Court orders Amsterdam tenant to vacate late mother’s rental apartment

A subdistrict court in Amsterdam has ruled that a man must vacate his late mother's apartment in the capital's Nieuw-West district within one month, rejecting his claim to remain in the home as a tenant. The decision hinged on whether the son had established a "sustainable shared household" with his mother, as required under Dutch tenancy law. The court issued its ruling in the lawsuit on November 12, and published the verdict on Friday.

The man, who said he moved back into the four-room apartment in May 2021, argued that he had been living there with his mother for years, serving as her caregiver after her open-heart surgery. He stated that their arrangement provided him with "structure and stability." However, Rochdale, the housing corporation that owns the apartment, contended that he had no legal right to continue as the primary renter following his mother's death in Turkey in August 2023.

The son filed a petition under Article 7:268 of the Dutch Civil Code, claiming a right to succeed his mother as the main tenant of the 75-square-meter apartment. He argued that they had maintained a shared household and that he had no other primary residence. His legal team also asserted that his caregiving role was evidence of their interdependence.

Rochdale disputed his claims, presenting evidence that undermined the man's assertions. The corporation highlighted that the mother had died in Turkey, and the son had spent five months in that country around the time of her passing. The social housing corporation argued this suggested neither party primarily resided at the Nieuw-West apartment.

Court records also showed inconsistencies in the man's housing history. Before 2021, he was officially registered at various addresses in the Netherlands, including the apartment in question. Additionally, he had an active account on Woningnet, the Dutch social housing platform, and had applied for 51 alternative rental properties. His repeated attempts to secure housing using his Woningnet status demonstrated a lack of intent to establish a permanent household with his mother, Rochdale claimed.

However, the man submitted statements from neighbors and a community team worker who described him as "friendly and helpful" and a "long-term resident" of the apartment. A community worker also emphasized that the man has psychological issues, putting him in a more vulnerable position. However, the court dismissed these statements as insufficiently specific to prove a sustainable shared household.

Instead, the judge in the case gave further scrutiny to a 2019 agreement between the man and his mother, in which he agreed to pay 300 euros monthly for rent and utilities. The court interpreted this as a rental arrangement rather than a contribution to a shared household. There was no evidence that these payments were consistently made or that the son contributed in other ways to household expenses, the judge said.

The court ruled that the man failed to meet the legal criteria for continuing the tenancy. While it acknowledged his registration at the apartment since May 2021, it found no evidence of a long-term, shared household. The judge noted that continuing to live with a parent after having previously moved out is considered "sustainable" only in exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this case.

The court also dismissed the man’s request to void any agreements with Rochdale, stating that no such agreements existed.

The man was ordered to vacate the property within a month of the ruling, subject to the possibility of an appeal. Failure to comply with the court order will result in enforcement actions, including potential intervention by bailiffs, the judge ruled. The subdistrict court also ruled that the man is responsible for covering Rochdale’s legal fees, amounting to 408 euros.