Owner kept deposit

[Suphawk]

Back story, I found a room I wanted to rent, unavailable until a few weeks in the future. Went ahead and signed a contract to begin when it became available and payed a 1 month deposit. With a couple of weeks until the contract started I had a change in my situation and had to cancel the contract. They decided to keep my deposit stateing they missed out on other customers.

This room will rent itself, high floor ocean view great location, reasonable price. So I'm pretty sure ( not certain) that they won't lose any money as they still have time to rent it to a new customer.

Was it legal to keep my 1 month deposit?

[retarius]

Sounds perfectly reasonable.....you broke the contract. 

[Woof999]

14 minutes ago, Suphawk said:

Was it legal to keep my 1 month deposit?

 

It wasn't just legal, it was perfectly reasonable. I'd have done the same. By you paying a deposit, they took the property off the market. Your circumstances changed, theirs didn't.

 

Might not be the news you wanted to hear, but if the shoe was on the other foot, I would expect you to do the same.

[Suphawk]

Sure I understand that, I have been on the owner side before. However where I'm from it would have been a more equitable and I would have held the deposit unless I was actually able to rent the room and therefore not lost any rent I would return the deposit.

 

I had a contract that had not started yet. There is a contract start date. Just my 2 cents.

But this is Thailand and I wanted to verify if there was any legal basis.

Thank you for the replies 

[noobexpat]

Change of title needed...

 

Owner rightly kept deposit

[Suphawk]

2 minutes ago, noobexpat said:

Change of title needed...

 

Owner rightly kept deposit

Your reply is useless 

[Korat Kiwi]

Unfortunately the same applies if you put a deposit on a house.  If you can't complete the transaction/contract then the seller has every right to retain the deposit. 

 

This occurs worldwide not just in Thailand. 

[farang51]

33 minutes ago, Suphawk said:

I had a contract that had not started yet. There is a contract start date. Just my 2 cents.

But this is Thailand and I wanted to verify if there was any legal basis.

Thank you for the replies 

The contract started when both partners signed it. Your rent period had not started yet.

 

Anything in the contract about what happens if one of the signers does not fulfill it? Also, how much was the deposit compared to rent and how long was the rent period?

[MangoKorat]

I believe the owner is within their rights to keep your deposit.  A more reasonable way though would be for them to market the flat again and if they let it without any loss - refund your deposit. Any losses would be taken from your deposit.

 

I doubt that's going to happen in Thailand though - I think you're going to have to accept you've lost your deposit.

[MangoKorat]

57 minutes ago, noobexpat said:

Change of title needed...

 

Owner rightly kept deposit

Change of title for a rental? No way.

[Keeps]

1 hour ago, Suphawk said:

Your reply is useless 

It's not the first time and certainly won't be the last unfortunately.

[NoDisplayName]

Yes.

 

You signed a contract.

You paid a deposit.

You broke the contract.

You lost your deposit.

 

Perfectly legal and moral and ethical.

[carlyai]

I think you have to be reasonable in this situation.

I think the owner should have given you back the money, or at least half of it.

Greed.

[Andre0720]

Doing business, typically has little to do with being moral.

 

This renter will certainly not lose any money in your change in plans.

 

But he leans on the side of 'doing business'.

[Andre0720]

21 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

Yes.

 

You signed a contract.

You paid a deposit.

You broke the contract.

You lost your deposit.

 

Perfectly legal and moral and ethical.

Disagree. Nothing in there is moral and ethical. Legal I would presume.

 

The renter having entered into a contract, means that he will get rent for the stated period.

 

Some civilized countries even allow someone to sub-rent at their own cost, so that the renter does not end up losing money.

And the most civilized renters will reimburse a deposit, after receiving rent from another tenant.

 

Oh yes, I forgot, TIT

[Ohyesuare]

23 hours ago, Suphawk said:

Sure I understand that, I have been on the owner side before. However where I'm from it would have been a more equitable and I would have held the deposit unless I was actually able to rent the room and therefore not lost any rent I would return the deposit.

 

I had a contract that had not started yet. There is a contract start date. Just my 2 cents.

But this is Thailand and I wanted to verify if there was any legal basis.

Thank you for the replies 

 

Once you signed the lease and paid the deposit, the room was taken off the market. They lost out on other customers and now suddenly have to scramble to find another tenant. Maybe pay for ads, hire an agent. You say it will rent itself but you can't guarantee that, "high season" is over.

 

If you've been on the owner side before, I'm baffled that you would feel entitled to your deposit back for breaking the contract a few weeks before. Whether they find a tenant in time or not, you've greatly inconvenienced them.

 

As for the legality of it, many landlords/owners keep deposits even when people have been the perfect tenants and left the place in the same condition and spotless. Some people are just greedy. Police don't care, it's a civil matter.

[NoDisplayName]

37 minutes ago, Andre0720 said:

The renter having entered into a contract, means that he will get rent for the stated period.

 The tenant having entered into a contract, means that he will pay rent for the stated period.

 

Oh, wait!

[brianthainess]

Sorry but You are known as a time waster in business.
I paid a 3k deposit on a S/H car, but when I did some research after found out there was a class action ongoing about the CVT gearboxes. I just rang and said I didn't want it,,  I didn't even try to get the deposit back, just the same as it could have been sold but was taken off the market. 

Having said that Contracts should state Clearly that you loose your deposit if you break the Contract. IMO