French Landlord denies trusted housesitters

Owner Questions, Advice & Chat
1

We have had a wonderful experience as pet owners in France for the last year. Unfortunately, our French landlord has just reached out to say that he does not give permission for us to continue using the service ‘people you don’t know, for reasons of security’.

The words in our rental agreement state ‘Subletting. The tenant must occupy the accommodation for themselves, their family and the persons for whom they are responsible. Consequently, they may not assign their rights under this lease, nor sublet, or even lend, all or part of the leased property, without the prior written consent of the LESSOR.’

We believe / hope that as we are employing a service though trusted Housesitters that this is still permitable (it’s certainly not subletting).

Your advice gratefully received. This is only for 1-2 weeks at a time.

2

How would he feel about friends or family coming to look after your pets while you’re away?

Not sure of law but instinct says it’s up to him how he interprets that clause.

2 Likes
3

That is a strange interpretation. I don’t French law well so I couldn’t guide you on what to do, but I guess it comes down to how much you want to argue.

He sounds unreasonable, to be honest.

4

So what he’s saying is that you can’t have a paid pet sitter either so you can never take a holiday unless you put your pets into kennels/catteries, and you can’t have any other service provider, like plumber, decorator, cleaner, or whoever else in your property.

Sounds like a horrible landlord who doesn’t understand the restrictions they are now putting you under… there is a way around it though, reach out to those that have sat for you before, because they are NOT people you don’t know.

2 Likes
5

Not sure what you can do if your landlord says no. You could try to reason in the sense that they allowed you to have pets and you need to figure some way to have someone care for the pets when you leave. I think the model does skirt laws in a lot of ways as many leases in the US don’t allow “unsupervised” guests. Usually, this is not only because of insurance and liability but also fears that the guests won’t leave or that the person may be running an illegal Airbnb. So I would check with the landlord if they will consider for a limited time, with ID for the sitters, and clear transparency. What guests would the landlord consider acceptable?

The wording on the contract implies he could give you permission, so it has to come down to what would be acceptable? Copy of their documents? A refundable deposit and home inspection when you return?

6

In my view

Legally, your interpretation is reasonable, this is not subletting.
However, because the clause forbids lending without permission, the landlord technically can object.

“The tenant must occupy the accommodation for themselves, their family and the persons for whom they are responsible. Consequently, they may not assign their rights under this lease, nor sublet, or even lend, all or part of the leased property, without the prior written consent of the lessor.”

This clause reflects article 8 of the Loi du 6 juillet 1989, which forbids subletting or lending the property without the landlord’s written consent

The legal distinction

  • Subletting means receiving payment (even indirectly) from someone staying in your place — so your landlord is right that you cannot rent or “lend” the property commercially.

  • However, a pet sitter through Trusted Housesitters is not a subtenant:

    • They do not pay rent or receive any rights of occupancy.

    • They are there on your behalf, to care for pets and maintain the home.

    • It is comparable to having a friend to house-sit and not lending or subletting.

So, legally speaking, this is not a sublease (sous-location) and does not transfer tenancy rights.

The grey area

The potential problem lies in the phrase “nor even lend … all or part of the property.”
In strict legal terms, “lending” (prêter le logement) can mean allowing someone else to occupy the place even temporarily when you are absent, even without payment.
So, a very cautious landlord could interpret your 1–2 week absences with caring friend sitter as “lending.”

That said, the law’s intent is mainly to prevent unauthorised occupants or hidden subletting, not to forbid a brief stay by someone taking care of your pets in your home.

What you can do

To keep good relations and stay within your rights:

  1. Explain clearly that the sitter is not a guest or tenant, receives no rent, and is there on your behalf to ensure the property and animals are secure.

  2. Offer to share the sitter’s ID and insurance coverage (Trusted Housesitters provides both).

  3. Emphasize security: it’s safer to have someone in the home rather than leave it empty.

  4. Request written confirmation that they agree to this arrangement, or, if your landlord insist, that they confirm why they consider it “lending”

In practice

Most landlords will accept the above once you clarify that you engage with a temporary caretaker, not an occupant or guest, and that there’s no financial transaction.

I hope this helps. Good luck :+1:t2:

5 Likes
7

I wou;ld have thought that you should not have mentioned having anybody from Trusted Housesitters. May have been better to just say you have friends staying to look after your pets whilst on holiday. Surely that is not classed as sub letting?

………………………………

The tenant must occupy the accommodation for themselves, their family and the persons for whom they are responsible.

……………………………………………..

Surely under the lease, you could class them as family, or persons for whom you are responsible?

1 Like
8

As annoying as it is I think most tenancy agreements would have a clause that eliminates sitters. Probably best to say they are friends (someone suggested asking repeat sitters who count as this which is a great idea.) & see if that solves it. #smallprintirritations

9

I’m not sure I would even call this lending. It’s a carer for a pet first and foremost so I would speak directly to the landlord and enquire what the alternative would be when you travel on holiday. While an argument could be made that you’re lending to random strangers, I really think that misses the whole point…this is about ensuring we have care for our loved ones (HO perspective) and it’s great that HS benefit as well.

Personally, I would also start looking for a new home and when the next lease is signed, I’d make sure there’s a clear clause that accommodates for arrangements to be made when you are traveling. Even without a pet, it is safer for all involved to have someone occupying the property as opposed to leaving it vacant.

We had issues with our landlords even though we’re were transparent about the fact that we have a dog and when traveling would obviously secure a dog sitter.

We wrote an email and broke down why we would not be comfortable leaving the place vacant and clarified it would be abuse to do so with our dog in there, then outlined our vetting process, emphasised that this is a closed network of housesitters who do this on a membership-only platform, as well as the fact that this is about over literally everything else, ensuring the welfare of our dog. No one is profiting monetarily off this arrangement.

But yea, I would vote with my feet if it came to it and vacate the premises if this became an issue. We also add in every lease that if the dog goes, we go and are released from all contractual obligations because absolutely not.

2 Likes