Reconciling different versions of a tenant-occupancy file
A tenant file often grows in layers: an original lease, renewal correspondence, rent-adjustment messages, deposit records, notices, bank transfers and perhaps litigation or mediation documents. The risk is not that one of these documents is necessarily false, but that the transaction file combines different periods and presents them as one current status. Version reconciliation establishes which document controls each field today.
Create a chronology before deciding which version is current
List the original lease date and property, every signed addendum, written notice, rent-change agreement, renewal event and any dispute filing. Attach the date each document was signed or served. Then map the payment history to the same periods. The chronology should show when the tenant entered, when rent changed, whether the parties changed, and whether any later document amended rather than replaced the original lease.
For residential and roofed-workplace leases, the statutory framework matters when reading the timeline. Article 347 provides that a fixed-term lease is deemed extended for one year on the same conditions unless the tenant gives notice at least fifteen days before the end; the landlord cannot terminate merely because the initial fixed period has expired, subject to the later statutory rules after the ten-year extension period. An old “end date” on the first page is therefore not enough to conclude that occupancy became unauthorized the next day.
Reconcile rent and security using evidence from the same period
Identify the current rent from the latest valid agreement and actual payment pattern, not from an old listing. If a deposit or other security is recorded, connect the amount to the version of the lease that created it. Article 342 limits contractual security in residential and roofed-workplace leases to three months’ rent and regulates monetary security. If one file says the deposit was transferred, another says it was returned and the bank history shows neither, mark the point unresolved.
Treat an eviction undertaking as its own document version
If the file contains a tahliye taahhütnamesi, record the original document, date, signature and the date on which the tenant undertook to vacate. Do not convert a sentence in the lease into an “eviction undertaking” by labeling it that way in a spreadsheet. The Ministry of Justice has publicly distinguished a generic lease clause promising departure on a date from the separate undertaking relevant to eviction. If multiple copies differ, preserve them and resolve authenticity and timing before relying on the document.
Reconcile dispute records with the lease rather than replacing it
A mediation, enforcement or court file may change the practical status, but it does not erase the need to understand the underlying lease. Since 1 September 2023, rental disputes generally fall within mandatory pre-litigation mediation under Article 18/B of the Mediation Law, with the statutory exception for eviction through non-judicial enforcement. Record the case or mediation number, parties, subject and latest procedural result, and connect it to the lease version and notice that generated the dispute.
Check whether ownership changed during the document chain
If the property was sold while occupied, Article 310 provides that the new owner becomes a party to the lease. A version table should therefore show the date of title transfer and the landlord identity before and after it. Rent paid to the previous owner after transfer, a deposit retained by the previous owner, or notices sent in the wrong name may require explanation.
Produce a current-state sheet, not a pile of documents
End the reconciliation by stating the current tenant, exact unit, governing lease and addenda, current rent, last verified payment, security status, active notices, any eviction undertaking and any open proceeding. For every field, cite the document and date that supports it. Keep superseded documents because they explain history, but clearly mark them as superseded.
This method prevents a buyer from being misled by a genuine but obsolete document. The most recent date is not automatically the governing version; the question is whether the later document validly changed the earlier one and whether the parties’ actual conduct is consistent with that change.