The short answer

  • Property fees are a contractual obligation, not an optional purchase you pay for only when you are satisfied with the service. Article 944(1) of the Civil Code is explicit: where the property service provider has provided services as agreed and in accordance with the relevant provisions, the owner may not refuse payment on the ground that it has not accepted, or has no need to accept, the service.
  • Never having signed a contract with the property company is no escape either: the preliminary contract is signed by the developer, the contract on selection is signed by the owners’ committee, and by law both bind all owners (Article 939).
  • An empty flat is in principle still charged; but where premises have not yet been handed over to the buyer, the fee is borne by the developer (Article 41 of the Property Management Regulation).
  • Poor service is no ground for refusing everything: keep evidence, demand rectification, and claim a reduction in price (Article 582). A full waiver is rarely upheld; in a few cases the court reduces the fee proportionally.
  • Cutting off water or electricity to collect fees is unlawful (Article 944(3)); loss caused must be compensated, and the Supreme People’s Court Case Database already holds a ruling on point.
  • After several years in arrears, part of the money may genuinely be unrecoverable: property fees are a debt of periodic recurring performance, and the three-year limitation period for each instalment runs separately, not from the date of the last payment.

1. What is this wave of “lead by example” property-fee appeals?

Between March and May 2026, Gongqingcheng city, Chaisang District and Wuning County in Jiujiang, Jiangxi, and Luchun and Pingbian counties in Yunnan, issued appeals one after another asking public officials and Party members and cadres to “take the lead” in paying property fees on time and in full; each cited the Civil Code and the community’s management rules. Some places later withdrew the articles, and the housing and construction departments responded that these were only appeals and had no binding force.

My view: an appeal is not a source of obligation. The duty to pay property fees comes from the property service contract and Article 944, and has nothing to do with whether an owner is a Party member or a public official; conversely, an appeal cannot become the basis for circulating names, summoning people for talks or referring them to the discipline inspection commission — an administrative organ may not act without statutory authorisation. What lies behind these documents is in fact a falling collection rate, and a falling collection rate ends with every resident sharing a shrunken service.

2. No contract was ever signed, so why is payment still due?

The answer is in Article 939 of the Civil Code: “A preliminary property management contract concluded between the construction unit and the property service provider in accordance with the law, and a property service contract concluded between the owners’ committee and the property service provider selected by the owners’ assembly in accordance with the law, are legally binding on the owners.” (original text)

In other words, the person who signs with you need not be you. When you bought the flat the developer had already signed the preliminary property management contract; the provider later selected by the owners’ committee under the proper procedure binds every household, including those who voted against it. The Supreme People’s Court Case Database contains one such case (database entry no. 2023-16-2-121-004): the community could not, for objective reasons, elect an owners’ committee, so the residents’ committee signed a property service contract in that capacity under government guidance, and the court held it binding on all the owners.

The boundary matters too: where there is no preliminary contract, no selection by an owners’ committee and no service actually provided, and the property company simply turns up to collect money, owners may refuse to pay.

3. The flat has stood empty — can the fee be waived?

It cannot. The basis is again the sentence in Article 944(1): an owner may not refuse payment on the ground that it has not accepted or has no need to accept the relevant property service. Property services are directed at the common parts and the community as a whole — the lifts are running, the guards are on duty, the planting is being maintained; your absence does not stop the service.

The situation that genuinely excuses payment is “not yet handed over to you”. Article 41(2) of the Property Management Regulation: “For premises that have been completed but not yet sold, or not yet handed over to the property buyer, the property service fee shall be paid by the construction unit.” (original text)

So where completion is delayed, the project is unfinished, or you did not take the keys because the inspection failed, the fee for that period belongs to the developer — provided you can prove non-delivery: the handover notice, the inspection record, the letter refusing acceptance and the date from which the fee starts to run. As for discounts on empty flats, national laws and administrative regulations lay down no uniform rule; where a local regulation or the contract provides for payment at a percentage, follow the rule currently in force there, and do not treat another city’s policy as authority in your own.

4. The service is poor — can I simply refuse to pay?

You cannot refuse the whole fee outright, but neither do you have to endure it. Article 582 of the Civil Code provides the route: where performance does not conform to the agreement, the injured party “may reasonably choose to request the other party to bear liability for breach of contract, such as repair, re-performance, replacement, return of the goods, or reduction in price or remuneration” (original text, excerpt).

In practice there are roughly three tiers: where the service has serious defects and the evidence is solid, the court may reduce the fee by a portion; ordinary lapses in cleaning or poor planting are mostly treated as service defects that do not amount to a fundamental breach, and the full fee is still ordered; where the property company has withdrawn entirely and stopped serving, the fee for that period may be refused — the Case Database holds one such case (2023-16-2-121-003), in which the provider stopped serving a particular building and staircase, the owners pooled funds and ran it themselves, and the court, in its discretion, ordered the owners of that staircase to pay a proportion.

The right approach is: photograph and video, keep repair and complaint records, raise the matter in writing with the property company and the housing and construction department, and demand rectification within a deadline; if negotiation on a reduction fails, sue for a reduction in price. Do not stop paying first — if you stop, you are the defendant, a claim of service defects has to be raised by counterclaim, and the burden of proof sits on you. On the boundary of “solving it yourself” in a community, see the article on parking-space self-help.

5. Can the property company cut off water or electricity to force payment?

It cannot. Article 944(3) of the Civil Code: “The property service provider may not collect property fees by stopping the supply of electricity, water, heating or gas.” (original text) The proper route given in paragraph 2 is: demand payment within a reasonable period, and if it is still not paid, bring a lawsuit or apply for arbitration.

Supreme People’s Court Case Database 2025-10-2-121-001 (Hengqin, Guangdong) is explicit: where a property service provider collects property fees by cutting off electricity, water, heating or internet and causes loss to owners, it shall bear liability for compensation. If it does happen, first photograph and video, call 110 or go to the sub-district office, then quantify the loss — medicine in the fridge, a fish tank, lost work, temporary accommodation all count.

Conversely, an owner cannot use “stopping the property fee” to counter other breaches by the property company; the two are distinct claims.

6. Does it expire after a few years? How the limitation period for property fees is counted

The limitation period（诉讼时效）is three years (Article 188 of the Civil Code). Property companies often argue that the service is one continuous contract, so the period should run as a whole from the due date of the last instalment (Article 189 deals with installment performance of a single debt).

The courts do not accept this. Supreme People’s Court Case Database 2024-07-2-121-002 (Jinzhong Intermediate People’s Court, Shanxi) separates the two kinds of debt: in installment performance of a single debt the total is fixed when the debt arises; in a debt of periodic recurring performance（定期重复给付之债）each instalment is a newly arising, independent debt. Property fees belong to the latter, and the period for each instalment runs from the day that instalment’s payment deadline expires. In that case the property company claimed RMB 2,118 for September 2019 to June 2022; the court held that the period from September 2019 to June 2020 was already time-barred and awarded only RMB 1,484.49. The Jieyang, Guangdong case (2023-16-2-121-003) took the same position on retrial.

For owners: for the time-barred part you may raise the defence that the limitation period has expired（不履行抗辩）(Article 192), but the court will not raise it for you. For property companies: do not let it pile up — demand payment instalment by instalment and keep a record; demand letters, text messages, WeChat messages and lawsuits all interrupt the period.

7. The flat is rented out — who pays the property fee?

In principle the owner. Article 41(1) of the Property Management Regulation: the owner shall pay in accordance with the property service contract; where the owner and the property user agree that the user shall pay, that agreement is followed, but “the owner bears joint and several liability for payment”.

So a landlord who writes “the tenant bears the property fee” does not thereby extract himself: the property company can still claim directly from the owner, and the owner then recovers from the tenant under the lease. In long leases of offices and shops this cost is usually already folded into the rent; stating clearly who pays and what happens if it rises saves more trouble than arguing afterwards.

8. A checklist for owners

  • Before taking delivery, check the “date from which the property fee starts to run” and align it with the handover notice and the inspection record; verify the published fee information once a year (Article 943 requires periodic disclosure and reporting to the owners’ assembly).
  • If the service falls short, fix the evidence: time-stamped photographs and video, repair work orders, complaint receipts, owners’ group chat records; demand rectification in writing and keep proof of delivery.
  • If you are sued, do not fail to appear — a default judgment will largely follow the property company’s claim; only by appearing can you raise the limitation and service-defect defences.
  • To change the property company, follow the procedure: Article 278 of the Civil Code requires dismissal to be voted on with the participation of owners holding at least two-thirds of the exclusive-area share and two-thirds of the number of owners, and the consent of more than half of those participating.
  • If water, electricity or internet is cut off, or access control is blocked, obtain evidence at once and report to the sub-district office and the housing and construction department; the loss can be claimed separately.

9. A few cautions

Judicial approaches to property fees vary considerably from place to place: for the same “service defect”, some courts reduce the fee by 10 to 30 per cent, others not a cent; discounts for empty flats mostly come from local regulations or government-guided prices, and this article has not checked every local document, so before relying on one, check the rule currently in force in the city where the property is.

On the hierarchy of sources: the text of the provisions is taken from the current versions of the Civil Code and the Property Management Regulation; the case numbers, amounts and holdings are taken from the Supreme People’s Court Case Database; the remaining generalisations about judicial tendencies are my own summary, not the text of any provision.

In one sentence: property fees are all the owners chipping in to buy a service; the money is saved not by digging in, but by playing the three cards — the handover date, the limitation period and service defects — on evidence.

If you are facing a property-fee demand, a lawsuit by a property company, a service dispute, or you want to change the property company, you are welcome to contact Wang Xin: phone 186-0113-9509, WeChat wang223040.

Quick answers

Can an owner in China refuse to pay the property fee for a flat that has stood empty?
In principle no. Article 944(1) of the Civil Code bars an owner from refusing payment on the ground that the service has not been accepted or is not needed, and the service to the common areas never stops. The exception is a flat not yet handed over to the buyer: under Article 41(2) of the Property Management Regulation the construction unit pays, provided the owner can prove non-delivery.
Does the limitation period for property fees run from the date of the last payment?
No. Property fees are a debt of periodic recurring performance, so the three-year period under Article 188 of the Civil Code runs separately for each instalment from the day that instalment falls due. In case no. 2024-07-2-121-002 the court held part of an RMB 2,118 claim time-barred and awarded only RMB 1,484.49.
Can a property company cut off water or electricity to collect unpaid property fees?
No. Article 944(3) of the Civil Code prohibits collecting fees by stopping the supply of electricity, water, heating or gas. The lawful route is a demand within a reasonable period, then litigation or arbitration. Case no. 2025-10-2-121-001 from Hengqin, Guangdong confirms that a provider that cuts supplies and causes loss must compensate for it.

This is an English edition of Wang Xin’s original Chinese article, 物业费能不能不交？空着没住、没签合同、服务太差，法院一条条判给你看. It explains the law of the People’s Republic of China in general terms and is not legal advice for any particular case; outcomes depend on the specific facts and on how local authorities apply the rules.