- Статьи
- Economy
- While everything is in the house: utilities opposed the new rules on access providers
While everything is in the house: utilities opposed the new rules on access providers
Public utilities opposed the admission of Internet service providers to homes without the approval of management companies and residents. In their opinion, the updated regulations do not provide adequate protection of household property and create a bias in favor of operators. The Association of Housing and Communal Services Enterprises appealed to the Ministry of Construction and the Ministry of Finance with a request to finalize the document. At the same time, providers call the accusations of damage to common property unfounded. Despite the fact that the Federal Antimonopoly Service supports the simplification of telecom operators' access to residential buildings, the management companies are not ready to adapt to work in new conditions, experts believe.
Why do they want to limit the providers' powers?
The Ministry of Construction and the Ministry of Finance are asking to finalize a new version of the rules for the interaction of telecom operators with management companies in apartment buildings. This request was addressed to the heads of the Ministry of Finance, Maksut Shadaev, and the Ministry of Construction, Irek Fayzullin, by Russia's largest association, the United Housing and Communal Services Council, which does not support the planned changes. Izvestia has reviewed the document.
"The proposed regulatory legal acts should not create an imbalance of the rights and obligations of participants in the relevant legal relations and put them in a pre—discriminatory position," the appeals signed by Mark Geller, executive director of the association, emphasize.
The rules of interaction between operators and management organizations were adopted in 2024. They were supposed to streamline the interaction between the Management Company and the telecommunications business. Among other things, one of their goals was to eliminate abuses by the Criminal Code, which, before these requirements appeared, could charge for access to premises for the installation or operation of communication networks. Currently, the rules stipulate that the operator does not pay for the use of common property (entrances, attics, technical rooms). However, the enforcement of other norms has shown that they need significant improvement. Therefore, in May of this year, the Ministry of Finance submitted amendments to the document.
Among other things, the appeals note that the developers of the new version do not provide justification for the amendments, which significantly expand the powers of operators. At the same time, as Mark Geller reports, judicial practice is already replete with solutions that show a tendency to mass abuse by signallers who lay cables through holes in the facade of buildings, install networks through dormer windows of attic rooms of houses, etc.
In addition, providers often commit violations such as sagging wires and communication networks, lack of cable protection in places where wiring malfunctions are possible, lack of protection in places where the cable passes through from penetration and accumulation of water, etc.
The Association opposes the lack of requirements for documenting the act of inspection of common property after work is carried out by providers, as well as allowing operators to carry out work in apartment buildings where communication networks are already located without the consent of the Management Committee.
"Such changes create a situation in which the operator can carry out any work on the common property without coordination with the managing organization, the quality and safety of which will be possible only in the future," the document emphasizes.
Also, the association does not support the transfer of control functions to the Federal Antimonopoly Service for providers of work in residential buildings. They are currently being implemented by the Housing Inspectorate. According to the association, the antimonopoly service lacks the qualifications to evaluate, for example, a grid installation project if there are disagreements about it.
— The "Council of Housing and Communal Services" is regularly contacted by management organizations from different regions regarding the illegal actions of signalmen. Among other things, they report damage to elements of common property, threats to fire safety, and so on," Mark Geller explained to Izvestia.
He believes that regulations should be primarily aimed at protecting homeowners, not operators. However, according to him, the new version of the rules, including the provisions on fixing specific deadlines for interaction — conducting inspections of common property, access to work on installed networks — was made without taking into account the opinion of the Criminal Code.
Pros and cons of changing providers' access to residential buildings
The Ministry of Finance informed Izvestia that the appeal has not yet been received by the ministry.
"The draft resolution is currently under public discussion. As part of this procedure, anyone interested, including industry associations, can leave their feedback. All of them are being reviewed, analyzed and, if necessary, taken into account," the press service of the department noted.
Izvestia also sent a request to the Ministry of Construction with a request to give its assessment of the utility's proposals.
"FAS supports simplification of the procedure for providers' access to the common property of apartment buildings. This will allow responding to cases of denial of access to operators or delayed approvals by management companies," the service told Izvestia.
In the State Duma, on the contrary, the association's proposals to finalize the new version of the document were supported.
— The industry's concern is understandable. At the bylaw level, regulation should ensure a balance of interests. However, in the current version, the project, instead of detailing the processes, creates a bias in favor of operators," Vladimir Koshelev, first deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on Construction and Housing and Communal Services, head of the committee's expert council on Housing and Communal Services, told Izvestia.
According to him, this is reflected, among other things, in the transfer of the powers of the Federal Antimonopoly Service to control providers' access to homes, which is currently being carried out by the housing inspectorate. The MP also agrees that the new regulations introduce unrealistic deadlines of 5-15 days for inspections of common property, as well as access to work on installed networks. In addition, this version of the rules allows operators to choose the cable entry method themselves, ignoring housing regulations, and carry out "modernization" without consulting the Criminal Code.
"The lack of clear requirements for the inspection report deprives the Criminal Code of evidence of damage," the deputy stressed.
Izvestia sent inquiries to the largest telecom operators and providers.
— We support the changes proposed by the Ministry of Finance. Of course, we want access for providers to work in homes to be much easier. I think this will be supported by the residents themselves, who need stable communication today," Ekaterina Agarkova, director of Internet providers Interlim and Samtelekom, told Izvestia.
According to her, statements that they are damaging residential property are more like a slander so that the amendments are not accepted. If such cases do occur, they are very rare and compensation is paid for them, the business representative noted.
— It is clear that there must be order everywhere. It happens that providers, like the Management company, make mistakes. However, in my opinion, there is still a lot to strive for in the work on regulating the industry, now the skew in powers is still in favor of managing organizations," Igor Titov, CEO of the Internet provider AIRnet, told Izvestia.
According to him, although the Criminal Code is required by law to allow providers into residential buildings, these standards are still not always met.
— As before, by hook or by crook, they put sticks in our wheels. It almost never happens that we come at the request of the landlord and are allowed in. To get this access, we have to sue," the business representative said.
He believes that management companies do not want to lose their influence and cannot yet adjust to work in a new way.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
