Evicting a squatter: the accelerated procedure (anti-squatting law)

Discovering strangers settled in your flat on returning from holiday, or learning that a property let between two leases has been broken into, puts the owner in an emergency where every hour counts. The spontaneous reaction, calling the police for an immediate eviction, quickly runs into contrasting answers depending on whether the premises are a home or not, and on the time elapsed since the intrusion. This guide focuses on the route that is often overlooked yet the quickest: the administrative procedure under Article 38 of the Law of 5 March 2007, which allows the prefect to have the premises cleared within a few days, without going through a judge. It distinguishes this express procedure from civil summary proceedings (référé) and from ordinary eviction of a tenant, sets out the steps to take in the first 48 hours, and contrasts the regime for squatting in a main residence with that for vacant premises.

Squatting, unpaid rent, unlawful occupation: not confusing the situations

In everyday language, the word squatter covers very different legal realities, and this confusion is costly because it leads to the wrong procedure.

A squatter, in the strict legal sense, is a person who enters and remains in a dwelling against the owner's will, with no right or title, by forcible entry (voie de fait: breaking in, climbing in, false keys). The squatter never had permission to occupy the premises. The situation falls under the offence of violation of a home (violation de domicile) provided for by Article 226-4 of the French Criminal Code.

A tenant who no longer pays rent, or an occupant who stays on after the end of a lease, is not a squatter. That person entered the premises lawfully. Eviction falls under the ordinary procedure for leases, with an order to pay (commandement de payer), termination of the lease, a summons before the protection litigation judge (juge des contentieux de la protection), a two-month period after an order to vacate the premises (commandement de quitter les lieux) and the application of the winter truce (trêve hivernale). This heavier route is not the subject of this guide. The steps of that procedure, from the formal notice to the referral to the court, are set out in our article on the complete procedure for evicting a tenant.

The distinction is decisive: the accelerated anti-squatting procedure is open only against genuine squatters, those who occupy without ever having had a title. Confusing a defaulting tenant with a squatter leads to rejection and a loss of precious time.

Home or vacant premises: the dividing line

A second distinction, equally structuring for what follows: is the occupied dwelling a home or simply vacant premises?

A home is the place where a person has the right to say they are at home, whether or not they live there permanently. Since Law No. 2020-1525 of 7 December 2020, known as the ASAP Act, the notion expressly covers the main residence as well as the second home. It therefore makes no difference whether the owner lives there all year round or whether it is a holiday house occupied a few weeks a year: both constitute a protected home.

Conversely, premises that are nobody's home, a vacant flat awaiting sale, an unused office building, a property acquired as an investment and never lived in, do not benefit from the same express mechanism. This difference governs the choice of procedure, as will be seen below.

The first 48 hours: acting quickly, the window of flagrante delicto

Time is the enemy of the owner whose property has been squatted. The longer the occupation lasts, the more complicated the procedural steps become. Three actions must be taken without delay.

File a complaint for violation of a home. The owner or the lawful tenant goes to the police station or gendarmerie and files a complaint on the basis of Article 226-4 of the French Criminal Code. This is the founding act that characterises the intrusion as a criminal matter and triggers the intervention of the law enforcement authorities.

Gather proof of the home. The authorities will require a demonstration that the premises are indeed the victim's home. Useful items are electricity or water bills, the local housing tax (taxe d'habitation) or the property tax (taxe foncière), tax notices showing the address, a home insurance policy, statements from neighbours, and earlier photographs showing personal belongings. For a second home, the same supporting documents are sufficient.

Have the occupation recorded by the law enforcement authorities. The intervention of a judicial police officer to record that the dwelling is unlawfully occupied is a key document in the administrative file that will follow.

Flagrante delicto and the question of 48 hours

A persistent received idea holds that after 48 hours of occupation, the squatter becomes untouchable and only a long court procedure remains possible. This belief rests on an outdated reading of the notion of flagrante delicto.

In the very first hours after the intrusion, the situation falls within flagrante delicto (flagrance) within the meaning of Articles 53 et seq. of the French Code of Criminal Procedure. The police may then arrest the occupants and remove them directly, without prior authorisation from the prefect or the judge. This is the most radical route, but it presupposes an almost immediate intervention.

It should nevertheless be known that violation of a home is now analysed as a continuing offence: the offence continues as long as the unlawful occupation lasts. This characterisation, consolidated by the anti-squatting law of 2023, makes it possible to rule out the argument that flagrante delicto lapses automatically after two days. In practical terms, the victim has an interest in acting as early as possible, but the passing of a few days does not close the door to a rapid intervention, in particular through the administrative route of Article 38.

The express administrative procedure: eviction by the prefect

This is the core of the mechanism, the one that allows eviction of the squat by the prefect within a few days, without ever applying to a court. It rests on Article 38 of Law No. 2007-290 of 5 March 2007 establishing the enforceable right to housing (droit au logement opposable), as amended by the ELAN Act of 23 November 2018 and then by the ASAP Act of 7 December 2020, which considerably shortened the time limits.

The conditions

To apply to the prefect, four conditions must be met:

• the occupied property is the victim's home, main or second residence
• the entry was made by forcible entry, that is, unlawfully and against the owner's will
• a complaint for violation of a home has been filed
• the unlawful occupation has been recorded by a judicial police officer

The applicant may be the owner, but also the tenant under the lease, a family member, or any person acting in the owner's interest. A child who discovers that the home of elderly parents has been occupied during their hospital stay can thus start the process.

The process, step by step

Once the file has been put together, the victim asks the prefect to give the occupants formal notice to leave the premises. The ASAP Act requires the prefect to rule within 48 hours of receipt of the request. It is this time limit that has given the procedure its reputation as an express eviction.

The prefect may refuse to give formal notice only for an overriding reason of general interest, an exception to be interpreted strictly. If the prefect grants the request, formal notice to leave the premises is served on the occupants, with a period that cannot be less than 24 hours. The decision is published by posting at the town hall and on the premises.

When this period expires, if the occupants have not left, the prefect proceeds to forced eviction with the assistance of the police. No court decision is needed, no bailiff instructed by the owner, no order to vacate the premises. It is the administration that carries it out.

A decisive advantage: neither winter truce nor two-month period

The Article 38 procedure escapes the protections that slow down ordinary eviction of tenants. The winter truce, the period from 1 November to 31 March during which evictions are in principle suspended, does not apply to persons who entered the home by forcible entry. Likewise, the two-month period following an order to vacate the premises, specific to the court procedure, is irrelevant here. The course of that stage of court enforcement is set out in our article on the timetable of the order to vacate the premises after the eviction judgment.

A couple whose home is squatted in the middle of December can therefore obtain the removal of the occupants without waiting for spring, provided they show that the premises are indeed their home.

Squatting in a main residence or vacant premises: two clearly distinct regimes

The effectiveness of the administrative procedure lies precisely in its central condition: the property must be a home. This requirement draws a clear line with the other situations of unlawful occupation.

Squatting in a main or second residence

The squatter of a main residence, like the squatter of a second home since 2020, falls fully within Article 38. This is the typical case that the legislature wanted to deal with firmly: the family that returns from holiday and finds its home occupied, the retired person whose country house was taken over during the winter. Here, the express prefectoral route is open and is the first step to favour.

Vacant premises, an office building, an unoccupied dwelling

Where the occupied property is nobody's home, the Article 38 procedure does not apply. A flat bought as an investment and never lived in, an empty dwelling between two sales, commercial premises or disused offices are not homes within the meaning of the text.

In these cases, the owner must take the court route: apply to the judge, in principle by summary proceedings (référé) before the judicial court (tribunal judiciaire), to obtain an eviction order, and then have that decision enforced by a bailiff (commissaire de justice) with the assistance of the police. The procedure remains longer and more formal than eviction by the prefect. On the choice of judge and the preparation of the summons, see our analysis of summary eviction proceedings against an occupant without right or title.

This asymmetry explains why the characterisation of the property is the first point to settle. A property investor whose vacant studio is squatted cannot rely on Article 38 and will have to go through the judge, whereas the same studio, if it were a second home, would have opened the express route.

The anti-squatting law of 27 July 2023: what has changed

Law No. 2023-668 of 27 July 2023 aimed at protecting homes against unlawful occupation hardened the repressive arsenal and clarified several procedural points. It deserves a careful reading because it changed the balance in favour of owners.

The main contribution lies in the strengthening of criminal penalties. The offence of violation of a home under Article 226-4 of the French Criminal Code is now punishable by three years' imprisonment and a fine of €45,000, as against one year and €15,000 previously. The law also created new offences punishing the fraudulent occupation of premises, including for business use, and remaining on the premises after an eviction decision.

The law also consolidated the idea that squatting is a continuing infringement, which facilitates intervention by the law enforcement authorities beyond the first hours. It has also regulated the liability of the owner whose squatted dwelling is in poor condition: previously, an owner could be held liable for a lack of maintenance that caused harm to the unlawful occupant, a situation that the legislature wished to neutralise.

It should be noted that the Constitutional Council (Conseil constitutionnel), to which the text was referred, struck down certain provisions held to be contrary to the Constitution, notably those that extended repression excessively to good-faith occupants or to former tenants. Prudence therefore requires checking the exact scope of the articles before relying on them.

Common errors and reflexes to avoid

The temptation to take the law into one's own hands is strong when one discovers one's home occupied. It is legally dangerous.

Changing the locks while the occupants are away, cutting off water or electricity, or forcing entry into the dwelling exposes the owner to prosecution. Paradoxical as it may seem, the squatter enjoys protection until removed by lawful means, and an owner who evicts by their own means may be prosecuted. Forcible entry is not fought by another forcible entry.

In the same way, neglecting to build the evidence file ruins the chances of success. Without solid proof that the premises are a home, the prefect may refuse the formal notice, and the owner finds themselves sent back to the slow court procedure. Gathering the supporting documents in the first hours is therefore decisive.

Finally, waiting in the hope of a spontaneous departure is the worst strategy. The more the occupation becomes established, the more the occupants organise their presence and the weaker the demonstration of urgency becomes.

Conclusion

Faced with a squat, the hierarchy of reflexes is clear. In the very first hours, flagrante delicto allows direct intervention by the law enforcement authorities. After that, provided the property is a home, main or second residence, the administrative procedure under Article 38 of the Law of 5 March 2007 offers the quickest route: a decision by the prefect within 48 hours, a formal notice, then forced eviction without a judge, without the winter truce and without a two-month period. This procedure, too often ignored in favour of summary proceedings alone, should be the first reflex of the owner of a squatted home.

The dividing line remains the characterisation of the property. A home opens the express prefectoral route; vacant premises that are nobody's home require a detour through the judge. Confusing the two wastes time that urgency does not forgive.

The practical advice is simple: as soon as you discover the occupation, file a complaint, gather without delay all the proof of the home, have the occupation recorded by a judicial police officer, and apply to the prefect. Before any change of locks or any personal intervention, have the situation characterised by a lawyer, because a hasty reaction can turn the procedure against you.

Frequently asked questions

Does the anti-squatting procedure apply to a second home? Yes. Since the ASAP Act of 7 December 2020, the notion of home protected by Article 38 of the Law of 5 March 2007 expressly covers the main residence and the second home. A holiday house occupied a few weeks a year is therefore a home entitling the owner to express eviction by the prefect, provided proof is given by supporting documents (bills, property tax, home insurance).

Can a squatter still be evicted after 48 hours of occupation? Yes. The idea that after 48 hours the squatter becomes untouchable is mistaken. In the first hours, the intervention falls under flagrante delicto. Beyond that, violation of a home is analysed as a continuing offence, and the administrative procedure under Article 38 remains open as long as the property is a home. The 48-hour period that really matters is the one imposed on the prefect to rule, not a supposed lapse of flagrante delicto.

What is the difference between eviction by the prefect and summary proceedings before the judge? Eviction by the prefect under Article 38 concerns only squatters of a home and allows removal within a few days, without a judge, without the winter truce or the two-month period. Summary proceedings before the judicial court are necessary for vacant premises that are nobody's home, or where the conditions of the administrative procedure are not met. They result in an eviction order that is then enforced by a bailiff (commissaire de justice).

Does the winter truce protect squatters? No. The winter truce, which in principle suspends evictions from 1 November to 31 March, does not apply to persons who entered a home by forcible entry. An owner whose residence is squatted can therefore obtain removal in the middle of winter through Article 38.

What penalties does a squatter face since the 2023 law? Law No. 2023-668 of 27 July 2023 raised the penalties for violation of a home under Article 226-4 of the French Criminal Code to three years' imprisonment and a fine of €45,000. It also created new offences punishing the fraudulent occupation of premises and remaining on the premises despite an eviction decision.

Can the locks be changed to prevent the squatters from returning? No, as long as the occupants have not been removed by lawful means. Changing the locks, cutting off utilities or forcing entry exposes the owner to prosecution, including criminal prosecution. The fight against unlawful occupation goes exclusively through the administrative or court procedures provided for by law.

Can a vacant dwelling that was never lived in benefit from the express procedure before the prefect? No. Article 38 requires that the property be a home. A dwelling bought as an investment and never occupied, vacant premises between two sales or unused offices do not fall within the prefectoral procedure. The owner must then apply to the judge, generally by summary proceedings, to obtain an eviction order.