Pursuant to Section 3 Paragraph 1 of the Renting Act, the landlord must inform the (future) tenant of the rental date on June 18.06.2019, 6 before the contract is concluded. According to Section 4 (2), the same applies with regard to the circumstances of the calculation. According to Section 3 Paragraph XNUMX, there is an obligation to cooperate and provide information to authorities at their request.
Yesterday's question, whether accepting rent outside of Berlin can be fined if there is no corresponding law outside of Berlin, immediately led to the next question, how is the disclosure obligation?
Let's say the landlord is a doctor from Cologne. He rents a Berlin apartment to an entrepreneur from Stuttgart. Reason: the Stuttgart native needs the apartment for his son, who starts studying in Berlin. The tenant does not want to move in, of course; he stays in Stuttgart and continues to run his company there.
In this case, both the landlord and the tenant live outside of Berlin and the rent payments are also processed entirely outside the city area. If there is a delay, a reminder is sent not in Berlin, but in Stuttgart.
In this case, the question arises as to how the MietWoG, which is only valid in the Berlin region, should effectively oblige the Cologne landlord to provide information to the Stuttgart tenant. If he does not, the "crime scene" of failure to do so is either Cologne or Stuttgart, but not Berlin. There are no such information requirements in Cologne or Stuttgart.
My colleagues who are reading this are called upon to find a convincing way of effectively establishing such an obligation for the Cologne landlord. In any case, I don't find any. But I'm also not a criminal lawyer, Owi matters do not fall into my (previous) area of expertise.
Now we modify the case. It remains with the Cologne landlord, but the tenant lives in Berlin. The obligation to provide information in Berlin must be fulfilled here, the place of success is here. So, in my opinion, we also have a starting point for an Owi, if that doesn't happen.
How is it the other way around, if the tenant is the Stuttgart entrepreneur, but the landlord is domiciled in Berlin? Then the question is where the duty to provide information has to be fulfilled. I think that it cannot be owed in Berlin, because here the Stuttgart tenant would not be able to take note of the declaration, it must somehow reach him. On the other hand, the landlord stays within the scope of the MietWoG, where he is obliged to make the declaration. How is it, however, when he's on vacation on Sylt? Is he also obliged there because he has a place of residence in Berlin?
Participation in accordance with Section 2 (3) MietWoG
The obligation to provide information and to present documents must be met with the relevant authority, i.e. in Berlin. However, the question arises why the Cologne landlord can be obliged to do so if there is no such obligation in Cologne. Let's take the unmodified case with the Stuttgart tenant. The only local point of contact here is the existence of an apartment in Berlin. However, this does not result in any obligation to provide information or to cooperate, rather it arises from the existence of a lease on a Berlin property. The tenancy, however, exists outside of it - the landlord and tenant and the contract documents are not within the scope of the MietWoG.
unusual legal issues
These considerations sound strange at first. The rent brake also triggers information obligations and applies to Cologne landlords. But that's because it's a federal law that regulates German tenancy law, §§ 556d ff.BGB, Anyone who signs a rental agreement for a German property under German law comes with the package. The MietWoG Berlin expressly regulates no tenancy law or civil law. It is a public law standard with limited spatial scope. Its facts can be fulfilled outside of its geographical scope. This distinguishes it from all other property-related standards, for example in building law, environmental protection or misuse.
Furthermore, the rental price brake does not provide any Owi facts, so that the question of the "crime scene" or the location of the omission does not arise. An infringement has civil law consequences, but does not result in a fine. The opposite is the case with the MietWoG, an infringement has no civil law consequences, but there is a risk of a fine. That is why you have to actually check where the "deed" was committed, ie whether it was there where you are not allowed to commit it. If it is committed in a place where it is not prohibited, it is not prohibited. So you can kiss on the street in Germany and don't have to worry about being thrown into prison in Indonesia if you travel there afterwards. Because it is only punishable there, i.e. if you kiss on the open road in Indonesia, but not if we do it in Germany.
Anyone who can convincingly explain from my colleagues how to differentiate and understand these things from one another is welcome to send in a guest post for my blog, which I will publish here.
So that the rental cover is good for something:
Do you love music? Good music needs good musicians. With the campaign
we collect money for a young pianist so that she can buy an adequate practice device. Unfortunately, this is very expensive. The blog here is free, but you can help get the tool together with a contribution. It is on the above platform or via PayPal here https://paypal.me/pools/campaign/113121080572323558 Thank you.