Rent reserve linked to rent decrease

Real Estate
1

Hello,

a few weeks ago we requested a rent reduction following the reference interest rate decrease in March. Initial contract details:

Net rent (excluding nebenkosten): 3415
Contract signed on 01.2024, moved in on 03.2024

Now we have received the proposed new rent from the owner/verwaltung applicable only from October (matching the termination notice):

Begründung der Mietzinsänderung
Referenzzinssatz von 1.750 % auf 1.500 % Fr. -99.45 ( -2.91 %); Teuerungsausgleich von 108.60 Pt. auf 109.90 Pt. (03.2025) Fr. 16.35 ( 0.48 %); Kostensteigerung von 06.2023 bis 05.2025 Fr. 32.75 ( 0.96 %);

Mietzinsvorbehalt gemäss Artikel 18 VMWG: Referenzzinssatz auf 1.750 % Fr. 102.45 ( 3.00 %); Teuerungsausgleich auf 108.60 Pt. (12.2023) Fr. -16.25 ( -0.48 %); Kostensteigerung bis 12.2023 Fr. -23.85 ( -0.71 %);

The rent decrease itself and update (first paragraph) seems OK except the Kostensteigerung should be updated from 12.2023, and not 06.2023. This seems a mistake I’ll ask the owner (who acts as the verwaltung too) to correct, because the contract was updated as of 12.2023 when it was signed on 01.24

However, what I don’t know how to interpret is the second paragraph (Mietzinsvorbehalt…). Anyone familiar of what this rent reserve means? I know of rent reserves when a contract is signed (I had this in the past in a different apartment), but not sure how this relates with the rent decrease. For reference, the current contract has no rent reserve at all.

Thanks for your support

2

No legal advice

The so-called rent reserve (as per Article 18 of the Swiss Ordinance on the Rent and Lease of Residential and Commercial Premises, VMWG) is a reservation that the landlord can explicitly include in the rental contract at the time of signing. It allows the landlord to make future rent adjustments based on changes in the reference interest rate, inflation, or cost increases that had already occurred before the contract was signed but were not yet reflected in the rent.

In your case:

  • If your current contract does not include such a rent reserve, the landlord generally cannot retroactively claim adjustments for periods before the contract started.
  • The second paragraph in the letter, which details the “Mietzinsvorbehalt,” appears to be a calculation showing what the rent would have been if such a reserve had existed. However, since you confirm that no such reserve is included in your contract, this section is not relevant to your current rent calculation and has no legal effect.
3

It might not be legal but I think landlord is basically saying that rent didn’t include full cost increases

It would be interesting to know what was the rent for previous tenant

4

As @logitacher mentioned, if these reserves are in the original contract, they are usually valid. If they suddenly come up then they are technically useless.

Had this happening before and Mietverband told me to just ignore that part as long as it’s not enforced. There would be no advantage or reason to fight that phrase if it is not in effect. In the meantime further changes have been made to the contract (lowering the rent) and they did not bring this up ever as counterargument. They probably know themselves that this has no legal basis.

That being said @Toni, if you wanna be sure, become member of the Mietverband and send them this contract to ask for their interpretation.

5

Previous tenant was paying roughly the same. When I took the apartment over (previous tenant cancelled with not enough notice), contract was updated for interest rate, inflation and costs. So the contract was “fully up-to-date” cost wise when I took it over. I know from this owner (I rented with him in a different apartment in the past) that he normally has rent reserve for something like lower-than-neighbourhood average rent, which he normally uses to prevent the tenant from requesting small changes due to interest rate change (as the decrease would be offset with the reserve).

1 Like
6

For me what is strange in the second paragraph is that it seems a “reverse” of the changes being applied now with my requested rent reduction (except for the cost part, which is properly calculated in the reserve, not in the actual rent change).