Questions and answers on the changes to tenancy law
Published: Sunday, Nov 24th 2024, 05:40
Updated At: Sunday, Nov 24th 2024, 04:41
Retour au fil d'actualité
Today, Sunday, voters will decide on two changes to tenancy law that are being fought with a referendum. The amendments concern the subletting of apartments and terminations for personal use. Here is the most important information on the two proposals:
WHAT IS THE STARTING POINT FOR SUBLETTING?
Anyone who has rented an apartment or business premises may sublet them, for example during a stay abroad or to share the rental costs and thus save money. Landlords must be informed about subletting and can veto it if the main tenant sublets the premises at too high a price, if the landlord has to accept disadvantages - such as noise or overcrowding - or if the main tenant does not inform the landlord about the conditions of the sublet. The main tenant must also inform the landlord who is moving in as a subtenant.
The consent of the landlord must be obtained for rentals via online platforms. In addition, depending on the canton and municipality of residence, restrictions apply to rentals via platforms.
The search for a suitable apartment is often not easy because the supply is scarce in many places. If rental costs are also high, this primarily affects people with low incomes.
WHAT IS THE STARTING POINT FOR PERSONAL USE?
There are three cases in which the landlord can claim urgent personal use - for themselves or for close relatives. After purchasing a property, the new owner can terminate a tenancy agreement taken over from the previous owner prematurely with a longer notice period if they claim urgent personal use. In the event of a legal dispute with landlords, tenants are protected from so-called revenge terminations during the proceedings and for a certain period afterwards. However, termination is possible in the event of urgent personal use. Own use also plays a role in tenant evictions in cases of hardship.
WHAT SHOULD CHANGE IN THE SUBLET?
The requirements for subletting are to become stricter. Tenants will now have to submit a written application for subletting and landlords will have to agree to the subletting in writing. The landlord must also be notified of any change of subtenant. If the rules are not complied with, it should be possible to terminate the tenancy within at least thirty days after an unsuccessful written reminder. Furthermore, landlords should be able to refuse subletting for more than two years or refuse subletting for other reasons. The law leaves the door open to this.
WHAT SHOULD CHANGE IN TERMS OF PERSONAL USE?
The conditions for exceptional early termination due to "urgent" personal requirements are to be reformulated: The asserted personal use should now be "significant and current when assessed objectively". In future, courts would have to rely on this wording when assessing specific disputes.
WHO INITIATED THE CHANGES?
The amendments to the Code of Obligations were not drafted by the Federal Council, but by Parliament. The Federal Council originally felt that neither bill was necessary. The stricter provisions on subletting were initiated by former Zurich SVP National Councillor Hans Egloff, ex-President of the Homeowners' Association, and the new provisions on personal use were initiated by former Ticino FDP National Councillor Giovanni Merlini.
WHO SUPPORTS THE TEMPLATES?
Parliament passed both amendments to tenancy law in the 2023 autumn session. The Federal Council initially rejected them, but now represents the Yes position by law. The Yes camp includes the SVP, FDP and Center Party as well as the trade and homeowners' associations. The Yes camp has joined forces in the "Alliance for more living space". The GLP only supports the new rules for claiming personal use.
WHY NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBLETTING?
The Yes camp argues that the current requirements for subletting are often not complied with and that there are abuses. The housing shortage and the renting out of living space on platforms encourage abuses. Clear regulations and legal certainty are needed for subletting to protect tenants, subtenants and neighbors from noise and commotion in the building. In future, landlords should be able to prohibit overpriced and long-term subletting. However, landlords and tenants would still be able to agree subletting for longer than two years. The Yes Committee accuses the left of increasingly restricting and regulating private housing construction.
WHY THE CHANGE IN PERSONAL USE?
The new provisions on registering personal use are intended to ensure that rented rooms can be used by the owners themselves more quickly than is currently the case. The conditions for urgent personal use are often unclear. Proponents argue that this sometimes results in lengthy procedures. In the eyes of the proponents, the fact that landlords are still liable for damages incurred by tenants as a result of premature termination puts the impact on those affected into perspective. Tenant extensions also remain possible, and terminations due to personal use following a new rewriting can be contested as before.
WHO IS AGAINST THE TEMPLATES?
An alliance led by the Tenants' Association is fighting the two changes to tenancy law with a referendum. The No camp also includes the SP and the Greens as well as trade unions and associations representing pensioners and students. The GLP is only saying no to the stricter subletting regulations.
WHY NO FOR THE SUBLET?
The No camp sees both proposals as an attack on tenant protection and as "ejection proposals". Their only goal is higher yields. Unnecessary harassment and restrictions would be introduced for the tried and tested sublet. Tenant protection would be weakened because tenants could be terminated for minor violations in connection with subletting. The restrictions would affect hundreds of thousands of people, from students in shared apartments to senior citizens who wanted to sublet a room in an apartment they had outgrown. Abuses could be combated with the current rules. Regulations from the cantons and municipalities are needed to restrict platform rentals.
WHY NO FOR PERSONAL USE?
The No camp argues that personal use is already being used as an excuse to terminate tenants' leases and then re-let rooms for more money. With the new wording, tenants would be less well protected against extraordinary terminations due to the landlord's own requirements.
WHAT HAPPENS WITH TENANCY LAW?
Parliament is currently discussing further proposals for changes to tenancy law, so further debates are to be expected. The National Council's Legal Affairs Committee has passed two bills that raise the hurdles for tenants to defend themselves against initial rents. The National Council is expected to decide on the bills in the spring. These bills were also initiated by former SVP National Councillor and former homeowner president Hans Egloff.
WHAT DID THOSE KAMPAGNEN COST?
The proponents are spending a good CHF 1.7 million on the two tenancy law bills on subletting and termination for personal use, as evaluations by the Swiss Federal Audit Office (SFAO) show. Their "Alliance for more living space" is supported by the Homeowners' Association, the Master Builders' Association and the Swiss Real Estate Association, among others. The opposing side is investing CHF 750,000 - a good CHF 600,000 comes from the Tenants' Association and the rest from the SP.
WHAT COULD BE THE OUTCOME OF THE VOTE?
The two tenancy law proposals are on the brink. According to opinion polls, the "no" vote in both cases increased continuously during the referendum campaign, which is the exception in terms of opinion formation for government proposals. Many respondents described the new rules as unnecessary because sufficient restrictions already exist today.
©Keystone/SDA
French 
English 
German 
Spanish 
Arabic