Reader question: What requirements apply to the allocation of shared lift costs?
You live on the ground floor and hardly ever use the passenger lift. Nevertheless, a lift cost share appears on the bill. Your own number of journeys is a reasonable reason to enquire, but does not by itself determine liability for costs. First check which agreed right of use the charging is based on.
The legal starting point
§ 24 paragraph 1 MRG links, where it applies, to the fact that the main tenant is entitled under the tenancy agreement or another arrangement to use a communal facility of the building. For the share of its operating costs it generally refers to § 17, unless the HeizKG is applicable. [MRG24]
The wording focuses on the entitlement. The article does not draw a final conclusion about every ground-floor flat from that: contract, actual access to the facility and special circumstances must be examined accordingly. The scope of application under § 1 must also be established. [MRG1]
What may you reach with the lift?
Our editorial recommendation: Note which levels the installation connects and which of those you have access to. For example, is there an allocated cellar room or a communal room on another level that you can reach? Which agreement refers to the lift, and was an exception actually agreed or only assumed in conversation?
Do not assert an entitlement merely because a button is present in the antechamber. Likewise, “I take the stairs” is not the same statement as “I am not contractually permitted to use it”. For technical access restrictions document the condition actually observed; you do not need to obtain others’ keys or take test rides into locked areas.
Read the specific cost item
Have it explained which services are summarised in the lift line. Operation, maintenance and a new acquisition should not be made invisible by a collective description in the technical review. Whether an individual invoice item was allocated correctly must be clarified with its actual scope of services.
For allocation under § 17, usable floor areas or another permissible key must again be examined. [MRG17] Your number of journeys is therefore not automatically the statutory allocation key. Where there is special consumption metering or a separate agreement, their concrete basis is required.
Two hypothetical enquiries
Sina does not use the lift, but could reach the contractually accessible cellar with it. She asks for the contractual basis, operating invoices and the share. Oskar, on the other hand, possesses a written document that describes a deviating facility rule for his unit. He produces exactly this and asks for an explanation of the position that was nevertheless charged.
The cases lead to different review tasks. They do not confirm either Sina’s obligation to pay or Oskar’s exemption. A mere comparison of the floor number would have missed the difference.
A usable result
In the end the right of use, facility scope, charged service and allocation key should match. If a contradiction remains, summarise it with the relevant document for housing law advice. Do not adjust the amount solely according to your own sense of use. This article does not provide a blanket exemption from lift costs or a legal assessment of a specific agreement; it shows which facts are needed for that decision.