My landlord wants to repossess the unit — can I refuse?

Silence means refusal — the opposite of a rent increase

This is the most common confusion, and it is costly in both directions.

For a rent increase, not replying within the month counts as acceptance. For a repossession, not replying counts as refusal. The two notices look alike, arrive through the same door, and produce opposite effects.

Reply in writing anyway. Relying on silence works in theory, but a dated reply spares you from having to prove later what you did not do.

Who may repossess, and for whom

Repossession is not available for any purpose. The lessor must first be the owner of the dwelling. They may take it back to live in themselves, or to house their ascendants or descendants in the first degree, or any other relative or person connected by marriage of whom they are the main support. They may also take it back to house a spouse of whom they remain the main support after separation from bed and board, divorce or dissolution of a civil union (article 1957).

It must be a genuine intention to occupy, not a route to recovering the unit to relet it at a higher rent or sell it vacant. The Code goes further here than most tenants realise: a tenant may recover damages resulting from a repossession or eviction, whether or not they consented to it, unless the lessor proves it was made in good faith (article 1968). The burden sits with the landlord. If the tenant also shows bad faith, punitive damages may be added.

Check who actually owns the property. A repossession sought by someone who is not the owner, or by a company, raises an immediate difficulty.

What the notice must contain

A repossession notice must state the date it is to be exercised, the name of the beneficiary and, where applicable, their degree of relationship or connection to the lessor. An eviction notice must state the reason and the date. In both cases the notice must also reproduce the content of article 1959.1, the provision protecting long-standing older tenants (article 1961). A notice missing any of these is contestable on that ground alone — and omitting article 1959.1 is common.

Timing matters as much as content. For a fixed-term lease the notice must be received six months before the end; for a lease of six months or less the period drops to one month; for an indeterminate lease it is six months before the date of repossession (article 1960). Received late, it does not hold for that term.

Keep the envelope, the email or the delivery confirmation. The date of receipt is what starts your month to reply.

Repossession and eviction are different

Repossession is about living in the unit. Eviction is about subdividing it, enlarging it or changing its use. The conditions and the compensation differ.

The rules governing both have tightened in recent years, particularly as to the burden the landlord carries. A notice drafted from older templates may no longer comply.

Before replying, it is worth having the notice reviewed — that is often where the matter resolves.

A protection many tenants do not know about

The Civil Code prohibits repossession or eviction outright where the tenant or their spouse is, at the time, 65 or older, has occupied the unit for at least ten years, and has income at or below 125% of the maximum qualifying for low-rental housing (article 1959.1).

Exceptions exist, notably where the landlord meets those same conditions. But if all three apply to you, that is the first thing to check — before even examining whether the notice is valid.

Compensation

The two measures do not carry the same rights, and the gap is wide. On an eviction, the landlord must pay reasonable moving costs and an indemnity of one month's rent for each year of uninterrupted occupancy, with a floor of three months and a ceiling of 24 months of rent; a tenant who considers the harm greater may apply to the court to have a higher amount fixed (article 1965). On a repossession, the court authorising it may impose conditions it considers just, including payment of an indemnity equal to moving costs (article 1967).

Agreeing verbally to leave and then discussing the amount puts the tenant in the weakest possible position. The reverse order is better.