China man spends around S$38,000 renovating new house, finds out it's neighbours house before moving in

A man in China's Zhejiang province spent about 200,000 yuan (around S$38,000) renovating and decorating his new house, only to discover that he had renovated his neighbour's house instead.

He only discovered the error before moving in, Sin Chew Daily reported.

By then, he had already spent over half a year decorating the house.

Wrong house number

According to ETtoday, the mix-up came about because during the handover of apartments, the developer had reportedly affixed the man's doorplate on his neighbour's door.

The doorplate of apartment 104, which belonged to the man, was fixed on the door of apartment 103, which belonged to his neighbour.

However, due to both units having similar layouts, the man supposedly did not carefully check the number, floor plan, and orientation when he took possession of it.

Assuming from the doorplate that the unit belonged to him, the man then selected building materials, supervised construction and completed renovation of the unit, which belonged to his neighbour.

Neighbour finds house renovated

The mistake was only brought to light over six months later when he was about to move in, according to m.163.com.

His neighbour, the rightful owner of apartment 103, had visited the unit as he was ready to inspect it, ETtoday reported.

Shocked to discover it had been renovated by someone else, both parties later realised the doorplates had been affixed to the wrong units.

Angered at the situation, the owner of apartment 104 demanded compensation, but the parties involved were unable to agree on the responsibility and amount of compensation.

All at fault except 103's owner: Judge

Following this, apartment 104's owner sued the developer, where he added the property management company as a co-defendant and apartment 103's owner as a third party.

To that, the judge ruled that the developer, who failed to verify the property information during handover, was to bear the initial responsibility.

In addition, the property management company was also found to be negligent for failing to discover abnormalities during the handover and subsequent inspections, according to ETtoday.

The judge noted, however, that the man was also partially responsible as he failed to fulfil his obligation as a buyer to verify the apartment's information when he took possession of it.

His neighbour, the owner of apartment 103, was found not to be at fault due to being unaware of the situation.

ETtoday reported that he had the right to restore the property to its original condition.

Compensation agreement

The court then invited a mediator and renovation company to conduct an assessment, which determined that a forced demolition would be wasteful.

This is because the renovation materials and workmanship were found to be of good quality and had increased the property's value.

According to ETtoday, the final settlement stated that the developer would compensate the man with a parking space and two years of property management fees would be waived by the property management company.

In addition, the owner of unit 103, who would retain the apartment's structural components, would pay 50,000 yuan (around S$7,600) as renovation compensation.

The owner of apartment 104 could remove his movable appliances and furniture and reclaim his unit.