Sophos Hukuk Bürosu

Estate Agent Let Your Property Without Your Knowledge: Can an Owner Silent for 2 Years Claim the Rent Again?

Yazar: Yayın: Son güncelleme:

Attorney Hüseyin Aydın – Alanya

One of the complex disputes frequently encountered in real estate and tenancy law – particularly in regions such as Antalya and Alanya with a large foreign population and many investors – is the letting of a property to a third party by an estate agent or broker without an express power of attorney or written authorisation from the property owner. Serious legal disputes arise where the tenant pays the rent for years directly into the estate agent’s personal bank account, the agent fails to pass these amounts on to the owner, and the registered owner remains silent for a long time despite learning of the situation.

Citizens of countries such as Russia, Ukraine, Germany, the Netherlands, Kazakhstan and Norway who own property throughout Alanya (Mahmutlar, Oba, Kargıcak, Kestel, Konaklı, Avsallar, etc.) – foreign property owners (yabancı mülk sahipleri / иностранные владельцы недвижимости) – often hand over the keys of their flats to local estate agencies or property managers without granting a formal notarised power of attorney, because they live abroad for most of the year. Lettings carried out through unauthorised representation (unauthorized property rental without power of attorney / аренда без доверенности / Vermietung ohne Vollmacht) result in loss of rights for both the tenant and the owner.

Introduction and Scope of the Dispute: A Real-Life Example

To make the issue concrete, let us consider the following typical example that often occurs in practice:

Case Example: Owner A., who holds a title-deed-registered flat in Antalya, lives abroad and therefore verbally entrusts the property to an estate agent (Agent B.) for the purpose of “finding a tenant”. However, Owner A. does not give the agent a written authority of representation or a power of attorney drawn up before a notary. Agent B. lets the property to Tenant C. for 2 years. Tenant C. regularly pays the monthly rent of TRY 15,000 into Agent B.’s personal bank account for 24 months. Owner A. learns from neighbours that a tenant is living in the property, yet raises no objection for 2 years and remains silent, thinking “the agent is taking care of it anyway”. At the end of the 2 years, Owner A. says “I did not know, I never gave the agent a power of attorney”, demands from Tenant C. a second payment of the rent for the past 2 years totalling TRY 360,000, and asks the tenant to vacate the flat immediately.

The key legal questions to be answered in light of this case are as follows:

In this guide, all aspects of the dispute are examined within the framework of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (TBK), the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 (TMK), the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004 (İİK) and the settled case law of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay).

1. Letting by an Unauthorised Estate Agent and the Owner’s Implied Ratification: Is Silence Consent?

Under one of the fundamental principles of Turkish tenancy law, a lease agreement is an obligation-creating contract that gives rise to personal rights. The landlord does not necessarily have to be the owner (registered title holder) of the property. A lease concluded by a person who is not the owner is, as a rule, valid between the parties to the contract. However, if the intermediary (estate agent/broker) declares that he or she is acting in the name of or on behalf of the owner, a legally valid authority of representation is required; otherwise the transaction constitutes unauthorised representation.

Under Article 46 TBK, a transaction carried out by an unauthorised representative is provisionally ineffective (pending invalidity) and becomes binding only when the principal (the owner) ratifies it. In legal doctrine and in Court of Cassation practice, it is indisputably accepted that ratification may be given not only by express declaration but also by implied (tacit) conduct.

The Legal Nature of 2 Years of Silence in the Case Example

Although the owner learned that the property had been let to a third party and that the tenant was actually using the leased premises, the owner took no legal action for 2 years, sent no formal notice, and did not bring an action for prevention of interference or eviction. The owner thus in fact consented to the use of the property.

Decision of the Court of Cassation Assembly of Civil Chambers (E. 2017/1541, K. 2021/1516, T. 30.11.2021): The Assembly of Civil Chambers (HGK) expressly held that a contract concluded by an unauthorised representative is provisionally ineffective, but that where the principal, despite knowing of the situation, fails to object for a long time and remains silent, he or she has adopted the contract and is deemed to have given implied ratification to the unauthorised representative.

Likewise, recent decisions of the 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation consistently emphasise that where the owner, despite being aware of the letting, does not object within a reasonable time, a valid implied tenancy relationship is established between the parties and the person using the property “cannot be regarded as an unlawful occupier (fuzuli şagil)”. The Chamber’s decision dated 14.05.2026 also confirmed that a lease may be concluded tacitly and that, if this is proven, the use is based on a lease agreement.

Outcome in the Case Example: The fact that Owner A. remained silent for 2 years despite knowing of the situation legally means that he gave tacit approval (implied ratification) to the contract. Consequently, a valid tenancy relationship has been established between Owner A. and Tenant C. with retroactive effect.

2. The Owner’s Right to Claim Past Rent from the Tenant and the Prohibition of Double Collection

Under Article 313 TBK, the tenant is obliged to pay the rent. As a rule, the property owner may demand payment of the rent on the basis of the right of ownership. However, where the tenant has regularly paid the rent to the estate agent via bank transfer, this claim of the owner is restricted by law and by case law.

2.1. Performance in Good Faith and Extinction of the Debt: The Tenant’s Legitimate Reliance

The tenant received the property from the estate agent who held the keys and stated that he was acting on the owner’s behalf, and regularly paid the rent into the bank account designated by the agent. The tenant has a legitimate reliance, worthy of protection, that the debt has been performed.

In the case example, Tenant C. paid the TRY 15,000 rent every month in full into Agent B.’s IBAN account for 24 months and kept the bank receipts. The tenant can prove with concrete bank records that the rent debt was performed in good faith.

2.2. Settled Case Law of the 3rd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation

In decisions of the 3rd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (judgments dated 01.11.2018 and 14.03.2019), it is stated that where the existence of payments made by the tenant to the estate agent, and the fact that they relate to the relevant months, are established by bank records, those payments must be set off against the rent claimed by the owner, and it must be accepted that the tenant has paid the debt.

Court of Cassation 3rd Civil Chamber (E. 2025/5394, K. 2026/2396): In this precedent, the court emphasised that the tenant’s 18 months of payments into the agent’s account were established by bank records and that the owner’s claim “I did not know” could not be heard in the face of 2 years of silence; the rent claim brought by the owner against the tenant was accordingly dismissed.

2.3. The Principle of Good Faith and the Prohibition of Double Recovery (Article 2 TMK)

Where the owner has tacitly ratified the situation for 2 years, demanding a second time the amount the tenant paid to the agent in good faith is contrary to the principle of good faith under Article 2 TMK. Collecting from the tenant a second time for the same rental period violates the prohibition of double recovery and leads to unjust enrichment.

Outcome in the Case Example: Owner A. cannot claim the past rent of TRY 360,000 from Tenant C. If Tenant C. submits the bank receipts, any action brought will be dismissed under Article 313 TBK (performance) and Article 2 TMK (principle of good faith).

3. The Owner’s Civil and Criminal Remedies Against the Estate Agent

If the amounts paid by the tenant have not reached the owner, the proper counterparty is not the tenant but the estate agent who collected the money and did not pass it on to the owner.

A. Civil Liability: Improper Agency Without Authority (Article 530 TBK)

Under Article 530 TBK (Appropriation of Benefits), where a person, without having the power of disposal, interferes with another person’s legal sphere and obtains a benefit, the principal (the owner) is entitled to demand that this person transfer to him or her all the benefits obtained.

By letting the property and collecting the rent, the estate agent intruded into the sphere of the owner’s right of ownership and made a profit. Owner A. may bring an action directly against Agent B. under Article 530 TBK for the surrender of benefits arising from agency without authority and for unjust enrichment, demanding repayment of the TRY 360,000 collected together with statutory interest.

Decision of the Istanbul 5th Commercial Court of First Instance (T. 06.04.2026): In a similar dispute, the court ordered that the money collected be recovered from the estate agent together with interest, on the grounds that “since it is understood that the defendant collected the rent on behalf of the owner, these amounts must be returned to the owner”.

B. Criminal Liability: The Offence of Breach of Trust (Article 155 TCK)

The act of an estate agent collecting amounts arising from the letting on behalf of the owner, keeping them in his or her possession and using them for his or her own benefit instead of handing them over to the owner may constitute the offence of qualified breach of trust committed in the course of service under Article 155 of the Turkish Criminal Code No. 5237 (TCK) (see Court of Cassation 15th Criminal Chamber, 21.02.2017). The owner may file a complaint with the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office and request that a criminal investigation be opened.

4. Conditions and Legal Methods for Evicting the Tenant

Since the owner has become a party to the lease by tacit ratification, he or she cannot evict the tenant immediately and without grounds merely because there was initially no written power of attorney or because the 2-year term in the contract has expired (Article 347 TBK). The statutory grounds for eviction must be invoked:

4.1. Prior Notice and Eviction for Default (Article 315 TBK, Article 269 İİK)

Case Law of the 6th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (T. 19.09.2013): For an owner who has not signed the contract but has acquired the status of landlord through implied ratification to be able to seek eviction, he or she must first send the tenant a notice through a notary stating that he or she is the registered owner, warning that the estate agent has no authority to collect, and specifying the bank account (IBAN) into which future rent is to be paid.

Step 1 – Notarial Notice: The owner serves a formal notice on the tenant through a notary:

“Dear Tenant, I am the registered owner of the leased premises. Agent B. has not been given authority to collect payments. You must pay future rent into the account with IBAN TR… registered in my name. Do not make payments to the estate agent. If, from the date of service, you fail to pay the rent falling due into the account specified, legal action will be taken.”

Step 2 – Payment Order with Default Warning (Form No. 13): If, despite the notice, the tenant does not pay the rent due into the owner’s account, the owner, under Article 315 TBK and Article 269 İİK, sends through the enforcement office a Form No. 13 payment order with eviction warning granting a 30-day payment period. If no payment is made within 30 days, an eviction action is brought before the Enforcement Court (Article 269/a İİK) and an eviction order is obtained.

4.2. Eviction on the Ground of Two Justified Warnings (Article 352/2 TBK)

If, after the owner has notified the account, two separate justified written warnings have been served on the tenant within one lease year for failure to pay rent that has fallen due, an eviction action may be brought before the Civil Court of Peace (Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi) within 1 month of the end of the lease year.

4.3. Eviction on the Ground of Housing Need (Article 350/1 TBK)

If the owner genuinely and necessarily needs the property as a residence for himself or herself, his or her spouse, descendants, ascendants or other persons whom he or she is legally obliged to maintain, an eviction action on the ground of need may be brought before the Civil Court of Peace within 1 month of the end of the lease term.

4.4. Written Undertaking to Vacate (Article 352/1 TBK)

If the tenant has given a valid written undertaking to vacate on a date after the delivery of the leased property, eviction may be sought through enforcement proceedings or an action within 1 month of the date undertaken.

Assessing the Unlawful Occupier (Prevention of Interference) Route and Its Risks

The owner may consider rejecting the tenancy relationship entirely and bringing an action for prevention of interference under Article 683 TMK and for compensation for unlawful occupation (ecrimisil) under Article 995 TMK. However, since in the case example the owner is deemed to have given implied ratification by remaining silent for 2 years, the courts dismiss such actions on the grounds that “the defendant cannot be regarded as an unlawful occupier”. Choosing this route may lead to the dismissal of the action and to the claimant owner having to bear high litigation costs and the opposing party’s attorney fees.

5. Mandatory Mediation and Competent Courts

Mediation as a Precondition to Litigation: Under Article 18/B, added by Law No. 7445 to the Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, mediation is mandatory as a precondition to litigation in disputes arising from tenancy relationships concerning eviction, rent claims and rent determination. An application to the mediation office is procedurally required before an eviction action is filed with the Civil Court of Peace; otherwise the action is dismissed on procedural grounds (mediation is not required for Article 269 İİK proceedings before the Enforcement Court).

Distinction Between Competent Courts:

6. A Practical Roadmap for the Owner (Step-by-Step Strategy)

The legal roadmap the owner should follow in a case where the property was let by an unauthorised estate agent and the tenant paid the agent is summarised in the table below:

Step Type of Action Legal Basis and Procedure Aim and Result Practical Application
Step 1 Serving a Notarial Notice Case law of the Court of Cassation 6th Civil Chamber The tenant is informed that the sender is the registered owner, warned that the agent has no authority to collect, and given the new IBAN. The owner sends a notice through a notary: “Future rent must be paid not to the estate agent but into the account with IBAN TR… opened in my name.”
Step 2 Claim Against the Estate Agent Article 530 TBK (Agency Without Authority) The amount the tenant paid to the agent over the last 2 years is recovered from the agent together with statutory interest. The owner brings an action against Agent B. before the Civil/Commercial Court of First Instance for TRY 360,000 plus interest, relying on the tenant’s receipts as evidence.
Step 3 Enforcement / Eviction in Case of Non-Payment Article 315 TBK, Article 269 İİK If, despite the notice, the tenant does not pay the owner, a 30-day payment order with eviction warning (Form No. 13) is sent. If the tenant does not pay the new rent to the owner, an eviction order for default is obtained from the Enforcement Court after 30 days.
Step 4 Special Statutory Grounds for Eviction Article 350 TBK, Article 352 TBK If the tenant pays the rent regularly, eviction can be sought only on the grounds of need, two justified warnings or a valid undertaking to vacate. If the tenant does not fall behind with the rent, the owner brings an action before the Civil Court of Peace based on a genuine housing need (Article 350 TBK) or two justified warnings.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the lease valid if an estate agent lets the property without the owner’s knowledge?

Since a lease is an obligation-creating transaction giving rise to personal rights, the landlord does not have to be the owner. Where the estate agent acts in the owner’s name, the transaction initially constitutes unauthorised representation and is provisionally ineffective. However, if the owner learns that the property is being used and fails to object for a long period such as 2 years, he or she is deemed to have given implied ratification and the contract becomes valid between the owner and the tenant with retroactive effect.

Can the owner claim again from the tenant the rent the tenant paid to the estate agent?

No. The tenant received the property in good faith from the estate agent who held the keys and performed the debt by regularly paying the rent into the agent’s bank account. Given the owner’s 2 years of silence, demanding the same money from the tenant a second time is contrary to the principle of good faith under Article 2 TMK and violates the prohibition of double recovery. The owner should claim these amounts not from the tenant but from the estate agent who collected the money.

Can an unlawful occupation (fuzuli şagil) action be brought for a property let without the owner’s knowledge?

If the owner directly brings an action for prevention of interference (unlawful occupation), there is a high risk of dismissal. According to the settled case law of the Court of Cassation, since the owner’s long silence establishes an implied tenancy, the person using the leased premises cannot be regarded as an unlawful occupier. Eviction must be achieved only by invoking the statutory grounds for eviction under tenancy law (default, two justified warnings, genuine need or a written undertaking to vacate).

How can rent wrongfully collected by an estate agent be recovered, and in which court is the action brought?

Relying on the receipts for the tenant’s payments to the agent as evidence, the owner should bring a monetary claim against the estate agent under Article 530 TBK based on the provisions on improper agency without authority and unjust enrichment. Under the general rules, the competent court for this action is the Civil Court of First Instance (or the Commercial Court of First Instance if the matter is commercial in nature). In addition, a criminal complaint may be filed with the public prosecutor for the offence of breach of trust under Article 155 TCK.

Conclusion: Exercise Your Legal Rights in the Right Order

In lettings carried out by an estate agent without the owner’s knowledge, remaining silent for a long time legally results in implied ratification of the contract. Since the tenant’s proven payments via bank transfer count as valid performance, the owner cannot demand double payment; the money collected must be recovered directly from the estate agent through legal action under Article 530 TBK. The tenant’s eviction must be pursued not by alleging unlawful occupation, but by notifying a new account through a notary and then, in the event of non-payment, by default enforcement proceedings or the special statutory grounds for eviction.

For comprehensive analyses of tenant and landlord rights, you can read our articles landlord’s rights against a tenant who does not pay rent and tenant eviction and landlord protection guide.

This article has been written solely for general legal information purposes and does not constitute a specific referral or recommendation. To avoid any loss of rights in property law, unauthorised letting, eviction proceedings and unlawful occupation compensation disputes, and to have your specific dispute assessed, it is advisable to seek professional legal advice from a lawyer.

Legal Notice: This text has been prepared for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. sophoshukuk.com makes no referral, guarantee or promise of outcome. Each case must be assessed on its own particular circumstances; for your specific dispute, please obtain professional advice from a lawyer.

Related Search Terms and Legal Concepts: estate agent letting property without owner’s knowledge Alanya, letting by an unauthorised representative, letting without power of attorney and implied ratification, Court of Cassation decisions on implied ratification of leases, Article 530 TBK agency without authority estate agent, tenant eviction Form No. 13, notarial notice to tenant specifying bank account, unauthorized property rental Alanya Turkey, аренда недвижимости в Аланье без доверенности, Vermietung ohne Vollmacht Türkei.