Yes I agree this is a grey area and a sad situation for everyone concerned. The details are so various that I cannot begin to set out all the relevant points and therefore value peoples opinions are caveated. Ultimately they will move out, probably before the deadline but need to reserve their position in relation to the owner trying to charge them for works carried out once they leave.
Bearing in mind that the authorities are not aware of the situation, by design so as not to create a taxable position I suspect, the owner needs to tread carefully. A contract was requested on several occasions (the occupier was probably able to claim housing benefit but could not prove occupation) none was forthcoming.
My advice is that they do not make any direct commitments in terms of vacating or undertaking works in advance and suggest that the matter is referred to ANIL. If problems persist they will need to seek legal advice but I very much doubt that it will come to this.
Sorry not sure if everyone got this post so here it is again.
Yes I agree this is a grey area and a sad situation for everyone concerned. The details are so various that I cannot begin to set out all the relevant points and therefore value peoples opinions are caveated. Ultimately they will move out, probably before the deadline but need to reserve their position in relation to the owner trying to charge them for works carried out once they leave.
Bearing in mind that the authorities are not aware of the situation, by design so as not to create a taxable position I suspect, the owner needs to tread carefully. A contract was requested on several occasions (the occupier was probably able to claim housing benefit but could not prove occupation) none was forthcoming.
My advice is that they do not make any direct commitments in terms of vacating or undertaking works in advance and suggest that the matter is referred to ANIL. If problems persist they will need to seek legal advice but I very much doubt that it will come to this.
I would have thought that, in the absence of a contract, a tenancy would be implied, but that is only based on what I suspect an English court would decide. As we know French law seems to strongly favour the occupier. The issue of potential tax evasion is also not going to be viewed very well either I suppose.
Given that French law is very much on the side of the tenant, especially with children, they just need to stand their ground. The owner can huff and puff, but unless it is formalised by a registered letter or by a huissier it is meaningless in the eyes of the law.
Very interesting Jane. Thanks a lot for this. I am sure that this will shed some light on their position and I hope a mutually acceptable solution can be found.
Roly
My earlier point exactly⊠I believe the owner will come off worse in the end if he pushes this to the limits.
Whilst two wrongs donât make a right, I think the tenant has the upper hand if he plays it right.
I think a bail verbal is by nature very much open to interpretation and abuse, the tenants could easily simply stop paying anything and say that is the arrangement etc (and be squatters in fact, which would protect them).
