Chinese man pre-bought a 34th-floor apartment — builder only reached the 32nd floor

A man in China who pre-purchased an apartment on the 34th floor of a building found himself unable to move in — and unable to recover his full deposit — after the developer stopped construction at the 32nd floor.

According to a South China Morning Post report published June 8, a man surnamed Shen living in Shaanxi Province purchased a newly built apartment near Xi'an, the provincial capital, in 2013.

The unit Shen bought was on the 34th floor with an exclusive use area of 90 square meters, priced at 2,646 yuan (about 590,000 won) per square meter — roughly one-third of the prevailing market price at the time. The discount reflected the fact that the complex was classified as "restricted-ownership housing."

Restricted-ownership housing refers to properties illegally built on collectively owned rural land in China. Developed without proper permits as part of efforts to use abandoned rural land during the country's rapid urbanization, such properties are difficult to resell and carry no legal protections. Despite those risks, buyers are drawn in by the low prices.

In 2013, Shen paid a deposit of 117,700 yuan (about 26.57 million won) to the developer, who assured him that the necessary permits would be obtained later and promised that residents could move in by 2015.

The deadline passed without the building being completed.

In 2017, the developer declared the building finished and called for Shen to pay the remaining balance. Shen said he would pay once he received the keys.

A few months later, the developer told Shen the building had only ever been 32 stories tall and offered him a unit on the 32nd floor instead. Shen was unable to come up with the remaining payment at the time. Within a couple of months, the developer informed him that all units on the 32nd floor had already been sold.

Shen then called for a refund of his deposit, but the developer said it had no money and asked him to wait.

The developer returned only partial amounts — 20,000 yuan (about 4.51 million won) in 2020 and 50,000 yuan (about 11.28 million won) in 2022 — and has since stopped responding to Shen's calls.

Shen ultimately sought arbitration. The arbitration committee ordered the developer to pay the outstanding deposit of 47,700 yuan (about 10.76 million won) plus interest of 27,000 yuan (about 6.09 million won), and ruled that if the developer failed to comply, it would owe an additional 47,000 yuan (about 10.61 million won) in damages.

As of last month, however, Shen had still not received the outstanding deposit.

He ultimately filed suit in the relevant court, but recovering the money remains difficult as the debtor holds no registered bank deposits or assets.

After the story gained attention online, Chinese internet users reacted with comments such as "There's always a reason something is cheap," "Restricted-ownership housing may be affordable, but the risks are real," and "Bad luck, but there's nothing to be done."

One user, explaining why people buy such properties despite knowing the risks, said: "That money would have gone to wolse — monthly rent — and after 10 years you'd still have nothing to call your own."