You own a two-room flat in the 20th arrondissement or a small house near Bergerac, bought before or after Brexit. The tenant pays on time, keeps the place decently, and has no intention of leaving. You do: you want to sell the property while prices are still attractive, or move into it yourself now that retirement or remote work makes France possible. A polite letter will not move a protected sitting tenant, and changing the locks would expose you to criminal prosecution and damages. French law offers two lawful exits, both contained in a single statute: the notice to sell (cong\u00e9 pour vendre<\/i>) and the notice to repossess (cong\u00e9 pour reprise<\/i>). Both look simple on paper and both collapse in court when landlords treat them as formalities. Two recent Paris-area appeal decisions, one annulling a sale notice for want of any genuine sale project and the other confirming the annulment of a second one for the same reason, show exactly where British owners fail. This guide follows the two routes in full, with the statutory text and the cases that decide them.<\/p>\n
The architecture is the same for both. The notice (cong\u00e9<\/i>) can only take effect at the end of the lease (\u00e9ch\u00e9ance<\/i>), it must state its reason on pain of nullity, and the tenant who stays past the date becomes an occupier without right or title whom only a judge can evict. The statute states the rule plainly: “Lorsque le bailleur donne cong\u00e9 \u00e0 son locataire, ce cong\u00e9 doit \u00eatre justifi\u00e9 soit par sa d\u00e9cision de reprendre ou de vendre le logement, soit par un motif l\u00e9gitime et s\u00e9rieux, notamment l’inex\u00e9cution par le locataire de l’une des obligations lui incombant.” (article 15-I of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>). For an unfurnished home the notice period is six months: “Le d\u00e9lai de pr\u00e9avis applicable au cong\u00e9 est de six mois lorsqu’il \u00e9mane du bailleur.” (article 15-I of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>). For a furnished letting the period is three months, and the letter must actually reach the tenant at least three months before the end of the lease; a plain email is void, while a registered letter, service by a commissaire de justice<\/i> (the enforcement officer formerly called huissier de justice<\/i>), or hand delivery against receipt all work. Serve from the United Kingdom through your officer or your lawyer, never by personal email, and diary the receipt date rather than the sending date.<\/p>\n The sale notice is a special object: it ends the lease and simultaneously offers the flat to the tenant. The statute imposes both contents together: “Lorsqu’il est fond\u00e9 sur la d\u00e9cision de vendre le logement, le cong\u00e9 doit, \u00e0 peine de nullit\u00e9, indiquer le prix et les conditions de la vente projet\u00e9e. Le cong\u00e9 vaut offre de vente au profit du locataire : l’offre est valable pendant les deux premiers mois du d\u00e9lai de pr\u00e9avis.” (article 15-II of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>). Name a real price and the real conditions: an inflated figure designed to frighten off any buyer is treated by the administration’s own guidance as the textbook example of a fraudulent notice, punishable and compensable as shown below. The tenant has the first two months of the notice period to accept. A tenant who accepts then has two months from sending the acceptance to complete the sale, extended to four months where the reply states that a loan is needed: “Le locataire qui accepte l’offre dispose, \u00e0 compter de la date d’envoi de sa r\u00e9ponse au bailleur, d’un d\u00e9lai de deux mois pour la r\u00e9alisation de l’acte de vente.” (article 15-II of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>). The lease is extended until the sale deadline expires; if the sale never completes, the acceptance is void as of right and the tenant loses all right of occupation: “A l’expiration du d\u00e9lai de pr\u00e9avis, le locataire qui n’a pas accept\u00e9 l’offre de vente est d\u00e9chu de plein droit de tout titre d’occupation sur le local.” (article 15-II of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>). Each tenant on the lease holds the right individually, a tenant-buyer pays no agency commission, and close relatives buying to live in the home for at least two years after the notice period fall outside the pre-emption machinery.<\/p>\n For a British seller this mechanism has a welcome side effect: the sitting tenant is your first, identified buyer, and a sale to the tenant avoids viewings, agency fees and vacancy. Instruct your notaire<\/i> (the French public officer who alone authenticates conveyances) early, give a power of attorney (procuration<\/i>) if you cannot travel, and make sure the price in the notice matches the price in the draft deed. If the tenant accepts and needs a mortgage, the four-month completion window runs while the lease continues, so keep collecting the rent until the deed is signed. Readers planning the tax side of the disposal, French capital gains, social charges and the treaty position of a United Kingdom resident seller, will find it in our guide to selling a French holiday home as a United Kingdom resident.<\/p>\n A tenant who refuses or ignores the offer must leave and return the keys by the end of the notice period at the latest, with no notice of their own to serve. If the tenant stays, the lease is over by operation of law and only a court order can remove the occupier: you summon the tenant before the juge des contentieux de la protection<\/i>, the protection litigation judge who alone hears residential eviction claims, since “Le juge des contentieux de la protection conna\u00eet des actions tendant \u00e0 l’expulsion des personnes qui occupent aux fins d’habitation des immeubles b\u00e2tis sans droit ni titre.” (article L213-4-3 of the Judicial Organisation Code<\/a>). Physical eviction then follows the ordinary buffers: no removal before two months after the order to vacate, extra delays from the enforcement judge, and no removal at all between 1 November and 31 March unless the occupants are rehoused. Our companion guide for British landlords facing unpaid rent details that enforcement phase step by step.<\/p>\n There is a third commercial option that needs no notice at all: selling the flat with the tenant in place. The administration confirms that an owner may sell an occupied home without informing the tenant or serving notice, and the lease simply transfers to the buyer on identical terms. The price reflects the occupation, usually below vacant value, and the buyer steps into your shoes until the next term, when he may serve his own sale or repossession notice. For a British seller who needs liquidity without litigation, a sale to an investor, often with the tenant’s cooperation for viewings, closes faster than any eviction. For a British buyer acquiring an occupied flat, the mirror caution<\/a> applies: read the current lease, its expiry date and the tenant’s age and resources before signing, because you buy both the rental income and the waiting period. Check the co-ownership minutes, the floor-area certificate and the technical surveys yourself rather than discovering them through a tenant’s later challenge, exactly the documents whose absence fed the annulments above.<\/p>\n Beware the second-offer trap, which catches sellers who adjust the price down after the tenant leaves. Where you decide to sell on better terms for the buyer than those in the notice, the notaire<\/i> must serve the new terms on the tenant, on pain of nullity of the sale itself: “Dans le cas o\u00f9 le propri\u00e9taire d\u00e9cide de vendre \u00e0 des conditions ou \u00e0 un prix plus avantageux pour l’acqu\u00e9reur, le notaire doit, lorsque le bailleur n’y a pas pr\u00e9alablement proc\u00e9d\u00e9, notifier au locataire ces conditions et prix \u00e0 peine de nullit\u00e9 de la vente.” (article 15-II of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>). That fresh offer lasts one month from receipt, and the five preceding paragraphs must be reproduced in every notification on pain of nullity. So a landlord who serves notice at 320,000 euros, finds no buyer, then agrees 285,000 euros with a third party without re-notifying the former tenant, sells a voidable title. Tell your notaire<\/i> about the earlier notice before signing anything, and keep proof of each notification and its receipt.<\/p>\n The repossession notice (cong\u00e9 pour reprise<\/i>) lets you take the home back to live in it yourself or to house a close relative, and the statute lists the permitted beneficiaries exhaustively: the landlord, the spouse, the civil-solidarity-pact partner at the date of the notice, a settled partner of at least one year, ascendants, descendants, and those of the spouse, partner or settled partner. The notice must state the reason and, for repossession, the name, address and family link of the beneficiary, on pain of nullity, and the landlord must show that the repossession decision is genuine and serious. Two warnings follow for British owners. First, the beneficiary must be a natural person named in the notice: if your French property is held through a family soci\u00e9t\u00e9 civile immobili\u00e8re<\/i> (SCI<\/a>, the non-trading property company British families often use), take advice before serving a repossession notice in the company’s name, because the named-beneficiary machinery is built for individuals. Our guide to the family SCI for British owners explains the holding structure; the exit notice is where that structure meets its limits. Second, prove the personal project with documents from the start: a landlord announcing his own return should be able to show the move, and one housing a child should show the child’s genuine need, because the judge may verify the reality of the reason on his own initiative. A British owner relocating from the United Kingdom should assemble relocation evidence early: shipping quotes, French school registrations, a French employment contract or proof of remote-work arrangements, and termination of the United Kingdom tenancy. The project must also be durable: a beneficiary who never moves in, leaves after a few weeks, or uses the flat as a holiday home hands the evicted tenant the fraud file described below, with annulment, damages and a criminal fine attached.<\/p>\n Some tenants cannot be dislodged at all without offering equivalent rehousing, whatever your project. The statute shields tenants over sixty-five with modest resources: “Le bailleur ne peut s’opposer au renouvellement du contrat en donnant cong\u00e9 dans les conditions d\u00e9finies au paragraphe I ci-dessus \u00e0 l’\u00e9gard de tout locataire \u00e2g\u00e9 de plus de soixante-cinq ans et dont les ressources annuelles sont inf\u00e9rieures \u00e0 un plafond de ressources en vigueur pour l’attribution des logements locatifs conventionn\u00e9s fix\u00e9 par arr\u00eat\u00e9 du ministre charg\u00e9 du logement, sans qu’un logement correspondant \u00e0 ses besoins et \u00e0 ses possibilit\u00e9s lui soit offert” (article 15-III of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>), within the rehousing area set by the 1948 Act to which the statute refers. The shield extends to a tenant supporting a dependent over sixty-five where the household stays under the ceiling, and a parallel shield protects recipients of the disabled-adult allowance. Ages are assessed at the lease expiry date and resources at the notice date. The resource ceilings are higher in Paris and neighbouring communes than elsewhere: for a single person the current table gives 26,920 euros in Paris and bordering towns against 23,403 euros in other regions, so a Paris tenant escapes the shield sooner, but the rehousing offer, matching needs and means within the statutory area, remains compulsory wherever the ceiling is met. The only asymmetric exit favours an older landlord: the shield does not apply where the landlord is himself a natural person over sixty-five or under the same resource ceiling. Check ages, household composition and the current ministerial table before serving anything on a long-standing tenant, because a notice served against a shielded tenant is dead on arrival and the lease renews.<\/p>\n This is where cases are won and lost, and the two appeal decisions every British landlord should read both turn on proof. The Paris Court of Appeal recalled the governing principle in a 11 January 2024 judgment (RG 21\/11157, full decision<\/a>): “En cas de contestation, le m\u00eame article dispose que le juge peut, m\u00eame d’office, v\u00e9rifier la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 du motif du cong\u00e9 et le respect des obligations pr\u00e9vues au pr\u00e9sent article.” (Paris Court of Appeal, 11 January 2024, RG 21\/11157<\/a>). The court added the classic formulation: “Si l’intention de vendre le bien lou\u00e9 constitue un motif p\u00e9remptoire de cong\u00e9 dispensant le bailleur de toute justification pr\u00e9alable de la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 d’un projet de vente, le locataire est toutefois fond\u00e9 \u00e0 contester l’intention r\u00e9elle et s\u00e9rieuse de vendre” (Paris Court of Appeal, 11 January 2024, RG 21\/11157<\/a>). In that case the landlords had served a sale notice for late June 2020 yet produced no sale mandate, no advertisements, no boards and no viewings, admitting as much; the excuse that an occupied property cannot be marketed was rejected because the lease itself required the tenant to allow two hours of viewings on working days. The court therefore annulled the notice, rejected the eviction and the occupation payments, and reclassified the sums due as ordinary rent. A British owner who serves notice and then waits for the tenant to leave before lifting a finger reproduces this exact fact pattern.<\/p>\n The Versailles Court of Appeal confirmed the same doctrine on 13 January 2026 (RG 24\/07884, full decision<\/a>), opening with a reminder that ownership is not absolute against tenancy statutes: “L’exercice du droit de propri\u00e9t\u00e9, pr\u00e9vu par les articles 544 du code civil, 17 de la Charte des Droits Fondamentaux de l’Union Europ\u00e9enne et 17 de la D\u00e9claration des droits de l’homme n’est pas absolu.” (Versailles Court of Appeal, 13 January 2026, RG 24\/07884<\/a>). The court restated that “L’intention de vendre le bien lou\u00e9 constitue un motif p\u00e9remptoire de cong\u00e9 dispensant le bailleur de toute justification pr\u00e9alable de la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 d’un projet de vente, toutefois le locataire est fond\u00e9 \u00e0 contester l’intention r\u00e9elle et s\u00e9rieuse de vendre.” (Versailles Court of Appeal, 13 January 2026, RG 24\/07884<\/a>), and that “le cong\u00e9 pour vendre doit correspondre \u00e0 une intention sinc\u00e8re du bailleur.” (Versailles Court of Appeal, 13 January 2026, RG 24\/07884<\/a>). There the landlady, aged seventy-six and living in the provinces, answered her tenant’s request for the co-ownership minutes, floor-area certificate and surveys with a bare invitation to contact her notaire<\/i>, whom the tenant then contacted in vain; no mandate, no notarial letter, no advertising and no viewing were ever produced, and age, distance, modest means and a medical certificate did not excuse the evidential void. The court confirmed the notice’s annulment for fraud and the lease’s continuation. Note the burden rule the court applied: “La charge de la preuve du caract\u00e8re frauduleux d’un cong\u00e9 pour vendre p\u00e8se sur le preneur.” (Versailles Court of Appeal, 13 January 2026, RG 24\/07884<\/a>). The tenant must evidence the sham, but judges assess fraud sovereignly and may rely on later events, so every inactive month after the notice feeds the tenant’s file.<\/p>\n The practical file for a British owner therefore writes itself. For a sale: sign a sale mandate with an agent or your notaire<\/i> before or immediately after the notice, publish advertisements, put up the board, organise viewings at the lease’s viewing hours, answer the tenant’s document requests, and keep every email and receipt. For repossession: keep the removal quotes, school enrolments, employment letters or medical certificates that make the move real, and ensure the named beneficiary actually moves in within a reasonable time and stays. The administration treats an excessive asking price as a badge of fraud, and the criminal sanction is explicit: “Le fait pour un bailleur de d\u00e9livrer un cong\u00e9 justifi\u00e9 frauduleusement par sa d\u00e9cision de reprendre ou de vendre le logement est puni d’une amende p\u00e9nale dont le montant ne peut \u00eatre sup\u00e9rieur \u00e0 6 000 \u20ac pour une personne physique et \u00e0 30 000 \u20ac pour une personne morale.” (article 15-V of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>). The tenant may join the criminal case as a civil party: “Le locataire est recevable dans sa constitution de partie civile et la demande de r\u00e9paration de son pr\u00e9judice.” (article 15-V of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>). Beyond the fine, a fraudulent notice is annulled, the lease continues, the eviction fails, and damages follow. Distance and age do not lower the bar, as Versailles expressly held.<\/p>\n A Paris and \u00cele-de-France note closes the loop, since the capital concentrates British-owned rentals. Serve the notice so it is received six months before expiry for an unfurnished Paris flat, three months for a furnished one, and litigate before the protection judge of the Paris tribunal judiciaire<\/i> or the relevant suburban court if the tenant stays. Apply the Paris resource column of the over-sixty-five table, currently 26,920 euros for a single person in Paris and bordering communes. Price a sale notice against genuine Paris comparables with your notaire<\/i>, because an optimistic price on a Paris studio reads as deterrence pricing. And remember the enforcement calendar after any judgment: two months after the order to vacate, possible extra delays, and no physical removal between 1 November and 31 March. An autumn notice served six months ahead lands its enforcement squarely inside the winter truce, so negotiate departure dates with that calendar open on the table.<\/p>\n A British landlord whose French tenant pays but will not leave holds two precise tools and no shortcuts. The sale notice ends the lease while offering the home to the tenant first, at a stated price, for two months, with a second offer through the notaire<\/i> if you later sell for less. The repossession notice takes the home back for yourself or named close family, with the beneficiary identified and the project documented. Both require service that actually reaches the tenant six or three months before expiry, both fail against shielded older tenants without a rehousing offer, and both collapse, with fines and damages, when the project behind them is hollow. The Paris and Versailles courts annulled notices where owners produced no mandate, no advertisement and no viewing, and distance or age excused nothing. Genuine price, genuine mandate, genuine move: assemble that file before the notice goes out, and the occupied flat ceases to be a trap.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Your French tenant pays but will not leave. This guide gives British landlords both exits: the sale notice with the tenant’s right of first refusal, and the repossession notice, with fraud traps from recent Paris courts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":16421,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kj_source_type":"","_kj_official_id":"","_kj_official_url":"","_kj_judilibre_id":"","_kj_jur":"","_kj_lieu":"","_kj_chambre":"","_kj_rg":"","_kj_date":"","activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","footnotes":""},"categories":[80312,80314],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2137617","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-british-desk","category-decryptage"],"yoast_head":"\nI. Selling an occupied flat: the sale notice and the tenant’s right of first refusal<\/h2>\n
A. A notice that doubles as a sale offer: price, time limits and the tenant as buyer<\/h3>\n
B. When the tenant declines, or when you later sell for less: losing occupation and the second offer<\/h3>\n
II. Taking the flat back to live in it or house family: the repossession notice and its fraud traps<\/h2>\n
A. Who can benefit, what the notice must say, and the tenants you cannot dislodge<\/h3>\n
B. Proving a genuine project from across the Channel: mandates, viewings and the price of a sham<\/h3>\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n