Dispute over debt?
As reported by Tien Phong, nearly 2,000 residents and customers living and working in Victory Tower building (District 7, HCMC) feel insecure when the disputes between
the investor
and the operating management unit continue, causing their lives to be disrupted, feeling anxious when they are regularly cut off from electricity and water.
“We have fully paid the service fees according to the contract signed with the investor. The disputes between the investor and the operating management unit are not related to customers. However, when customers do not fulfill the requirements of Sao Kim Company, this unit cuts off electricity and water to create pressure, causing our lives to be disrupted and suffer significant damages,” Ms. T.T.U expressed frustratedly.
The Victory Tower building has a scale of 30 floors, including shop houses (floors 1 – 2), office for rent (floors 3 – 23), and luxury apartments (floors 24 – 30). On February 20, 2017, Mr. Bui Minh Chinh, legal representative of Petroland (now Victory Capital Joint Stock Company – VCG) signed a service contract
for managing and operating
number 03/2017/CCDVQLVH-SK with Sao Kim Investment Service Joint Stock Company. Accordingly, VCG hired Sao Kim to manage and operate
Victory Tower building
within 6 years.
Victory Tower building – where the disputes between the investor and the operating unit occur.
In January 2023, floor tenants in the building received a notice from the investor that the contract for managing and operating the building with Sao Kim would end on February 20, 2023, and the investor would not renew it.
A few days later, Sao Kim announced that they were suing the investor for debt and that they would not hand over the management of the building until the investor paid off the amount owed. After that, Sao Kim sued VCG and was accepted by the District 7 Court as the authority for the lawsuit “Dispute over the contract for managing and operating services.”
Floor tenants and
residents
of Victory Tower building stated that the debt relationship is a civil relationship between the investor and Sao Kim. They wanted the services to be continuously provided, clearly defining the role of managing the building from March 2023 onwards.
Ms. Nguyen Thi Kim Thoa, General Director of Victory Capital Joint Stock Company, said that after the contract for managing Victory Tower building with Sao Kim expired on February 20, 2023, the investor had sent multiple notices, and requests to terminate the contract.
However, Sao Kim did not comply. From March 2023 to now, the investor has received feedback from many floor tenants about being suddenly cut off from electricity and water services. Even some tenants reported an increase in management fees.
According to Ms. Thoa, from March 2023 to now, although Sao Kim still managed and operated Victory Tower building as before, they did not pay the infrastructure exploitation fee of VND 375 million per month to the investor.
On the other hand, the representative of Sao Kim stated that according to the first-instance judgment announced by the District 7 Court in September 2023, VCG must pay Sao Kim VND 51.4 billion. Sao Kim must pay the investor VND 8 billion. From March 2023 to now, Sao Kim has not paid the infrastructure exploitation fee of VND 375 million per month to the investor due to offset against the debt.
Regarding the cessation of electricity and water services for office tenants in the building, Sao Kim’s representative affirmed that they had implemented it according to the contract signed with the investor, and these customers had long-term outstanding management fees.
The essence lies in contract 03
According to contract No. 03 signed by both parties, although it is only a unit hired to manage and operate, contract 03 gives Sao Kim full authority to carry out exploitation, use, business, enjoy all profits; negotiate, agree, sign contracts with customers; receive, collect, use the entire exploitation service fee… Sao Kim also receives the entire basement, area, and space that does not belong to the exclusive ownership of users to operate and charge fees… Sao Kim only has to pay VCG VND 375 million per month for infrastructure exploitation fee, and all remaining revenue belongs to this unit.
The contract stipulates a contract term of 72 months, but clause 13.3 of Article 13 provides: “The parties undertake to implement the content of the provisions in the contract. In case of arising difficulties in implementation, contract disputes, the parties will make efforts to resolve, negotiate, reconcile, based on good faith, voluntarily, fairly, and mutually beneficial… To ensure the stability and safety of the building, if such disputes arise, this contract will still be implemented until a final decision is made by the competent State agency.”
According to lawyer Trinh Van Hiep – Deputy Head of the Quang Nam Provincial Lawyers’ Delegation, the above clause clearly stipulates that only when the contract is still in effect and the parties are performing the contract with arising difficulties or disputes, clause 13.3 of Article 13 of contract 03 will be activated.
Customers, residents in Victory Tower building affected by the disputes between the investor and the operating unit.
However, it is this provision that allows contract 03 to be implemented within a specific time frame from the occurrence of the dispute until the date of the final decision of the competent State agency, not that contract 03 is implemented without an end date. If contract 03 has expired, clause 13.3 of Article 13 of contract 03 cannot be activated.
“In fact, contract 03 has expired since February 21, 2023. Sao Kim only sued VCG for disputes over the debt under contract 03, not disputes over the content of contract 03. If Sao Kim keeps referring to this reason, this dispute will lead to another dispute, causing this strange contract to last indefinitely, and the damages suffered by
the investor
will never come to an end,” lawyer Hiep said.
The representative of Sao Kim also stated that although the contract stipulates a contract term of 72 months, under the clause on the termination of the effectiveness of the contract at point g clause 9.4 of Article 9 is “according to the specific provisions of this contract.”
“To ensure the stability and safety of Victory Tower building, if disputes over this contract arise, during the time when the dispute resolution agency is settling the dispute, this contract will still be implemented until there is a final decision of the competent State agency,” the representative of Sao Kim said.
