Contesting the Initial Rent of Your New Lease
Just moved in and find your rent high compared to what the previous tenant paid? In Switzerland, the law lets you contest it — even if it hasn't increased compared to before.
A very short deadline: 30 days from key handover
You have 30 days from the handover of keys to refer a request to the Conciliation Commission for leases and rents. A letter to the landlord isn't enough — the challenge must be formally filed with the authority. Past this deadline, the rent is considered accepted, even if it's actually completely unjustified: there's no legal limit like "no more than 10% above the previous tenant."
You can contest even without an apparent increase
The fact that your rent hasn't increased compared to the previous tenant doesn't prevent you from contesting it — but in that case, you'll need to prove it's abusive, generally through a return calculation.
The return calculation, your main tool
For any building purchased or built within the last 30 years, a return calculation is possible: it determines, from the building's actual acquisition price, the maximum rent the owner can legally charge (profit margin currently capped at 3.25% by the Federal Supreme Court). In most cases where this calculation applies, the rent turns out to be abusive, sometimes reduced by more than 50%.
No risk in contesting
- The procedure is free before cantonal authorities, and you never pay the landlord's legal fees.
- The rent can never be set higher by a judge than what was agreed in the contract.
- You're protected against a retaliatory termination during the entire proceedings and the 3 years that follow.
- There is no blacklist of tenants — this is an urban legend.
The set rent applies retroactively
If the challenge succeeds, the new rent applies retroactively to the lease start date, and any overpayment made in the meantime is refunded to you.
A special case: fixed-term leases
If your lease is for a fixed term, it's recommended to contest both the initial rent and the fixed term itself — the Federal Supreme Court has recognized that such a contract can constitute fraud of the law when it aims to prevent the tenant from asserting their rights.