Representatives of the New People faction propose to create a rating and anti-rating of management companies based on the opinions and assessments of residents of apartment buildings. The professional community has a lot of questions that remain unanswered so far
The deputy head of the faction of the New People party, Sardana Avksentieva, took the initiative to create an anti-rating of management companies with the sonorous name “Filthy Broom”.
In her appeal to the Ministry of Construction, which RIA Novosti refers to in a material published on September 7, she explained that this anti-rating could be based on the opinions of residents, which they would express on the portals of public services or GIS housing and communal services.
“The concept of such a rating would be to grant the right to all owners once a year to evaluate the work of their management company according to predetermined parameters: from the quality of cleaning entrances to the clarity and transparency of tariffs. It is also advisable to give citizens the right to write detailed comments about the work experience of the Criminal Code. Based on the assessments of citizens, a point rating of the best and worst criminal codes will be formed. This will help citizens, when choosing a new criminal code, to focus on its real work experience and avoid entering into contracts with the criminal Code, which received the worst ratings in the rating,” the document says,” the publication writes.
A month earlier, on August 8, the telegram channel “Superintendent|Housing and Communal Services” told in detail that Vladislav Davankov, Vice Speaker of the State Duma from the New People party, also suggested that the Ministry of Construction place a rating of the Criminal Code on the GIS housing and communal services, positions in which will be formed based on the annual vote of residents and their assessment of the work of management companies according to approved criteria. According to the author of the proposal, this will improve competition in the market.
“If we discard some kind of populism, then the initiative is not without meaning. Indeed, there are no objective ratings of the Criminal Code, of which there are about 22 thousand in the country. Many regions use local GJI to make some kind of such ratings. However, they are of no use or use. Most often, the number of violations in relation to the volume of the housing stock is taken into account. If we talk about competition and rating as a tool for choosing a new criminal code, then in the same GIS there is enough objective data, adding which into a common table, you can get an initial idea of a potential criminal code. The average maintenance fee, the availability of direct contracts, the availability of reports and their compliance with requirements, the software used, and the like. All this can be done automatically. And already to such objective information on 15-20 points, you can fasten reviews, assessments of residents and so on. We hope the deputy speaker’s assistants will read this post,” the telegram channel wrote at the time.
The Ministry of Construction seems to have reacted carefully and positively to the proposal of “New People”. “The ministry stated that the introduction of the national rating of management organizations can have a positive impact on industry competition and affect the improvement of the quality of services provided to the population. However, they noted that the proposal under consideration does not define the procedure for maintaining the rating and sources of financing for the implementation of this event, and also stressed that the issue of legal regulation of such a rating requires additional study,” the Housing and Communal Services Management information portal notes in its publication.
In addition, “the Ministry of Construction stated that they consider it advisable to consider the issue of introducing a rating after the adoption of the draft law “On Amendments to Article 57 of the Federal Law “On State Control (Supervision) and Municipal Control in the Russian Federation” in terms of supplementing with a new basis for conducting control measures within the framework of state housing supervision”, currently being developed by the Ministry of Economic Development”, it is emphasized in the material.
In general, dividing the players of any segment that comes to hand into “right” and “wrong” is our tradition. And there would be even more such ratings and anti-ratings if, as has already been rightly noted, it was clear who would be able to develop evaluation criteria that no one doubts, who would finance this whole story and how significant it would be not only from a public but also from a legal point of view.
“What legal force will this rating have? Is this JP Morgan?” one of the subscribers of the telegram channel “Laws of Construction” asks, commenting on the proposal about the “Filthy broom”. “It’s just PR, an offer of the level of grannies at the entrance,” says another. However, “let’s see if the authorities will seriously think about creating such a rating,” the third does not exclude. The telegram channel itself wonders whether rating (or anti-rating) will become a real incentive for management companies to improve the quality of services.
But the partner, CEO of CMWP Management Company Denis Trotsenko, in an interview with BFM.ru he was much tougher in his statements regarding the offer of “New people”. “I sometimes get the feeling that some of our legislators, deputies, offering any initiatives related to housing and communal services, having the most direct access to commissions and committees, and simply having a huge administrative resource and access to knowledge, exist in some kind of parallel universe. The question arises: either they are completely far from the reality of the housing and communal services market, or their PR people decided to take a swipe at populism. I prefer the second option,” the expert admits.
Denis Trotsenko partner, CEO of CMWP Management Company “My compatriot Sardana Avksentieva proposed to create an anti-rating of the management company with voting on GIS housing and communal services and “Public Services”: it is proposed to put down grades once a year and form lists of the best and worst. Immediately there is not just a question, but a perplexity: that is, according to the respected deputy, until now neither the relevant committees under the State Duma, nor the professional communities that exist under the Ministry of Construction, nor the management community itself has thought about how to objectively judge the quality of the work of the Criminal Code and by what criteria to evaluate? Obviously, in the current turbulent time, no criteria can be formed, since there are no uniform principles and standards that could be used as base points for starting an assessment. A total shortage of labor resources, an increase in overhead costs by more than 30%, the diversity of MCD facilities, the lack of uniform standards, the imperfection of basic laws (some of which are relevant, but some are hopelessly outdated), the overload of the industry by executive authorities and control institutions… Until these basic issues are resolved, it will not be possible to talk about any objective assessment of the work of the Criminal Code.”
According to the interlocutor of the portal, the proposed decision, if adopted, will lead to another uncontrolled financial hole in the Criminal Code. “Someone negligent who, due to cost savings (because we do not have legally accepted rules for doing business on the principle of an open book), will buy good reviews, although in fact he is not a quality leader in this market. And someone who really spends all their potential and works honestly, but because of the complex market and low marginality of the service sector cannot “organize” positive votes of respondents, they will simply run into artificially created negative reviews (ordered from competitors, for example), which will give the conditional assessment that the company is barely Lee is not proficient. So what is the help for business here? What is the industry’s help? And an attempt to help the owner with such an ill—conceived method can only lead to the emergence of new points of social tension, since the resources offered for evaluation are key and system-forming,” Denis Trotsenko emphasizes.
The assessment of the management system should be professional, have clearly verified rules with reference to the class of the object, the economics of the project, and the financial results of the company. Approved principles are also needed, violation of which would threaten serious administrative or even criminal punishment, the expert concludes.
English 
Russian 
German 
Polish