Housing issue: Krasnodar court may review the results of privatization

Its task is to recognize the illegality of the transfer of housing to the ownership of a veteran of the Great Patriotic War.

Lyudmila Butuzova

This is a precedent case, if it works out, the owners will face difficult times. It will be possible to take away housing not only under the “law on renovation” or for the development of territories, but also simply because agreements concluded under the law “On the privatization of the housing stock in the RSFSR” can be easily recognized as “obsolete” or “issued with violations" a quarter of a century ago.

Here is a specific situation. Sukko village within the city of Anapa. Primorskaya Street is the only one leading to the sea. The house, in which several families still live, was built in 1947 and consisted of three apartments. Later, tourist centers and health centers appeared next to it. In one of them, which bore the name "Rabochaya Smena", for many years he worked as a carpenter, a front-line soldier, holder of the Order of the Patriotic War of the second degree, Viktor Maksimovich Nebero. In 1996, he and his wife received ownership of about 90 square meters under the privatization law. meters of housing and seven "acres" of land in the house number 1 on the same Primorskaya street. The commemorative "veteran" plaque is still on the facade. To his grandfather, while he was alive, the postman wore bundles of congratulatory letters by May 9 from all officials of the Krasnodar Territory, including from the interregional prosecutor's office. At the end of 2019, everything changed. Anapa prosecutor Alexander Fomenko demanded that the veteran's children and grandchildren go out into the street. In the implementation of this plan, the prosecutor's office filed a lawsuit against the Anapa administration and several families living in the village of Sukko to reclaim the land plot and residential premises from their possession and recognize their rights for the Russian Federation, since 24 (!) Years ago privatization was carried out "Wrong" and it is urgent to return the illegally alienated state property!

The court of first instance dismissed the prosecutor's claim in view of an obviously unlawful (and monstrously unfair) position. The decision of the Anapa District Court states that the house, which suddenly became the subject of a dispute, was transferred into common joint ownership of Viktor Maksimovich Nebero and his wife Antonina Petrovna on the basis of a 1996 contract by the Rabochaya Smena health and educational center signed by head Nikolai Ivanyushkin. The privatization agreement, according to which the apartment became the property of the veteran, is legal and has never been challenged. After the death of his wife, the veteran transferred the ownership of the apartment to his great-grandson under a sale and purchase agreement in 2012. The Anapa District Court also dismissed the arguments of the Prosecutor's Office as untenable that the land plot on which the house is located should be part of the land plot children's center "Change". However, the center, which at that time was called "Rabochaya Smena", was granted ownership of the land by the head of Anapa only in 1998, and the ownership of the house on Primorskaya was registered back in 1996. It would seem that attempts to take away housing with the family of a veteran of the Great Patriotic War. But the inter-district prosecutor's office did not calm down and filed an appeal with the Krasnodar Regional Court.

Involuntarily, the question arises, who is pulling the strings of the Anapa prosecutors so that, contrary to their purpose, to protect the legitimate interests of people, they try with all their might to deprive them of their homes and throw them out into the street? The question disappears by itself when you learn that the third parties in the process are the Ministry of Education of Russia, the Rosreestr Administration for the Territory, the Interregional Territorial Administration of the Federal Agency for State Property Management and the FDC “Smena”.

The last interested person is the same "Workers' Change", which lost half of its name with the transition from the socialist formation to the market one and, as human rights activists say, the last remnants of conscience too. In 2013, the camp changed its leadership - the long-term head Nikolai Ivanyushkin, under whom the balance of interests of the residents of Sukko and the resting children was respected, moved to another job, the camp, which by that time had become a federal health center, was headed by a Moscow team close to the leadership of Rosmolodezh and, as the Anapa media report, "with the habits of princelings, who were entrusted with spanking local slaves".

One of the first actions of "Smena" against "local slaves" was an appeal to the court demanding to exclude Primorskaya Street from the "list of public highways of local importance in the resort city of Anapa" and from the "address register of the Moscow region of Anapa". The local branch of the Yabloko party actively intervened in the situation.

“The Sukko Valley is infinitely built up with sanatoriums, recreation centers and residential complexes,” Aleksey Yegorov, the head of the local Yabloko, told NI. - Everything is already so crowded that the only convenient and open passage to the sea was Primorskaya Street. In 2013 "Smena" blocked this passage too. At the beginning of the street, a checkpoint was built, then they blocked off the beach area, and in the summer they block off the coastal strip and charge a fee for being on the beach. Both residents and vacationers were hurt. Many people need a pass to get to their homes, but to get to the sea for free, they have to climb over the fence at the risk of their lives.

Residents twice turned to President Vladimir Putin in connection with this problem - the first time in 2013 there was a mass appeal from 862 people, the second time in 2017 556 people asked for help. Both times, the letter was "sent down" to the authorities with a formal reply at the end, "- said Yegorov. - Popular gatherings against the construction of fences on the beach do not subside to this day. In 2017, Smena employees even called police officers with machine guns to disperse the dissatisfied residents of the village.In 2018, an initiative group of Sukko residents appealed for help to the presidential adviser - chairman of the Presidential Council for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights Mikhail Fedotov.During a visit to the Krasnodar Territory, members of the Council visited the beach in Sukko, identified violations and developed a number of recommendations for the regional prosecutor's office, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the city administration, however, all of them were left without attention. The proceedings reached the Supreme Court, which on February 5, 2018 also refused the Federal Children's Center Smena's appeal in cassation and left Primorskaya Street as a street of general use.

- But the decision of the RF Armed Forces to the invaders doesn’t hurt, ”Sergey Mitrokhin, a member of the Yabloko political council, is indignant, one of the initiators of the residents' appeal to the Supreme Court. - In order to walk or drive to their own house, residents of st. Primorskaya still, like all the last seven years, forced to ask permission from the camp administration. Torment of the population and vacationers of the village Sukkos are not limited to the arbitrariness of "Smena". The last narrow passage to the sea on Kazachy Proyezd, which remained after the seizure of the coast, was just as brazenly grabbed by the military sanatorium "Zolotoy Bereg". He turned the center of the public beach into a fenced wasteland. I have a question for the interregional prosecutor's office: why does it turn a blind eye to these gross violations of the laws, but shows zeal and helps the invaders to squeeze more and more pieces of resort land from ordinary people?

It is worth recalling that not the law enforcement agencies of Anapa, but the Yabloko activists, back in 2017, revealed violations of the antimonopoly legislation on purchases for 163 million rubles in this children's camp, which deals with non-childish problems. In 2019, also at the request of Yabloko, the Krasnodar Treasury Department conducted two inspections of the Smena VDC in Anapa. The total amount of financial violations amounted to 216,755,451.98 rubles. The management of Smena was brought to administrative responsibility for gross violations of financial discipline.

I don’t want to draw parallels, but they suggest themselves: today's prosecutor’s run over the residents of st. Primorskaya and the attempt to evict them from their legal apartments may well be related to the activity of the Anapa "Yabloko" people. The head of the department, Aleksey Yegorov, is the same great-grandson of the war veteran Viktor Nebero, who is now posthumously accused of "illegal privatization" of a house on Primorskaya Street. And this is not at all into any gate. Today several branches of a once large family live on grandfather's square, all of these 20-25 square meters have their only housing. Residents fear that without attention and due legal assessment, their property rights will be null and void. Hopes for justice were pinned on the regional court, which was supposed to take place on September 29, but it looks like the nerves will still help people.

“The trial was postponed until October 20”, Aleksey Yegorov told NI. - The meeting did not even begin, the judge called everyone and immediately postponed the meeting. The prosecutor's office, Smena and other representatives of federal departments were there. Before the meeting, the prosecutor said "in a friendly way" that he would insist on the demands - "there was no command to withdraw the claim". The judge was also friendly and in a good mood. Unlike the unfortunate tenants, who no longer know which god to pray and which law to obey.

Comment

Lawyer of the Non-Profit Partnership "Housing and Law" Evgeniya Ushakova:

- The privatization of the residential sector has not met with resistance, unlike the denationalization of land or industry. This was one of the few popular reform measures among the general public. People were assured that they now become homeowners, which they can dispose of at their own discretion - to sell, bequeath, exchange, etc. And tens of millions of people became apartment owners. Nobody thought about what would follow. Renovation and integrated development of territories have significantly violated the right to private property, attempts to revise the results of privatization in court exacerbate the situation. People are agitated because the authorities have a bad credit history and there is no mutual trust between them and society.

But it is no longer possible to cancel the privatization of housing. If the Krasnodar court decides on this, a fateful precedent will be created, giving a start to a total and I am not afraid of this word, gangster redistribution of property in the Russian Federation. The Civil Code will have to make a provision that these rights are preserved until property becomes the subject of interest of any structures that are in favor with the state.

As for what is happening in Anapa, I must note: the arguments of the prosecutor's office in this case do not correspond to both the norms of civil and land legislation, and the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights. The position of the courts considering similar situations is unanimous: "When reclaiming possession from someone else's illegal possession (if we are talking about a common interest), public authorities must act in a timely, appropriate manner and as consistently as possible".

The position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation boils down to reject the claims of public legal entities, if a bona fide acquirer, when buying real estate (house, apartment, land plot) relied on data from the USRN and, in accordance with the procedure established by law, registered ownership of it, and publicly -the legal entity did not take, in accordance with the requirements of reasonableness and discretion, timely measures to establish and properly formalize its ownership of this property. The Krasnodar Regional Court should refresh this verdict in its memory, and everything will fall into place.