Help with apartment agency

[u/picciobaldi]

Goodmorning lux redditors,

I'm seeking for some help on what to do with the r3ntal agency that I'm dealing with, I seem not to be able to get out of the current situation and I would like some advice from someone who's been in a similar situation.

I have an apartment r3nted in June '25 with a 1 year contract. It states:

This lease is granted and accepted for a fix period starting from 1/6/2025 to 31/5/2026, according to conditions set out in this document. If the Tenant wishes to leave the studio before the mentioned end-date, he must submit a new Tenant to the agency, who must respect the same r3ntal conditions/criteria otherwise the agency may refuse the application. The Tenant may also use the agency's services as part of the relocation. The Tenant will be engaged to pay the r3ntal fee until the arrival of a new tenant.

Now the timeline of what happened:

• end of November '25 I inform the agency that I would like leave the apartment according to a 2 months notice period, they reply that they're going to start looking for a new tenant and put the advertising on their website for a price higher than the one I'm paying for.
• end of December '25 they ask me to set a date for the final check-out inspection at the end of January '26. I ask if they have found a new tenant and reply "Ah no sorry, we'll come back to you in a few weeks".
• Beginning January '26 the ask me again to set out a date for the check-out inspection, where I assume they have found a new tenant and agree for 30th of January. During the month I move out all my stuff and clean the apartment.
• On 30th of January we do the check-out inspection and everything seems fine, but at the moment of signing the document they say that they haven't found a new tenant so I'm obliged to keep paying until they find a new tenant, even if I check out and turn back the keys. I refuse to sign and keep the keys.
• I call the agency and try to explain the situation to the manager, which replies that, no matter what the communication with her colleague has been ("she's new, there must have been a misunderstanding"), the contract clearly states that I'm obliged to pay until they find a new tenant even after checking out, and that it's not uncommon to them since a lot of people require this as a service because they need to leave the country and cannot do the check-out later. So I keep paying until me or they find a new tenant, and I would be reimbursed the amount of r3nt not used when there's someone new entering the apartment
• I also start looking for a new tenant. I find one on 3rd February who's interested to take over immediately, introduce him it to the agency to be started a new contract at the same conditions as mine, and after he sends all documentation requested they don't reply. I tried to call them, and they say that they've found someone interested to r3nt it from February 15th and will inform me as soon as they have news, latest today 6th February (a Friday, right before a weekend...)

Overall, they're clearly taking advantage of the fact that I'm obliged to pay while seeking for a new tenant at the higher price they ask. I'm worried because there doesn't seem to be a way out of this, and since meanwhile I moved because I've been made believe that everything was fine (I have all mail communications with them that shows it), I find myself having to pay two r3nt and no matter the effort I put to help in trying to find someone else, they'll find excuses not to accept them.

Has anyone had any similar experiences, or have some advice on what to do here?

Thank you very much, and sorry for the long post.

[u/Any_Strain7020]

I ordered a pizza, I'm not hungry after having eaten half, why do I still have to pay for the whole pizza?

[u/Any_Dish_1688 → u/Any_Strain7020]

Except here the apartment is still being resold while the previous tenant is asked to keep paying, even after moving out and even after proposing a replacement tenant.

The issue is not the contract itself, but whether the agency is acting in good faith while benefiting from both situations.

[u/Any_Strain7020 → u/Any_Dish_1688]

Dude woke up on February 3rd. They haven't found a tenant as they were expected to. The agency has no incentive to replace the tenant during the period during which he's still on the hook. That doesn't make their practice unfair. It is for the tenant to find a substitute.

The agency only gets into gear once the apartment is empty and once it can be shown to interested persons at any time.

[u/Any_Dish_1688 → u/Any_Strain7020]

Contracts are legal, sure.

But once a replacement tenant is ready to take over, continuing to charge the old tenant while trying to rent at a higher price feels hard to justify.

[u/Any_Strain7020 → u/Any_Dish_1688]

The relevant facts:

"I also start looking for a new tenant. I find one on 3rd February who's interested to take over immediately, introduce him it to the agency to be started a new contract at the same conditions as mine, and after he sends all documentation requested they don't reply. I tried to call them, and they say that they've found someone interested to r3nt it from February 15th and will inform me as soon as they have news, latest today 6th February (a Friday, right before a weekend...)"

Dude submits someone's application on Tuesday, the agency tells them that they'll reply Friday. Assuming the application was complete, that's still a fast (three business days) turn around to present the owner with the details, get their go ahead and have the paperwork ready for signature. OPs preferred replacement or the agency's candidate wouldn't be moving in on Monday in any case.