Error and Fraud in Concluding a Rental Agreement in Utrecht

Error (art. 6:228 CC) and fraud (art. 6:229 CC) render a rental agreement in Utrecht voidable, as opposed to absolute nullity. Error occurs when a tenant has an incorrect impression of the property due to misleading information from the landlord, such as hidden defects in a typical Utrecht canal house on the Oudegracht. Fraud involves intentional deception, for example regarding leaks in old buildings around the Dom Tower. The aggrieved tenant may annul the contract via the Utrecht cantonal court, with retroactive effect. Evidence is crucial: keep photos from viewings, emails with promises or witness statements from real estate agents. Example: a landlord in the Lombok neighbourhood conceals structural moisture problems; the tenant proves that otherwise they would not have signed. Annulment period: three years after discovery. After annulment, the tenant vacates the property and receives rent back, minus usage fee. Landlords in Utrecht must provide accurate descriptions in accordance with NVM guidelines, taking into account municipal requirements for monumental buildings. Tenants: always record viewings and oral assurances in writing, especially for popular addresses in Wittevrouwen or Voorburg. For social housing via Utrecht housing corporations such as Portaal, additional protection applies under the Housing Act and the Utrecht Housing Regulation. First try negotiation on repairs via the Rent Tribunal. The District Court of Midden-Nederland, Utrecht location, handles these cases quickly and cost-effectively. This way you maintain balance in Utrecht rental law and prevent proceedings with the local Huurteam Utrecht. (248 words)