Analysis of Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation data
639.8 billion out of 890.9 billion unreturned amount
1st to 3rd place without return, almost 150 billion won
Villas, apartments, offices
According to the Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation (HUG), 70% of the deposit for jeonse that could not be recovered after subrogation was attributed to multi-family homeowners.
According to the ‘Stat of Default on Jeonse Deposits’ received by Democratic Party lawmaker Jang Cheol-min from the Land Transport Committee of the National Assembly on the 20th, the amount of non-refundable deposits in July this year was 890.9 billion was won.
HUG pays the deposit to the tenant on behalf of the tenant who has purchased the guarantee insurance and recovers the deposit by claiming the amount from the landlord. A non-refundable security deposit is an amount that has not been recovered by the landlord.
639.8 billion, or 72%, of the 890.9 billion earned in the non-refundable deposit from the multi-family home owners was not returned. This means that more than 70% of the deposits taken from tenants were taken from multi-family residents.
Most of the total non-refundable 831 billion won came from individual landlords, not corporations. Mr A in his 40s was the person with the most non-repayable houses (49.9 billion won). It was followed by B (49 billion won) and C (47.3 billion won). In the case of D, who is in his 20s, he did not return a deposit of 23.4 billion earned while owning 104 houses. The youngest multi-house person, E, aged 22, did not return the 500 million deposit earned. Among corporations, there were 46 cases, it gained the highest number of non-refundable deposits of 9 billion.
By house type, the non-refundable amount of deposits for multi-family houses (villas) was the largest with 614.1 billion won (68.9%) of non-refundable deposits. It was followed by apartments with 146.1 billion won (16.4%), offices with 92.5 billion won (10.4%), and townhouses with 25.2 billion won (2.8%).
Representative Jang said, “HUG has limitations in terms of collection and additional investigation, and if the debtor decides to go into hiding, it is difficult to verify the details of the property. We need strong administrative sanctions such as realizing non-compliance,” he said. . .