Unpaid Rent and Tenant Eviction: Is Peru More Protective Than Europe?

Squatting, unpaid rent, staying on after a lease: four situations not to confuse

The word "squatting" is often used to describe any disputed occupation of a property. Legally, though, these situations are very different, and that difference directly determines which procedure applies, how fast it moves, and how it ends.

1. Squatting or unlawful entry from the start

Someone enters or moves into a property without ever having received the owner's authorisation. Depending on the country, this can amount to trespass, unlawful occupation, or a criminal offence, with potentially faster consequences for the owner, particularly when the property was occupied at the time.

2. The tenant in arrears

The person entered the property legally, under a signed lease, and then stopped paying. They are generally not treated in law as a squatter, even if they remain in the property after the lease is terminated on that basis. This is the most common situation, and the one that concerns a landlord most directly.

3. The former tenant who refuses to leave

The lease has ended or been validly terminated, but the occupant does not hand back the property. They then become an occupant without right or title, without being treated the same as someone who forced their way in from the start. This distinction matters concretely, particularly in Peru, where the concept of a "precario" occupant specifically covers this situation.

4. Fraudulent subletting or occupation

Other, rarer but well-documented situations complicate the picture further: forged leases, unauthorised subletting, keys handed to third parties not named on the lease, or occupants using false documents. These cases usually call for specific legal treatment and should not be lumped in with a straightforward case of unpaid rent.

Why a landlord cannot take back a property themselves

This is often the point least understood by a landlord facing unpaid rent for the first time. In virtually every legal system covered by this guide, an occupied property is the occupant's home, even once rent has stopped being paid. A landlord generally cannot decide, on their own, to enter the property, remove furniture, change the locks, cut off water or electricity, or threaten the occupant to force them out.

This restriction, which can seem unfair at first glance, is mainly designed to prevent arbitrary evictions, mistakes made in good or bad faith, abuse by the stronger party to the contract, and conflicts that could turn dangerous if every landlord could take the law into their own hands without oversight from a neutral authority.

In most of the countries covered here, a landlord who carries out a de facto eviction risks civil liability (damages, forced restoration) and, depending on the circumstances, criminal prosecution. The exact penalties vary by country and are not covered exhaustively in this guide: they should be verified with a local lawyer before any decision is made.

Does a minority genuinely exploit the system?

It's a fair question, often raised by landlords who have already been burned, and it deserves an honest answer rather than a reassuring one.

There is no denying that some people act in bad faith: renting a property with no lasting intention to pay, deliberately stopping payments once settled in, systematically using every available avenue to contest the case, exploiting procedural mistakes by the landlord, waiting until eviction is imminent before leaving, then repeating the pattern elsewhere. This organised behaviour exists and represents a real cost for the landlords affected by it, particularly small landlords for whom several months of unpaid rent represents a significant loss.

But just as often, if not more so, unpaid rent stems from a job loss, a separation, an illness, an accident, gradually mounting debt, a rising cost of living, or a difficult family situation. Nothing supports the claim that most tenants in arrears are acting in bad faith.

Switzerland: non-payment, termination and the eviction procedure

Swiss tenancy law sets out a precise process to follow in the event of non-payment, through a two-stage mechanism under the Code of Obligations (CO).

The formal notice: article 257d CO

When a tenant falls behind on a rent instalment or on ancillary charges that have fallen due, the landlord can set a written payment deadline and warn the tenant that the lease will be terminated if payment is not made within that period. This deadline is at least 30 days for residential or commercial premises. For a family home, this formal notice and any termination that follows must be served separately on the tenant and on their spouse or registered partner, on pain of nullity.

Termination and its challenge

If the tenant does not pay within the deadline, the landlord can terminate the lease with at least 30 days' notice to the end of a month. The tenant can still challenge this termination before the conciliation authority for tenancy matters, which can significantly extend the process if the dispute concerns the validity of the termination itself.

The eviction procedure

Once termination is valid and has not been successfully challenged, the property still needs to be physically vacated. The fastest route is the clear-case protection procedure (art. 257 of the Code of Civil Procedure): if the facts are not genuinely disputable and the evidence is immediately available, the judge can order eviction without a full trial. If the case is contested, the ordinary procedure applies, with considerably longer timelines.

Recovering unpaid rent: a separate procedure

Obtaining eviction does not resolve the rent debt itself. Recovering unpaid rent goes through Switzerland's debt enforcement procedure (Federal Act on Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy, LP), filed with the relevant debt enforcement office. The debtor can object within 10 days, which forces the creditor to obtain a court order lifting that objection before collection can proceed. This is a separate process from eviction, and it can remain open long after the tenant has left, particularly if they are insolvent.

No winter moratorium in Switzerland

Unlike France, there is no winter moratorium in Switzerland: an eviction can, in principle, be carried out at any time of year. A court can nonetheless grant a humanitarian delay of a few weeks in exceptional circumstances (serious health issues, for example), but this is not a general right suspending evictions during winter.

Since tenancy law is partly administered at cantonal level (conciliation authorities, competent courts), some practical details can vary between cantons even though the federal legal framework remains the same.

France: payment notices, the anti-squat law and the winter moratorium

French law underwent a significant reform with Law No. 2023-668 of 27 July 2023, known as the anti-squat law or the Kasbarian-Bergé law, which changed several timelines applicable to eviction for unpaid rent while clearly distinguishing squatting from ordinary rental arrears.

The payment notice and the automatic termination clause

The procedure begins with a payment notice (commandement de payer), served by a commissaire de justice (formerly a huissier de justice). Since the 2023 law, the tenant has six weeks to settle the debt, down from two months previously, although this shortened deadline does not apply where the tenant is a legal entity. In addition, every lease signed after 29 July 2023 must include an automatic termination clause that applies as of right in the event of non-payment of rent, charges, or the security deposit.

Court involvement and payment deadlines

If the debt is not settled, the landlord goes before a judge to have the termination confirmed and to obtain an eviction order. The tenant, the landlord, or the judge acting on their own initiative can request a payment deadline of up to three years (article 1343-5 of the Civil Code) to allow the tenant to settle the debt, under two cumulative conditions: being able to pay off the arrears, and having resumed full payment of current rent before the hearing. One point changed with the 2023 law: granting this payment deadline no longer automatically suspends the effects of the automatic termination clause; that suspension must now be expressly requested from the judge.

According to French Ministry of Justice statistics, the average time between filing and the court's ruling is around 5.1 months.

The order to vacate and the winter moratorium

Once an eviction order has been obtained, the commissaire de justice serves an order to vacate, which in principle gives the occupant two months to leave (a period the judge can shorten). The winter moratorium, which runs from 1 November to 31 March each year, prevents neither the court ruling nor the order to vacate from being issued: it only suspends enforcement of the eviction with police assistance during that period, subject to statutory exceptions.

Police assistance and state liability

If the occupant does not leave voluntarily, the commissaire de justice records the failed eviction attempt and requests police assistance from the prefecture. The prefect has two months to respond; in the event of refusal or prolonged silence, the state's liability can be engaged for simple fault, entitling the landlord to compensation covering, among other things, rent and charges for the affected period, with the state then stepping into the landlord's rights against the occupant.

Squatting proper: a different procedure

The 2023 law also increased penalties applicable to squatters in the strict sense (unlawful occupation of a property, forced entry) and created an accelerated administrative procedure, separate from ordinary rental eviction, reserved for genuine cases of unlawful occupation of a home. This procedure should not be confused with the one applicable to a tenant in arrears: the latter remains protected by the ordinary judicial procedure described above, which is inherently longer.

Spain: desahucio, okupas and the 2025 reform

Spain's public debate around "okupas" occupies a place disproportionate to the actual number of properties affected, partly because Spanish criminal law distinguishes between two offences with very different consequences for how quickly the authorities can intervene.

Allanamiento de morada versus usurpación: a decisive distinction

Allanamiento de morada (article 202 of the Criminal Code) punishes entering or remaining in someone's habitual home without authorisation. It protects a fundamental right, the inviolability of the home, and applies to a property that is actually lived in. In this case, police intervention can be almost immediate, as the offence is often caught in the act.

Usurpación (article 245.2 of the Criminal Code) punishes occupying a property that is not anyone's habitual home, typically a vacant property or an unoccupied second home. Here, the police do not intervene immediately as a rule: the owner must file a criminal complaint and go through a judicial procedure, which explains most of the widely publicised long-running "okupación" cases.

Desahucio por falta de pago: the procedure for a regular tenant

For a tenant who entered the property legally and then stops paying, the applicable procedure is desahucio por falta de pago, governed by the Civil Procedure Act (article 250, juicio verbal). The landlord files a claim; the tenant receives a payment and eviction notice and has 10 business days to pay (enervación), vacate the property, or contest the claim. Without a response, an eviction order can be issued directly, without a hearing. If contested, a hearing is scheduled and judgment is typically issued within five days.

The 2025 reform: a fast-track trial, but not for every case

Ley Orgánica 1/2025, in force since April 2025, amended criminal procedure law to allow allanamiento de morada and usurpación offences to be tried via a fast-track process, potentially cutting the time to the hearing to around 15 days. This reform, however, concerns criminal offences of squatting proper, not the civil desahucio procedure applicable to a regular tenant in arrears. It also has an important practical limitation: according to Prosecutor's Office Circular 1/2025, "minor and peaceful" usurpación, which makes up most everyday okupación cases, continues to be treated as a minor offence, outside this fast track.

Separately, the same reform (the justice efficiency law) introduced mandatory prior mediation for certain civil proceedings, which, according to specialised sources, has tended to add around two months to total timelines in the cases affected.

Protection for vulnerable occupants

Real Decreto-ley 11/2020, extended several times and applicable until the end of 2025, allows an eviction to be suspended where a household's vulnerability is duly documented and linked to the economic and social consequences of COVID-19, for up to two months for an individual and four months for a corporate landlord.

Peru: a different framework, not a lawless zone for tenants

Contrary to a common assumption, Peru is not a country where a landlord can freely evict a tenant. Peruvian law also protects the occupant against an arbitrary repossession of the property, and Peru's ordinary judicial eviction procedure (Code of Civil Procedure) can, just as in Europe, prove lengthy, particularly when the occupant disputes their status.

What sets Peru apart is the existence of two specific contractual mechanisms, introduced by successive laws, that allow a landlord to arrange, from the moment the lease is signed, a considerably more direct procedural route in the event of non-payment or lease expiry. These mechanisms do not apply automatically: they depend entirely on what the lease provides for from the outset.

The allanamiento a futuro clause (Ley 30201)

Ley 30201, whose official title concerns the creation of the Registry of Defaulting Judicial Debtors (Registro de Deudores Judiciales Morosos), introduced in 2014 a provision allowing an allanamiento a futuro clause to be included in a lease.

What this clause actually means

In simple terms, the tenant agrees in advance, at the time the lease is signed, to submit to a claim for the return of the property if certain conditions later arise: the end of the lease term, or termination for non-payment. This is not a waiver of all right to a defence, but a prior contractual commitment that simplifies the judicial phase if one of these events occurs.

Conditions for validity

• The clause must appear explicitly in the lease, worded unambiguously as to the events that trigger it.
• Both parties' signatures must be legalised before a notary public, or before a justice of the peace where no notary is available locally.
• The grounds for use are limited: end of the lease term (vencimiento) or non-payment (falta de pago), not any and every ground for termination.

How the procedure unfolds

The justice of the peace (juez de paz letrado) for the location of the property has jurisdiction. When the landlord invokes this clause, the judge notifies the claim to the tenant, who has six days to prove either that the lease is still in force or that the rent owed has actually been paid. This procedure does not require prior out-of-court conciliation, and the tenant cannot raise the exceptions or preliminary defences normally available under Peruvian civil procedure: their scope to contest the case is deliberately narrowed by law, in exchange for the contractual commitment they signed.

Enforcement of the eviction then follows Peru's general rules for enforcing court decisions, with the ordinary rights of appeal against the judge's ruling, subject to the restrictions specific to this special procedure.

Eviction with notarial intervention (Ley 30933)

Published on 24 April 2019, Ley 30933 ("Ley que regula el procedimiento especial de desalojo con intervención notarial") goes further than Ley 30201 by handing a notary part of the verification work that previously fell entirely to the judge.

Requirements

• A lease containing both an allanamiento clause and an express submission clause to the Ley 30933 procedure, distinct from the plain Ley 30201 clause.
• Precise identification of the rented property and legalised signatures from both parties.
• A bank account designated in the lease for receiving rent, the only proof the notary will accept when establishing non-payment.

The notary's central role

To establish non-payment, the notary considers only transfer or deposit records into the bank account agreed by the parties: a cash payment, even if genuine, cannot be raised against the landlord under this procedure if it was not traced. The tenant can object, but only on three grounds strictly set out by law: renewal or extension of the lease, proof of a payment made into the agreed account, or failure to meet the formal requirements set by the law itself. If none of these grounds is established, the notary issues a non-contentious notarial deed recording the end of the lease or the default, which constitutes an enforceable title.

The step before the justice of the peace

The notarial file is then forwarded to the justice of the peace, who has three business days to verify that the formal requirements are met and to order the lanzamiento (the eviction itself). The judge then sends a formal request to the Peruvian National Police, who must provide assistance and ensure enforcement within two business days of being notified. The ruling can be appealed, but the appeal has no suspensive effect: the eviction can therefore be carried out even if the tenant has appealed.

Ley 30201 or Ley 30933: what's the difference?

These two mechanisms are often lumped together under the common label "express eviction," even though they follow different procedural logics.

Criterion	Ley 30201 (allanamiento a futuro)	Ley 30933 (notarial intervention)
Authority verifying the facts	The justice of the peace, from the start	First a notary, then a formal check by the judge
Proof of payment	Not strictly defined by law	Only via the bank account named in the lease
Clause required	Allanamiento a futuro clause	Allanamiento clause + submission clause to Ley 30933
Tenant's response window	6 days to prove payment or that the lease is valid	Response during the notarial phase, limited grounds for objection
Judicial step	Simplified judicial procedure from start to finish	3 business days for the judge once the notarial file is received
Appeal	Available under ordinary rules	Available but with no suspensive effect

In practice, a well-prepared Peruvian lease can combine both approaches: an allanamiento a futuro clause compliant with Ley 30201, supplemented by the specific clauses required under Ley 30933 if the landlord wants access to the notarial route. This should be worked out with a local notary or lawyer when drafting the lease, not after arrears have already arisen.

What timelines can you realistically expect in Peru?

No official source consulted for this guide publishes a consolidated, reliable average duration for either of these procedures. This guide therefore promises neither a guaranteed eviction in fifteen days, nor a systematic recovery within a few weeks: such claims, sometimes used for marketing purposes, do not reflect a legal guarantee.

It is possible, however, to break down the total timeline into several separately documented components:

• Tenant response window: 6 business days under Ley 30201, once the judge has served notice of the claim.
• Judicial verification window: 3 business days for the justice of the peace under Ley 30933, once the notarial file is received.
• Police intervention window: 2 business days for the National Police after being notified of the judge's request (Ley 30933).
• Timeframe not fixed by law: the time the notary needs to build the file (Ley 30933), and the time it takes a given court to actually process the case, which depends directly on its caseload.

Taken together, these elements explain why specialised Peruvian legal sources cite an order of magnitude of roughly two to three months for an uncomplicated allanamiento a futuro clause, and a wider range, sometimes cited around 15 to 51 days, for a particularly smooth notarial case under Ley 30933. These figures come from law firms and specialised legal portals, not from an official Poder Judicial statistic: they should be understood as observed examples, not a promise applicable to every case.

What happens without the right clause?

A landlord whose lease contains neither an allanamiento a futuro clause nor a Ley 30933 submission clause must bring the ordinary eviction procedure under the Peruvian Code of Civil Procedure. Depending on the case, this involves mandatory prior conciliation, filing a full judicial claim, formal notifications to the defendant, one or more hearings, every ordinary defence available to the tenant, and the usual avenues of appeal (including cassation in some cases).

Where the occupant disputes their status as a tenant or claims a right to remain, the judge must precisely characterise the situation, particularly with reference to the concept of a "precario" occupant defined by the Peruvian Supreme Court's IV Pleno Casatorio Civil: a person occupies a property on a precario basis when they do so without paying rent and without title, or when the title they once held has expired or can no longer be relied upon against the claimant.

It is precisely this gap, between a potentially very long ordinary procedure and a notably faster special procedure available under conditions, that explains why preparing the lease before the tenant moves in matters more, in Peru, than the choice of country itself.

Comparison table: Switzerland, France, Spain, Peru

This table summarises the points developed throughout this guide. Timeline assessments are deliberately cautious where the data does not support a reliable, rigorous comparison.

Country / situation	First step	Court involvement	Accelerated mechanism	Winter / social protection	Landlord changing locks	Cautious assessment
Switzerland	Written formal notice (art. 257d CO)	Mandatory	Clear-case procedure (art. 257 CPC) if uncontested	No general winter moratorium	Prohibited	Reasonably structured process if uncontested; potentially long if contested
France	Payment notice (commissaire de justice)	Mandatory	None for ordinary arrears; fast-track criminal route for squatting proper only	Winter moratorium (1 Nov.–31 Mar.), suspends enforcement with police assistance	Prohibited, civil and criminal penalties	Heavy weight placed on formalities; potentially long timeline, particularly via police assistance
Spain	Payment and eviction notice (desahucio)	Mandatory	Fast-track trial only for criminal allanamiento/usurpación (LO 1/2025), not for civil arrears	Suspension possible for documented vulnerability (RDL 11/2020)	Prohibited, except flagrant allanamiento de morada handled by police	Highly variable timeline depending on court backlog and any objection
Peru (with the right clause)	Claim before the judge (Ley 30201) or notarial deed (Ley 30933)	Reduced (formal check rather than a full trial)	Allanamiento a futuro clause and/or notarial eviction	No comparable mechanism identified	Prohibited	Accelerated mechanism under strict conditions; heavy weight on contractual formalities
Peru (without the right clause)	Prior conciliation then ordinary judicial claim	Mandatory, full procedure	None	No comparable mechanism identified	Prohibited	Potentially very long, particularly where a contested precario classification is involved

Is it really easier to evict a tenant in Peru?

The honest answer is nuanced, and it depends almost entirely on a decision made before the tenant ever moves in.

This guide therefore does not conclude that "landlords are always better protected in Peru." Such a claim would ignore both the real protection every occupant enjoys, even in bad faith, until a ruling has been issued, and the very real risk posed by a poorly prepared lease.

What genuinely sets Peru apart, then, is not the absence of tenant rights, but the possibility, granted by law, of contractually securing a faster route out of a problem, provided this risk is anticipated when the lease is drafted rather than discovered after the first missed payment.

The risks that remain even with a solid lease

Even a lease perfectly drafted in line with the requirements of Ley 30201 and Ley 30933 does not remove every risk. A landlord, particularly one based abroad, should stay aware of the following points.

• A poorly drafted or incomplete lease: an imprecise, badly worded clause, or one that doesn't exactly cover the situation that arises, can strip the landlord of the fast-track route.
• Unlegalised signatures: a strictly required condition; its absence automatically routes the case back to the ordinary procedure.
• Cash payments that cannot be proven: under Ley 30933, the notary only takes into account payments made through the designated bank account.
• An insolvent tenant: even after a successful eviction, recovering the rent debt remains a separate process, and one that can still fail.
• Local court delays: even the statutory timeframes (3 days for the judge, for example) assume an available, non-overloaded court.
• Damage to the property over the course of the procedure, however long it takes.
• Unfamiliarity with the procedures for a landlord based abroad, unable to be on hand to follow every step or react quickly to a notification.
• No local management in place to catch early warning signs, keep evidence on file, and quickly coordinate a notary and lawyer if needed.

Preventing unpaid rent in Lima: the landlord's checklist

The best protection against a long, costly case of unpaid rent is built before the lease is signed, not after the first missed payment. Any tenant screening should rely on objective criteria and comply with applicable law, with no discriminatory practices.

• Identity verification of the prospective tenant using official documents.
• Proof of income and employment consistent with the rent being asked.
• References from previous landlords and payment history, where these can be legally obtained.
• A guarantor and security deposit suited to the tenant's profile and the value of the property.
• A complete lease, clearly setting out the lease term, the entry condition report, an inventory of furniture where relevant, and the number of authorised occupants.
• An allanamiento a futuro clause, and the specific Ley 30933 clause if that route is being considered, drafted with a local professional.
• Legalised signatures before a notary or justice of the peace at the time the lease is signed, not after the fact.
• A dedicated bank account for rent, explicitly named in the lease.
• A ban on unauthorised subletting, clearly stated in the lease.
• Precise clauses covering late payment and its contractual consequences.
• Rigorous monthly tracking of payments, reacting from the very first delay rather than after months of arrears have piled up.

Managing a rental investment remotely

A landlord based in Switzerland or Europe faces extra difficulties that have nothing to do with the legal framework itself: time zone differences make quick communication with the tenant or local professionals harder, physical absence makes it harder to check on the property regularly, and picking up on early warning signs (an isolated delay, a change in the tenant's behaviour) is inevitably slower from a distance.

On top of that come tasks that call for a responsive local presence: actually collecting and tracking payments, entry and exit condition reports, notarial steps if using Ley 30933, coordinating with a lawyer if a court case becomes necessary, and routine maintenance.

Our guide on property management in Lima covers all of this in detail, and our guide on long-term versus short-term rental can also help clarify a rental strategy less exposed to this type of risk.

The role of Swiss Lima Property and Havenbnb Peru

Protecting a rental investment in Lima is built before the property goes on the market, starting with the selection of the property and analysis of the project. This is the stage at which Swiss Lima Property supports Swiss and European investors: searching for and analysing properties suited to a rental strategy, verifying documentation before purchase, and pointing towards the right legal and notarial professionals when preparing a secure lease becomes relevant.

Day-to-day operational management once the property has been bought and let, particularly tracking payments, spotting early warning signs, and coordinating with a notary or lawyer if a procedure becomes necessary, is the work of our local partner Havenbnb Peru, where the services on offer match the landlord's project.

If you are considering a rental investment in Lima, we can help you assess the risks before buying, compare the rental strategies available for your situation, and point you towards the right professionals to secure your lease from the moment it is signed.

Frequently asked questions