A friend in Phuket has a 30-year Lease Agreement, but it could not be registered at the Land Office as the owner had a bank loan. Is it any use at all? Google tells me the lease is unenforceable if not registered. Can my friend do anything at all?

If I am not mistaken, a lease with a validity over 3 years that is not registered at the Land Office is basically invalid. For example if the bank takes the owner's house/villa/land because it is not registered at the land office your friend will lose access to the place he leased.

 

7 hours ago, thomasfielk said:

If I am not mistaken, a lease with a validity over 3 years that is not registered at the Land Office is basically invalid. For example if the bank takes the owner's house/villa/land because it is not registered at the land office your friend will lose access to the place he leased.

 

 Yes, that's what I have read online, too - thank you. But he seems to want to fight the new owner (who did not sign the agreement) - the new owner wants to increase the rent. 

2 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

 Yes, that's what I have read online, too - thank you. But he seems to want to fight the new owner (who did not sign the agreement) - the new owner wants to increase the rent. 

AS has been posted, your friend doesn't have a lease.  His lease is invalid and his right to occupy the place is at risk. He needs to sign a new lease with the new owner and get this registered at the Land Office.  The rent fee is up to discussion...

1 minute ago, simon43 said:

AS has been posted, your friend doesn't have a lease.  His lease is invalid and his right to occupy the place is at risk. He needs to sign a new lease with the new owner and get this registered at the Land Office.  The rent fee is up to discussion...

Morning! It can't be registered as the house has a bank loan. He met with the new owner, and the owner asked for a small increase in rent - my friend refuses - I have explained that his unwillingness to negotiate in good faith puts his tenancy at risk, but his Thai lawyer seems to think he has rights. He is now saying he will stick to this non-lease and to hell with the new owner. Farnags can be very stubborn and stupid. I guess the new owner will ask him to leave - but he's determined not to budge.

When you say he has a 30-year lease, does this mean that he has paid 'upfront' for the 30 years? (as opposed to say leasing a plot of land for 30 years and paying each month/quarter).  If the former, then IMHO he has a lot to lose. Thai law says (as has been pointed out), that a lease is invalid if it's more than 3 years and is not registered.  Therefore his lease is invalid and the owner could possibly kick him out.  Good luck to him in getting the 30 years of upfront lease payments back!

 

It seems (horse bolted etc situation) that the leasee did not do his homework when originally taking out the lease and checking if a mortgage had been taken out by the owner.

14 minutes ago, simon43 said:

When you say he has a 30-year lease, does this mean that he has paid 'upfront' for the 30 years? (as opposed to say leasing a plot of land for 30 years and paying each month/quarter).  If the former, then IMHO he has a lot to lose. Thai law says (as has been pointed out), that a lease is invalid if it's more than 3 years and is not registered.  Therefore his lease is invalid and the owner could possibly kick him out.  Good luck to him in getting the 30 years of upfront lease payments back!

 

It seems (horse bolted etc situation) that the leasee did not do his homework when originally taking out the lease and checking if a mortgage had been taken out by the owner.

 Hi - no, he pays annually. He made a mistake, and his stupid Thai lawyer thought it was ok, and they all went to the Land Office, which denied the Usufruct.

Now that owner has sold to another owner who wants to adjust the rent - not unreasonably, in my opinion.