As of: February 10, 2024, 11:43 a.m
By: Kathrin Böhmer
Comments
Press
Split
Puchheim is taking tough measures: it will be expensive for the owner of a single-family home because the building has been empty for years.
Nobody can live there.
Puchheim
– The city of Puchheim wants to send a clear signal: simply letting buildings rot is not possible.
The owner has to pay a fine.
© -mm
It's about an old single-family house that has around 250 square meters of living space and is quite centrally located.
There was once a chic villa, but it has been empty since March 2020, according to Jens Tönjes, managing director at the town hall.
The condition is now bad: roof broken, water damage, mold, doors and windows broken out.
Simply uninhabitable.
But apparently that doesn't release the owner from her duties.
She now has to pay 4,500 euros to compensate for the vacancy.
(Our FFB newsletter regularly informs you about all important stories from your region. Sign up here.)
Statutes are intended to protect against vacancies
The city of Puchheim has had a so-called misappropriation statute since 2018.
This clearly stipulates that living space may not remain empty for longer than three months (or be rented out as a holiday apartment).
The aim is to ensure that houses and apartments are not permanently withdrawn from the tight market in the suburbs.
However, the current case shows how problematic the application can be.
According to the city, the owner actually wanted to sell the house, but that didn't work out.
It had been planned for some time to be demolished and a new building built.
But here too, nothing progressed.
About a year after the property became vacant, the city sent out a notice that the owner should pay compensation.
The woman sued.
The owner should have prevented the house from sinking
Now both parties met again before the administrative court.
The crux of the matter: Is there actually living space if a house is no longer habitable?
In other words: Do the statutes even apply?
My news
Renovate or fill in: What will happen to the small railway underpass? read
For the first time in 60 years: In Puchheim the oxen are harvested at Carnival
Bigger, bigger, Emmering: women's carnival reaches new dimensions
A feast for the ears Olau: The Olching carnival parade is coming up
“We don’t know what will happen next”: the former tennis hall is increasingly becoming an eyesore
The next market Sunday will be significantly larger
According to managing director Tönjes, things should have been prevented from getting to this point.
From the city's perspective, it would have been up to the owner to "prevent the demise through renovation measures".
At the very least, however, she should have had the vacancy or demolition approved within the three-month period.
A fine of up to half a million euros
The city is strict: there is a fine of up to half a million euros for illegal vacancies.
It didn't come to that.
The parties reached an agreement before the actual trial took place.
According to Tönjes, the personal circumstances of the owner and the proven efforts to sell and create replacement living space were taken into account.
However, if nothing happens, the city wants to take action.
According to Tönjes, the judge was surprised that Puchheim was one of the few municipalities in Bavaria that even had a misappropriation statute and, above all, punished the violations.
Because proof is often difficult.
“The statutes in Puchheim are very strict”
Ulrike Kirchhoff, chairwoman of “Haus & Grund Bayern”, is also hearing about such a case for the first time.
She admits that vacancy is a problem, also in terms of the devaluation of real estate.
But: “The statutes in Puchheim are very strict.” From the owners’ perspective, the decision is difficult to understand.
“The property is not empty because it is not intended to be rented out, but because the condition is uninhabitable.”
Even if that doesn't protect against punishment: In many cases, the affected owners don't even know that they have to get approval for the vacancy.
And it's easy for people in the town hall to say: Then it just needs to be renovated.
Renovation measures are expensive.
This is particularly unreasonable for older people, as they do not necessarily have the financial resources and cannot get the necessary loans.
Kirchhoff makes it quite clear: “Basically, you are forcing the owners who cannot afford the renovation to sell.” This sounds like a “cold expropriation”.
Expert advises documenting everything
Speaking of which: a sale cannot even be managed casually, especially for seniors.
“It is often easier to leave the property empty,” explains Kirchhoff.
She advises owners to document everything.
Why is the property empty, what were the difficulties in renovating it or finding new tenants?
And she advocates seeking conversation.
“It doesn’t always have to be coercive measures.”
You can find even more current news from the Fürstenfeldbruck district at Merkur.de/Fürstenfeldbruck.