Owner selling the house, what are tenant's rights?

[LivinLOS]

It then falls to contract law, that while weaker than the 'real right' of a registered >3 year lease is still valid. 

 

It is not as easy as people think to simply demand someone leaves a property, even when the tenant stops paying rent. Of course if Thais do it legally or not is a different story. 

[Jsinbkk]

4 hours ago, smutcakes said:

That is for registered land lease over 30 years. I presume you don't have the same security of tenure on a 3 year residential lease which would not be registered on the title deed at the lands department.

Nope. It's a contract and enforcible. 

 

Only illegal contracts acts are not enforcible(more that 30 years for example or one party being incapable of contracting( mad or underage)). 

 

Think about it. Who would sign a lease if it could just be canceled by a sale?  Better to just me month to month. Who would invest in improvements? No one. 

[smutcakes]

8 minutes ago, Jsinbkk said:

Nope. It's a contract and enforcible. 

 

Only illegal contracts acts are not enforcible(more that 30 years for example or one party being incapable of contracting( mad or underage)). 

 

Think about it. Who would sign a lease if it could just be canceled by a sale?  Better to just me month to month. Who would invest in improvements? No one. 

People would sign a lease as they have no other option. How can a contract be enforceable if one of the parties to the contract is not even the legal owner of the property? Does he still collect rent as per the contract? Its very illogical a d i am sure incorrect.

[fanjita]

I hope the OP is packing her bags as she's not got a lot of time left.

 

I also note that she's been quite rude in suddenly implying that she might be the seller.  Why not just be honest.  Tenant or seller?  Rather than all the messing about.

 

Hope she gets booted soonest.  Just another idiot falang.

 

Edited November 28, 2017 by fanjita

[andre47]

On 11/27/2017 at 6:35 PM, SiSePuede419 said:

Do you practice law around here often?  A contract is between two parties.  The new owner is not one of those parties, I can assure you because their name does not exist on the lease.  Ipso de facto. ?

Change of ownership does not break a lease contract. - This is the law. - practice may differ, but if I were the tenant I would enforce it or claim for an compensation

[Jsinbkk]

On 11/28/2017 at 5:21 PM, smutcakes said:

People would sign a lease as they have no other option. How can a contract be enforceable if one of the parties to the contract is not even the legal owner of the property? Does he still collect rent as per the contract? Its very illogical a d i am sure incorrect.

Perfectly logical. Lease is an instrument to ensure two parties the length of occupancy. The property is leased and described in the lease. 

 

If the the structure is sold, no problem. New owner gets a tenant. Can needs to be taken when buying leased property. Buyer needs to investigate deposit amounts, lease terms, payments made. An estoppel is used for this. 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎11‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 6:31 PM, PhuketSarah said:

 Ok  Thanks for this but really we're wondering about the law. Is there one?  What is it?  

 

If going down the legal route, one needs deep pockets and a lawyer that one knows personally.