You bought a flat in Lyon as an investment, or you moved back to Britain and kept your house in the Dordogne as a rental. The rent arrives every month \u2014 until it does not. One missed payment becomes three, your messages go unanswered, and you start wondering what an owner in your position is actually allowed to do. France answers that question with a procedure, not a reflex: no locks changed, no belongings on the pavement, no self-help of any kind. Everything passes through a commissaire de justice<\/i> \u2014 the enforcement officer formerly called the huissier de justice<\/i> \u2014 a judge, and a series of deadlines that run in weeks and months, not days. Since Brexit this machinery applies to you exactly as it applies to a French landlord: British owners letting homes in France play by French rules, in French courts, in the French language. This guide follows the order in which a British landlord meets the system. Part I deals with unpaid rent: the formal demand that starts the clock, the termination clause it triggers, and the payment delays and winter truce that can still slow you down. Part II deals with ending the lease and recovering the flat: the six-month notice to quit, and the court order and supervised enforcement that finally return the keys. Every French term is explained at first use, and every decisive proposition is tied to the official text or court decision it comes from. This guide covers unfurnished residential leases, the standard French rental; furnished lets follow a separate shorter regime outside its scope.<\/p>\nI. Your tenant has stopped paying: the recovery ladder before you recover the flat<\/h2>\n
A. The formal demand and the termination clause: the six-week letter that decides everything<\/h3>\n
French residential leases all contain the same loaded mechanism. As Article 24 of the Act of 6 July 1989 \u2014 the loi du 6 juillet 1989<\/i>, the statute governing residential tenancies \u2014 puts it: “Tout contrat de bail d’habitation contient une clause pr\u00e9voyant la r\u00e9siliation de plein droit du contrat de location pour d\u00e9faut de paiement du loyer ou des charges aux termes convenus ou pour non-versement du d\u00e9p\u00f4t de garantie. Cette clause ne produit effet que six semaines apr\u00e8s un commandement de payer demeur\u00e9 infructueux.” In plain terms, every lease contains a termination clause (clause r\u00e9solutoire<\/i>) for unpaid rent, charges or deposit, but that clause only takes effect six weeks after a formal demand to pay \u2014 the commandement de payer<\/i> \u2014 has gone unanswered. See Article 24 of the Act of 6 July 1989 on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. Nothing happens without that document, and everything afterwards depends on its validity.<\/p>\n The demand is served by a commissaire de justice<\/i> at your request, and the statute lists what it must contain on pain of nullity. It must state that the tenant has six weeks to pay: “La mention que le locataire dispose d’un d\u00e9lai de six semaines pour payer sa dette”. It must give the monthly amount of rent and charges, a breakdown of the debt, and a warning that failure to pay or to ask for time to pay exposes the tenant to court proceedings to terminate the lease and evict them. It must also tell the tenant they can apply to their departmental housing solidarity fund (fonds de solidarit\u00e9 pour le logement<\/i>) for financial help, and that they can ask a court at any time for a grace period under Article 1343-5 of the Civil Code. Miss one of these mentions and the whole demand can be annulled \u2014 which is why landlords who post an informal reminder letter, however firmly worded, have achieved nothing in law. If a guarantor (caution<\/i>) guarantees the lease, the demand must be served on the guarantor within fifteen days of service on the tenant, failing which the guarantor cannot be held to penalties or late interest. All of these compulsory mentions come from Article 24 of the Act of 6 July 1989 on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>.<\/p>\n Courts examine these demands closely, from both sides. The Court of Cassation has approved judges who verify that the tenant was genuinely able to understand exactly what was demanded of them \u2014 in one case it upheld findings that the addressee had been put in a position to grasp the orders sent to them, holding that “celui-ci avait pu prendre l’exacte mesure des injonctions qui lui avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 adress\u00e9es”. See Court of Cassation, 3rd civil chamber, 25 March 2021, No. 19-20.458<\/a>. The lesson for a British landlord is symmetrical: a sloppy demand collapses your case, while a tenant who claims confusion against a precise, itemised demand will struggle to be heard. Have the figures reconciled in euros, charges separated from rent, and payments allocated before the officer drafts the act.<\/p>\n Two parallel alarms go off once the demand is served. Where the tenant has been continuously in arrears for two months, or the rental debt equals twice the monthly rent excluding charges, demands issued for an individual landlord \u2014 or a family property company (soci\u00e9t\u00e9 civile<\/i> formed exclusively between relatives) \u2014 are reported by the enforcement officer to the departmental commission for the prevention of rental evictions, the commission de coordination des actions de pr\u00e9vention des expulsions locatives<\/i> (CCAPEX): the statute provides that such demands “sont signal\u00e9s par le commissaire de justice \u00e0 la commission de coordination des actions de pr\u00e9vention des expulsions locatives”. The State representative in the department then orders a social and financial assessment (diagnostic social et financier<\/i>) of the household. This is not your enemy; it is the system triaging the file, and a landlord who cooperates with the assessment moves faster than one who ignores it. The reporting duty itself is set by Article 24 of the Act of 6 July 1989 on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. If you let through a company that is not a family property vehicle, different preliminary steps apply: such corporate landlords cannot issue proceedings to record termination of the lease until two months after referral to the same commission, on pain of inadmissibility.<\/p>\n Before any court summons (assignation<\/i>) seeking termination can be issued, one more notification is compulsory. The summons must be notified by the enforcement officer to the State representative in the department at least six weeks before the hearing \u2014 “au moins six semaines avant l’audience” \u2014 so that a further social and financial assessment can be carried out and sent to the judge before the hearing, with the parties’ written observations attached where applicable. Miss this step and your claim is inadmissible. British landlords managing from the United Kingdom should absorb what this means in practice: every stage requires a local enforcement officer, documents in French, and a French address for service. Appointing a bilingual managing agent (gestionnaire<\/i>) or a lawyer before the first demand is served is not a luxury; it is how you avoid losing months to defective paperwork. The companion guide to letting your French property within the rules, paying French tax and registering correctly<\/a> covers the setup that should have preceded this dispute.<\/p>\n Even with a valid demand and a terminated lease, the judge hearing your case holds two powers that routinely surprise British owners accustomed to the swifter English possession procedure. The first is the general power to grant grace periods (d\u00e9lais de gr\u00e2ce<\/i>). Article 1343-5 of the Civil Code provides: “Le juge peut, compte tenu de la situation du d\u00e9biteur et en consid\u00e9ration des besoins du cr\u00e9ancier, reporter ou \u00e9chelonner, dans la limite de deux ann\u00e9es, le paiement des sommes dues.” The judge may therefore defer or spread payment of the sums due over up to two years, weighing the tenant’s situation against your needs as creditor. See Article 1343-5 of the Civil Code on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. During the period fixed by the judge, enforcement proceedings are suspended, and late-interest uplifts and penalties are not incurred. Any lease term to the contrary is deemed unwritten.<\/p>\n In rental disputes specifically, the judge can go further. Article 24(V) of the 1989 Act states: “Le juge peut, \u00e0 la demande du locataire, du bailleur ou d’office, \u00e0 la condition que le locataire soit en situation de r\u00e9gler sa dette locative et qu’il ait repris le versement int\u00e9gral du loyer courant avant la date de l’audience, accorder des d\u00e9lais de paiement dans la limite de trois ann\u00e9es”. Three conditions therefore decide whether your tenant buys up to three years: the tenant must be in a position to clear the rental debt, must have resumed paying the full current rent before the hearing date, and the judge must be persuaded \u2014 at a party’s request or on the court’s own motion. See Article 24 of the Act of 6 July 1989 on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. For the landlord, the practical consequence is sharp: if the tenant resumes paying the current rent before the hearing and shows a credible repayment capacity, opposing any payment schedule outright usually fails, and the smarter strategy is to negotiate a tight, court-approved schedule whose breach restarts your enforcement. If the tenant has paid nothing for months and offers nothing, ask the judge to record that the statutory conditions are not met.<\/p>\n Where the tenant has entered a consumer over-indebtedness procedure (surendettement<\/i>), the timetable bends further. If an over-indebtedness case is open and the tenant has resumed paying rent and charges by the hearing date, the judge who records that the termination clause has operated must align the payment periods with the over-indebtedness process: until approval of a recovery plan, the decision imposing measures, a judgment of personal recovery, or closure of the case. In other words, the debt proceedings pause inside the collective debt procedure. Landlords sometimes discover this only at the hearing; a prudent step before suing is therefore to invite the parties to disclose any over-indebtedness proceedings \u2014 indeed the statute directs the judge to invite production of everything relating to such a procedure. Ask your lawyer to check this point when the summons is prepared, not when the judge raises it.<\/p>\n The second brake is seasonal and automatic: the winter truce (tr\u00eave hivernale<\/i>). Article L. 412-6 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures provides that “il est sursis \u00e0 toute mesure d’expulsion non ex\u00e9cut\u00e9e \u00e0 la date du 1er novembre de chaque ann\u00e9e jusqu’au 31 mars de l’ann\u00e9e suivante, \u00e0 moins que le relogement des int\u00e9ress\u00e9s soit assur\u00e9 dans des conditions suffisantes respectant l’unit\u00e9 et les besoins de la famille.” No unexecuted eviction measure may therefore be carried out between 1 November and 31 March unless the occupants are rehoused in conditions that preserve the unity and needs of the family. See Article L. 412-6 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. The truce suspends enforcement; it does not cancel the debt, terminate the protection, or prevent the judge from ruling during winter. Note the narrow exception: the truce does not protect occupants who entered the premises by acquit of manoeuvres, threats or violence, and the judge can lift or reduce it where premises other than a dwelling were taken by such means.<\/p>\n Beyond winter, the judge who orders eviction can grant renewable stays (d\u00e9lais<\/i>) whenever the occupants cannot be rehoused in normal conditions: “Le juge peut accorder des d\u00e9lais renouvelables aux occupants de lieux habit\u00e9s ou de locaux \u00e0 usage professionnel, dont l’expulsion a \u00e9t\u00e9 ordonn\u00e9e judiciairement, chaque fois que le relogement des int\u00e9ress\u00e9s ne peut avoir lieu dans des conditions normales.” See Article L. 412-3 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. These stays last no less than one month and no more than one year: “La dur\u00e9e des d\u00e9lais pr\u00e9vus \u00e0 l’article L. 412-3 ne peut, en aucun cas, \u00eatre inf\u00e9rieure \u00e0 un mois ni sup\u00e9rieure \u00e0 un an.” In fixing them, the judge weighs the good or bad faith of the occupant, the respective situations of owner and occupier \u2014 age, health, family and financial circumstances \u2014 the steps the occupant has taken to find new housing, and the right to decent independent housing. See Article L. 412-4 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. A British landlord should read this list as a checklist in reverse: document the tenant’s bad faith (rent unpaid while means exist, refusal of social support, no rehousing applications), file evidence of your own situation (reliance on the rental income, health or age factors on your side), and oppose each renewal with fresh facts. Tenants, for their part, will find the tenant-side view of deposits, notices and defences in the guide to renting in France as a British tenant: lease, deposit and eviction<\/a>.<\/p>\n Termination for arrears is only one route. You may want the property back to live in it, to house a child studying in France, or to sell it empty. That route runs through the cong\u00e9<\/i> \u2014 the landlord’s notice to quit \u2014 governed by Article 15 of the 1989 Act, and its formal demands catch out foreign owners more than any other document in French rental law. The principle first: “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.” Every notice must therefore rest on one of three pillars: repossession (reprise<\/i>), sale (vente<\/i>), or a legitimate and serious ground such as the tenant’s breach. See Article 15 of the Act of 6 July 1989 on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>.<\/p>\n Form is everything. The notice must state the ground relied on, failing which it is void, and for repossession it must name the beneficiary with address and relationship: “A peine de nullit\u00e9, le cong\u00e9 donn\u00e9 par le bailleur doit indiquer le motif all\u00e9gu\u00e9 et, en cas de reprise, les nom et adresse du b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire de la reprise ainsi que la nature du lien existant entre le bailleur et le b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire de la reprise”. Only a closed circle can benefit: the landlord, spouse, civil partner (partenaire de PACS<\/i>), established cohabiting partner of at least one year, ascendants, descendants, or those of the spouse, partner or cohabiting partner. And the landlord must show the decision is genuine: “Lorsqu’il donne cong\u00e9 \u00e0 son locataire pour reprendre le logement, le bailleur justifie du caract\u00e8re r\u00e9el et s\u00e9rieux de sa d\u00e9cision de reprise.” The notice period running from the landlord is six months: “Le d\u00e9lai de pr\u00e9avis applicable au cong\u00e9 est de six mois lorsqu’il \u00e9mane du bailleur.” Serve it late and the lease simply continues; the six months must expire on or after the lease term. Each of these formal requirements is stated in Article 15 of the Act of 6 July 1989 on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>.<\/p>\n The courts test the ground, not the wording alone. The judge may verify of their own motion whether the ground is real and the statutory duties were honoured: “En cas de contestation, 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.” See Article 15 of the Act of 6 July 1989 on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. Two recent Court of Cassation rulings show how concrete this control is. In the first, the beneficiary of a repossession died before the notice took effect, and the landlord’s heir claimed the notice passed to him. The Court quashed the eviction, holding that “les conditions de la reprise du logement devant \u00eatre appr\u00e9ci\u00e9es en la personne de son b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire, le d\u00e9c\u00e8s de celui-ci, survenu avant la date d’expiration du d\u00e9lai de pr\u00e9avis, prive d’effet le cong\u00e9 aux fins de reprise” \u2014 the conditions of repossession being assessed in the person of the beneficiary, their death before expiry of the notice period deprives the notice of effect. It added, quashing the appeal ruling: “En statuant ainsi, alors qu’elle avait constat\u00e9 que la b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire de la reprise d\u00e9sign\u00e9e dans le cong\u00e9 \u00e9tait d\u00e9c\u00e9d\u00e9e avant la date d’effet de ce cong\u00e9, la cour d’appel a viol\u00e9 le texte susvis\u00e9.” See Court of Cassation, 3rd civil chamber, 16 April 2026, No. 24-13.191<\/a>. For a British family letting through generations, the warning is direct: a notice naming an elderly parent as beneficiary is fragile, and the heir cannot simply inherit the notice.<\/p>\n In the second ruling, a landlord nearing retirement, himself a tenant of his own home, gave notice to repossess one of his flats to cut his housing costs. The tenant argued the move was financially unnecessary. The Court approved the judges who had held that the genuineness of the landlord’s wish to repossess cannot turn on money alone \u2014 “la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 de la volont\u00e9 du bailleur de reprendre le bien lou\u00e9 ne saurait d\u00e9pendre uniquement de sa situation financi\u00e8re et patrimoniale” \u2014 and who had sovereignly found the intention real and serious as at the date of the notice, given the foreseeable fall in retirement income and the tenant’s own delaying tactics. See Court of Cassation, 3rd civil chamber, 3 July 2025, No. 24-11.504<\/a>. The date of assessment matters: your situation at the date of the notice is what counts, so build the file then \u2014 retirement letters, income projections, proof you actually moved in afterwards. A notice for sale (cong\u00e9 pour vendre<\/i>) adds its own trap: the sitting tenant has a statutory right of first refusal (droit de pr\u00e9emption<\/i>), and the notice must reproduce it. Owners who bought an occupied property face extra clocks: where the current lease ends less than three years after acquisition, notice to sell can only be given for the end of the first tacit renewal, and where it ends less than two years after acquisition, a repossession notice takes effect only two years after the acquisition date \u2014 “le cong\u00e9 pour reprise donn\u00e9 par le bailleur au terme du contrat de location en cours ne prend effet qu’\u00e0 l’expiration d’une dur\u00e9e de deux ans \u00e0 compter de la date d’acquisition.” See Article 15 of the Act of 6 July 1989 on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. British buyers of tenanted flats in Paris should diary these dates on the day of the acte de vente<\/i>.<\/p>\n One protection can block even a flawless notice: the elderly tenant. Where the tenant is over sixty-five with modest resources, or has such a person habitually living in the home with combined household resources below the ceiling, the landlord may not give notice without offering rehousing matching the tenant’s needs and means within a defined geographical area. Check your tenant’s age and resources before serving anything; discovering the protection after six months of procedure is an expensive education. Finally, remember that a notice founded on nothing real exposes you to damages: a tenant who proves the ground was a sham \u2014 no sale completed, no beneficiary moved in \u2014 can sue for compensation and, in some cases, reinstatement of the lease. Never serve a cong\u00e9 pour vendre<\/i> as a disguised eviction for arrears; use the arrears procedure in Part I, which is built for exactly that.<\/p>\n Assume the judge has recorded termination of the lease, ordered eviction, and fixed an occupation indemnity (indemnit\u00e9 d’occupation<\/i>) \u2014 the monthly sum the former tenant owes until departure, usually set at the former rent level. Many British landlords read the judgment as the end. In France it is the middle. Eviction of an occupied home “ne peut avoir lieu qu’\u00e0 l’expiration d’un d\u00e9lai de deux mois qui suit le commandement” \u2014 it cannot take place until two months after the order to vacate has been served: “Si l’expulsion porte sur un lieu habit\u00e9 par la personne expuls\u00e9e ou par tout occupant de son chef, elle ne peut avoir lieu qu’\u00e0 l’expiration d’un d\u00e9lai de deux mois qui suit le commandement”. See Article L. 412-1 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on L\u00e9gifrance<\/a>. The judge can reduce or remove this period only in defined cases, notably where rehousing steps failed through the tenant’s fault, or set it aside entirely on a finding of bad faith or forcible entry.<\/p>\nB. Time to pay, the judge’s grace periods and the winter truce: what can still slow you down<\/h3>\n
II. Ending the lease and recovering the flat: the notice to quit and the eviction order<\/h2>\n
A. Notice to quit to sell, to repossess or for a serious reason: the six-month letter that must be perfect<\/h3>\n
B. From the court order to the front door: the two-month commandement, enforcement and challenging each step<\/h3>\n