You hand back the keys to your Paris flat, fly home to Manchester, and wait for the deposit to land in your British account. Instead you receive a one-page statement keeping 1,600 euros of a 1,900-euro deposit for cleaning and repainting, supported by a single estimate you never saw, and then silence. For British tenants in France after Brexit this scene is now routine, because the distance makes it tempting for landlords and agencies to test what you will accept, and because many Britons assume the English habit of a protected deposit scheme travels with them. It does not. France has no deposit protection scheme. Your protection is a statute, and it is a strong one where you use it properly.<\/p>\n
That statute is the Act of 6 July 1989, known in France as the loi du 6 juillet 1989, which governs nearly every residential letting, called a bail d’habitation, and its article 22 sets the whole machinery of the deposit, called the d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie: how much can be taken, how fast it must come back, what may be deducted, and the monthly penalty that punishes late repayment. Around it sit the Civil Code rules on the inventory of condition, called the \u00e9tat des lieux, the ban on abusive clauses, the free conciliation board in each d\u00e9partement, and a specialist housing judge, the juge des contentieux de la protection, who hears these disputes every week. This guide explains each piece with the exact legal texts, two court decisions that show how judges reason, and the three-step recovery path from the formal demand letter to the courtroom, including the traps that catch British tenants in particular: the forwarding address you forgot to leave, the direct debit clause your lease should never have contained, and the departure for Britain before the paperwork was finished.<\/p>\n
French law caps the deposit before anything else. The opening words of article 22 of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a> provide that “Lorsqu’un d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie est pr\u00e9vu par le contrat de location pour garantir l’ex\u00e9cution de ses obligations locatives par le locataire, il ne peut \u00eatre sup\u00e9rieur \u00e0 un mois de loyer en principal”, which means that for an ordinary unfurnished letting the deposit cannot exceed one month of rent excluding charges, however much the agency would prefer two. The amount must appear in the written lease itself, because article 3 of the same Act<\/a> lists among the compulsory contents of the contract “Le montant du d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie, si celui-ci est pr\u00e9vu”. No deposit at all may be demanded where the rent is payable in advance for more than two months. Where your lease nonetheless shows two months of deposit for an ordinary flat, the excess was never lawfully due.<\/p>\n The return clock starts when you hand the keys back, in person or by recorded delivery letter, to the landlord or their agent. Two deadlines then compete under article 22 of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>. The deposit “est restitu\u00e9 dans un d\u00e9lai maximal de deux mois \u00e0 compter de la remise en main propre, ou par lettre recommand\u00e9e avec demande d’avis de r\u00e9ception, des cl\u00e9s au bailleur ou \u00e0 son mandataire, d\u00e9duction faite, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, des sommes restant dues au bailleur et des sommes dont celui-ci pourrait \u00eatre tenu, aux lieu et place du locataire, sous r\u00e9serve qu’elles soient d\u00fbment justifi\u00e9es”, which is the general two-month rule with deductions only for sums that are properly documented. But the deadline shrinks to one month where the exit inventory matches the entry inventory: “Il est restitu\u00e9 dans un d\u00e9lai maximal d’un mois \u00e0 compter de la remise des cl\u00e9s par le locataire lorsque l’\u00e9tat des lieux de sortie est conforme \u00e0 l’\u00e9tat des lieux d’entr\u00e9e, d\u00e9duction faite, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, des sommes restant dues au bailleur et des sommes dont celui-ci pourrait \u00eatre tenu, en lieu et place du locataire, sous r\u00e9serve qu’elles soient d\u00fbment justifi\u00e9es”. In both cases the three words that decide most disputes are “d\u00fbment justifi\u00e9es”, properly documented, because a deduction without paperwork is a deduction the judge will cancel. At the key handover, give your new address in writing and keep proof that you did, for reasons explained below that matter enormously to Britons returning home.<\/p>\n Flats in blocks with shared charges, called charges de copropri\u00e9t\u00e9, follow a special timetable under article 22 of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a>. The landlord draws up a provisional statement and “peut, lorsqu’elle est d\u00fbment justifi\u00e9e, conserver une provision ne pouvant exc\u00e9der 20 % du montant du d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie jusqu’\u00e0 l’arr\u00eat\u00e9 annuel des comptes de l’immeuble”, and “La r\u00e9gularisation d\u00e9finitive et la restitution du solde, d\u00e9duction faite, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, des sommes restant dues au bailleur et des sommes dont celui-ci pourrait \u00eatre tenu en lieu et place du locataire, sont effectu\u00e9es dans le mois qui suit l’approbation d\u00e9finitive des comptes de l’immeuble”. The English version of the official service-public guidance confirms the same mechanics for British readers, including the yearly-accounts adjustment, on the service-public page on deposits in residential leases<\/a>. Two further points close the loopholes: “Le montant de ce d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie ne porte pas int\u00e9r\u00eat au b\u00e9n\u00e9fice du locataire”, so no interest accrues to you, and it “ne doit faire l’objet d’aucune r\u00e9vision durant l’ex\u00e9cution du contrat de location”, so the landlord cannot top it up when the rent rises. Where the building is sold with you still inside, the buyer inherits the deposit debt and cannot send you back to the seller for repayment.<\/p>\n Missed deadlines are punished automatically by a monthly surcharge. Article 22 of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a> provides that “A d\u00e9faut de restitution dans les d\u00e9lais pr\u00e9vus, le d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie restant d\u00fb au locataire est major\u00e9 d’une somme \u00e9gale \u00e0 10 % du loyer mensuel en principal, pour chaque p\u00e9riode mensuelle commenc\u00e9e en retard”, which is 10 per cent of the monthly rent excluding charges for every started month of delay, running without any need to prove loss. The official English guidance states the same penalty plainly. Take a concrete example: a rent of 1,400 euros with 900 euros of deposit still unpaid three started months after the two-month deadline means 420 euros of penalty on top of the 900 euros, and the meter keeps running. But there is one exception, and it is the trap that swallows British departures: “Cette majoration n’est pas due lorsque l’origine du d\u00e9faut de restitution dans les d\u00e9lais r\u00e9sulte de l’absence de transmission par le locataire de l’adresse de son nouveau domicile”. Leave France without giving a forwarding address and you hand the landlord a complete defence to the penalty, however late the repayment. Give the address at the key handover, in the handover report itself or by recorded letter the same day, and keep the proof for years.<\/p>\n Judges apply these texts weekly, and a recent decision shows the method. In a judgment of 6 May 2026 the tribunal judiciaire of Nantes ordered a landlord to pay a former tenant 257.12 euros as the unpaid balance of a 660-euro deposit, in case number 25\/04061, published at Tribunal judiciaire de Nantes, 6 May 2026, No 25\/04061<\/a>. The court opened by recalling that “Les conventions tiennent lieu de loi \u00e0 ceux qui les ont faites ; elles doivent \u00eatre ex\u00e9cut\u00e9es de bonne foi”, then quoted article 22 at length, including that “Le d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie est restitu\u00e9 dans un d\u00e9lai maximal de deux mois \u00e0 compter de la remise en main propre, ou par lettre recommand\u00e9e avec demande d’avis de r\u00e9ception, des cl\u00e9s au bailleur ou \u00e0 son mandataire, d\u00e9duction faite, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, des sommes restantes dues au bailleur et des sommes dont celui-ci pourrait \u00eatre tenu, aux lieu et place du locataire, sous r\u00e9serve qu’elles soient d\u00fbment justifi\u00e9es”, and that “A d\u00e9faut de restitution dans les d\u00e9lais pr\u00e9vus, le d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie restant d\u00fb au locataire est major\u00e9 d’une somme \u00e9gale \u00e0 10 % du loyer mensuel en principal, pour chaque p\u00e9riode mensuelle commenc\u00e9e en retard. Cette majoration n’est pas due lorsque l’origine du d\u00e9faut de restitution dans les d\u00e9lais r\u00e9sulte de l’absence de transmission par le locataire de l’adresse de son nouveau domicile”. The lesson for a British claimant is practical: arrive with the lease, both inventories, the key-handover proof, the forwarding-address proof and the landlord’s deduction statement, and the court can do the arithmetic in one hearing.<\/p>\n Every deduction dispute is decided by comparing two documents, and the Civil Code distributes the burden of proof between them. Where an inventory was drawn up at entry, article 1730 of the Civil Code<\/a> provides that “S’il a \u00e9t\u00e9 fait un \u00e9tat des lieux entre le bailleur et le preneur, celui-ci doit rendre la chose telle qu’il l’a re\u00e7ue, suivant cet \u00e9tat, except\u00e9 ce qui a p\u00e9ri ou a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9grad\u00e9 par v\u00e9tust\u00e9 ou force majeure”, so the tenant must return the flat as described at entry except for what age or force majeure has worn away. Where no inventory was drawn up at all, article 1731 of the Civil Code<\/a> reverses the presumption: “S’il n’a pas \u00e9t\u00e9 fait d’\u00e9tat des lieux, le preneur est pr\u00e9sum\u00e9 les avoir re\u00e7us en bon \u00e9tat de r\u00e9parations locatives, et doit les rendre tels, sauf la preuve contraire”. And during the tenancy article 1732 of the Civil Code<\/a> adds that “Il r\u00e9pond des d\u00e9gradations ou des pertes qui arrivent pendant sa jouissance, \u00e0 moins qu’il ne prouve qu’elles ont eu lieu sans sa faute”. Read together, the landlord who claims damage must show a difference between the two inventories and attribute it to you, while you defeat the claim by showing the difference comes from age, from a pre-existing defect noted at entry, or from nothing at all.<\/p>\n The Cour de cassation, the highest French civil court, confirmed in 2025 how seriously judges take a properly built exit file, including photographs. In Cass. 3rd Civil Chamber, 6 February 2025, No 23-21.193<\/a>, the parties had agreed, faced with the difficulty of describing the flat literally, to record its exit condition on the same document as the entry inventory by means of photographs, an agreement noted under the heading other observations and followed by both signatures. The Court approved the housing judge’s reasoning in these terms: “Le juge des contentieux de la protection a relev\u00e9 que les parties \u00e9taient convenues, d’un commun accord, compte tenu des difficult\u00e9s rencontr\u00e9es pour d\u00e9crire de fa\u00e7on litt\u00e9rale l’\u00e9tat du logement lors de l’\u00e9tablissement de l’\u00e9tat des lieux de sortie, de consigner cet \u00e9tat sur le m\u00eame document que celui dress\u00e9 lors de l’entr\u00e9e dans les lieux par la prise de photographies, cet accord \u00e9tant mentionn\u00e9 dans la rubrique \u00ab autres observations \u00bb de l’\u00e9tat des lieux de sortie suivie de leur signature”. Having thus established that the document was drawn up adversarially and amicably, so that calling in a judicial officer was not compulsory, the judge “a pu, appr\u00e9ciant souverainement la valeur et la port\u00e9e des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de preuve qui lui \u00e9taient soumis, en d\u00e9duire que ces photographies permettaient la comparaison de l’\u00e9tat du logement constat\u00e9 \u00e0 l’entr\u00e9e et \u00e0 la sortie des lieux et qu’elles prouvaient l’existence de d\u00e9gradations imputables au locataire lors de la restitution des lieux”. The ruling cuts both ways and that is why it matters to you: photographs taken together, dated, signed and attached to the inventory can prove damage against a tenant, but the same method in your hands, taken at entry and at exit with the landlord present, destroys inflated claims for rooms you left as you found them. Never sign an exit inventory you disagree with without writing your reservations on the document itself, and never accept an inventory conducted in your absence where you can attend or send a representative with written authority.<\/p>\n Against that evidential background, test each deduction on the landlord’s statement separately. Cleaning and repainting are the two classic battlegrounds. A full repaint charged after a five-year tenancy will rarely survive where the entry paint was old, because article 1730 of the Civil Code<\/a> expressly excepts “ce qui a p\u00e9ri ou a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9grad\u00e9 par v\u00e9tust\u00e9 ou force majeure”, and many leases now attach a wear-and-tear grid, called a grille de v\u00e9tust\u00e9, agreed at signature, which fixes the yearly depreciation of paint, carpet and fittings and leaves only abnormal damage to the tenant. Ask for the grid, check the flat’s age against it, and compare each room line by line with the entry inventory. Where the landlord produces only a one-line estimate prepared unilaterally long after your departure, remember that article 4 of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a> declares void, as if never written, any clause “Par laquelle le locataire s’engage par avance \u00e0 des remboursements sur la base d’une estimation faite unilat\u00e9ralement par le bailleur au titre des r\u00e9parations locatives”. The article opens with the general guillotine: “Est r\u00e9put\u00e9e non \u00e9crite toute clause”, followed by the list of forbidden terms. A clause is not the same as a deduction, and a judge assesses each file sovereignly, but a file built on comparison plus dated invoices will always beat a file built on a single estimate, and a tenant who demands the invoices, the entry inventory and the exit inventory in writing forces the landlord to show their hand before any court date.<\/p>\n Unpaid rent and service charges are the deductions most easily verified and therefore the hardest to contest where they are real, but they still require documents. The landlord may deduct genuine arrears of rent and the regularisation balance of recoverable charges, and in collective buildings may hold the 20 per cent provision described above until the yearly accounts are approved. What the landlord may not do is convert the deposit into a general damages fund: reletting fees, viewing costs and vague administration charges have no place in the article 22 list, and any clause that would authorise the landlord to collect fines or penalties for breaches of the lease terms is struck by the same article 4 that kills unilateral estimates. Keep every rent receipt, called a quittance de loyer, every charge statement and the final regularisation notice, because the tenant who can show a zero balance on rent and charges reduces the dispute to the condition of the flat, which is precisely the ground where the inventories decide.<\/p>\n Step one is a written formal demand, called a mise en demeure, sent by recorded delivery with proof of receipt or served by a commissaire de justice, which is the reformed title of the former huissier, the officer who serves court papers. Address it to the landlord and to the agency where one manages the flat, recall the key-handover date and the one- or two-month deadline that applied to your file, list each deduction you challenge with the inventory comparison that defeats it, demand the balance plus the 10 per cent monthly surcharge with your calculation, attach your bank details including the IBAN of your British or French account, and set a clear deadline of fifteen days. This letter is not a courtesy: it fixes the date from which the landlord is on notice, it frames the claim the conciliator and the judge will read first, and agencies that ignore tenants routinely pay within days once the same letter arrives with article numbers. Send a copy to your former guarantor where one exists, because guarantors who learn of the dispute sometimes pressure the agency harder than the tenant can.<\/p>\n Step two costs nothing and succeeds often: the d\u00e9partement conciliation board, called the commission d\u00e9partementale de conciliation. Article 20 of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a> creates it in each d\u00e9partement with equal numbers of landlord and tenant representatives, provides that “La commission rend un avis dans le d\u00e9lai de deux mois \u00e0 compter de sa saisine et s’efforce de concilier les parties”, and gives it jurisdiction over exactly your dispute, since its competence covers “Les litiges relatifs \u00e0 l’\u00e9tat des lieux, au d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie, aux charges locatives et aux r\u00e9parations”. Referral is by simple letter from either side, the hearing is informal, and the reasoned opinion that follows carries real weight: agencies that plan to keep deducting need to explain to a judge why they ignored a balanced board’s view. In Paris the board sits under the pr\u00e9fet, and its secretariat will tell you the filing address and the documents to attach, which are the lease, both inventories, the key-handover proof, the deduction statement and your demand letter. File the referral as soon as the deadline passes rather than after months of correspondence, because the two-month opinion period runs while the 10 per cent penalty accumulates.<\/p>\n Step three is the specialist housing judge. The article L213-4-4 of the Code of Judicial Organisation<\/a> provides that “Le juge des contentieux de la protection conna\u00eet des actions dont un contrat de louage d’immeubles \u00e0 usage d’habitation ou un contrat portant sur l’occupation d’un logement est l’objet, la cause ou l’occasion”, which makes this judge, sitting within the tribunal judiciaire, the natural forum for every deposit claim. Sue in the court of the place where the flat is situated, even where you now live in London, and act within the limitation period, because article 7-1 of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a> provides that “Toutes actions d\u00e9rivant d’un contrat de bail sont prescrites par trois ans \u00e0 compter du jour o\u00f9 le titulaire d’un droit a connu ou aurait d\u00fb conna\u00eetre les faits lui permettant d’exercer ce droit”. Three years sounds generous until the agency strings you along with promises, so diary the deadline from the key handover and file while the evidence is fresh. Claim the unpaid balance, the accumulated 10 per cent surcharge month by month, and the costs of the proceedings, and attach the full bundle the Nantes court expected: lease, both inventories with photographs, key-handover receipt, forwarding-address proof, demand letter, conciliation opinion and the landlord’s statement. Deposit claims of this size are routinely decided on the papers and exhibits in a single hearing.<\/p>\n Three frictions hit British tenants harder than French ones, and each has a legal answer. First, the forwarding address. The penalty exception quoted above exists precisely for tenants who vanish, and Britons who return to the United Kingdom at the end of an assignment are its classic victims: new address in Leeds on no document, landlord claiming the repayment letter came back unclaimed, penalty refused. The defence fails where you prove transmission, so write the new address into the exit inventory at the handover, repeat it in your demand letter, and keep the recorded-delivery slip. An address abroad is fully valid; the statute asks for transmission, not for a French address.<\/p>\n Second, the payment method. Leases presented to foreigners sometimes require rent by automatic direct debit on a French account or authorise deductions from wages, terms that many Britons accept to secure the flat. Both are void. Article 4 of the Act of 6 July 1989<\/a> declares unwritten any clause “Qui impose comme mode de paiement du loyer l’ordre de pr\u00e9l\u00e8vement automatique sur le compte courant du locataire ou la signature par avance de traites ou de billets \u00e0 ordre”, and the same guillotine covers wage deductions. Pay by standing order or transfer, keep the proof of each payment, and never believe that a void clause signed under pressure binds you. The related friction is the guarantee demanded at entry: agencies that refuse British bank statements or a United Kingdom-based guarantor often accept the guarantee schemes the market built for mobile tenants, and the position of guarantors, called cautions, and of insurers covering unpaid rent is explained in our companion guide for landlords at British landlords in France: guarantors, Garantie des Loyers Impay\u00e9s and recovering unpaid rent after Brexit<\/a>, which describes from the other side of the table what a solid guarantee file looks like.<\/p>\nB. Which deductions you can refuse: cleaning, repainting, wear and tear and missing paperwork<\/h3>\n
II. How to force repayment when your landlord will not pay after Brexit<\/h2>\n
A. From the formal demand to the housing judge: the three steps that recover deposits<\/h3>\n
B. The British traps in Paris and beyond: forwarding address, bank orders and leaving France<\/h3>\n