

A property management company signs rental agreements without a foreign property owner’s approval in Turkey. Learn how to challenge unauthorized leases, terminate authority, recover rent, seek eviction and claim damages.
Foreign property owners in Turkey frequently appoint property management companies, real estate agents or local representatives to manage apartments, villas and commercial properties while they live abroad. Problems can arise when the management company goes beyond the authority granted to it and signs a rental agreement, determines the rent, collects deposits or delivers possession to a tenant without the foreign owner’s approval. The legal consequences depend heavily on the management agreement, power of attorney, communications between the parties, the authority actually granted to the representative and whether the owner subsequently approved or accepted the transaction. A foreign owner discovering an unauthorized lease should therefore act quickly but should not assume that merely declaring the lease “invalid” will automatically remove the tenant from the property.
The answer depends primarily on the scope of the company’s authority. A property manager may have been authorized only to advertise the property, communicate with prospective tenants, collect existing rent or supervise maintenance. Those powers do not necessarily mean that the manager can independently conclude a new rental agreement on whatever terms it chooses.
Conversely, a sufficiently broad authorization may permit the representative to perform certain leasing transactions on behalf of the owner. The wording and legal form of the authority must therefore be examined carefully.
The foreign owner should obtain the complete agreement signed with the management company. It should be reviewed for provisions concerning tenant selection, rental negotiations, execution of rental agreements, minimum rent, lease duration, deposits, rent collection, maintenance, subletting, termination and reporting obligations.
A company that had authority to locate tenants but not authority to execute a lease may have exceeded its contractual mandate.
Foreign owners frequently issue powers of attorney for property-related transactions. The existence of a power of attorney alone does not answer the dispute. The exact powers granted must be examined.
The central question is whether the representative had authority to perform the particular transaction that is now disputed.
The owner should obtain a complete copy of the rental agreement allegedly signed on their behalf. Review the tenant’s identity, rent, lease duration, deposit, commencement date, payment account, renewal provisions, signature and the capacity in which the management company purported to act.
Do not rely solely on the property manager’s description of the agreement.
The contract may identify the foreign owner as landlord while being signed by a representative. Alternatively, the property management company may have improperly represented itself as the landlord.
This distinction can significantly affect the legal analysis.
If the company purported to execute the agreement expressly on behalf of the foreign owner, the scope of representative authority becomes central.
The owner should determine whether the tenant knew, or reasonably should have known, that the manager’s authority was limited.
Where a representative concludes a transaction without sufficient authority, Turkish law contains rules governing unauthorized representation and the effect of subsequent approval by the person allegedly represented.
The precise consequences depend on the facts. The foreign owner should therefore avoid conduct that could unintentionally be interpreted as approval before the legal position is evaluated.
If the owner discovers the lease and then repeatedly accepts rent without objection, the other parties may later rely on that conduct when arguing that the owner accepted the arrangement.
Rent received after discovery should therefore be handled only after considering the legal consequences.
Ratification can become a major issue in unauthorized-representation disputes. Emails, messages, rent collection, instructions to the tenant or other conduct may be relied upon as evidence that the owner subsequently accepted the lease.
Foreign owners should coordinate their response before communicating substantive approval of the tenancy.
Once unauthorized activity is discovered, the owner should consider formally notifying the management company that the transaction is disputed.
The notice can identify the alleged excess of authority, request the complete transaction file, demand an accounting of money collected and reserve the owner’s rights.
The tenant’s position should be analyzed separately from the property manager’s wrongdoing. A tenant may claim that they entered the agreement believing the representative had valid authority.
Any notice to the tenant should therefore be legally structured rather than simply demanding immediate departure without examining the contractual and possession issues.
Not necessarily. Physical possession should not be recovered through self-help measures such as changing locks, removing belongings or shutting off utilities merely because the owner disputes the property manager’s authority.
If the tenant does not voluntarily vacate, the appropriate legal procedure must be determined according to the circumstances.
Even where the owner has strong arguments against the management company, the practical recovery of possession may require a separate analysis.
The validity or binding effect of the lease, the tenant’s possession and the applicable eviction mechanism should be evaluated together.
Evidence that the tenant knew about the restriction can materially affect the dispute. For example, the tenant may have received communications stating that final owner approval was required before execution.
Preserve emails, messaging records, draft agreements and negotiation correspondence.
A tenant may argue that the management company appeared authorized to act for the owner. The factual basis of that belief should be examined.
Advertising materials, prior dealings, the power of attorney shown to the tenant and communications from the owner can all become relevant.
Request copies of advertisements, tenant applications, correspondence, draft contracts, signed contracts, deposit records, rent receipts, invoices and bank-transfer records.
The objective is to reconstruct exactly what happened.
One of the most important issues is determining where rent and deposits were paid.
The management company may have collected money into its own account rather than transferring it to the foreign owner. Bank records should be obtained and compared with the rental agreement.
Potentially. If the property manager collected money that should have been transferred to the owner, contractual, accounting and restitution-related claims may arise depending on the facts.
The amount should be calculated month by month.
Determine whether a deposit was collected, how much was paid and where the money is held.
The owner should not unknowingly assume responsibility for funds that were retained or misused by the management company without first establishing the factual position.
An unauthorized lease at a significantly reduced rent can cause substantial loss. Obtain evidence of comparable rental values at the relevant time and preserve the original listing history.
The owner may need to establish the difference between the agreed rent and the amount that could reasonably have been obtained.
A management company may sign a multi-year lease that substantially restricts the owner’s ability to use or sell the property.
The duration of the agreement and the manager’s authority to make long-term commitments should be examined carefully.
If the property was placed into short-term accommodation or tourism use without the owner’s approval, additional regulatory issues may arise beyond an ordinary residential lease.
The owner should determine how the property was advertised and whether repeated short-term occupancies occurred.
The company may have rented the property to itself or another intermediary and then placed third parties into possession. Such structures require examination of each agreement and the actual flow of payments.
The registered owner should identify every person or company claiming a right to occupy the property.
Potentially. Exceeding authority, withholding rent, failing to account for money or entering unauthorized transactions may create grounds for contractual remedies depending on the agreement and circumstances.
Termination provisions, notice requirements and outstanding management fees should be reviewed before action is taken.
If the management relationship has broken down, the owner should examine whether existing powers of attorney or other authorizations should be revoked.
Revocation should be handled through the legally appropriate procedure and communicated where necessary to reduce the risk of further transactions.
Property management companies may control keys, alarm systems, smart-lock codes, building access cards and utility accounts.
The owner should establish an inventory and seek lawful return or transfer of all access mechanisms when the management relationship ends.
The foreign owner should confirm that no transaction beyond leasing has occurred. Where trust has seriously broken down, review the property’s title status and any registrations or encumbrances that may require attention.
Save emails, messaging conversations, rental advertisements, screenshots, payment instructions and electronic copies of agreements.
Digital evidence may be particularly important where the manager denies receiving restrictions from the owner.
Messages showing that the owner required prior approval before any lease was signed can become central evidence.
Preserve original conversations and devices where appropriate rather than relying exclusively on cropped screenshots.
Potentially. Depending on the breach and evidence, losses may include unpaid rent, improperly retained deposits, reduced rental income, repair costs, unauthorized expenses and other losses causally connected to the manager’s conduct.
Each claimed loss should be documented separately.
A claim that the property “could have earned much more” should be supported. Comparable rentals, prior rental history, valuation evidence and actual offers can become relevant.
Speculative calculations are more difficult to establish.
Document the condition immediately. Obtain photographs, repair estimates, invoices and, where appropriate, formal evidence concerning the property’s condition.
Responsibility between the tenant and management company should then be analyzed according to the relevant facts and agreements.
Some disputes are purely contractual or civil. However, if the evidence indicates conduct such as falsified signatures, fabricated powers of attorney, fraudulent collection of money or other potentially criminal behavior, criminal-law issues may also arise.
A contractual disagreement should not automatically be characterized as a crime, but genuine evidence of fraudulent conduct should not be ignored.
A forged signature changes the nature of the dispute significantly. Preserve the original document and obtain information about how it was created and delivered.
Depending on the circumstances, handwriting or document examination and criminal-law remedies may become relevant.
The owner should verify the alleged power of attorney immediately. If it was never issued or has been altered, urgent legal action may be required to prevent further use.
Related property, banking and contractual transactions should also be reviewed.
An unauthorized rental agreement may not be an isolated event. Review previous tenants, rental income, deposits, repair invoices, commissions and payments.
A complete accounting can reveal whether the problem extends beyond one lease.
The property management company should be asked to explain all money received and paid in connection with the property.
Compare that accounting with bank statements and tenant payment records.
Document the refusal. The owner may need to pursue appropriate legal mechanisms to establish contractual breaches, recover money or obtain evidence.
Do not allow the absence of voluntary cooperation to prevent preservation of evidence available from other sources.
If there is a concrete risk of further unauthorized transactions, dissipation of funds or another legally protectable urgent interest, available interim measures should be evaluated according to the circumstances.
The appropriate remedy depends on the nature of the right requiring protection.
Physical residence outside Turkey does not prevent the owner from protecting property rights. Legal representation can generally be arranged so that necessary proceedings are handled without requiring the owner to remain continuously in Turkey.
The power of attorney used for litigation should be prepared carefully.
Unauthorized rental activity may also create practical tax and reporting issues for the registered owner.
The owner should determine what income was collected, what declarations were made and whether corrective action is necessary.
Foreign owners can reduce future disputes by defining in writing whether the manager may negotiate rent, select tenants, sign leases, collect deposits, receive rent, authorize repairs or renew agreements.
High-value decisions can be made expressly subject to written owner approval.
A useful management structure can require the owner to approve the tenant, monthly rent, deposit, duration and final contract before signature.
This creates a clear evidentiary trail.
Where commercially practical, direct payment can reduce accounting disputes. If the manager collects money, the contract should establish strict reporting and transfer obligations.
A foreign owner discovering an unauthorized rental agreement should immediately obtain the lease and management agreement, review any power of attorney, preserve communications showing limits on authority, determine whether rent and deposits were collected, avoid conduct that could unintentionally approve the disputed transaction, formally notify the manager where appropriate, analyze the tenant’s legal position, revoke unnecessary authority, audit previous transactions and evaluate claims for possession, rent, accounting and damages.
Only if it has sufficient legal authority to perform the relevant transaction. The management contract and any power of attorney should be examined carefully.
The consequences depend on the rules governing representation, the scope of authority and whether the owner subsequently approves the transaction. It should not be treated as automatically resolved without legal analysis.
Potentially. Conduct after learning of the agreement can become relevant to arguments concerning subsequent approval. The owner should therefore obtain advice before acting inconsistently with a challenge.
Self-help measures can create additional legal problems. Recovery of possession should follow the legally appropriate procedure.
Potentially, depending on the legal status of the lease and possession. The correct procedure should be determined before commencing an eviction claim.
Potentially. The owner should obtain a full accounting and trace all rent and deposit payments.
Forgery can create significantly more serious civil and potentially criminal issues. The document should be preserved and investigated immediately.
Potentially, if breach, loss and causation can be established. Evidence of the property’s market rental value will be important.
Potentially, depending on the management agreement, authority granted and circumstances of the breach. Any related power of attorney should also be reviewed separately.
Obtain the allegedly unauthorized lease, management contract, power of attorney and payment records before taking action against the tenant. The central issue is whether the manager possessed authority to conclude that specific agreement and whether anything subsequently done by the owner could affect the legal position.
Unauthorized property management can create disputes involving rental agreements, representation authority, powers of attorney, rent collection, deposits, eviction, damages, forged documents and recovery of possession. Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign property owners facing unauthorized rental and property-management transactions in Turkey. Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance in reviewing management agreements and powers of attorney, challenging unauthorized transactions, terminating management relationships, pursuing rent and accounting claims, evaluating eviction proceedings and seeking compensation for losses caused by unauthorized property management.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile / WhatsApp: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Office No:148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey