How to structure them so they actually protect you when payment incidents (or insolvency) happen
When a debtor stops paying, the practical question is rarely theoretical. You want to know what you can keep, what you must return, and how quickly you can enforce. In France, security deposits (for real estate leases) and guarantee cheques (often used for movable rentals) can be useful tools, but only if you understand their legal regime and their limits.
This guide focuses on what matters in practice: amounts, interest, restitution rules, set-off, evidence, and enforcement reflexes.
1. Commercial leases (“bail commercial“): the security deposit as a professional tool
1.1 Amounts commonly imposed in practice (and why they matter)
In commercial leases, it is standard for landlords to require a security deposit at signature. In practice, the deposit often corresponds to:
-
Three months’ rent when rent is payable in advance; or
-
Six months’ rent when rent is payable in arrears.
This is not a strict statutory scale, but it reflects market practice and a risk-management logic: the deposit is intended to protect the landlord against late payment, damage, or end-of-lease adjustments.
1.2 Interest: the hidden constraint of Article L. 145-40 of the Commercial Code
The key statutory point is the interest mechanism. Under Commercial Code Article L. 145-40, if the deposit exceeds an amount equivalent to more than two rent terms, the excess must bear interest for the tenant.
In other words, large deposits may create an interest cost. Many leases therefore remain within the commonly accepted levels, unless a specific risk justifies more.
Payment incidents demand fast, tactical decisions. Set-off, restitution and enforcement must be anticipated. Get litigation-ready guidance from a French debt expert.
1.3 Indexation during the lease: keep the deposit aligned with the rent
Even where the initial amount is acceptable, landlords often include an adjustment clause so that the deposit remains aligned with the rent after indexation or revision. The objective is simple: the deposit should not become “too small” over time if rent increases.
That said, any adjustment mechanism should be drafted cleanly. You do not want a debate later as to whether the tenant owes a “top-up” without a clear contractual trigger.
2. Restitution in commercial leases: the real-world practice and the legal pitfalls
2.1 In practice, the deposit is often not “returned” mid-life
Unlike residential leases, commercial leases frequently run into situations where the deposit is not physically refunded because:
-
the lease continues (renewal), and the landlord simply keeps the deposit; or
-
the tenant assigns the lease, and the incoming tenant reimburses the outgoing tenant directly (commercial practice).
This is commercially common, but it does not mean the deposit becomes legally irrelevant. The deposit remains a financial instrument whose legal “owner” and restitution debtor must be identified.
2.2 No statutory restitution deadline (today), but the contract must anticipate the endgame
In commercial leases, French law does not impose a general mandatory restitution deadline comparable to residential rules. As a result, the contract and end-of-lease documents are decisive: inventory, exit report, deductions, and evidence.
Landlords generally provide that restitution occurs after deductions for:
-
sums still owed (rent, service charges, taxes contractually due); and
-
costs justified by damage or reinstatement.
If you want the deposit to be retained in case of tenant default, you must say so explicitly and consistently with the overall remedies framework (termination clause, penalty clause, damages).
3. Insolvency and set-off: what happens to the deposit when one party collapses
In debt recovery, the deposit becomes strategically valuable when insolvency proceedings begin, because the question shifts from “who is right?” to “who gets paid, and how quickly?”.
3.1 Tenant insolvency: deposit vs landlord’s claim (a practical set-off reflex)
When the tenant enters insolvency proceedings, landlords often want to retain or apply the deposit against amounts due. Case law you cited illustrates a typical outcome: set-off can operate between the landlord’s claim (rent/charges) and the tenant-side claim for restitution of the deposit, depending on timing and conditions. (This is the practical reason why landlords treat the deposit as a “first shield” in default scenarios.)
3.2 Landlord insolvency: the tenant becomes a creditor and must declare the deposit
If the landlord becomes insolvent, the tenant will generally have to treat the deposit as a claim and declare it in the proceedings. This is not intuitive for many tenants, but it is operationally crucial: if you do not declare, you risk being treated like a late or absent creditor.
4. Sale of the premises: who owes the deposit back to the tenant?
This is a frequent trap. Parties often assume the deposit “follows the building” automatically. In practice, the situation is more delicate.
Your source material highlights a strong line: a clause in the sale deed about transferring the deposit is not automatically opposable to the tenant, because the tenant is not a party to the sale deed. The consequence, in many real situations, is that the tenant may still look to the original landlord for restitution, unless the legal and factual framework clearly shifts the obligation.
This is a classic area where debt recovery disputes arise years later, when corporate structures and ownership have changed. The safest approach is to document, at the time of sale, (i) what is transferred economically between seller and buyer, and (ii) what is opposable to the tenant.
5. Ongoing legislative changes: a reform proposal to know about
A new bill is currently in discussion that would reshape commercial-lease deposit practices by capping guarantee sums and clarifying restitution timing. Because legislative processes evolve, the prudent drafting posture is to write deposit clauses that remain workable even if a cap or mandatory deadline is enacted.
Security deposits only protect you if they are enforceable. Poor drafting turns leverage into litigation risk. Have your lease and guarantee clauses reviewed.
6. Residential and mixed leases (bail d’habitation / bail mixte): a different legal universe
Residential leases are primarily governed by the Law of 6 July 1989. The legal logic is more protective of tenants, and the deposit is not automatic: it must be expressly provided in the lease.
6.1 Amount cap: one month’s rent (principal only)
The deposit is capped (typically one month’s principal rent, excluding recoverable charges). This is a strict regime compared with commercial leases.
6.2 Restitution deadlines: legally framed (and financially punitive if missed)
For residential leases, the law imposes restitution deadlines (depending on whether the exit inventory matches the entry inventory). When the landlord is late, statutory consequences apply (including an increased amount calculated by reference to the rent).
The operational takeaway is simple: in residential recovery files, landlords must treat the deposit as a regulated instrument, not a free contractual reserve.
6.3 Deductions: the importance of proof
Even when deductions are legally possible (repairs, unpaid rent, charges), the landlord must be able to justify them. The most common litigation driver is not “whether damage exists”, but whether the landlord proved it correctly (entry/exit inventory, contradictory evidence, estimates).
7. Movable rentals: the “guarantee cheque” and why oppositions usually fail
Guarantee cheques are common in practice (vehicle rental, equipment hire, professional material). Parties often agree that the cheque should only be cashed if the customer breaches certain obligations. The problem is that the legal nature of a cheque does not always follow that commercial logic.
7.1 Opposition to payment: only in very limited statutory cases
Under Monetary and Financial Code Article L. 131-35, the drawer can oppose payment only in limited situations (loss/theft, certain insolvency events, or fraudulent use). This means that a customer who opposes payment “because it was a guarantee cheque” is often acting outside the permitted grounds.
7.2 A key line from case law: cashing a “guarantee cheque” is not automatically fraudulent
French case law has repeatedly treated the cheque as a payment instrument that can be presented, even if the parties described it as a “guarantee”, and even if a letter asked the beneficiary not to cash it. For example, the Cour de cassation has held that the right to payment by cheque cannot be subordinated to a condition; the beneficiary may present it, and the drawer’s remedy is typically a later restitution action if the cashing was unjustified.
7.3 The creditor’s tactical advantage: rapid lifting of opposition (référé)
Because opposition grounds are narrow, a creditor who holds the cheque can often seek a swift court order lifting the opposition (often via urgent proceedings). That speed is precisely why guarantee cheques remain attractive in certain rental sectors—although they are not risk-free.
7.4 The customer still has a remedy: restitution if the cashing was unjustified
If the cheque was cashed without contractual justification, the drawer can sue to recover the amount and potentially claim damages. The practical issue is procedural: this is rarely as fast as the creditor’s opposition-lifting route, and the burden of proof becomes a central battlefield.
8. Drafting and enforcement checklist (light, practical, and enforceable)
If you want these mechanisms to work in real recovery situations, you should adopt three discipline rules.
First, document the trigger.
For deposits, define precisely what can be deducted (unpaid rent, charges, reinstatement costs) and how it is evidenced (inventories, quotations, invoices, contradictory reports). For guarantee cheques, define what event authorises cashing and how you notify it.
Second, avoid ambiguity that creates a “proof war”.
A deposit clause that says “the landlord may retain the deposit in case of breach” without stating what counts as breach, what amounts are deductible, and what evidence is required is an invitation to litigation.
Third, align the clause with the applicable legal regime.
Commercial lease drafting should be consistent with Article L. 145-40 interest constraints. legifrance.gouv.fr
Residential drafting must track the 1989 law timetable and mandatory caps.
Guarantee cheque practices must respect the strict opposition grounds and the case law treating cheques as unconditional payment instruments.
If you are dealing with a commercial lease deposit dispute, a tenant insolvency, or a guarantee cheque opposition, we can review your documents and build a recovery strategy that is enforceable in France: formal notices, set-off analysis, evidence structuring, urgent proceedings when appropriate, and litigation if necessary.
