Jump to content

Letting Pitfalls


Jon 1
 Share

Recommended Posts

We have been deterred from letting out our apartment, because of all the horror stories.

We prefer to arrange a furnished let as the apartment is fully equipped.

If we arranged the let through an agent and incorporated the letting insurance, should we have anything to fear?

Can it still quite easily go sour, and we find ourselves in a difficult position?

We are getting too long in the tooth for hassle!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have just been compiling information for an upcoming piece in French Property News about the letting market, so here are a few pointers.

Basically leases are a minimum of one year for furnished and three for unfurnished, but given adequate notice (3, 6 months respectively) tenants can leave at any time, with less notice in some situations - sudden loss of job, illness, job relocation to another area etc. For their part, owners are restricted in many ways - generally unable to give notice except in special circumstances (breach of tenancy rules, non-payment of rent) or if they need the property for themselves or immediate family. Again there are exceptions, such as whether it is the tenant's principal home or the owner wants it as one, and the winter non-eviction rules, tenants of advanced years etc etc. Eviction can take several months in practice.

There are insurances for non-payment of rent etc and individuals or agencies can do their best to vet potential tenants' financial security - normally seen as someone in a steady job (CDI) and a salary that is 3 to 4 times the rent. But if a tenant falls ill, loses their job etc he/she can stick it out until evicted. Shortish term furnished rentals can be subject to high levels of wear and tear and high turnover (students, seasonal workers etc).

All that said, figures from FNAIM show that out of France's 27 million households, some 11.6 millions are renters, of which 6.55 million are in private accommodation (as opposed to public sector HLM). So someone is getting the formula right......

Hope this helps a bit - P-D de R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jon 1"]We have been deterred from letting out our apartment, because of all the horror stories.

We prefer to arrange a furnished let as the apartment is fully equipped.

If we arranged the let through an agent and incorporated the letting insurance, should we have anything to fear?

Can it still quite easily go sour, and we find ourselves in a difficult position?

We are getting too long in the tooth for hassle![/quote]

Personally, I'd go for unfurnished rental: as P-DdR says, the furnishings will probably suffer from increased wear and tear and will not last anything like as long in the hands of the shorter-term renters that you are likely to end up with as they would in your own use. You would not get enough additional income in terms of either a higher rental or withholdings from a damage deposit to cover the degradation to the furnishings - remember that "wear and tear" (notionally "fair wear and tear", but where the line is drawn is very difficult to state) is not generally recoverable from a tenant's deposit. And to be honest, furnishing the property is just one more damn thing to go wrong/cause complaints. When a new successor tenant moves in, their expectations will generally be that the furnishings ought to be in a better state than that in which the previous tenant will have left them, resulting in additional costs in renewals.

Regarding letting through an agent, it is best to do some research to see how good a job they do - especially when it comes to vetting new tenants. We use an agent for an F2 unfurnished rental, as we are not around all the time, and their charges are lower than they would be in the UK. So far we have not had any problems. They are quite strict in terms of who they are prepared to accept (ie guarantors, levels of income etc).

Regards

Pickles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
I have a tenant in a property who has defaulted on the rent for the past 5 months due to losing his job. He tells us that he is applying for social security but I have yet to see any documentation. Do you have any advice? What rights does he have if any as a tenant, and worse case scenario, how do I evict him?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The winter  period during which you cannot evict is coming to an end.

He may be able to claim 'allocation logement' from the CAF if he is unemployed, but they take into account the previous year's earnings not present income.

There are various steps which you have to take, but tenants are well-protected.

Clair has previously posted some useful links.

I am a bit pressed for time today, but if there are no further replies by  the weekend I will look something out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nibbles, you have my sympathy.

We went through a similar experience but for different reasons and we took time out to chat with a local Hussier for advice. In broad terms if the tenant gets difficult it can take up to another 3 months to get them out after the "winter period". The process would seem to involve several letters from a hussier and getting them involved with visits to the tenant much like bailifs in the UK but the tenant seems to hold all the cards. See if you can have a chat with your local Hussier, see yellow pages, ours did not charge for the advice !

Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Nibbles"]I have a tenant in a property who has defaulted on the rent for the past 5 months due to losing his job. He tells us that he is applying for social security but I have yet to see any documentation. Do you have any advice? What rights does he have if any as a tenant, and worse case scenario, how do I evict him?[/quote]

Eviction procedure at the end of the no-eviction period: HERE (translation).

Owner's recourse about unpaid rent (unfurnished property): HERE (translation).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="halfblind"]... the tenant seems to hold all the cards. [/quote]

It is a fact that rental law is heavily skewed in favour of the tenant.

Owners seem to be considered as rich capitalists who have no other aim but to extract as much rent as possible for as little outlay as they can get away with, in order to support their lavish lifestyle! On that basis, non-payment of the rent is almost justifiable!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incidentally there was an item on the news yesterday about landlords using illegal methods to get tenants out.

It was pointed out that there are hefty fines for doing this, or trying to evict without going through the legal process.

This link gives a pretty clear idea (in French)  of a series of steps to take. It is slightly different from Clair's

http://www.anil.org/profil/vous-etes-proprietaire/bailleur/impayes-de-loyer/vos-recours/

If you need help in understanding please ask

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Laurier"]

Clair

You and some of the others contributors must have an amazing reference/filing system to be able to pull up these links 'as and when'.  They are so useful on so many different subjects.

Thanks![/quote]

Many forum users contribute with their own experience and add to the general knowledge.

Some questions come back regularly, so it's fairly easy to answer them.

Knowing the language does help![:)]

On legal or admin questions, my first port of call is Service Public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="NormanH"]Incidentally there was an item on the news yesterday about landlords using illegal methods to get tenants out.

It was pointed out that there are hefty fines for doing this, or trying to evict without going through the legal process.

This link gives a pretty clear idea (in French)  of a series of steps to take. It is slightly different from Clair's

http://www.anil.org/profil/vous-etes-proprietaire/bailleur/impayes-de-loyer/vos-recours/[/quote]

The place where ANIL's help falls down is in the first line. If the tenant is acting in good faith, then all the argy-bargy can be avoided. If the tenant does not act in good faith, then your ONLY recourse is to use a very long, slow legal process that is very much biased towards the tenant. Meanwhile, the tenant can live in the property rent-free. They don't need the help of an attention-seeking local maire (who recognises that his action would not stand up in court) trying to extend locally the winter ban on evictions (as referred to in NH's previous post).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="NormanH"]Incidentally there was an item on the news yesterday about landlords using illegal methods to get tenants out.

It was pointed out that there are hefty fines for doing this, or trying to evict without going through the legal process.[/quote]

As a very-small-scale, part-time landlord I am amazed at what the Rachmans of the UK and France get away with.

If yopu are found guilty of harrassing a tenant in the UK - £20K fine plus possibility of prison

Failure to register a tenant's deposit with one of the 3 recognised deposit schemes - penalty of three times the deposit plus more ..

Failure to maintain gas safety certs etc - more fines

The situation in France is similar

Yet some people in the UK and France are RENTING badly-maintained wrecks. If I were that landlord I would have been arrested - why aren't they? How do they get away with it?

It's not a business model that I wish to emulate, for many reasons, but all the laws to prevent this state of affairs are in place in both countries - we don't need more restrictions. So how are the culprits evading the cosh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In many cases the tenants are either ignorant of their rights or too scared to complain. Their  'papers' might be a bit dodgy, or they don't want to attract attention to the fact they work on the black or have some other dubious source of income.

Or they just don't see an alternative, as the demands of agents in terms of guarantees become harder and harder to satisfy.

For example someone whose rent will be paid by the AL, but has only the RSA. cannot show that his income is 3 times the rent, as is often be damanded

Yet the landlord will normally be paid. That person is only to glad to take a sub-standard place.

There is a lot of fear, mutual distrust and 'dog eat dog'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...