Property Sold - Seller Will Not Leave

[newnative]

9 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

not sure on what planet you live, and how your little narrative is relevant to the thread, but in a sale contract, there will always be a date for "delivery", you are not buying a truck or a PC. The delay of that date is the main issue here. I think there is a minimum of 1 month but it could be 2 weeks in Thailand.

 

You don't get the key when you sign, you get the key at the delivery date. Money has to be cleared, titles have to be transferred etc... and that take at least a few days.

     Wrong.  Money should already be 'cleared' before the transfer date of sale at the Land Office.  On the date of transfer the seller should receive either a cashier's check in his or her name, or cash.  If there is any uncertainty regarding the cashier's check, the issuing bank can be phoned to verify the check.  Also incorrect in that it does not take a 'few days' for titles to be transferred--it's done on the same day at the Land Office in a couple hours while both parties are there.  The final money payment is exchanged when the buyer receives the chanote (title deed).  

[Liverpool Lou]

1 hour ago, GrandPapillon said:

2 hours ago, Janner1 said:

Exchange of contract sets the completion date, Completion means all money is paid to the seller who is out on  the day, and the purchaser moves in.

I have seen a lot of property deals, never seen anyone moved in the same day.

On completion of the sale, i.e. the property ownership has been transferred and is now owned by the buyers, they can move in whenever you want to. 

 

In the purchases/moves I made in the UK every one was on completion day.   In the last move the previous owners were moving out as we were moving in.

[soi3eddie]

14 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

Apparently in the US, some states have exceptions, but in the civilized world, like Europe and Asia ????, there is a transition period before you take the keys. 

 

I've bought and sold a number of properties over the years in the UK and never heard of any "transition period". In the UK residential property is almost always sold as "vacant possesion" unless it's being bought as an investment property with a paying (and contracted) tenant in place. The moment that "completion" i.e payment and title transfer takes place, the keys are available and one may occupy their property immediately. In the case of the OP then T.I.T and anything goes. He can wait until end of the month but what happens if they still refuse to vacate? A very difficult situation.

 

[Janner1]

14 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

You don't get the key when you sign, you get the key at the delivery date. Money has to be cleared, titles have to be transferred etc... and that take at least a few days.

Me thinks you are getting mixed up between saying one will buy the house and exchange of contracts

Where upon all the relevant paper work is finalised and making the last payment in full.

The poster stated he had made that payment and got the papers on the due date. 
Therefore he is now the legal owner of the house and he can move in at will, otherwise why would there be a completion date?

On the day final payment is made the vendor must move out because he no longer owns the house.

So to be clear, The transition period is between exchange of contracts and completion of all legalities with purchase price paid in full, at that time the vendor has the money in his account and the purchaser is the new owner. and can move in immediately if he chooses.

Having bought and sold 20 plus houses I think I would know how it works by now

[Liverpool Lou]

1 hour ago, BestB said:

Yes he did buy and it is only reasonable to allow some time for someone to vacate . Sellers asked for 2 weeks, hardly unreasonable.

Yes, he did buy it and it is only reasonable for the buyer to have possession of it the day the seller has possession of his money!

 

The seller didn't "ask for two weeks", he announced that he wasn't leaving for two weeks, after he had received the OP's money.

[newnative]

17 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

that's being naive, and this is not how it's done. Apparently in the US, some states have exceptions, but in the civilized world, like Europe and Asia ????, there is a transition period before you take the keys. 

 

Same with business properties,

 

not sure what kind of person, in his right mind, could expect to move in immediately after signing some document, without the previous owner pre-agreeing to this

     Actually, it is how it's done.  I've bought a half-dozen condos in America and 20 here in Thailand and I always moved in immediately after completion of the sale.  In America, it was at the Settlement Attorney's office.   Here, it's at the Land Office.   You are correct (finally!) in that 'pre-agreeing' is needed.  And, that 'pre-agreeing' is spelled out in detail in the sales contract.  That's actually what a sales contract is--pre-agreeing on everything in writing so, hopefully, no questions or disagreements come up later.  If a seller wants to remain in a property that is sold, that needs to be negotiated before the sale and written into the sales contract. 

[KhaoYai]

3 hours ago, jackdd said:

They don't have any legal right to stay there, they are just trespassing. Simply call the police because there are people who illegally entered your property and refuse to leave. Then they can either leave voluntarily or police will arrest them and take them to the police station.

I wouldn't be so sure on that.  As I said in a previous post, the police may help or like western police, they may not be able to get involved if its classed as a civil matter.  As for legal rights, again, the law may be different in Thailand but you would be shocked at the rights tenants and indeed, squatters have in some countries.  You might have heard the saying 'possession is 9 tenths of the law - that's not far wrong in some cases.

 

I had a couple move into a house after paying a deposit and 1 months rent in advance. I never saw another penny in rent and they were trashing the place.  I entered without permission and removed a part from the bolier which meant they had no hot water.  They simply got a plumber to fit a new part and called the police who visited me and told me that I was not allowed to enter the property or touch any of the fittings - if I did so again I would be prosecuted.  They also advised me that if anything went wrong at the property whilst the non-paying tenants were living there, I'd still have to fix it - even though I wasn't getting any rent.  When accused them of being on the wrong side they explained to me that their hands are tied - enforcing a landlord's rights is a civil matter but in many cases, tenants rights fall within their remit.

 

Long story short, it took me the best part of 6 months to get them out - during which they caused over £5000 of damage.  Take them to court?  Complete waste of money (court costs) - even if I won the case they'd probably claim they were broke and pay me back at £1 per week and I'd have to chase that.

 

Again, I don't know the law in Thailand but to give an example of UK law - a landlord can stipulate in a lease that they will make property inspections periodically (with notice) but that does not give them any right of entry. If the tenant refuses to let them in and they try or do, the police can become involved and they can be prosecuted for trespass. Ownership does not guarantee a right of entry.

 

As I say, the law may be different in Thailand - either way but don't assume its on the side of the owner, the truth can be very different.  If the law in Thailand is anything like it is in the UK, my advice to the OP would be to issue a possession notice requiring possession from the end of the month and sit tight. 

 

He should of course firstly, take advice to find out what rights he does have, who will enforce those rights and how long enforcing those rights will take/cost.

[Liverpool Lou]

35 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

You don't get the key when you sign, you get the key at the delivery date. Money has to be cleared, titles have to be transferred etc... and that take at least a few days.

You get the key as soon as you want it once the seller has your money. 

 

Money paid for property purchase is either cash, bank transfer or a bank's Cashier Cheque.  They are all cleared funds, no time is required for clearing.  The transfer of the title happens when the purchase funds are handed over, it does not take a few days.

[Liverpool Lou]

30 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

it's a sale, different process, maybe you are not familiar with those

You clearly aren't.

[KhaoYai]

1 minute ago, Liverpool Lou said:

The transfer of the title happens when the purchase funds are handed over, it does not take a few days.

Title and possession are two different things in law though.

[Liverpool Lou]

21 minutes ago, kynikoi said:

Just let them stay until eom. What's the big deal? Really.

Just let them return the buyer's purchase money until the end of the month, then.

[Liverpool Lou]

23 minutes ago, kynikoi said:

Just let them stay until eom. What's the big deal? Really.

How about the fact that the buyer now owns the property?   

 

What's the big deal with them moving out the day they get the buyers money?  Really?  

[kynikoi]

6 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

How about the fact that the buyer now owns the property?   

 

What's the big deal with them moving out the day they get the buyers money?  Really?  

 

I didn't say it's right. It's just not worth hassling over. They probably have nowhere to go. If the OP has a roof over their head who cares?

 

It will be a total hassle in the heat, with covid. All these insipid, dramatic posts. Huge schemes and plans. Just let it go. Cops won't care lol

[Liverpool Lou]

11 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

the police may help or like western police, they may not be able to get involved if its classed as a civil matter. 

Trespass in Thailand is a criminal offence, not a "civil matter".    Taking possession of a buyer's money and refusing to give the buyer possession of the property paid for is criminal also, it's called fraud. 

[GrandPapillon]

38 minutes ago, kynikoi said:

Just let them stay until eom. What's the big deal? Really.

I think we are dealing with characters with a special background, they need to move in immediately ????

[GrandPapillon]

41 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

On completion of the sale, i.e. the property ownership has been transferred and is now owned by the buyers, they can move in whenever you want to. 

 

In the purchases/moves I made in the UK every one was on completion day.   In the last move the previous owners were moving out as we were moving in.

not sure where you get your info, but there is always a date for taking physical possession of the property and it's never immediately unless the previous owner agrees to it in the contract.

[Kinnock]

On 5/15/2021 at 1:59 AM, CharlieH said:

No agreement in place, chanote in your posession, I would have thought they are now tresspassing. Go to the nearest Police station and report it, ask them to remove the tresspassers.

Yes - if property now transferred to your name, they are occupying illegally.  Police may need some 'encouragement' - but they can help with eviction.

[sanuk711]

Anyone notice that the OP of a few posts does not seem to be in this discussion......

 

Oh well I suppose its better then, how much Sin-sot should I pay or, what should I do my wife's brother has moved in.

 

[kynikoi]

3 minutes ago, josthomz said:

 

The biggest problem is not the 2 weeks. It's the weakness that you are showing by letting them stay those 2 weeks after they no longer own that property and you have transferred the money to them. 

 

In life either you are the one screwing or you are the one getting screwed. And in this cases where you have already paid all the money, and fulfilled all your obligations in relation to the sale, if you let them screw you and stay there those 2 extra weeks, chances are after 2 weeks another excuse will come up not to leave once again. 

 

OP has no chance but to take a harsh stance ASAP. 

 

They probably have nowhere to go? Well, they have the money from selling the apartment, should be more than enough to pay a hotel and rent a house. 

 

 

 

 

So you're going to teach these strangers a *life lesson*. After June 1 you'll never even see them again.

 

You have far too much time of your hands

[Liverpool Lou]

14 minutes ago, kynikoi said:

I didn't say it's right. It's just not worth hassling over. They probably have nowhere to go. If the OP has a roof over their head who cares?

And the same cannot be applied to the buyer/OP?  

[kynikoi]

2 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

Police may need some 'encouragement' - but they can help with eviction.

 

This will take 15-20k and 7-10 days.

[kynikoi]

1 minute ago, josthomz said:

it is their duty and their legal right to remove someone who is illegally occupying a house which does not belong to them

 

Well, it did and you're a farang. If you think cops gonna get aggressive with this guy you're wrong.

 

I could see paying them 10k. They visit..the guy says sorry, covid no place to go. Cops turn to OP and shrug...June 1. Lol.

[Liverpool Lou]

5 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

not sure where you get your info, but there is always a date for taking physical possession of the property and it's never immediately unless the previous owner agrees to it in the contract.

You're right, unless there is an agreement in place, the date for taking possession of the property is the same date that the buyer gives the seller the money for the purchase.   It is always on completion of the sale and transfer of the title (all done at the same time in Thailand).

[Ventenio]

Squatter has the money, FREE rent, a FREE place, and who knows if he's well connected in the neighborhood.  Probably VERY well connected.

 

OP, I've changed my mind.  Do nothing.  Temple, daily.  Meditation.  Around the 2nd of next month have a friend check-in if anyone is staying there.  You might kick him out but then have problems for DECADES......imagine if the neighborhood blames you!!!  of course they will.

 

This is why I like renting outside of my home country.  No real contract, can leave relatively easy.  If I lose money, it's very little.

 

These stories, true or not, only reinforce what I knew I'll never do.  buy property, unless with money I don't care if I lose.  

 

this could be the start of a nightmare that ends in 2045.  lol

[GrandPapillon]

7 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

To quote you, Jesus, you are confused, this is Thailand and no one is talking about squatting.

squatting is very much present in Thailand, in particular farmland. Back in Issaan, if someone moves in on agriculture land they don't own, they can stay there if the owner didn't notice after 1 year !!!

 

even the crown property bureau in Bangkok faced that issue on a number of their properties, they couldn't legally remove squatters from their land, even after 20 years

 

so you think you can legally remove someone for over staying 2 weeks ????

[GrandPapillon]

13 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

You're right, unless there is an agreement in place, the date for taking possession of the property is the same date that the buyer gives the seller the money for the purchase.   It is always on completion of the sale and transfer of the title (all done at the same time in Thailand).

maybe in the UK for council flats, but in Thailand and rest of Europe, you have to state the "exit" date of the previous owner, it's a legal requirement

[GrandPapillon]

15 minutes ago, kynikoi said:

 

Well, it did and you're a farang. If you think cops gonna get aggressive with this guy you're wrong.

 

I could see paying them 10k. They visit..the guy says sorry, covid no place to go. Cops turn to OP and shrug...June 1. Lol.

yeah, classic ????

[Liverpool Lou]

4 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

squatting is very much present in Thailand ... so you think you can legally remove someone for over staying 2 weeks ????

This is not about squatting and, yes, if a seller refuses to leave a property that has been paid for, obviously, he can be removed, legally. 

[GrandPapillon]

Just now, Liverpool Lou said:

This is not about squatting and, yes, if a seller refuses to leave a property that has been paid for, obviously, he can be removed, legally. 

you are confusing the issue of payment, with the actual move in requirement, 2 different chapters that will be addressed in the sale agreement, if done properly

 

jesus, not sure what you guys are dealing with or buying your properties from, but this is really basic requirement stuff here

 

ok the US is brutal, but they are uncivilized savages, so who cares ????

[Scott]

Inflammatory troll post reported and removed.  Keep it civil.