On April 20th, 20 10, Yang signed a commercial housing sales contract with a real estate developer in Liancheng. The two parties agreed that the construction area was 249.7l㎡ and the price per square meter was 3,630 yuan, totaling 906,447 yuan. In the terms of the contract on the determination of area and the treatment of area difference, Yang chose the method of pricing by building area (tick). After the contract was signed, Yang paid all the purchase price in two installments, and the real estate company delivered the house on 20 13.
On April 5, 20 16, Yang happily went to get the real estate license, only to find that the housing area on the real estate license was different from that in the contract. This certificate confirms that the building area of the house purchased by Yang is 245.20㎡, which is 4.5 1㎡ less than the house sold. To this end, Yang repeatedly asked for a refund of the overcharged purchase price of 4.51m2, but the real estate company always refused to return it for various reasons. In the end, Yang sued the Liancheng County Court, hoping to solve it through legal channels.
During the trial, the real estate company argued that in addition to signing the Commercial Housing Purchase and Sales Contract, both parties also signed a supplementary contract, namely Annex VI of the Commercial Housing Purchase and Sales Contract. Article 3 of Annex VI stipulates that if the houses involved are sold in sets, if the absolute error ratio between the registered area of property rights and the construction area agreed in the contract is within 10%, the difference will be settled at 3,000 yuan/square meter. The actual area of the house involved in this case is 245.20㎡, and the error is 4.5 1㎡, which is within 10%. There is no need to make up the difference, and Yang's claim is rejected.
After trial, the court held that the commercial housing sales contract signed by Yang and the real estate company was the true intention of both parties, and it did not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and regulations and had legal effect. Both parties shall fully fulfill their obligations in accordance with the agreement. The dispute between the two parties in this case is whether to calculate the price by area or by suite. Although the fourth pricing method and price, the fifth area confirmation and area difference treatment are marked with "√" in the contract, it can be known from the registration information of the commercial house at that time that the pre-sale area of the commercial house is 249.7 1㎡, calculated at 3630 yuan per square meter, and the total amount is 906447 yuan.
Moreover, the commercial housing sales contract is provided by the real estate company. If there are two different options for terms, the other party should choose. Therefore, Yang chose to calculate the price by area, and the court supported it. Articles 4 and 5 of the Commodity House Purchase and Sales Contract have agreed to calculate the price according to the construction area. If there is any difference between the construction area and the property right registration area, the property right registration area shall prevail. If the absolute value of the error ratio of the construction area is less than 3% (including 3%), the settlement of the house price shall be binding on both parties.
The judge believes that in this case, Yang has paid 906,447 yuan for the house with a building area of 249.7l㎡, while the registered area of the house property right sold by the real estate company to Yang is only 245.2㎡, which is less than the contracted area of 4.5 1㎡, and the absolute value of the area error ratio is less than 3%, so it should be settled according to the contract. Accordingly, the above judgment was made.
(The above answers were published on 20 17-02-28. Please refer to the actual situation for the current purchase policy. )
Sohu Focus provides you with comprehensive information on new houses, second-hand houses, renting houses and home improvement.