Thai Law: What Landlords Must Now Do (Or Go To Jail)

[webfact]

Thai Law: What Landlords Must Now Do (Or Go To Jail)

By Wirot Poonsuwan, Attorney-at-Law

 

  

Photo: Orangeaurochs / Flickr

 

On May 1, residential leases will become restricted contracts under the newly amended Consumer Protection Act.

 

That means any leases that conflict with the new law, which likely is most leases, must be amended and remade to comply. Landlords who ignore the new legal requirements and take no action to deliver a new compliant lease to the tenant are criminally liable for a year in jail and fine of 100,000 baht per lease violation.

 

Full story:  http://www.khaosodenglish.com/news/2018/03/13/thai-law-what-landlords-must-quickly-do-or-go-to-jail/

 

-- © Copyright Khaosod English 2018-03-13

[Chang_paarp]

Some interesting new regulations being put on the landlords. Some even exceed those in Oz. It will be interesting to see if they are enforced or just on the statutes like the smoking in bars and restaurants regulations. The one that interested me was the introduction of a "class action" as a form of redress for breaches.

 

I will be interested to see if it applies to condo "supervisors" with things like water, power and internet having to be passed on at cost. Maybe they (some) will see the writing on the wall and make individual condos have their own meters thus passing the onus of collecting the cost onto the suppliers as there is nothing in it for them.

[zaphod reborn]

This legislation is pretty meaningless.  There aren't that many landlords who own 5 or more units which they rent.  Moreover, it is easy to circumvent the law, by leasing any units in excess of this limit to family members or friends and having them be the subleasing agent to the real tenant.  Don't expect sophisticated consumer protection legislation from a bunch of unqualified army rejects.  There's absolutely no reason why they only applied this legislation to landlords with larger rental stock.

Edited March 13, 2018 by zaphod reborn

[Thailand]

Have not read the new laws in great depth but it may only apply to properties that have dartboards.

[mercman24]

i asked why my water in Bangkok was about 100 baht a month, but my new address in Jomtien is a fixed 400, if i go over it is 500, no one could answer me. and they have done away with night security cant afford it lol just waiting for a scooter or car to get nicked.,

[kannot]

Hmmm   "owners"  of  5  or  more, what happens if  I own 5   but rent  out 4  and live in the other one myself??

[jenny2017]

31 minutes ago, kannot said:

Hmmm   "owners"  of  5  or  more, what happens if  I own 5   but rent  out 4  and live in the other one myself??

 

      Buy one more. 

 

The maximum security deposit warranted is one month, plus another one month’s rent payable in advance, amounting to two months’ worth.

 

   That's good for customers, perhaps not for you? 

Edited March 13, 2018 by jenny2017

[spidermike007]

This has to relate to apartment buildings, correct? Nearly all rental apartments are in buildings that are over five units, in Hua Hin, for example, and nearly all charge up to a 100% markup on electric, which should be criminal, and apparently it will be? About time. Wonder if these laws can be enforced? Or will the weak, hapless, super incompetent army government just ignore them, like they do all other laws?

Edited March 13, 2018 by spidermike007

[worgeordie]

The law or the lawyer is contradicting its/himself, first he says 10 units, 

then its 5 properties. 

regards worgeordie

[jenny2017]

48 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

This has to relate to apartment buildings, correct? Nearly all rental apartments are in buildings that are over five units, in Hua Hin, for example, and nearly all charge up to a 100% markup on electric, which should be criminal, and apparently it will be? About time. Wonder if these laws can be enforced? Or will the weak, hapless, super incompetent army government just ignore them, like they do all other laws?

You're asking a good question, and you've answered it correctly. 

[jenny2017]

3 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

The law or the lawyer is contradicting its/himself, first he says 10 units, 

then its 5 properties. 

regards worgeordie

What does that tell us? Don't trust lawyers, bankers, politicians, prostitutes and sometimes ( after too much alcohol) not even yourself

[ukrules]

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

This has to relate to apartment buildings, correct? Nearly all rental apartments are in buildings that are over five units, in Hua Hin, for example, and nearly all charge up to a 100% markup on electric, which should be criminal, and apparently it will be? About time. Wonder if these laws can be enforced? Or will the weak, hapless, super incompetent army government just ignore them, like they do all other laws?

 

Really, how much do you pay for your electricity per unit on average in Hua Hin ? I didn't realise it was that bad.

 

[IamRoach]

3 hours ago, zaphod reborn said:

This legislation is pretty meaningless.  There aren't that many landlords who own 5 or more units which they rent.  Moreover, it is easy to circumvent the law, by leasing any units in excess of this limit to family members or friends and having them be the subleasing agent to the real tenant.  Don't expect sophisticated consumer protection legislation from a bunch of unqualified army rejects.  There's absolutely no reason why they only applied this legislation to landlords with larger rental stock.

Actually yes there are many people who own several units often exceeding 5 ... in my 1200 unit building almost almost all the people I know have landlords that own several units.

[tropo]

4 hours ago, Chang_paarp said:

Some interesting new regulations being put on the landlords. Some even exceed those in Oz. It will be interesting to see if they are enforced or just on the statutes like the smoking in bars and restaurants regulations. The one that interested me was the introduction of a "class action" as a form of redress for breaches.

 

I will be interested to see if it applies to condo "supervisors" with things like water, power and internet having to be passed on at cost. Maybe they (some) will see the writing on the wall and make individual condos have their own meters thus passing the onus of collecting the cost onto the suppliers as there is nothing in it for them.

I doubt it has anything to do with condo "supervisors". For example, I pay 35 baht/m3 for water, but that is paid to the condo "supervisors", not the landlord. I don't mind paying extra as I'm getting well-filtered clean water rather than dirty water at waterboard rates.

 

I will be interested to see if I get a refund for 1 month's security deposit before May 1.

[tropo]

3 hours ago, mercman24 said:

i asked why my water in Bangkok was about 100 baht a month, but my new address in Jomtien is a fixed 400, if i go over it is 500, no one could answer me. and they have done away with night security cant afford it lol just waiting for a scooter or car to get nicked.,

I used to pay a minimum 350 a month in a rental house. That's the corporate rate... and I pay more if I go over 15 m2. 

[coulson]

4 hours ago, Chang_paarp said:

Some interesting new regulations being put on the landlords. Some even exceed those in Oz. It will be interesting to see if they are enforced or just on the statutes like the smoking in bars and restaurants regulations. The one that interested me was the introduction of a "class action" as a form of redress for breaches.

 

I will be interested to see if it applies to condo "supervisors" with things like water, power and internet having to be passed on at cost. Maybe they (some) will see the writing on the wall and make individual condos have their own meters thus passing the onus of collecting the cost onto the suppliers as there is nothing in it for them.

A condo with a proper juristic person and decent management won't have any problems with these regulations.

 

It is a great deal for many people getting short changed on rounded up utilities, like private owned rental businesses who screw deposits out of low earners who don't read the small print.

 

For anyone renting out their personal properties it just means shortening your lease to 6 months to keep your tenants in line. A lot of interesting changes in notifications, but only enforced if the tenant realises they are empowered. 

[tropo]

1 hour ago, worgeordie said:

The law or the lawyer is contradicting its/himself, first he says 10 units, 

then its 5 properties. 

regards worgeordie

I interpret his reference to the penalty for a landlord with 10 units as an example only.

 

He also mentions "residential units". Why wouldn't this include townhouses and detached houses too? 

 

From the OP: "Note that while the regulations apply to a “residential lease business”

 

This indicates it covers any residential lease. He only excludes hotels and dormitories.

 

Anyway, my landlord owns way more than 5 and I signed my lease through a major real estate company, so I'll be waiting for my refund as I paid 2 month's security deposit. I already sent the manager an email asking LOL.

 

 

[coulson]

2 hours ago, jenny2017 said:

You're asking a good question, and you've answered it correctly. 

The revised law empowers tenants, to enforce it the tenants only have to act.

 

I don't understand anything you say.

[Felt 35]

1 hour ago, ukrules said:

 

Really, how much do you pay for your electricity per unit on average in Hua Hin ? I didn't realise it was that bad.

 

 Contract with a sensible condo owner and pay government rate, if through a rental company 7baht electricity and 35baht for water

[worgeordie]

1 hour ago, tropo said:

I interpret his reference to the penalty for a landlord with 10 units as an example only.

 

He also mentions "residential units". Why wouldn't this include townhouses and detached houses too? 

 

From the OP: "Note that while the regulations apply to a “residential lease business”

 

This indicates it covers any residential lease. He only excludes hotels and dormitories.

 

Anyway, my landlord owns way more than 5 and I signed my lease through a major real estate company, so I'll be waiting for my refund as I paid 2 month's security deposit. I already sent the manager an email asking LOL.

 

 

Good Luck, put your name down now for the class action suit.

regards worgeordie

[tropo]

1 hour ago, worgeordie said:

Good Luck, put your name down now for the class action suit.

regards worgeordie

If I get it, good. If I don't, no problem. I have no interest in a legal battle over it.  

[smedly]

seems pretty simple, those renting will be forced to pay the actual utility cost instead of the inflated padded rate that most charge right now

 

about time

[lamyai3]

6 hours ago, tropo said:

Anyway, my landlord owns way more than 5 and I signed my lease through a major real estate company, so I'll be waiting for my refund as I paid 2 month's security deposit. I already sent the manager an email asking LOL.

I wonder how many people will get their money back easily this way. I'm pretty happy with my landlady, always quick to deal with repairs etc and utilities charged at cost, but I did have to pay a two month security deposit. I'd be happy to get one month back if possible, but I'd like to keep renewing my contract there, so not inclined to rock the boat unnecessarily, especially since I have no reason to think she has more than 5 properties to let out. Be interested how things unfold, as two months deposit seems to be standard almost everywhere these days.  

[tropo]

1 hour ago, smedly said:

seems pretty simple, those renting will be forced to pay the actual utility cost instead of the inflated padded rate that most charge right now

 

about time

What if the landlord pays the inflated cost? In many buildings it can work that way, in which case he's passing exactly his costs onto his tenants, which would be quite legal under the new law if I understand it correctly. That's the way it is with my water bill. The condo charges the landlord, which he passes on to me. Considering there's a big filtration system on the roof that requires regular servicing, I'm quite happy to pay more than for stinky water straight from the street.

[connda]

Hopefully the implement a consumer hot-line to let renters report violations.

[spidermike007]

14 hours ago, ukrules said:

 

Really, how much do you pay for your electricity per unit on average in Hua Hin ? I didn't realise it was that bad.

 

A good friend of mine, was paying 8 baht per unit (KW Hour?) in Hua Hin, in  building called the Precious, on Soi 88. The going rate is about 4 baht per unit. That constitutes a 100% markup. The building he was living in was about 80 units. If fully occupied, that means somewhere between 80,000 and 120,000 baht per month, in electric profit for the landlord, who should be in prison. 

 

The first question I would ever ask of a Thai landlord, is what do you charge for electric and water? Do I pay the actual bill from the meter, or do you mark it up? Oh you mark it up. This meeting is over. I want nothing to do with your criminal tactics. Although, frankly I am not sure if there are any buildings in Hua Hin that do not mark up utilities. Maybe renting from an owner of a private condo? 

 

The real question is, will this new law be enforced? It flies in the face of everything this administration represents. Protecting the wealthy, the elite, those in power, and those who are connected. That is all they do, day and night. 

[newnative]

     The 'rule of 5'  makes perfect sense to me.   Obviously, you have landlords with a few properties that they rent out to earn some extra pin money.  It's likely not their major or only source of income.  At various times I have had one or two rental condos and the rental income when the condos were actually rented and not sitting empty was helpful but I certainly didn't depend on it for my living.

    Then you have landlords that are renting on a much larger scale and they are, in fact, running a business with that many rentals.  It was, of course,  an arbitrary decision to set 5 as the magic number.  Part of the reasoning might have been to limit the number of landlords taken to court and eliminate the 'small potatoes' cases.  

     

[Emster23]

"Another prevalent conduct of landlords is to fix their own utility charges by marking up electricity, water, and telephone charges from the utility providers for a profit. Security deposits and arbitrary installation charges for installation of a landline and internet fees can only be passed on at cost."

 My place in BKK does that doubling scam for electricity. If I want a DSL line, there would also be a monthly fee for that although absolutely no work would be done to earn that cash, just another gouge. My landlord would also only allow connection to True, as her sister works for them...

 Is anything stopping landlords from just jacking up the rent if they can't get you with utilities scam? Our one year lease ran out a few months ago, asked the wife about signing a new one, and she said no need, we just continue on old one month to month (is that common?)

[LukKrueng]

Condo buildings usually have water tanks on the roof of the building. They mange the pumps to get the water from street level to the roof and all the pipes from the tanks to the units. If you want to get water directly from the city water authority you'd get it only to the entrance of the building which means you won't have water running in your unit. On private houses / town houses etc' the city installs the water meter outside your fence from where the owner is responsible to bring it in.

As for electricity in apartment buildings (not condos) the building usually has one owner and the electricity is delivered to a meter just outside the property from where the building owner connect it to a board inside the building and distribute it to the rooms (apartments) so again, a tenant of a room can't get direct supply from the electricity authority 

[tigermoth]

19 hours ago, zaphod reborn said:

This legislation is pretty meaningless.  There aren't that many landlords who own 5 or more units which they rent.  Moreover, it is easy to circumvent the law, by leasing any units in excess of this limit to family members or friends and having them be the subleasing agent to the real tenant.  Don't expect sophisticated consumer protection legislation from a bunch of unqualified army rejects.  There's absolutely no reason why they only applied this legislation to landlords with larger rental stock.

I suspect the five condo rule is a problem in translation. Any condo with five or more units, translated as a 'property' is meant. The five property stipulation also covers those owning individual properties.  This should be cleared up.