Thai Law: Landlord Not Playing By New Rules? Here’s What To Do.

[VeriThai Investigations]

23 hours ago, brucec64 said:

I foresee many shell companies owning 4 condos being formed in the near future if this law is actually enforced.

We still have to see what the future brings, but with this new law having been mooted some time ago you'd expect there to have been some uptick in registration of property management or holding companies. But the industrial classification category most relevant to property rentals has seen 10% fewer new registrations this year January-April versus last year for the same period. 

 

It's possible that the legitimate large-scale landlords will simply grumble and comply without splitting up their rental holdings among multiple new firms each of which will also incur start-up and maintenance costs. The scummier landlords on the other hand are probably the least likely to even bother with a company structure at all and simply offer the lease as a private party and then pay taxes as a sole trader if they pay taxes at all. 

[newnative]

32 minutes ago, norrska said:

That would be a great honor to serve under such a great President....can you write a letter of recommendation for me.

    No need.  Just write it yourself and sign some name like 'Paul Ryan'.  It's obvious with the yahoos he has working for him that nobody is doing any checking.

[newnative]

1 hour ago, norrska said:

Post 63 is by stud858 and contains no such link...more fake news!

No, more deflection.

[brucec64]

1 hour ago, VeriThai Investigations said:

We still have to see what the future brings, but with this new law having been mooted some time ago you'd expect there to have been some uptick in registration of property management or holding companies. But the industrial classification category most relevant to property rentals has seen 10% fewer new registrations this year January-April versus last year for the same period. 

 

It's possible that the legitimate large-scale landlords will simply grumble and comply without splitting up their rental holdings among multiple new firms each of which will also incur start-up and maintenance costs. The scummier landlords on the other hand are probably the least likely to even bother with a company structure at all and simply offer the lease as a private party and then pay taxes as a sole trader if they pay taxes at all. 

The law did not take effect until May 1st so I think stats for the first 4 months are not that applicable. I think the response will be a "wait and see", because many things in Thailand so often just fade away. If the law does end up having teeth, then we may see an uptick in property rental companies. Also, companies can be registered with somewhat vague or misleading classifications, and if I was going to shelter my condos, (not that I would), I would make the classification as vague as possible.

 

[jerry921]

6 hours ago, norrska said:

more fake news!

63 was a typo for 68. You had enough info to find the post I was talking about, if you wanted. But I don't think you really deserve the help. What I think you deserve is a ban.

 

 

[norrska]

11 minutes ago, jerry921 said:

63 was a typo for 68.

sorry I am not your spellchecker.  The devil is in the details.  I hope you aren't a heart surgeon!

[jerry921]

1 hour ago, norrska said:

sorry I am not your spellchecker.  The devil is in the details.  I hope you aren't a heart surgeon!

I'm still not hearing you admit:

- you were given the link you demanded

- you intentionally didn't see it

- you still refuse to see it

- you refuse to click on it and read it

- you refuse to admit you're wrong

- you refuse to apologize for your behavior and your antisocial attitude
 

[Huayrat]

On 16/05/2018 at 1:09 PM, kannot said:

Wife deals with this daily ( estate  agent) and NO ONE she knows is  going to comply with these laws................and I dont blame them, way too easy for a tenant to bail on ANY contract, in fact it  makes the contracts virtually null and void.

Whilst there have been serious issues with some rse hole landlords never giving back deposits, for the most part they do from what she sees........ this is not a  one person viewpoint either, we are talking hundreds of condo contracts ending that she deals with and likewise her other agents/friends  in this line of work. 

However Chinese inflow is causing some serious issues, lets  just say honesty doesnt appear to be their best side. 

A new Tenant will not rent from a landlird then its that simple.  Take one months deposit or ill go elsewhere

[tropo]

26 minutes ago, Huayrat said:

A new Tenant will not rent from a landlird then its that simple.  Take one months deposit or ill go elsewhere

It wasn't that long ago that one month's deposit was the norm, especially if you're dealing with the landlords directly. My first contract was 1 month. There have been many rental threads where people looking for rentals were advised never to pay more than 1 month. All this new regulation will do is make it slightly less of a risk to rent as many landlords don't return deposits and there's nothing tenants can do if they refuse. I'd call it meeting in the middle. A little better for tenants, a little less good for landlords.

[poanoi]

10 hours ago, norrska said:

Post 63 is by stud858 and contains no such link...more fake news!

more contentious drivel from you, come off it.

from jackdd post 68

 

“ธุรกิจการให้เช่าอาคารเพื่ออยู่อาศัย” หมายความว่า การประกอบธุรกิจที่ผู้ประกอบธุรกิจ ตกลงให้ผู้เช่าซึ่งเป็นบุคคลธรรมดาได้ใช้อาคารเพื่ออยู่อาศัย และผู้เช่าตกลงจะให้ค่าเช่าเพื่อการนั้น โดยมีสถานที่ที่จัดแบ่งให้เช่าตั้งแต่ ๕ หน่วยขึ้นไป ไม่ว่าจะอยู่ในอาคารเดียวกันหรือหลายอาคารรวมกัน

http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2561/E/035/12.PDF

 

 

[newnative]

7 hours ago, norrska said:

sorry I am not your spellchecker.  The devil is in the details.  I hope you aren't a heart surgeon!

And yet, even more deflection.

[norrska]

7 hours ago, jerry921 said:

I'm still not hearing you admit:

- you were given the link you demanded

- you intentionally didn't see it

- you still refuse to see it

- you refuse to click on it and read it

- you refuse to admit you're wrong

- you refuse to apologize for your behavior and your antisocial attitude
 

Sorry no time to go a treasure hunt for things if people do not know how to properly count or use correct number references.

I am much too busy for that.  You have one chance to get it right, so do not make a mistake.

Being argumentative like you is the epitome of anti-social.

[norrska]

5 hours ago, poanoi said:

more contentious drivel from you, come off it.

from jackdd post 68

 

“ธุรกิจการให้เช่าอาคารเพื่ออยู่อาศัย” หมายความว่า การประกอบธุรกิจที่ผู้ประกอบธุรกิจ ตกลงให้ผู้เช่าซึ่งเป็นบุคคลธรรมดาได้ใช้อาคารเพื่ออยู่อาศัย และผู้เช่าตกลงจะให้ค่าเช่าเพื่อการนั้น โดยมีสถานที่ที่จัดแบ่งให้เช่าตั้งแต่ ๕ หน่วยขึ้นไป ไม่ว่าจะอยู่ในอาคารเดียวกันหรือหลายอาคารรวมกัน

http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2561/E/035/12.PDF

 

 

Thank you for being kind enough to post the link, unlike these other defensive arguers who can't even count!

 

What will be interesting is to see the legal interpretation of this.

 

 

 

 

[poanoi]

4 minutes ago, norrska said:

Thank you for being kind enough to post the link, unlike these other defensive arguers who can't even count!

 

What will be interesting is to see the legal interpretation of this.

In most countries, it is very rare for 1 group of tenants to have 1 set of rights/conditions, and another group to have a different set, unless you are talking residential versus corporate.

The only way to know for sure would be through due process of the legal system.

 

 

 

agree its horribly awkward to have a tier 2 rental law,

but i will for sure only rent from those that the law apply to from now on,

and i can dissect if the law apply by asking how much electric is ?

cause i have yet to see a landlord that doesnt fleece me

to the best of his ability, so if electric is max 5 baht per unit,

its safe to rent, if its above 5 baht, its a con landlord

[emilywhitaker]

Are the new rules retroactive?

 

Do they apply to people who rent or plan to rent houses?

 

[Rimmer]

A personal attack has been removed, did you miss this rule when you signed up?

 

Posting Content & General Conduct
7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.
 

[yourauntbob]

On 5/17/2018 at 4:12 AM, tropo said:

No, you've missed the point. A security deposit is a security deposit. A commission payment is a commission payment. The point is that an agent does work and advertises to obtain tenants and obviously should be paid. Do you think that if a tenant skips early the agent should be the loser? Good agents probably have an arrangement to cover such eventualities. You're under the delusion that the landlord should always win. Losing a security deposit here or there is the cost of doing business.

I never said the agent should not be paid.  The agent should be paid for their work.  If the tenant skips after a month or two the landlord typically loses even with a deposit in hand.  Not only are there going to be expenses(electric, water, cleaning)  but most landlords are also still paying off the mortgage plus will then have the place go empty for additional time.  Which is why a two month deposit is very reasonable and laws forbidding them are going to have unintended consequences.  

[tropo]

43 minutes ago, yourauntbob said:

I never said the agent should not be paid.  The agent should be paid for their work.  If the tenant skips after a month or two the landlord typically loses even with a deposit in hand.  Not only are there going to be expenses(electric, water, cleaning)  but most landlords are also still paying off the mortgage plus will then have the place go empty for additional time.  Which is why a two month deposit is very reasonable and laws forbidding them are going to have unintended consequences.  

 

You're exaggerating potential problems. We're talking about 1 month's security deposit.  Do you think that wealthy Thai landlords who own more than 5 units are going to suffer greatly because they could potentially lose a month's rent? It's water off a duck's back. Who cares about mortgage payments? If they can't afford it, don't buy it. It won't affect battling Thai landlords who own less than 5 units. Don't worry, Thai battlers won't usually go out and buy more than 5 units. Most of the Thai landlords who rent privately are happy to accept one month's security deposit anyway. You won't find any problems talking most landlords down to 1 month's security deposit. They should be more concerned about the quality of prospective tenants. Do some homework. Ask some questions. I've always been surprised that landlords don't ask questions when I rent places here. No references, nothing.

 

If paying a commission to a real estate agent doesn't appeal, then advertise for tenants privately.

 

The tenants are always at more risk here. They are usually the losers because the security deposit is always held by the landlords and there's no way to get it back if the landlord refuses.

[poanoi]

ok, so my experience with how landlords greets the new law:

when i asked my landlord of he knew about the new law that outlaw his 9 baht/unit,

, his response was

"i dont care" and after giving it a thought, he offered to make a new contract

where i would pay for cleaning/cable/water/

 

when i went to next hotel, and their 10 baht/unit, the response was

"we will just increase rent in compensation" if you insist

 

still i think a reward offer for reporting charges above 5 baht/unit

will make cost more transparent in a heartbeat,

a few penalties will wipe out this sneaky charge quickly