons from the project.

Before this can be done only through the courts.

Now, if real estate investors has delayed payment for more than three months, the developer is free to terminate the contract. However, this does not happen too quickly.

First, the company must send a written warning to a citizen of the need to repay the debt. And if 30 days after the mailing date of the letter-holders did not pay off, then the developer cancels the contract and returns a citizen of the funds invested in its construction.

No interest in this, of course, is not calculated, so that the actual inflation-adjusted interest-holders will have already depreciated amount.

To firm actively constructed new buildings, they are introduced to facilitate the following:

Abolishes the requirement to publish in the media certainly design a declaration with information about the construction project. Trat on the publication can be avoided if the developer does not accept advertising for attracting funds of citizens in the construction. In this case, the company is obliged only to provide project declaration by any interested person upon request.

Is canceled so-called joint liability lending institutions and the developer's interest-holders in front. Now the banks, in which firms borrow to build, will not have their own funds to respond to the citizens for the sins of `unfair` builder. It is assumed that as a result, banks will issue loans for the construction of active and possibly cheaper.

The company is not liable for defects of new buildings, found in the warranty period, if he proves that the defects resulted from normal wear and tear of the object or as a result of violations of the rules of operation of the facility, including improper repair conducted by a citizen or persons engaged by them.

Reduced the size of the penalty, which the developer pays the interest-holders in case of violation of the surrender the apartment. Decreased and the penalty, which is charged with co-investors, delaying payment of fees for construction.

At first glance, the interests of the citizens affected by the amendments. However, it should be borne in mind that the benefits promised by the previous law, in practice, still not acted, and defrauded real estate investors sought to protect their rights mainly through rallies and hunger strikes. Because good thing is that there were more `live` and the applicable rules of equity building.

To help citizens navigate, how reliable and honest company, developers simply instructed not to inform customers about their previous building projects, and provide more detailed information. Namely, to specify addresses of houses built, the timing of delivery, provided the project documentation, and the actual date of commissioning. With this future interest-holders will be able to check: if it matches the promise of real activities of the firm.