Decorative repairs — who really pays

What are decorative repairs?

Defined in the "Annex to §28(4) II. BV": wallpapering, painting or whitewashing the walls and ceilings, painting the floors, radiators including heating pipes, interior doors, and the windows and exterior doors FROM THE INSIDE.

NOT included are: exterior painting, replacement of floor coverings, repairs to walls/ceilings (cracks, lintels), damage from normal wear (scratched door frames).

The Federal Court of Justice turnaround since 2015

In a series of judgments (in particular VIII ZR 185/14 of 18/03/2015), the Federal Court of Justice declared most old decorative-repair clauses invalid. Today the following applies:

• Was the flat handed over UNRENOVATED? → the decorative-repairs clause is INVALID, the tenant does NOT have to redecorate on moving out
• Was the flat handed over RENOVATED (fresh wallpaper/paint, photographed)? → the clause MAY be valid if it is worded correctly
• Clause with a FIXED schedule of intervals ("kitchen every 3 years, living areas every 5 years") → INVALID (German Federal Court of Justice case law)
• Clause with a "soft" schedule of intervals ("generally", "as a rule") → valid
• Clause with an OBLIGATION TO REDECORATE ON MOVING OUT without regard to the length of the tenancy → INVALID
• Pro-rata clauses (proportional cost-sharing according to the length of the tenancy) → usually INVALID

Practical consequence for landlords

If your tenancy contract contains an invalid clause:

• You CANNOT demand redecoration on moving out
• You must renovate the flat YOURSELF (or re-let it without renovation)
• You may NOT pass the costs on to the tenant or retain them from the deposit
• If you do anyway: the tenant can reclaim the money and, where there is harassment, possibly claim damages for distress

What you should do as a landlord IMMEDIATELY

• 1. Check the tenancy agreement: does it contain a "rigid" clause with fixed deadlines? → is INVALID
• 2. Apartment handed over UNRENOVATED? → Clause practically always INVALID, even if it is cleanly worded (Federal Court of Justice)
• 3. On re-letting: use a current, Federal Court of Justice-compliant clause (soft wording, RENOVATED handover, written handover documentation with photos)
• 4. On move-out: do not even attempt to enforce old clauses — litigation costs more than the renovation

When the tenant really must renovate

• A valid clause in the contract (rare!) AND
• The flat was handed over in a RENOVATED condition AND
• There IS a need for renovation (not just routine, but actual wear) AND
• The tenant has caused visible damage themselves (drill holes beyond the norm, coloured walls, wallpapering damage)

Tenant damage vs decorative repairs

Caution: what the tenant has caused through SCHÄDEN must be distinguished from the renovation question:

• A knocked-through wall, coloured walls (instead of white), broken sanitary fittings → ALWAYS to be made good by the tenant (damages under German Civil Code)
• Normal drill holes (pictures, lights) → not damage, do not have to be filled in
• Purple-painted walls → must be handed back in a neutral colour

Federal Court of Justice-compliant clause wording (example)

This clause is Federal Court of Justice-compliant — but only valid if the flat was handed over renovated + the renovated handover is properly documented.

How Rentprime helps you

Rentprime creates Tenancy agreements with a current Federal Court of Justice-compliant decorative-repair clause — with soft deadline wording. The handover protocol documents the renovation condition at move-in with photos + a checklist. This makes the clause valid in the event of a dispute — and saves you expensive legal battles when the tenant moves out.