A Lörrach resident’s eviction due to alleged personal use by the landlord has sparked a debate over tenant rights and the justification for such actions, even as legal challenges mount in similar cases across Germany. The case, highlighted by FOCUS Online, underscores the limited recourse available to tenants facing eviction, even when the landlord’s claim is legally sound, unless extenuating circumstances – a “hardship case” – can be demonstrated.
According to Rolf Bosse, chairman of the Mieterverein zu Hamburg (Hamburg Tenants’ Association), a hardship case arises when an eviction would impose undue hardship on the tenant, their family, or another household member, a burden that isn’t justifiable even considering the landlord’s legitimate interests. “Many reasons can be considered,” Bosse stated, as reported by Berliner Zeitung.
These reasons can include health issues, disability, advanced age, or professional or educational difficulties that would be exacerbated by a move. Pregnancy and the potential for higher rental costs for a new residence also factor into the assessment. “Tenants should present everything they can to support their case,” advises Dennis Rehfeld, a lawyer with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Mietrecht und Immobilien im Deutschen Anwaltverein (Working Group for Tenancy and Property Law in the German Bar Association). A comprehensive weighing of the tenant’s and landlord’s interests takes place.
However, a successful hardship claim doesn’t automatically halt an eviction. Luisa Peitz of Eigentümerverband Haus & Grund Deutschland (House & Property Owners Association Germany) notes that some landlords voluntarily withdraw or postpone evictions upon recognizing the tenant’s difficult situation. “For a 90-year-old woman who has lived in her apartment for decades and is deeply rooted in her neighborhood, a move would undoubtedly be a hardship. Many landlords recognize this,” she said.
Disagreements over what constitutes a hardship are common. For example, a landlord might be skeptical of claims of psychological distress if they aren’t supported by current medical documentation. Such cases often end up in court.
Tenants facing eviction are encouraged to engage in direct communication with their landlords. “It’s better than simply objecting and waiting months for a court process,” Rehfeld suggests. “Perhaps a solution can be found to prevent or postpone the eviction, which is in the interest of both parties.”
Legally, tenants facing eviction due to personal use must respond within two months of receiving the notice, submitting a written objection. If a landlord initiates eviction proceedings, tenants can only challenge the eviction if they weren’t properly informed of their right to object, according to Bosse.
Hardship claims aren’t limited to evictions. They can also be invoked in cases of rent increases due to property improvements. Tenants have the right to object to such increases, arguing financial hardship, Rehfeld explains. However, strict deadlines apply: objections must be received by the landlord by the end of the month following notification, provided the landlord has informed the tenant of this right. Otherwise, the objection must be made before the start of construction. Whether financial difficulties alone will be accepted as a hardship remains uncertain, Bosse cautions.
While there isn’t a specific hardship provision for property defects like a broken heating system – landlords are legally obligated to address such issues promptly, especially during winter – a tenant’s individual circumstances can influence the response. Peitz notes that an elderly person living alone might receive an electric heater or temporary hotel accommodation more quickly than a younger person who works during the day. “The personal situation of the tenant plays an important role in determining the necessary measures, such as providing a replacement heater, hotel accommodation, or a rent reduction. Courts consider age, health, and how the apartment is used.”
If a landlord disputes the validity of a hardship claim, they can seek a judicial ruling, either as part of an eviction proceeding or a claim for payment of increased rent. “A decision is always made on a case-by-case basis,” Rehfeld states. “The court will weigh which interests prevail.” Even if unsuccessful, raising a hardship claim can buy a tenant valuable time to find alternative housing, he adds.
