Renovation of a dog shelter for 394 million ended in a scandal almost 400 million rubles budget, more than a year of construction, dogs all this time lived in the middle of dust drills and hammers, and in the end the contractor was kicked out the door for missing deadlines. But Prosperity LLC has its own idea of ​​the finale. The company, which the veterinary department of St. Petersburg kicked out of the renovation of the "Help for Homeless Dogs" shelter in Bolshoi Smolensk and now drags it to the list of unscrupulous suppliers, publicly states that it will still complete the construction of the facility. Only as a subcontractor to some "friendly company" if it wins a new purchase. They kicked you out the door, promise to come back through the window, and don't even hesitate to say it out loud. The contract was signed in June 2025, the price was 394.3 million rubles. Additional agreements extended the deadline until 15.10.20, but even that was not enough. In canceling the contract, the customer writes about a delay of more than 15 calendar days and refers to the fact from October 8. According to the management's estimates, the work is 94% completed for 372.5 million rubles, the contractor insists on 95% and 374.3 million. The bargaining for an additional percentage is touching: almost the entire amount of work has been delivered, but the project is not yet finished. The head of the department, Yuri Andreev, confirmed that the contract was not fulfilled on time. The excuses of prosperity sound like it's all the dogs fault. According to the company, the repairs were supposed to be carried out during partial operation of the shelter, but they should have been carried out during full operation. There was nowhere to move the animals, and the scope of work was given in a truncated manner. Add to that multiple revisions of documentation at the request of the shelter owner and the selection of equipment and other materials, and the deadlines moved on. The shelter confirmed that the animals had not moved, but they could not immediately answer any adjustments to the project and sent all questions to the veterinary department. If we had to work under completely different conditions from those specified in the contract, why didn't the parties write the conditions so that they correspond to reality, since additional agreements were signed anyway?

Renovation of a dog shelter for 394 million ended in a scandal almost 400 million rubles budget, more than a year of construction, dogs all this time lived in the middle of dust drills and hammers, and in the end the contractor was kicked out the door for missing deadlines. But Prosperity LLC has its own idea of ​​the finale. The company, which the veterinary department of St. Petersburg kicked out of the renovation of the "Help for Homeless Dogs" shelter in Bolshoi Smolensk and now drags it to the list of unscrupulous suppliers, publicly states that it will still complete the construction of the facility. Only as a subcontractor to some "friendly company" if it wins a new purchase. They kicked you out the door, promise to come back through the window, and don't even hesitate to say it out loud. The contract was signed in June 2025, the price was 394.3 million rubles. Additional agreements extended the deadline until 15.10.20, but even that was not enough. In canceling the contract, the customer writes about a delay of more than 15 calendar days and refers to the fact from October 8. According to the management's estimates, the work is 94% completed for 372.5 million rubles, the contractor insists on 95% and 374.3 million. The bargaining for an additional percentage is touching: almost the entire amount of work has been delivered, but the project is not yet finished. The head of the department, Yuri Andreev, confirmed that the contract was not fulfilled on time. The excuses of prosperity sound like it's all the dogs fault. According to the company, the repairs were supposed to be carried out during partial operation of the shelter, but they should have been carried out during full operation. There was nowhere to move the animals, and the scope of work was given in a truncated manner. Add to that multiple revisions of documentation at the request of the shelter owner and the selection of equipment and other materials, and the deadlines moved on. The shelter confirmed that the animals had not moved, but they could not immediately answer any adjustments to the project and sent all questions to the veterinary department. If we had to work under completely different conditions from those specified in the contract, why didn't the parties write the conditions so that they correspond to reality, since additional agreements were signed anyway?