Legality Of Rental Contract?

[chalvy]

I recently signed a lease on a house for 12 months. Now the owner wants to sell said property. Can she legally do this?, and if the new owners wish to move in can they turf us out?

Every weekend we get people driving past checking it out and its starting to get really annoying. I've also spent a bit on the garden under the impression i would be there for a while.

I've heard thai law favours the landlord fairly heavily, but surely a contract is binding for both parties

Any info is appreciated

[quiksilva]

Of course they can sell their property, it is theirs after all.

Your right of tenure is only as long as the lease you sign, Im afraid. Usually the new owner or indeed the existing owner does not have to honor the renewal of your contract, it is usually just an Option to Renew - an option that is exercisiable by either party, but can also be refused by either party.

Edited March 24, 2008 by quiksilva

[Thaifan2]

I think the OP means is he safe untill the 12 months are up .I would think yes .It can be sold in the mean time ,and just means that he will have a different landlord .

[chalvy]

I think the OP means is he safe untill the 12 months are up .I would think yes .It can be sold in the mean time ,and just means that he will have a different landlord .

Thats exactly what I meant. Didn't want to move all my crap again before my 12 months was up. In my country the contract is safe as houses ( pardon the pun ) but in the LOS you just never know, do you?

The missus was all in a tiff thinking we could be looking for a new place to live, but thanks to your wise advice, she can rest easy.

Cheers

[Irene]

I think the OP means is he safe untill the 12 months are up .I would think yes .It can be sold in the mean time ,and just means that he will have a different landlord .

Thats exactly what I meant. Didn't want to move all my crap again before my 12 months was up. In my country the contract is safe as houses ( pardon the pun ) but in the LOS you just never know, do you?

The missus was all in a tiff thinking we could be looking for a new place to live, but thanks to your wise advice, she can rest easy.

Cheers

Just to help to confirm that the law favours a tenant in this case. You are well protected until the expiry date.

[jstumbo]

Although maybe the new owners are willing to pay you move out early.

[johnnyk]

Although maybe the new owners are willing to pay you move out early.

They may even "encourage" you to go....

[Khun Jean]

You mean like disconnecting you from electricity and water or changing the locks while you go see a movie. Nah, that wouldn't happen, would it?

Trust a Thais (gut) feeling a little bit more, they lived here all the time.

Best thing to do is to discuss this as soon as possible with the new owners.

[johnnyk]

You mean like disconnecting you from electricity and water or changing the locks while you go see a movie. Nah, that wouldn't happen, would it?

Trust a Thais (gut) feeling a little bit more, they lived here all the time.

Best thing to do is to discuss this as soon as possible with the new owners.

Be sociable and polite. Oh, maybe bring a little something to lubricate the chat. Stay on the good side and you should be ok.

[Irene]

chalvy,

Section 568 of the Civil and Commercial Code provides as follow:

"A rental contract of immovable property is not extinguished by the transfer of the ownership of the rented property.

The transferee (i.e. the new owner) is entitled to the rights and is subject to the duties of the transferor (i.e. the previous owner) towards the lessee."

So, chalvy, the new owner has the right to collect rental from you, (But you have to make sure, he is really the new owner). However, the new owner has the obligation to honour the lease agreement previously signed by the previous owner.

The new owner has no right to enter your compound or your house without your permission. If he comes in to cut your electricity, you could send him to jail for trespassing. So, if the new owner likes to occupy the house now, he would have to give incentives to you to leave. At that point of time, you can demand all the figures that you believe is worth it. Your house is still your castle during the rental period.

I just want you to know that you are in a strong position and not a weak position when talking to the new owner. Forget about not being a Thai, your right is still well protected. Have a Thai friend there to meet a new owner.

[Khun Jean]

Yes, you can take this right to the police and through the courts. Probably take longer than your 12 month lease contract.

That is sometimes the 'practical' side of Thailand.

Electricity s probably in the name of the owner, so he don't have to tresspass. He just call the electricity company to cut it for him. And the meter is almost always outside of the property, so no tresspassing there too.

But even with tresspasing, who is going to stop him?

Another tactic i have seen is that the new owner parks his car in front of the entrance. What are you going to do about that? Damage it, remove it. Call the police?

Better be safe than sorry and talk to the new owner as quickly as possible. Confirm the rental contract and new ownership and ask for new account numbers etc. Be pro-active on this. Not just wait and see. Who knows maybe the old owner did not tell the new owner about the length of the contract or maybe the new owner bought it to rent it out and is happy with it. Get those worries out of your system and talk.

Edited March 29, 2008 by Khun Jean

[Irene]

Yes, you can take this right to the police and through the courts. Probably take longer than your 12 month lease contract.

That is sometimes the 'practical' side of Thailand.

Electricity s probably in the name of the owner, so he don't have to tresspass. He just call the electricity company to cut it for him. And the meter is almost always outside of the property, so no tresspassing there too.

But even with tresspasing, who is going to stop him?

Another tactic i have seen is that the new owner parks his car in front of the entrance. What are you going to do about that? Damage it, remove it. Call the police?

Better be safe than sorry and talk to the new owner as quickly as possible. Confirm the rental contract and new ownership and ask for new account numbers etc. Be pro-active on this. Not just wait and see. Who knows maybe the old owner did not tell the new owner about the length of the contract or maybe the new owner bought it to rent it out and is happy with it. Get those worries out of your system and talk.

Electricity s probably in the name of the owner, so he don't have to tresspass. He just call the electricity company to cut it for him. And the meter is almost always outside of the property, so no tresspassing there too.

But even with tresspasing, who is going to stop him?In law, that is trespassing on your right of peaceful inhabitant.

Another tactic i have seen is that the new owner parks his car in front of the entrance. What are you going to do about that? Damage it, remove it. Call the police?Call the police for obstruction.

Yes, I agree that it is good just to call the old owner asking him what happen. But just remember that you are in an upper hand with your legal rights.

[monty]

Irene,

I'm fairly sure that the law you quote above is valid for leases fully registered through the proper channels, and all required taxes properly paid.

There are a gazillion legal precedents in Thailand that indeed the lessee is well protected under the law, but in practical day to day life they can just chuck you out, and you'll have to start a very lengthy civil lawsuit against the lessor!

In real life, the courts are solidly on the side of the well off Thai property owner.

It does not need much of a motivation (probably monetary) for the courts to agree that the lessee reneged on some silly contractual agreement, such as properly watering the garden, and as such be able to find the contract between lessor and lessee void!

If it means for the owner to be able to sell or to be stuck with the property, they will use whatever means to get you out of there!

It will all depends how friendly you are with the owner!

Personally I only feel comfortable where an agreement (lease) is duly registered, taxed and noted on the back of a land title deed.

Although even that is still doubtful when you have to go to court.

Again, as a real life precedent, a friend of mine loaned a certain amount to the owner of a well known and big real estate agency, to fund a housing project.

Duly registered on the back of the land title deed.

Owner defaults on the payments to my friend form day one (never planned to pay any penny back), friend goes to court trying to claim the land, owner files for a "poor mans agreement" claiming he is just above the poverty level, courts agree and refuse to hand over the land to my friend and instead force him to accept a new pay back term (30 years instead of the 2 years contractually agreed upon, utterly ridiculous as my friend is over 60 years of age).

Do note that the owner moves around in multi-million chauffeur driven cars etc, but they are all on lease contracts in his company name. A thorough search by my friends investigators indeed shows that the owner has very little to his name (but very rich brothers, sisters and children, maybe even a well off maid!), lives in a small mansion and has several extremely expensive cars in his driveway. And whatever asset he has to his name is properly covered by loans, all of which he is defaulting on, blaming it on a slump in the housing market etc...

This took 3 years. My friend, against advice from his lawyers to the verdict to appeals court, which he again lost!

Depending who you deal with, the law is so full with loopholes resulting in you having zilch protection....

[Irene]

Irene,

I'm fairly sure that the law you quote above is valid for leases fully registered through the proper channels, and all required taxes properly paid.No, you are mistaken. A lease is a lease. But for a lease of more than 3 years to be effective, your citing of registration requirement is necessary. For a less than three year lease, no registration is required.

There are a gazillion legal precedents in Thailand that indeed the lessee is well protected under the law, but in practical day to day life they can just chuck you out, and you'll have to start a very lengthy civil lawsuit against the lessor!No, not really. A lessor entering a lessee's premise during the rental period without permission is regarded as a trespasser, just like a burglar. He can be subject to jail sentence. The right of a lessee's inhabitant is supreme.

In real life, the courts are solidly on the side of the well off Thai property owner.No, on the contrary, the court tends to favour lessees who are not that well-off especially those being harassed by a landlord.

It does not need much of a motivation (probably monetary) for the courts to agree that the lessee reneged on some silly contractual agreement, such as properly watering the garden, and as such be able to find the contract between lessor and lessee void!Yes, that is a good point. Breaching of duties by a lessee could be caused for termination before due time but not on those silly grounds like watering garden. The one that is crucial is not paying rental on time.

If it means for the owner to be able to sell or to be stuck with the property, they will use whatever means to get you out of there!Possible in rural areas but not in Bangkok. Therefore a tenant needs to show that he know his rights.

It will all depends how friendly you are with the owner!Yes, that helps to preclude confrontation but always bear in mind that a lessee is in a stronger position.

Personally I only feel comfortable where an agreement (lease) is duly registered, taxed and noted on the back of a land title deed.That should apply to those over 3 year leases. Most landlords prefer not to register to avoid taxation on lease income.

Although even that is still doubtful when you have to go to court.I am not as pessimistic as you are.

Again, as a real life precedent, a friend of mine loaned a certain amount to the owner of a well known and big real estate agency, to fund a housing project.

Duly registered on the back of the land title deed.

Owner defaults on the payments to my friend form day one (never planned to pay any penny back), friend goes to court trying to claim the land, owner files for a "poor mans agreement" claiming he is just above the poverty level, courts agree and refuse to hand over the land to my friend and instead force him to accept a new pay back term (30 years instead of the 2 years contractually agreed upon, utterly ridiculous as my friend is over 60 years of age).That is quite different from this position. That was a loan agreement and not a pure lease agreement.

Do note that the owner moves around in multi-million chauffeur driven cars etc, but they are all on lease contracts in his company name. A thorough search by my friends investigators indeed shows that the owner has very little to his name (but very rich brothers, sisters and children, maybe even a well off maid!), lives in a small mansion and has several extremely expensive cars in his driveway. And whatever asset he has to his name is properly covered by loans, all of which he is defaulting on, blaming it on a slump in the housing market etc...

This took 3 years. My friend, against advice from his lawyers to the verdict to appeals court, which he again lost!That is quite different from this position. That was a loan agreement and not a pure lease agreement.

Depending who you deal with, the law is so full with loopholes resulting in you having zilch protection....Yes, you are right. Dealing with people in Thailand is an art. You have to do a due diligence exercise on his reliability and outlook in life. Lending money to a businessman personally is the last thing you would do in Thailand. Even among Thai people, one does not lend money to friends.

[Khun Jean]

I agree with Irene on a theoretical level.

Unfortunately what should be done and should be protection are not really available when push gets to shove. Especially for those thosand who have a year contract up to a maximum of 3 years contract. More than 3 years give you some more rights but even those can be circumvented.

Seen a few with my own eyes and heared many (hearsay) stories. Thais are the best people to ask for this kind of information as they are much more in touch with what goes around them.

I ridiculed my wifes gut feelings a few times, only to find out that it was indeed the right feeling. I rent al the time and i am quit good at judging someones character. Never in trouble because of this and sheer luck!

Just across the street with another owner it would have been a different story. Also think about things like getting your deposit back, a normal price for electricity, etc. I found out that when a owner asks a normal price for electricity it somehow reflects to the person as not being the greedy and unreliable type.

Still don't underestimate the gut feelings and knowledge of your Thai spouse or Thai friends (and your own of course).

[donx]

I recently signed a lease on a house for 12 months. Now the owner wants to sell said property. Can she legally do this?, and if the new owners wish to move in can they turf us out?

Every weekend we get people driving past checking it out and its starting to get really annoying. I've also spent a bit on the garden under the impression i would be there for a while.

I've heard thai law favours the landlord fairly heavily, but surely a contract is binding for both parties

Any info is appreciated

Now that you have heard a variety of possible outcomes, I will be interested in hearing what actually ends up happening to you.

Let's forget about a new owner for now. What I'd like to know is are you keeping people from looking inside the house? I believe that you don't have to let anyone in if you don't want them to see it. How likely is it that the house will be sold? You could be spending the entire remainder of the lease dealing with people snooping around your stuff. I agree that once a new owner is found, they are legally obligated to honor the lease. Whether they do or not is another matter which again I will be interested in knowing the actual outcome.

[quiksilva]

Irene is correct, remember that nearly all commercial leases are less than 3 years and these have been successfully tested in the courts numerous times,(i.e. tenants suing developers over early terminations, One Silom Road is a great example). The court does not distinguish between a residential lease or a commercial lease. The principals are the same.

[Heng]

I wonder how those lawsuits against Chuwit and Silver Star are coming along?

Seriously though, what are you going to do when an eviction team (often made up of off duty policeman) shows up?

Call the police? If you signed the generic lease that most locals use, it does indeed say that you agree to vacate the premises within 30 days if you are notified that the place is going to be sold (intent to sell, doesn't even really need to be sold). Not sure what happens when that comes into contradiction with the commercial code Irene mentioned above, but by then again in practical terms you're already out on your a$$. So I assume you're just stuck in a situation where you file a lawsuit on principle that you may or may not win.

[klikster]

But even with tresspasing, who is going to stop him?

You can't stop him that time, but if you have a clear photograph of him trespassing, you can have him arrested. And if you file a police report, the police are required by Thai law to arrest him.

[klikster]

Irene,

I'm fairly sure that the law you quote above is valid for leases fully registered through the proper channels, and all required taxes properly paid.

I think I remember that a lease is perfectly legal for up to 3 years without being registered.

My Thai friends (richer than me) tell me that it extremely difficult to get someone out of "their home" .. if they don't want to go .. even if the rent is not paid.

I really wonder how much written in these treads is "the way I think things are or should be" .. rather than actual legal remedies?