It turns out.
The consent of the heating network on the shutdown of the apartment in the MKD from centralized heat supply is not required. This was pointed out by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, considering the complaint about the cancellation of permission to reorganization: the local administration allowed the owner of the apartment in the MKD to dismantle the batteries of central heating and establish electrical heaters instead, and the city heating networks who lost the client, tried to challenge this permission in the Arbitration Court ( Definition of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation of November 20, 2017 No. 302-kg17-17007).
The heat seafood substantiated their dissatisfaction with the following arguments:
The batteries of this separate apartment are part of the general heating system. When the owner of this apartment demolished the battery, he thus reduced the composition of the general property of the MKD. And it is possible to reduce this property only with the consent of all owners of premises in the MCD. However, this document did not seem to be subordinated with the coordination of the reorganization;
The controversial reconstruction of the heating system may disrupt the heat-hydraulic regime of the building as a whole and the thermal regime of adjacent rooms. Because of which the heating network can not provide the quality provision of a communal service for the supply of heat to the owners of related apartments;
When developing a controversial project of the reorganization, it was not taken into account that the total power of the heating devices should be equal to or more than heat loss (in order to avoid reducing the temperature of the internal air in the adjacent rooms). In addition, the project was prepared without obtaining technical conditions, without coordination with the energy supply organization and Energonadzor. It is known, the project does not comply with the requirements of the legislation;
In fact - in fact - the owner of the renewed apartment continues to use the central heating (due to heat transfer from adjacent premises, as well as from the main pipelines of heat supply (risers) passing through a disputed apartment. And no money pays. This is violated the rights and legitimate interests of heatpets, who carry losses in the form of incomplete income that they could get while maintaining the centralized heat supply of the disputed apartment.
The courts of all three instances fell to the side of the local administration, and that is why:
The law allows the apartment to be transferred to the ICD on autonomous heating, subject to the design of the reorganization of the residential premises. The Housing Code establishes a closed list of documents that must be provided to coordinate the reorganization, and there is no document on the consent of all other owners in this list. Therefore, the local administration and could not refuse redevelopment on this basis. And the main thing - the battery in the disputed apartment do not belong to the general property of the MCD, because they do not serve more than one apartment and are not outside the apartment. And it does not matter that there are no disconnecting devices on these batteries;
The heating networks could not prove that the controversial re-equipment of the heating system led to violations in the work of engineering systems and that the dismantling of batteries in the disputed apartment does not allow heating networks to ensure high-quality heat supply to neighboring rooms. In addition, none of the neighbors did not complain about the neighbors - there is no information about the appeals of residents of the house on the violations of the thermal regime;
Coordination of the project of reorganization with Energy Padzor and power grids is not required. Snip 41-01-2003 and the rules for the technical operation of electrical installations of consumers, which referred to the heating network, do not apply to the installation of heating devices in residential premises. At the same time, the developer of the project of the Reconstruction (Specialized Organization) assures that the technical solutions adopted in the project comply with the requirements of environmental, sanitary and hygienic, fire-fighting and other rules operating in the territory of the Russian Federation, and ensure the safe and health of people to operate the object when Compliance with the activities provided by working drawings. Reverse is not proven;
The heating networks could not prove that in a disputed apartment there is a unpaid residual heat consumption from poorly isolated heating risers, inter-weltering partitions and plates overlap. In addition, the house has a general heat meter, so the heating agents in any case receive payment for all the heat supplied in the MCD;
And the argument of heating networks about "client loss" does not indicate a violation of their rights and legitimate interests in the field of business activities. The requirements of the heatplets are obviously aimed at restoring violated rights, but to receive commercial benefits.
The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, having examined the cassation complaint with heating networks, did not see the violation of the norms of material and procedural law, which influenced its outcome, and refused to transfer the dispute to the judicial board on economic disputes of the Russian Armed Forces.
A source