Prevent the abuse of "petty authority," and return community management rights to property owners

“Prevent ‘Small Authority Arbitrary Decisions’” “Return Management Rights to Residents” … This morning, Fan Yun, Chairwoman of Shanghai Fushen Evaluation Consulting Group, told reporters, “This is the main purpose of changing ‘management’ to ‘service’.”

At this year’s National People’s Congress and Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, Fan Yun’s proposal to change “property management” to “property service” received a swift response from the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development and sparked heated online discussion.

“I didn’t expect the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development to reply so quickly.” This morning, after the Shanghai delegation’s plenary session ended, Fan Yun’s phone kept ringing. Ministry staff called to further consult her opinions, and relevant Shanghai departments also invited her to return to Shanghai for community research.

On March 7, at the Shanghai delegation group meeting, Fan Yun proposed that in relevant policy documents, the term “property management” be uniformly changed to “property service.” She believes that the two words have completely different meanings — property must first have a service mindset.

After her on-site speech was reported by the media, it quickly attracted widespread social attention, and Fan Yun was called “my strongest spokesperson” by netizens.

On March 9, at noon, staff from the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development called, but Fan Yun did not answer. That evening, the call was directly made to the delegation’s accommodation, clearly informing her that they would begin revising the “Property Management Regulations” to “Property Service Regulations,” and industry classification would also change from “property management” to “property service,” to be included in the national economic statistics. The Ministry will also propose suggestions for amending the Civil Code, which is a higher law.

Third-party research institutions in the property industry show that by 2025, the average collection rate of property fees among the top 500 property service companies nationwide has fallen to 71%, a decline for four consecutive years, mainly due to unsatisfactory service quality.

During her research, Fan Yun learned that a 71-year-old driver wanted to enter the community to pick up his elderly mother living alone, but because he was not driving a long-term rental vehicle, security staff refused to let him in.

“The rights of property management in the Civil Code belong to the owners, not the property companies,” Fan Yun said. “Changing two words is actually about returning management rights to the residents, and property companies should think from a service perspective.”

This year’s government work report proposed implementing projects to improve housing quality and property service quality. Some representatives believe that changing “property management” to “property service” will have a profound impact on community governance.

Fang Yan, director of Beijing Jincheng Tongda (Xi’an) Law Firm, suggested promoting the optimization and upgrading of relevant clauses in the Property Management Regulations, clarifying the legal rights and responsibilities of property companies, owners, owners’ committees, street communities, and regulatory departments; refining standards for property service quality, fee setting rules, public benefit management, and the use of maintenance funds.

Fan Yun also proposed a set of measures to improve property service levels: property can operate using a “beneficial service + customized service” model, with beneficial services remaining affordable and customized services charged; conducting credit ratings for property companies; improving hiring and dismissal mechanisms; and implementing community democratic autonomy to disclose accounts.