30 Year Land-lease Contract For Private Dwelling

[simon43]

I need some advice/sample contract!

In my quest to find some permanent accomodation away from my ex, I have hit upon the idea to rent a small piece of land for 30 years - with the rental contract registered at the local amphur etc.

I will then pay an agreed monthly rent for the land, with any annual increase in rental amount clearly defined in the rental contract.

I will then build a Mai Sak/Mai Daeng small house for my own use, which has the advantage of being able to dismantle and relocate it should this become necessary due to some unforseen circumstances in the future.

This accomodation idea means that I do not need to find the funds to purchase the land or to pay for the lease outright - I simply agree/sign a contract with the land owner and then pay them each month.

Does this idea seem reasonable? What problems could occur?

I have actually found a suitable piece of land and the Thai -farang owners seem agreeable to this idea (because they do not want to sell the land but have no need to use the land for 30 years).

I can think of a few issues:

- I am almost 50 years old now and single. So I will be about 80 years old when the lease expires. I understand that I cannot legally 'force' the land owner to renew the contract. Is there anything contractually that I can do in the event that I am still alive at 80, and unwilling to dismantle my house in my old age?

- I understand that a land-lease expires when the lessee expires! So I could sign this lease, build my beautiful little house and then be killed immediately by the landowners who would then legally own my house. (The landowners are not relations of my ex BTW!). Anything that I can do to try to minimise this eventuality??

- In the future, my financial state may improve. Would I be able to simply dismantle/relocate my house and terminate the land lease? Or does such a lease usually bind the lessee to the complete 30 years?

- I should be legally able to reassign the lease, or to sublet the property.

Anyway, advice is gratefully received

Simon

[mickba]

Search and read Khun Jean's thread on 30+30+30 Lease scam if you haven't and then look into Usufructs. I think that may suit your purpose better. Usufructs are for life and are simpler and cheaper and probably more effective - I think. They also will die with the beneficiary I believe, so if you have a young relative then perhaps include them on it. Neither a Lease or Usufruct is really transferrable I believe, whatever the agreement might say.

Sounds like a reasonable plan, though presumably the owner will want a lump up front as well as the rent.

[Riley'sLife]

Any contract which enables the other party to make a substantial gain in the event of your death would seem rather stupid to enter into, especially in Thailand where your demise can be "arranged" for the cost of a dozen Chang.

Instead of trying to find ways around the problems of land possession/ownership why not take the much safer, straightforward, legal route of condo purchase? Everything else is high risk and unnecessarily complicated IMO. Unless, of course, you like donating your assets toThais!

[longball53098]

Buying a condo may be a good way to get by some of the issues but if the OP wants to live in the country or where ever the condo is not a way to go. Also condo buying is a bumpy road too. You open a whole new can of worms when you buy into a condo. So its not so smooth either

[simon43]

Condo buying is not an option, (nor indded any sort of lump-sum payment becasue I do not have the funds. For this proposed land-lease, the landowner requires no upfront payment - just sign the contract and start paying monthly.

I'm looking for a quiet rural place because I'm also very eccentric and do strange things with bits of wire and radio antennae

I'm aware that only 30 years lease is possible, but the usufrunct is maybe a better option since perhaps I can put my Thai son down on the contract.

Simon

[hellohello]

Hi! From what friends have done and told me - Most wont make a long term lease with out a year or two minimum rent, upfront. But looks like it will be a slow season so you might have a good chance of finding some motivated Thai peeps in lets say, March 2009.

I have a few houses made of Mai Deng- its not cheap! The cost has gone up on Mai Deng about 33% since 2004.

[simon43]

Hi Hellohello, the landlord has already agreed to no lumpsum upfront

As for the costs of Mai Sak/Daeng, I have a coupe of options:

- I can commission a complete project with 1 bedroom and 1 living room and extras. I have been quoted about 1 million baht in Mai Sak, all complete with wiring. plumbing etc - by the builders in Ayuthaya

- Or I can purchase an old Mai Sak/Daung barn and relocate/rebuild it in Phuket

I'm going to take my time anyway, want to get this project off on the right foot!

Simon

[mickba]

Hi Hellohello, the landlord has already agreed to no lumpsum upfront

.......................................................

I'm going to take my time anyway, want to get this project off on the right foot!

Simon

Without doubt, the agreement on the land is the key point, not so much what you do with it.

It still sounds as tho' a Usufruct is the way to go, especially as you have a young Thai son.

You need to find out whether the owner would agrre to one being registered on his land, especially as it could be for 70 years or so?

You could try sending a PM to Sebastian at IsaanLawyers on here - he may give you a quote for a draft document, or I believe I've read posts here somewhere that you can simply go to the Amphur and get one - presumably in Thai.

Search around on here some more for "Usufruct" etc..

For myself (30 year lease) I wish I hadn't done it but there you go. I must concur with a poster above, that condo' purchase is not straightforward either. Not everybody is happy to buy the "freehold", or even live in, a space up in the sky, with all that that entails. That is mainly what draws some of us into the perils of "owning"/leasing a house and land.

After serving my 2 year apprenticeship I can fully understand why so many (most) people advise renting, though if you want long term stabilty/security, then that will mean a Lease, albeit not from the (ex)GF.

Edited December 30, 2008 by mickba

[chiangrai]

hi,

need advise on a similar situation,

i'm high up in tha mountaims where the land has no title,would love to build,

i'm only reseaching the matter but i could buy land for a pitence and build a house on it,

building in wood so i could in theory take the house with me if things went sour,

i would loose the money i paid for the land but that would be about 150,000.

my girl friend says the owner could stop me taking a houe off what would stil be his land offically,

anybody been there or done that,al advice welcome

[mickba]

hi,

need advise on a similar situation,

i'm high up in tha mountaims where the land has no title,would love to build,

i'm only reseaching the matter but i could buy land for a pitence and build a house on it,

building in wood so i could in theory take the house with me if things went sour,

i would loose the money i paid for the land but that would be about 150,000.

my girl friend says the owner could stop me taking a houe off what would stil be his land offically,

anybody been there or done that,al advice welcome

you lost me a bit - you say the land has no title? - but you could buy it (presumably in GF's name)?

so are you saying if things went sour the GF could stop you removing the house? bit honest of her because she's probably right unless you went to an awful lot of trouble to get the house in your name = yellow book = marry her = half hers anyway = you lose everything

is that it?

[chiangrai]

hi,

need advise on a similar situation,

i'm high up in tha mountaims where the land has no title,would love to build,

i'm only reseaching the matter but i could buy land for a pitence and build a house on it,

building in wood so i could in theory take the house with me if things went sour,

i would loose the money i paid for the land but that would be about 150,000.

my girl friend says the owner could stop me taking a houe off what would stil be his land offically,

anybody been there or done that,al advice welcome

you lost me a bit - you say the land has no title? - but you could buy it (presumably in GF's name)?

so are you saying if things went sour the GF could stop you removing the house? bit honest of her because she's probably right unless you went to an awful lot of trouble to get the house in your name = yellow book = marry her = half hers anyway = you lose everything

is that it?

sorry for not being clear,

the land has no title,there is some way i can buy the land in GF name with the approval of the poo yai baan and when the land office gets around to giving it a title her name would be put on it,

i've just been offored land for 30,000 baht,

i'm going on the premise that it's a gamble and i will probably have to walk away from the land and you should never gamble what you cannot afford to loose,

but if this happens could we be stopped taking away the house by the previous owner,

i'm just exploring how to live up here,all the chanote land seems to be in the valleys or hills,here is so much more beautiful,

we would probably end up living there for a few years anyway and if i had to move and by chanote land i could take the hit,nothing ventured nothing gained,

[mickba]

Firstly bear in mind that I am not an expert, but from what I've read...................

Oh and I've just noticed you've hijacked Simon's thread but he seems to have gone quiet so..........

Some say never buy land that has no title/chanote (there are different levels of title I believe, chanote being the best) but 30,000 (down from 150,000 already) doesn't seem of much consequence as long as it doesn't affect your right to remove the house. I think you would have to ask a lawyer that one. On the face of it, it shouldn't be difficult to write that into the purchase contract, but if the latter won't stick then neither will the former. Sorry, but I just went in a circle I think. There are experts on here who understand the various levels of title but you'd have to search the topic, find them and PM them.

My guess would be that if things went pear shaped with GF, your difficulty would be with her rather than the former owner. Bearing in mind that the land would be in her name, I think it quite likely that she would be able to prevent you removing "her" home.

You should probably be prepared to walk away from everything IMO. Depending how much you think you can build a home for, if it's much more than a million and you don't get at least 5 years out of it then it probably doesn't stack up despite the low land price. Sounds nice if it works out though.

Edited January 4, 2009 by mickba

[johnnyk]

Chanote or nothing.

How do you know you are paying 30K to the rightful owner if he has no paper?

Edited January 4, 2009 by johnnyk

[wolfmanjack]

I would not buy land in anyone's name unless it has one of the following. The last so called deed is only the right to use the land and can not be sold. It can only be transferred to a direct relative of the current "owner". From what i have heard on buildings built on leased land you can register ownership of the building. At the expiration of the lease you have to remove the building or it reverts to the owner of the land. At least that is what i was told by my lawyer when i was thinking of leasing land to be used as retail space.

1. Freehold Title deed (Chanote or Nor Sor 4)

This type of title grants the holder of this document the full rights over the land. Thus, if you are planning to buy land in Thailand, this type of title deed is the best option

2. Nor Sor 3 Gor

A land awaiting a full title deed is granted the document Nor Sor 3 Kor. The land is measured by the Land Department; therefore, it has its exact boundaries. The owner knows exactly what he owns. This type of land may be sold, transferred, or mortgaged, as a land with freehold title deed (Chanote). The owner of the land may file a petition to the Land Department demanding to change it to a full title deed (Chanote), and the Land Department may do so if there is no opposition made against the petition.

3. Nor Sor 3

A difference between this type of land title deed and the previous one is that a land with Nor Sor 3 has never yet been measured by the Land Department; hence the land has no exact boundaries. However, Nor Sor 3 may later be switched to a Nor Sor 3 Gor, then a freehold title deed (Chanote) in the future.

[simon43]

Wolfmanjack - you are entirely correct that when the lease expires, the house has either to be removed from the land, or everything left on the land (including the house) will become the landowner's property.

That'd fine for me, because I will be dead anyway.....

However, since I am going to build a traditional teak house, I could 'will' that house to my kids and they (ao contractors), will legally be able to dismantle and remove said house from the land

Simon

[ballbreaker]

Wolfmanjack - you are entirely correct that when the lease expires, the house has either to be removed from the land, or everything left on the land (including the house) will become the landowner's property.

That'd fine for me, because I will be dead anyway.....

However, since I am going to build a traditional teak house, I could 'will' that house to my kids and they (ao contractors), will legally be able to dismantle and remove said house from the land

Simon

Its my understanding that you can transfer and even sell your lease to another individual. So if you died I think that you could will the lease to someone and the land owner would have to honor.

Always best to consult a lawyer. They usually give a free consultation to answer questions.

[chiangrai]

thanks for the advice,

still researching,

must consult a lawer,must find the price of the cheapest wood house,

must look ito clay houses.

must stick to the topic