Reducing people’s car use and increasing the proportion of rather sustainable modes of transportation effectively by interventions is challenging. Mobility behavior is supposed to be mostly habitual behavior and habits are difficult to change as long as their contexts remain stable. Therefore, an intervention needs to tackle the central maintaining condition of a habit: context stability. Alternatively, the intervention design can take advantage of significant context changes, for example those which naturally occur in the course of life. Following this line of argumentation, the presented study focuses on house moving situations. These situations often go along with considerable spatial as well as social and/or individual changes in a person’s life, which in turn often require a conscious adjustment of one’s mobility patterns. Thereby, mobility habits supposedly are weakened or broken for a while. Within this window of opportunity a soft policy intervention consisting of information and incentives to use alternative modes is implemented in this study. There is a considerable body of studies taking the same starting point and whose results support the assumption that house moving situations can be promising windows of opportunity to change habits. At the same time, the understanding of the character of habits and its interconnectedness with the context they are embedded in is still at its beginning. What are the main and interaction effects of the moving situation itself and the implemented intervention? When does a habit start to weaken or break – with the moment of relocation or already before in anticipation of it? How does a habit influence decision making, that is which role does a mobility habit play when choosing the new living place? How long and under what conditions can a habit outlast alternative behaviour? Referring to such questions, the talk will present empirical data from a quasi-experimental field study conducted in Leipzig, Germany, from 2008-2010. Newcomers to Leipzig answered to a 3-wavesurvey before their move (N=156), shortly after their move (so far: N=51) and half a year after their move (so far: N=16). One sub-sample received the intervention (information and incentives) before the move, another sub-sample right after the move, a third subsample did not receive the intervention. Also habitants participated in a 3-wave-survey (N1=663, N2=262, so far: N3=73), with one half of the sample receiving an intervention. In addition, an online survey is running addressing people who want to move but did not yet decide for a certain apartment. Thereby, we intend to present some quantitative data about the role of habits within the search process. Not only should the results offer new input to the development of the habit concept, but also provide a sound contribution to the discussion about the generation of effective soft policy interventions to lastingly change habitual behaviour. Eventually, referring to the robustness of habits in a stable environment, an intervention should dare to strive not only for the breaking of a habit, but, moreover, for the creation of a new (desired) habit.