Off- premises contracts in France
08/09/2026- Legal news, News of the ASA
Off-premises contracts: a checklist for people who have been cold-called and regret signing too quickly
14/04/2025-
Telephone services, solar panels, subscriptions and directories, and home renovation work are all areas in which contracts are often taken out following a cold call.
Lawyers are regularly approached by clients seeking to cancel such contracts, either because the service promised has not been provided – or has not been provided properly – or because, after taking the time to read the contract carefully, reflect on it and compare options, the contract turns out to be unnecessary or unfavourable.
Here are the first questions you should ask yourself.
Is this actually a door-to-door sale?
The french law protects consumers who sign a so-called ‘off-premises’ contract with a trader, in the simultaneous physical presence of both parties or their representatives and outside the trader’s premises. However, the concept of an ‘off-premises contract’ extends to contracts concluded on the trader’s premises, but immediately following a personal solicitation carried out at a different location, as well as to those concluded during a commercial excursion organised by the trader.
A building contractor visiting a client’s home to take measurements with a view to drawing up a quotation, which is subsequently sent by email, does not constitute door-to-door selling.
Telemarketing is subject to specific provisions.
Distance selling (in particular, sales concluded via the internet) and sales concluded at trade fairs and exhibitions are not covered by the provisions governing door-to-door selling.
Has the withdrawal period expired?
In the case of doorstep selling, except for certain goods or services such as perishable goods, goods made to the buyer’s specifications, and accommodation or catering services, the consumer has a right of withdrawal. The 14-day period for exercising this right begins on the day the goods are received, in the case of the sale of tangible goods, or on the day the contract is concluded in all other cases.
In the case of an order comprising several goods delivered separately, or in the case of an order for a good consisting of multiple parts, the period begins on the date of receipt of the last good or the last part.
However, this period is extended to a maximum of 12 months if the consumer has not received all the information relating to the right of withdrawal as required by law. It is therefore important to check carefully whether the order form does indeed contain all the information required by the Consumer Code. Similarly, failure to provide the consumer with a compliant withdrawal form results in an extension of the withdrawal period.
In this regard, the courts consider that a withdrawal form printed on one side of the order form—with the space for signing the contract on the other side—is not compliant, since the use of this form must not have the effect of compromising the integrity of the contract, which the consumer must be able to retain.
And what about business-to-business transactions?
Article L.221-3 of the Consumer Code extends the right of withdrawal to contracts concluded off-premises between two businesses, provided that the subject matter of such contracts does not fall within the scope of the principal business activity of the business in question and that the number of employees employed by that business is five or fewer.
The courts have thus upheld the withdrawal by an architect who had entered into a contract for the creation of a website, that of a sole trader who had placed an order for an advertisement in a local directory, and that of a pharmacist who had entered into a telecommunications contract.
The extension of the right of withdrawal to small businesses also applies to legal entities.
Is the contract valid?
Information relating to the right of withdrawal is not the only information that must be included in a contract concluded off-premises.
The consumer must receive a dated copy of the contract setting out, in particular, the identity and contact details of the trader, the essential characteristics of the goods or services, the price, the date of delivery or performance, the dispute resolution procedures, where applicable, information relating to statutory guarantees, etc.
Failing this, the contract is void and the consumer may rely on this voidness even after the expiry of the withdrawal period, subject to the ordinary rules on limitation periods.
In the case of a photovoltaic installation, it has been held that, in order to inform the consumer of the ‘essential characteristics of the goods’, the order form must not only include a list of the components making up the installation, but must also describe its technical characteristics in terms of performance, efficiency and production capacity.
Case law is also stringent regarding the manner in which the delivery period must be stated. In a case involving a contract under which the trader had undertaken to supply, install and commission an aerovoltaic power plant, as well as to carry out the administrative procedures necessary for its commissioning, the Court of Cassation criticised the specification of a single four-month timeframe that did not include the completion of all the necessary procedures. The contract should have distinguished between the timeframe for the physical delivery and installation of the goods and that for the performance of the other services.
For repair, maintenance and servicing work in the building and home furnishings sector, the decree of 24 January 2017applies, stipulating in particular that a detailed quotation must be provided, clearly setting out the prices of parts and labour. The consumer must be informed that they may keep the replaced parts, components or appliances
For certain goods, door-to-door selling is prohibited (e.g. high-risk financial products, gold) or strictly regulated (banking and financial services); a contract concluded in breach of this prohibition is void.
Has the contract come into force? Is it not void due to the termination of another related contract?
If the contract concluded through door-to-door selling is financed by a specific-purpose loan, the failure to grant the loan – for example, due to the financing organisation’s refusal to approve the borrower – renders the main contract void. Conversely, the invalidation of the contract for the sale of goods or the provision of services automatically renders the special-purpose loan invalid, owing to the interdependence between these contracts.
A consumer who validly exercises their right of withdrawal from the main contract or the specific-purpose credit agreement is thereby released from the other contract.
Contracts forming part of a transaction involving a finance lease are likewise interdependent. This is the case with a finance lease agreement and a maintenance contract relating to the same asset.
Thus, the invalidity of the order may render the finance lease invalid; any lack of conformity or malfunction of the equipment entitles the consumer to request early termination of the finance lease; and failure to fulfil maintenance obligations may justify the suspension of lease payments.
Are the performance deadlines being met?
Where the trader fails to meet the agreed delivery or performance deadline, the consumer may withdraw from the contract by notifying the trader of their withdrawal.
However, unless meeting the deadline constituted an essential condition of the contract for the consumer – which the consumer must prove – or it is clear that delivery or performance will not take place, the consumer must, before terminating the contract, give the trader formal notice to deliver the goods or provide the service within a reasonable additional period.
What if the door-to-door salesperson obtained the signature by unfair means?
In certain extreme cases, the contract concluded as a result of unfair or misleading practices may be declared void, or even the criminal offence of taking advantage of a person’s vulnerability may apply.