The furnished lease for primary residence follows an autonomous regime within the law of July 6, 1989, articles 25-3 and following. The minimum duration, the mechanism for renewal, and the clauses deemed unwritten differ significantly from an unfurnished lease. Confusing the two regimes, or importing stipulations from the mobility lease or student lease, exposes the landlord to the nullity of entire clauses and the tenant to obligations without legal basis.
Clause deemed unwritten and abusive clause on a case-by-case basis: two distinct regimes in furnished leases
Article 4 of the law of July 6, 1989 lists the clauses that are directly prohibited. They are deemed unwritten by law, without the need for a judge to qualify them. The tenant can ignore them from the moment of signing.
A second mechanism has existed since the reform of contract law: Article 1171 of the Civil Code allows for the contestation of any clause creating a significant imbalance in a standard form contract. The standard furnished lease, unilaterally drafted by the landlord or their agent, falls into this category.
The operational difference is clear. For a clause listed in Article 4 (penalty for late rent, prohibition on hosting a third party, obligation to take out insurance with a designated insurer), the tenant has nothing to prove: the clause is null by the text.
For a clause not listed but potentially unbalanced (for example, a clause of solidarity extending beyond the actual departure of a roommate), it is necessary to bring the matter before a judge and demonstrate the imbalance. Distinguishing these two foundations before any dispute is necessary, as the burden of proof and the response time are not the same.
The Commission on abusive clauses publishes recommendations which, while not having the same binding force as a legal prohibition, serve as a reference for courts to assess the abusive nature of a stipulation. A furnished tenant who finds useful information on Crédit et Immobilier can identify the targeted clauses and invoke them before a mediator or a local judge.
Legal duration of the furnished lease: the three regimes not to be confused
The furnished lease for primary residence imposes a minimum duration of one year with tacit renewal. The renewal occurs under the same conditions, except for rent revision according to the IRL if an indexing clause is included in the contract.
The student lease deviates from this rule: its duration is set at nine months, with no tacit renewal. It expires at its term. Any clause providing for automatic renewal of a student lease is deemed unwritten.
The mobility lease covers a period of one to ten months, non-renewable and non-extendable. No security deposit can be required in this context. Including a security deposit clause in a mobility lease constitutes a direct violation of the text.
- Classic furnished lease: a minimum of one year, tacit renewal, security deposit capped at two months’ rent excluding charges.
- Student lease: nine months, no renewal, same security deposit rules as the classic lease.
- Mobility lease: one to ten months, neither renewable nor extendable, no security deposit allowed.
A common trap: the landlord drafts a mobility lease to circumvent the minimum duration of one year, while the tenant does not meet the eligibility conditions (professional training, higher education, temporary mission, voluntary commitment, transfer). If the tenant does not fall under any of these situations, the contract can be reclassified by the judge as a classic furnished lease of one year.
Most common prohibited clauses in furnished leases for primary residence
Some stipulations appear in a significant proportion of contracts, sometimes taken from outdated models or unsuitable for furnished leases.
- Penalty clause in case of late rent payment: Article 4 prohibits any automatic financial penalty for late payment. Reminder fees charged to the tenant are also prohibited.
- Clause imposing a single payment method (automatic debit): the tenant freely chooses their payment method. Only bank transfer or check can be suggested, never imposed.
- Clause limiting the right to host: the tenant can host relatives without the landlord’s agreement, as long as the accommodation remains their primary residence and decency rules are respected.
- Clause for automatic termination for neighborhood disturbances not established by a court decision: the termination of the lease can only result from a procedure respecting legal forms.
- Clause placing the burden of repairs on the tenant that fall under Article 606 of the Civil Code (major works, roofing, structure): these works are the landlord’s responsibility without any possible contractual exception.
The case of the security deposit and its return
The cap of two months’ rent excluding charges applies strictly. Any clause setting a higher amount is deemed unwritten. The return must occur within one month if the exit inventory is compliant, two months in case of discrepancies.
A clause conditioning the return of the deposit on the re-letting of the accommodation is illegal. Similarly, withholding amounts without itemized justifications constitutes a fault of the landlord, even if the lease provides for a flat-rate deduction.
Contesting an abusive clause in a furnished lease: the concrete approach
The tenant who identifies a prohibited clause does not need to wait for a dispute to act. A registered letter to the landlord citing Article 4 of the law of July 6, 1989 and the concerned clause is sufficient to formalize the contestation. If the clause falls under significant imbalance (Article 1171 of the Civil Code), contacting a justice mediator is free and constitutes an effective prerequisite before any legal proceedings.
Approved consumer associations can also take action to eliminate abusive clauses, including in lease models distributed by platforms or agency networks. This action benefits all tenants concerned by the same contractual model.
A well-drafted furnished lease fits into a few pages. Each additional clause that deviates from the legal framework represents a risk of nullity for the landlord and an unjustified burden for the tenant. Checking the contract clause by clause, distinguishing what falls under pure prohibition and what falls under imbalance appreciable by a judge, remains the best protection before handing over the keys.
