Whats the penalty for landlords for having a Westerner in their house on overstay?

[Liverpool Lou]

6 hours ago, jippytum said:

However with accumulated fines of 450,000 baht probsbly best make it to the airport and pay the 20,000 baht fine on departure. 

Which B450,000 fines?

[itsari]

2 hours ago, Liquorice said:

Not condescending, just factual.

 

On record and by law, the landlord or owner is not solely responsible.

 

The Immigration Act (Law, not some commercial website) concerning residential properties states it's the responsibility of ''The house – master, the owner or the possessor of the residence'' to file a TM30. It defines the housemaster as ''any persons who is the chief possessor of a house, whether in the capacity of owner, tenant, or in any other capacity whatsoever.''

Like any law it is how it is used .

In Chiang Mai you will be fined if you are the owner or renterof a house with a foreign guest without having a TM 30 and that is what the poster was asking about.

If Asean now has covered it has no meaning to the poster or myself.

If you want to post please refrain from being condescending.

 

 

[Maestro]

7 hours ago, Sophon said:

From the 1979 Immigration act
 

Quote

Section 77. Whoever fails to comply with the provisions of Section 38, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand baht. If the person is a hotel manager, the punishment shall be by a fine from two thousand baht to ten thousand baht.

 

 

Correct, but handing down punishment under Section 77 of the Immigration Act can only be done by a court of law, not by an immigration official. Please take a look at Section 84 for clarification.

[thailand49]

2 hours ago, Liquorice said:

Not condescending, just factual.

 

On record and by law, the landlord or owner is not solely responsible.

 

The Immigration Act (Law, not some commercial website) concerning residential properties states it's the responsibility of ''The house – master, the owner or the possessor of the residence'' to file a TM30. It defines the housemaster as ''any persons who is the chief possessor of a house, whether in the capacity of owner, tenant, or in any other capacity whatsoever.''

That is pretty much what I said! Landlord, Hotel, staff assigned as noted by you in capacity of owner. They are responsible not solely cause as noted if Im a owner I assigned someone they act on my behalf. 

please dont get anal and come back

[Maestro]

16 minutes ago, thailand49 said:

That is pretty much what I said! Landlord, Hotel, staff assigned as noted by you in capacity of owner. They are responsible not solely cause as noted if Im a owner I assigned someone they act on my behalf. 

please dont get anal and come back

 

It's not quite like that. When a tenant makes the TM.30 notification, he does not do so on behalf of the owner (whom you refer to as the landlord). He does it on his own behalf as the "householder", so defined by Section 4 of the Immigration Act. The immigration office may ask the foreigner to submit with the notification copies of some documents which he has to obtain from the owner, but this does not mean that he makes the notification on behalf of the owner.

 

This is how Section 4 defines the householder (in some translations called the house-master or house master) in the case of a rented dwelling (highlighting in bold is mine):

 

Quote

“Householder” means any persons who is the chief possessor of a house,
whether in the capacity of owner, tenant, or in any other capacity whatsoever in accordance with the law on civil registration.

 

The rental agreement makes the tenant the chief possessor of the dwelling and thus the householder.

[Maestro]

Removed a troll post and the replies to it.

[itsari]

19 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

I replied to this question.,...

 

"I assume that none of this applies to someone like me who expects 2 of my friends from Oz to fly in and stay with us here in Surin for 2 weeks in Nov/Dec?" 

 

So we have couple coming for short stay and no dealing with immigration for eg extensions.

The possibility of a fine for no TM30 is miniscule. 

Agree the risk is minimal as I stated before if you took any notice 

However the way to advice is what the potential outcome can be if you choose to ignore the law.

[itsari]

1 hour ago, Maestro said:

 

It's not quite like that. When a tenant makes the TM.30 notification, he does not do so on behalf of the owner (whom you refer to as the landlord). He does it on his own behalf as the "householder", so defined by Section 4 of the Immigration Act. The immigration office may ask the foreigner to submit with the notification copies of some documents which he has to obtain from the owner, but this does not mean that he makes the notification on behalf of the owner.

 

This is how Section 4 defines the householder (in some translations called the house-master or house master) in the case of a rented dwelling (highlighting in bold is mine):

 

 

The rental agreement makes the tenant the chief possessor of the dwelling and thus the householder.

Agree totally, thank you

[itsari]

Just now, itsari said:

Agree totally, thank you

Where you misunderstood is it is the owners responsibility to make the application.

[Maestro]

1 hour ago, itsari said:

Where you misunderstood is it is the owners responsibility to make the application.

 

I have misunderstood nothing.

 

If I live in my condo in Thailand and invite a foreign friend to stay with me, I retain possession of the condo and thus continue to be the householder and it is my obligation to make the TM.30 notification of the arrival of my guest.

 

If I rent out my condo to a foreigner and live somewhere else – currently in Switzerland – the tenant becomes the possessor and thus the householder and it is his obligation to make the TM.30 notification.

 

I realise that the law and the rules posted on some immigration web pages can sometimes be confusing, even to immigration officials.

[Maestro]

2 hours ago, itsari said:

...is the owners responsibility to make the application.

 

Part of the confusion is that some people talk of the TM.30 as an application, as if the owner had to apply to the immigration office for permission to allow the foreigner to stay in his house. This is of course not the case.

[itsari]

4 hours ago, Maestro said:

 

Part of the confusion is that some people talk of the TM.30 as an application, as if the owner had to apply to the immigration office for permission to allow the foreigner to stay in his house. This is of course not the case.

You are wrong in that assumption 

[Liquorice]

4 hours ago, Maestro said:

 

Part of the confusion is that some people talk of the TM.30 as an application, as if the owner had to apply to the immigration office for permission to allow the foreigner to stay in his house. This is of course not the case.

24 minutes ago, itsari said:

You are wrong in that assumption 

 

 

Well, it appears not to be a wrong assumption;

6 hours ago, itsari said:

Where you misunderstood is it is the owners responsibility to make the application.

It's actually a notification of an alien's residence.

[Maestro]

1 hour ago, itsari said:

You are wrong in that assumption 

 

What assumption? I made no assumption.

 

I stated the fact that the TM.30 is not for the owner of a dwelling he rents out to a foreigner to apply to the immigration office for permission to allow the foreigner to stay in that dwelling.

 

The TM.30 is not an application for anything at all.

 

[itsari]

4 hours ago, Maestro said:

 

What assumption? I made no assumption.

 

I stated the fact that the TM.30 is not for the owner of a dwelling he rents out to a foreigner to apply to the immigration office for permission to allow the foreigner to stay in that dwelling.

 

The TM.30 is not an application for anything at all.

 

You are applying information yet it is classified as a notification.

I will continue to notify guests for the TM 30 even if I am out of the country.

Your reading into the law what you assume it is rather than how immigration use it.

 

 

[bigt3116]

15 hours ago, Maestro said:

 

Correct, but handing down punishment under Section 77 of the Immigration Act can only be done by a court of law, not by an immigration official. Please take a look at Section 84 for clarification.

 

You must be reading a different Section 84, the one in your link says "

Section 84.

     For  all  offences  under  this  Act,  except  for  offences  under 

Sections  62  paragraph  one,  63,  64,  71,  and  82 

paragraph  two,  there  shall  be  established  a 

Settlement  Committee  comprising  of  the  Police

  Director-General  or  representative,  the 

Public  Prosecutor  Director-General  or  repr

esentative,  the  Commander  of  the  Immigration 

Division  or  representative,  as  members.   

The  Settlement  Committee  shall  have  power  to 

compound  the  matters  and  to  authorize  the  inqu

iry  official  or  the  competent  official  to 

carry  out  settlement  on  its  behalf.    The  Settl

ement  Committee  may  prescribe  criteria  for 

settlement or any conditions as deemed fit."

 

Clearly reads that the power to fine etc has been handed down to competent officials, (in this case, an immigration officer), there is absolutely no mention of a court of law.

 

[Gottfrid]

On 8/28/2024 at 6:09 AM, jippytum said:

However with accumulated fines of 450,000 baht

What accumulated fines? How do you count that?

[Sophon]

15 hours ago, Maestro said:

 

Correct, but handing down punishment under Section 77 of the Immigration Act can only be done by a court of law, not by an immigration official. Please take a look at Section 84 for clarification.

 

That's the opposite of how I read it:

Quote

Section 84. For all offences under this Act, except for offences under
Sections 62 paragraph one, 63, 64, 71, and 82 paragraph two, there shall be established a Settlement Committee comprising of the Police Director-General or representative, the Public Prosecutor Director-General or representative, the Commander of the Immigration
Division or representative, as members. The Settlement Committee shall have power to compound the matters and to authorize the inquiry official or the competent official to carry out settlement on its behalf. The Settlement Committee may prescribe criteria for settlement or any conditions as deemed fit.
Upon payment of fine as compounded for settlement, it shall be deemed that the case has been settled in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code.

 

Section 84 allows the settlement committee to grant authorization to Immigration officers to issue fines and close the matter without taking it to court.

 

But regardless of this my point is; the Immigration act is the legal framework setting out duties and punishments surrounding immigration matters. Immigration have been granted authorization (via police orders) to issue fines for transgressions against the act, but they cannot be granted authorization to issue fines in excess of what is legally set out in the Immigration act. When the act states a maximum fine for a transgression, no one can fine you more than what is stated. 

 

Also from the Immigration act:
 

Quote

Section 81. Any alien staying in the Kingdom without permission, or with expired or revoked permission, shall be punished by imprisonment not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding twenty thousand baht or both.

 

This is why, when years ago Immigration increased the daily fine for overstay from THB 200 to THB 500, the maximum fine was left unchanged at THB 20,000. To increase the maximum fine for overstay would have required amendment of the Immigration act, which is a lot harder than just issuing a new police order.

[thailand49]

14 hours ago, Maestro said:

 

It's not quite like that. When a tenant makes the TM.30 notification, he does not do so on behalf of the owner (whom you refer to as the landlord). He does it on his own behalf as the "householder", so defined by Section 4 of the Immigration Act. The immigration office may ask the foreigner to submit with the notification copies of some documents which he has to obtain from the owner, but this does not mean that he makes the notification on behalf of the owner.

 

This is how Section 4 defines the householder (in some translations called the house-master or house master) in the case of a rented dwelling (highlighting in bold is mine):

 

 

The rental agreement makes the tenant the chief possessor of the dwelling and thus the householder.

If you go back badly written I never mention the tenant being assigned!

[Liquorice]

1 hour ago, itsari said:

You are applying information yet it is classified as a notification.

You're not 'applying' for anything.
You're submitting a notification of an alien residence, supplying the address and aliens details.

[Liquorice]

16 hours ago, thailand49 said:

That is pretty much what I said! Landlord, Hotel, staff assigned as noted by you in capacity of owner. They are responsible not solely cause as noted if Im a owner I assigned someone they act on my behalf. 

please dont get anal and come back

The topic is about who's responsible for filing a TM30 for a private residential address, not Hotels, which are commercial businesses.

It's very clear who is responsible for making the notification for a hotel, either the owner or an assigned manager.

 

For private residential properties, the responsibility lies with the owner, landlord, tenant (alien), or possessor (alien).
Were it purely the responsibility of the owner or landlord, then Immigration wouldn't allow the foreign tenant/possessor to register and file a TM30.

[Rob Browder]

8 hours ago, Gottfrid said:

What accumulated fines? How do you count that?

He was off by a zero, multiplying 500 Baht times the number of days overstay was 45K, not 450K - and without recognizing the fine-increase stops accumulating at 20K baht.

[Gottfrid]

30 minutes ago, Rob Browder said:

He was off by a zero, multiplying 500 Baht times the number of days overstay was 45K, not 450K - and without recognizing the fine-increase stops accumulating at 20K baht.

Yeah, it was a lot of wrong there. I just didn´t bother to count. 🙂