

A foreign tenant’s boiler or heating system stops working in Turkey. Learn whether the landlord or tenant must pay for repairs, how responsibility is determined, what evidence should be collected and when rent reduction or lease termination may become possible.
A foreign tenant living in Turkey may suddenly discover that the apartment’s heating system no longer works. The boiler may stop producing heat, radiators may remain cold, central heating may fail, pipes may require replacement or an expensive component may break. The problem can become particularly serious during winter, and a dispute may immediately arise over one question: Does the landlord have to pay for the repair, or is the foreign tenant responsible?
There is no reliable rule that every heating repair must automatically be paid by the landlord or that every malfunction occurring during a tenancy belongs to the tenant. Under Turkish rental law, the landlord must deliver the rented property in a condition suitable for its intended use and maintain it in that condition throughout the tenancy. At the same time, the tenant is generally responsible for cleaning and maintenance expenses required by ordinary use. The cause of the malfunction, type of repair, age of the equipment, tenant’s conduct and seriousness of the defect must therefore be examined.
The cause of the failure is often more important than the fact that the system stopped working.
If an old boiler suffers a major internal failure because of age or ordinary deterioration, the legal analysis may differ substantially from a situation where the tenant damaged the equipment through improper use.
Similarly, routine maintenance should be distinguished from replacement of an essential component or installation.
Before agreeing to pay a substantial repair bill, the tenant should identify what actually failed and why.
Article 301 of the Turkish Code of Obligations establishes the landlord’s fundamental obligation to deliver the rented property in a condition suitable for its intended contractual use and maintain it in that condition throughout the tenancy.
For residential leases, this obligation cannot be modified to the tenant’s disadvantage.
A functioning heating system can therefore become an important part of the landlord’s continuing obligations where heating forms part of the rented property’s ordinary residential functionality.
The landlord’s general maintenance obligation does not mean that every small expense must necessarily be paid by the landlord.
Article 317 provides that the tenant is responsible for cleaning and maintenance expenses required for the ordinary use of the rented property, with local custom also taken into consideration.
This distinction between ordinary maintenance and a significant defect is central to heating-system disputes.
A tenant may be expected to deal with ordinary maintenance associated with normal use, depending on the circumstances.
A major boiler failure, replacement of essential heating infrastructure or substantial repair required because an aging installation has deteriorated presents a different issue.
The repair invoice alone does not determine responsibility.
The nature and cause of the work should be identified.
Age can become important evidence.
A boiler may have been installed many years before the tenant moved into the apartment. If a major component eventually fails because of normal deterioration, the landlord may have difficulty treating the entire cost automatically as tenant responsibility.
The tenant should preserve information showing the equipment’s age, previous repairs and condition when the tenancy began.
A heating system that was already defective when possession was delivered raises additional issues.
Article 304 addresses defects existing when the rented property is delivered. Where a material defect exists, the tenant may rely on the remedies provided under the applicable defect provisions.
Foreign tenants should therefore test essential systems soon after moving in and report defects promptly.
Article 305 addresses defects arising after the tenancy begins.
Where the rented property subsequently becomes defective, the tenant may potentially request removal of the defect, a proportionate rent reduction or compensation for resulting losses. In the case of a material defect, termination rights are preserved.
A serious heating failure can therefore involve more than simply determining who pays the technician.
A foreign tenant should not wait several weeks before informing the landlord that the heating system has stopped working.
Article 318 requires tenants to notify landlords without delay of defects that tenants are not themselves responsible for remedying. A tenant who fails to provide the required notification may become responsible for resulting additional damage.
Notification should preferably be made in a provable form.
Telephone calls can later be disputed.
Send a written message identifying when the heating stopped working, what symptoms appeared and whether a technician has inspected the equipment.
If the apartment has become extremely difficult to use because of the failure, state this clearly.
Preserve the landlord’s response.
Many foreign tenants communicate with landlords through WhatsApp.
Messages may demonstrate that the landlord knew about the malfunction, previously repaired the same boiler or promised to arrange a technician.
The complete conversation should be preserved rather than only individual screenshots.
Messages created before a dispute arises can become particularly valuable.
A technical report can be one of the most important pieces of evidence.
The report should ideally identify the malfunction, necessary repair and, where technically possible, probable cause.
A technician may determine that an internal component failed because of age, that routine maintenance was neglected or that damage resulted from misuse.
This information can materially affect responsibility.
Do not rely only on a verbal statement that the repair will cost a particular amount.
Request a written estimate identifying the defective component, required work, replacement parts and labor.
A detailed invoice or estimate can help distinguish routine servicing from major replacement work.
That statement should not automatically be accepted.
The statutory framework distinguishes the landlord’s obligation to keep the property suitable for its intended use from the tenant’s responsibility for ordinary cleaning and maintenance expenses.
Responsibility must therefore be assessed according to the actual nature and cause of the malfunction.
The wording of the rental agreement should be reviewed carefully.
However, Article 301 specifically provides that the landlord’s obligation to deliver and maintain residential and roofed workplace premises in a condition suitable for the intended use cannot be modified to the tenant’s disadvantage.
A broad contractual clause should therefore not automatically be treated as resolving every major repair dispute against the tenant.
The analysis changes where the tenant caused the damage.
If a technician concludes that the system was damaged through improper intervention, misuse or another act attributable to the tenant, responsibility may fall differently.
The landlord should not simply make this allegation without evidence, and the tenant should not automatically assume that every malfunction constitutes ordinary deterioration.
Technical evidence can be decisive.
A current tenant should preserve evidence showing the condition at the beginning of the tenancy.
Move-in inspection records, photographs, earlier messages and previous repair reports may help establish that the problem existed before the current tenant occupied the apartment.
This can be especially important if the landlord attempts to charge the foreign tenant for an old malfunction.
Replacement is substantially different from routine servicing.
If an old heating appliance can no longer be reasonably repaired and must be replaced to keep the apartment suitable for residential use, the landlord’s Article 301 obligations become particularly relevant.
The technical reason for replacement should nevertheless be documented.
The value of the component does not automatically determine who pays.
The cause of the malfunction and whether the expense constitutes ordinary maintenance or remedy of a defect should still be examined.
Tenants should therefore avoid accepting simplistic rules based solely on the cost of the repair.
Routine servicing can raise a different issue from a major malfunction.
Article 317 places ordinary cleaning and maintenance expenses required for use on the tenant, subject also to local custom.
The precise work performed should therefore be examined rather than describing every technician visit as a “repair.”
Central heating can involve additional parties and building-management issues.
The malfunction may originate inside the apartment, in common building infrastructure or in the central heating installation.
The tenant should identify the source before accepting financial responsibility.
Communications with building management should be preserved where the problem affects multiple apartments.
This can be important evidence that the malfunction is not specific to the tenant’s use.
Ask building management whether the problem affects the entire building and preserve any notices concerning the failure.
A building-wide heating problem may require a different analysis from damage limited to equipment located exclusively inside the rented apartment.
Not every radiator problem requires replacement of the entire heating system.
The issue may involve routine adjustment, trapped air, circulation problems, valves or a larger installation defect.
A professional inspection should identify the cause before responsibility is allocated.
The tenant should document the refusal or lack of response.
Under Article 306, the tenant may request that a defect be remedied within an appropriate period. If the defect is not remedied within that period, the law provides additional remedies under specified conditions.
The appropriate period will depend on the seriousness of the heating failure and surrounding circumstances.
The practical seriousness of a heating defect depends heavily on timing.
A heating failure during mild weather may not have the same effect as a complete failure during very cold conditions.
The landlord should be informed immediately where the apartment’s normal residential use is substantially affected.
Evidence showing indoor conditions and duration of the failure may become relevant.
Potentially, under the statutory conditions.
Article 306 provides that if the landlord does not remedy the defect within an appropriate period, the tenant may have it remedied at the landlord’s expense and deduct the resulting claim from the rent.
This should not be treated as permission to order any expensive replacement immediately and automatically deduct the entire cost.
The notice, repair period, necessity and expense should be properly documented.
A tenant who replaces an entire heating system without informing the landlord may later face a dispute about necessity and cost.
Unless an emergency requires immediate action, document the malfunction, notify the landlord, obtain a technical assessment and preserve repair estimates before substantial work begins.
If immediate action is genuinely necessary, preserve evidence explaining why delay was not reasonable.
If the foreign tenant pays for repair work, all documentation should be retained.
This includes technician reports, estimates, invoices, receipts, bank transfers and communications with the landlord.
A cash payment without documentation can make later reimbursement substantially more difficult to prove.
Potentially, but only after the applicable legal conditions are considered.
Article 306 contains a statutory mechanism allowing the tenant, where the landlord fails to remedy a defect within an appropriate period, to arrange repair at the landlord’s expense and deduct the resulting claim from rent.
Foreign tenants should avoid making an undocumented unilateral deduction that later appears to the landlord as unpaid rent.
Potentially.
Article 307 provides that where a defect affects the use of the rented property, the tenant may request a reduction in rent proportionate to the defect for the period from when the landlord learns of the defect until it is remedied.
A complete heating failure may therefore raise a rent-reduction issue depending on its seriousness, duration and effect on the apartment’s use.
The tenant should not simply decide that a broken boiler means rent should be reduced by 25, 50 or 100 percent.
The reduction must be proportionate to the defect’s effect on use.
The season, duration, availability of alternative heating and overall impact on the apartment may all become relevant.
Potentially.
Article 308 provides that the landlord must compensate losses resulting from defects unless the landlord proves absence of fault.
If a tenant incurs additional expenses because of a serious heating failure, those expenses should be documented carefully.
Whether they are recoverable depends on the circumstances and causal connection with the defect.
A tenant may purchase or rent temporary heaters while waiting for the main system to be repaired.
Receipts should be preserved.
Electricity consumption may also increase significantly.
Whether these costs can be recovered depends on the circumstances, but without documentation the claim becomes considerably more difficult.
A severe heating failure may in exceptional circumstances make ordinary occupation extremely difficult.
If the tenant temporarily stays elsewhere, accommodation invoices and payment records should be preserved.
Recovery is not automatic; the seriousness of the defect, necessity of alternative accommodation and landlord’s responsibility would need to be assessed.
Potentially, where the defect is sufficiently serious.
Article 305 preserves the tenant’s termination right in the case of a material defect. Article 306 further provides that if a defect eliminates or substantially impairs suitability for the intended use and remains unresolved within the appropriate period granted, the tenant may terminate the contract.
A minor heating problem that can be repaired quickly should not automatically be equated with a defect justifying termination.
The evidence becomes especially important.
The tenant should document the heating failure, weather conditions where relevant, duration, repair attempts and effect on normal occupation.
Technical reports and communications showing repeated landlord inaction may become central if termination is later disputed.
A foreign tenant may become frustrated, move to a hotel and immediately leave the apartment.
That can create a later dispute concerning continuing rent.
If the tenant intends to rely on the seriousness of the heating defect to terminate the lease, the defect, notice, opportunity to repair where applicable, termination communication and return of possession should all be documented.
Temporary measures can affect the analysis.
If the landlord immediately provides an effective alternative while arranging permanent repair, the extent to which the property’s use has been impaired may differ from a situation where the tenant is left without any heating.
The adequacy and duration of the temporary solution should be documented.
A tenant cannot normally complain about a defect while simultaneously refusing reasonable access necessary to repair it.
Article 319 requires the tenant to tolerate work aimed at remedying defects or preventing damage. The landlord must provide appropriate advance notice and take the tenant’s interests into consideration. The tenant’s rights concerning rent reduction and compensation remain protected.
Foreign tenants should preserve communications arranging technician access.
Repeated repair failures should be documented.
Record each technician visit, what work was performed and when the heating failed again.
A recurring defect may demonstrate that temporary interventions have not restored the property to the required condition.
Request the technical basis for the allegation.
If the landlord claims that the tenant damaged the boiler, a technician’s assessment may help determine whether the failure resulted from misuse, inadequate maintenance, age or another cause.
Avoid turning the dispute into competing unsupported statements.
The tenant should request an explanation and supporting documentation.
If the landlord alleges tenant-caused damage, the cause of the malfunction should be examined.
Move-in evidence, equipment age, technician reports and repair history may become relevant when challenging the deduction.
A foreign tenant should not pay a major repair expense merely because the landlord demands immediate cash.
First determine what was repaired, why it failed and who is legally responsible.
If a payment is made, obtain an invoice or receipt clearly identifying its purpose.
Previous repairs can reveal an important pattern.
The landlord may have paid for the same malfunction several times before the foreign tenant moved in.
Messages from previous months, service stickers, technician records and communications with building management can help establish that the problem was not newly caused by the current tenant.
Photographs are useful not only for walls and furniture.
Where possible, tenants should document the boiler, heating controls and other major equipment at the beginning of the tenancy.
Any visible damage or warning messages should be reported immediately.
If the property was advertised as having a functioning individual boiler, central heating or another specific heating system, save the advertisement.
This can help establish what was represented as part of the rented property’s features.
Online listings may disappear shortly after the tenancy begins.
A clear chronology can make the dispute substantially easier to assess.
Record the date the system failed, when the landlord was notified, technician visits, repair estimates, landlord responses, temporary measures and the date full heating was restored.
Attach the relevant messages, photographs and invoices to each event.
This can happen where a tenant deducts repair costs or reduces rent and the landlord treats the difference as unpaid rent.
The tenant should not ignore enforcement or court documents.
The statutory basis for the deduction or reduction, notification history and supporting evidence should be organized immediately.
Procedural deadlines may apply.
Rental disputes in Turkey generally fall within mandatory mediation for many categories of claims before litigation.
A dispute concerning repair expenses, rent reduction, compensation, termination or security-deposit deductions should therefore be legally classified before proceedings are pursued.
Potentially, yes.
Leaving Turkey does not automatically eliminate claims arising from a rental relationship.
The tenant should preserve the rental agreement, technician reports, invoices, payment records and communications before departure.
Appropriate legal representation may be necessary if the dispute continues after the tenant returns abroad.
When a heating system fails, a foreign tenant should first determine whether the problem involves ordinary maintenance, a major defect caused by deterioration or damage attributable to the tenant. This distinction can determine who ultimately bears the repair expense.
The tenant should notify the landlord promptly in writing and obtain a professional assessment identifying the malfunction and necessary repair. Article 301 places the continuing suitability obligation on the landlord, while Article 317 places ordinary cleaning and maintenance expenses on the tenant. Articles 305–308 provide additional remedies where a genuine defect affects the rented property.
If the landlord refuses to repair a defect for which the landlord is responsible, the tenant should not immediately stop paying rent or order an expensive replacement without documentation. The notice, reasonable repair period, technician’s findings, invoices and effect of the malfunction on residential use should be preserved.
Where a dispute develops over repair costs, rent reduction, compensation or termination, Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya can examine the rental agreement, heating-system history, technician reports, landlord communications and payment evidence to determine which party may be responsible and which remedies may be available.
Not automatically. Responsibility depends on the cause and nature of the malfunction. Major defects affecting the property’s suitability should be distinguished from ordinary maintenance expenses and tenant-caused damage.
Ordinary cleaning and maintenance expenses required for normal use generally fall within Article 317, subject also to local custom. The exact service performed should be examined.
If the failure results from age or ordinary deterioration and requires major repair or replacement to keep the residence suitable for use, the landlord’s maintenance obligations may become particularly relevant. The technical cause should be documented.
Ask for technical evidence. A technician’s report may help determine whether the malfunction resulted from misuse, ordinary deterioration or another cause.
Article 306 provides a mechanism under specified conditions where the landlord fails to remedy a defect within an appropriate period. The tenant should document notice, necessity and repair costs carefully.
Potentially, where the statutory conditions under Article 306 are satisfied. An undocumented unilateral deduction can create an unpaid-rent dispute.
Potentially. Article 307 allows a proportionate rent reduction where a defect affects use, covering the relevant period from the landlord’s knowledge until remedy.
Potentially, if the defect eliminates or substantially impairs suitability for the intended use and remains unresolved under the conditions established by Article 306.
Preserve landlord messages, technician reports, repair estimates, invoices, photographs, equipment information, previous service records and evidence showing when the landlord was notified.
Notify the landlord immediately in writing, obtain a technical assessment identifying the cause of the malfunction and preserve all repair records. Before paying for a major replacement, deducting expenses from rent or terminating the lease, determine whether the problem constitutes ordinary tenant maintenance, landlord responsibility or tenant-caused damage.
Foreign tenants can face serious difficulties when a boiler, central heating system or other essential heating equipment fails and the landlord refuses to pay for repairs. The dispute may involve major repairs, ordinary maintenance, tenant-caused damage, rent reduction, compensation, security-deposit deductions or lease termination.
Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign nationals with heating-system disputes, defective rental properties, landlord repair obligations, rent-reduction claims, compensation claims, mandatory mediation and landlord-tenant litigation. Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya can evaluate the rental agreement, technician reports, repair history and communications with the landlord to determine which party may be responsible for the expense and how the dispute should be handled.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
WhatsApp: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr