District Court of Schöneberg, October 30, 2014, Case No.: 102 C 194/13
Moisture damage and the resulting mold formation are among the most common defects in rental properties.
Correspondingly, disputes frequently arise over whether the tenant or the landlord is responsible for the mold formation, often leading to legal proceedings.
If the mold is caused by water intrusion due to defective or inadequately insulated roofs or exterior walls, leaking pipes, or insufficient thermal insulation, the cause lies in the deficient building structure, which falls within the landlord’s responsibility.
However, if the mold is due to the tenant’s faulty heating and ventilation practices, the tenant cannot claim a rent reduction due to this defect.
In the case presented here, the District Court of Schöneberg had to decide whether the rent reduction for mold claimed by the tenant was justified and whether the mold formation was attributable to the tenant or the landlord.
Case Background
The defendants rented an apartment from the plaintiff starting on October 15, 2011. The rental agreement contained clear instructions on ventilating and heating the apartment to prevent mold formation. Among other things, it was recommended not to lower the room temperature below 17°C and to ventilate the apartment regularly. However, during the 2013 heating period, mold appeared in the apartment. The defendants subsequently reduced the rent by €165.60 per month between February and June 2013. The plaintiff sued for the withheld amount, totaling €828.00.
Defects and Rent Reduction
In December 2012, the plaintiff had already hired a heating company to repair a heating valve after the defendants complained of heating issues. A few weeks later, the defendants reported further heating failures via email and announced a rent reduction of 30%. During a property inspection by the administrator on January 25, 2013, with an outside temperature of -7°C, it was found that several rooms were not or insufficiently heated. Simultaneously, condensation covered window panes, and mold spots were discovered in the bedroom. The administrator attributed the defects to the defendants’ improper ventilation and heating practices.
Expert Report and Cause Analysis
The defendants subsequently commissioned a graduate engineer architect, who inspected the apartment on March 8, 2013. In his report, he noted mold in various areas of the apartment, including window seals, baseboards, and near the bathtub. He attributed the mold growth to inadequate insulation of the building and increased humidity in the apartment. Nevertheless, he confirmed that the surface temperatures of the walls ranged from 14°C to 22°C, and no damp wall surfaces were present. The expert stated that the exterior insulation of the building was responsible for the mold, as the exterior wall surfaces were colder than the interior walls.
Judgment of the District Court of Schöneberg
The District Court of Schöneberg ruled in favor of the plaintiff. It concluded that the rent was not reduced for the months from February to June 2013, despite the undisputed mold infestation in the apartment during this time. The court explained that the mold infestation was attributable to the defendants, as they had not heated and ventilated the apartment in accordance with the contractual requirements. According to established higher court rulings, a rent reduction under Section 536 of the German Civil Code (BGB) cannot be claimed if the defect is the tenant’s fault.
Burden of Proof and Responsibility of the Defendants
The court emphasized that in cases of mold infestation, the landlord bears the burden of proving that the defect resulted from the tenant’s responsibility. The plaintiff successfully provided this proof by demonstrating that the mold was due to the defendants’ improper heating and ventilation behavior. The defendants, on the other hand, could not prove that the mold was due to structural defects or other causes for which they were not responsible. Therefore, the mold infestation was solely attributable to the defendants, and the plaintiff was entitled to the outstanding rent payments.
Conclusion
The ruling highlights the importance of proper heating and ventilation behavior in rental apartments to prevent mold formation. Even if structural defects such as insufficient insulation play a role, tenants are obligated to follow the contractually stipulated measures to prevent mold. In this case, the defendants’ incorrect behavior led to their responsibility for the mold infestation and the resulting obligation to pay the withheld rent.
Source: District Court of Schöneberg
Important Note: The content of this article has been prepared to the best of our knowledge and belief. However, due to the complexity and constant evolution of the subject matter, we must exclude liability and warranty. Important Notice: The content of this article has been created to the best of our knowledge and understanding. However, due to the complexity and constant changes in the subject matter, we must exclude any liability and warranty.
If you need legal advice, feel free to call us at 0221 – 80187670 or email us at info@mth-partner.de.
Lawyers in Cologne provide advice and representation in tenancy law.