Cost Of Housing In Phuket

[KarenBravo]

To answer your question, NamKangMan: "The math" doesn't come into it for me.

Whatever house I live in is, and always has been, for as long as I can remember, a very, very important part of my life. I would be very unhappy and uncomfortable living in a house that was owned and/or designed by someone else. I like a house to be designed to suit me, and I like to know I can modify it in any way I choose. So, renting is not for me – not interested.

Of course I realise I am lucky to be financially able to build a house that suits me, and that is what I have done.

I, and no one else, knows if it will turn out to be a good investment, but that is not why I built it. I built it to live in and enjoy.

I could have written the exact same, but, you did it already. Good post.

[thaiwanderer]

With so many farang coming here and getting into property, can some of you tell me why you made the decision that you did because I'm just not seeing "the math" to it and I do not say this to offend anyone. I am sure there are many good reasons to purchase. Eg: I can imagine a lot of the property has been bought with "black money." Not necessarily the proceeds of crime, but maybe tax evasion etc. No probs, in that case, I understand your reasons for purchase.

Am I missing something???? (Yes, I know, I am not a rocket scientist) :)

Farangs can legally own land but the exception is subject to such conditions and restrictions that it isn't worthwhile even where they qualify.

Your consideration didn't refer to other methods of contolling and having beneficial use of land other than lease (including nominee company, nominee wife / other, and rights of habitation, superficies and usufruct - there are many threads on these in the Real Estate section of Thai Visa).

Regardless of the route, farangs invest in real estate due to varying reasons including:-

1) plain stupidity or egotism

2) ignorance or assumed knowledge on poor research and advice

3) knowledge on decent research and advice together with accepting the risks.

There is in fact no one ideal route for all farang.

As to 'value' in farang real estate it is of course a strange market.

This thread alone tells us some people misunderstand exactly what they have already bought.

Nominee company has many risks but assuming those are avoided (a big assumption) it won't then involve a depreciating asset (but will involve a criminal offence).

You will always have to rely on other's seeing value when you want to cash out and a large part of that will involve other people's stupidity, egotism or lack of knowledge (whether your particular buyer or the'market rate' being what it is because of the high proportion of such people pushing the price up).

The oft touted idea that Thailand will never rock the boat by enforcing current laws or changing them as if we are beggars dependent on your money and future patronage is laughable in the extreme.

The guaranteed high failure rate of future lease 'renewals' will certainly rock the market but smug 'owners' may well have already found out to their cost that the rise in the value of 'their' land wasn't so inevitable as they thought (especially given their own ridiculous purchase price).

Edited January 4, 2011 by thaiwanderer

[LivinLOS]

To be honest living in other peoples houses doesnt bother me, tho I am real picky about the house I do rent, usually takes a lot of legwork to find one I like, but that would be the same with anything I didnt design and build. I like the freedom to leave should bad things happen around the home, the freedom from maintaining it, etc etc.

[petercallen]

To many ifs, buts and maybes with leasing in Thailand

If i go the lease way the property will be owned by my wife and i will have a 30 year lease.

That will see me out

[barka]

To answer your question, NamKangMan: "The math" doesn't come into it for me.

Whatever house I live in is, and always has been, for as long as I can remember, a very, very important part of my life. I would be very unhappy and uncomfortable living in a house that was owned and/or designed by someone else. I like a house to be designed to suit me, and I like to know I can modify it in any way I choose. So, renting is not for me – not interested.

Of course I realise I am lucky to be financially able to build a house that suits me, and that is what I have done.

I, and no one else, knows if it will turn out to be a good investment, but that is not why I built it. I built it to live in and enjoy.

I could have written the exact same, but, you did it already. Good post.

i agree... most of us who live here bought our houses to live in and enjoy i know i did..and if after 30 years some thing changes so what..i will be well gone...i am not a peculator..my house i s my..HOME..

[petercallen]

To answer your question, NamKangMan: "The math" doesn't come into it for me.

Whatever house I live in is, and always has been, for as long as I can remember, a very, very important part of my life. I would be very unhappy and uncomfortable living in a house that was owned and/or designed by someone else. I like a house to be designed to suit me, and I like to know I can modify it in any way I choose. So, renting is not for me – not interested.

Of course I realise I am lucky to be financially able to build a house that suits me, and that is what I have done.

I, and no one else, knows if it will turn out to be a good investment, but that is not why I built it. I built it to live in and enjoy.

I could have written the exact same, but, you did it already. Good post.

i agree... thats why i bought..and if i own it for 30 yesr so what... i will be well gone

i personally am happy what i have done..i am not a speculator..

Why post other peoples posts with no comment of your own???

[KarenBravo]

i agree... most of us who live here bought our houses to live in and enjoy i know i did..and if after 30 years some thing changes so what..i will be well gone...i am not a peculator..my house i s my..HOME..

I bought the land, then designed and had the house built.

I love it. Been living in it for more than 10 years now.

Edited January 4, 2011 by KarenBravo

[barka]

To answer your question, NamKangMan: "The math" doesn't come into it for me.

Whatever house I live in is, and always has been, for as long as I can remember, a very, very important part of my life. I would be very unhappy and uncomfortable living in a house that was owned and/or designed by someone else. I like a house to be designed to suit me, and I like to know I can modify it in any way I choose. So, renting is not for me – not interested.

Of course I realise I am lucky to be financially able to build a house that suits me, and that is what I have done.

I, and no one else, knows if it will turn out to be a good investment, but that is not why I built it. I built it to live in and enjoy.

I could have written the exact same, but, you did it already. Good post.

i agree... thats why i bought..and if i own it for 30 yesr so what... i will be well gone

i personally am happy what i have done..i am not a speculator..

Why post other peoples posts with no comment of your own???

Peter .IF You look back through the thread you can see were i have given examples of what i have done with my experiance of buying selling and owning houses and apartments here in Phuket ...and this is all based on...Facts... if i want to agree with a post that i think is valid and is good advice... why cant i agree..some time i think you memory is going.....read back.....

[BangTaoBoy]

Also interesting is that if the lessee dies "should the lessee die the lease contract will be terminated and the lease rights WILL NOT transfer to the heirs of the lessee'.

Either way: if owner dies or has transferred ownership without the new owner specifically accepting the renewal option the renewal option is lost, or if the lessee dies the lease is terminated including the renewal option according to written laws and Supreme Court judgments."

With this & the other comments it just reinforces the fact that leases are tenuous at best & as LOS says best to only lease from a family member or as HD said just consider it as a long term rental option which would also be the way to value the property e.g a 20 million Baht home equates to 55,555 per month over 30 years which could be considered expensive now but considered quite cheap in 5 or 10 years. Using this "rental" option means you don't have to move at the whim of the owner & you will have the house you really like but it should never be considered as an investment due to all the lease complexities mentioned on this thread.

The other thing about 30 years leases is that no one can predict what your life & financial situation will be in the future & so if you need to sell what return can you expect, not much if any at all. You can't beat freehold property as it will always increase in value over time yet at present it is denied to foreigners in Thailand & so you are left with the other tenuous option of trusting your Thai spouse or family member.

Agree with this post except the last bit. Trusting your wife and putting property in her name doesn't always have to be a tenuous option. If we ever split up, I would have to move out anyway, and leave the house as the family home. I think there are a lot of people out there, that can be fairly certain that they're in it for the long haul, and if the unlikely, unforseeable, does happen, then there is enough trust and decency, to do what's best for both parties and most imprtantly, what's best for the kids.

For myself, putting a house in my wifes name feels no less secure than it being in mine. (queue the laughter from all the people with several failed marriages under their belt)

If you don't feel that way, or aren't married to a Thai at all, then the only other option that I can see, is to rent, or as many people have said, treat the house as a life style not an investment.

That's where I believe the confusion comes from. People who are desperate to own a property and have it be exactly the same as it would be in the West, a secure, apreciating investment. That's not going to work here, so you need to change that mind set or forget about it all together.

[petercallen]

PETER Like i said before i think you know what you want to buy and at what price..yet all you seem to want to do is argue with all the other posters opinions...buy a house soon then you wont need our opinions...if your such a shrewd real estate guy with all your experiance buy one....

Barka check your post #13, where you say you would be lucky to get your money back after 4 years of owning a house

I will buy a house when i am ready and i will not lose money on it

I have also received a lot of useful information from some people on this forum, some through PM and some through posts

We have moderators and if i do anything wrong i am sure i will be told, i do not need you to tell me what to do

[barka]

PETER Like i said before i think you know what you want to buy and at what price..yet all you seem to want to do is argue with all the other posters opinions...buy a house soon then you wont need our opinions...if your such a shrewd real estate guy with all your experiance buy one....

Barka check your post #13, where you say you would be lucky to get your money back after 4 years of owning a house

I will buy a house when i am ready and i will not lose money on it

I have also received a lot of useful information from some people on this forum, some through PM and some through posts

We have moderators and if i do anything wrong i am sure i will be told, i do not need you to tell me what to do

im sorry you feel this way about my posts...i never tell poeple what to do.. and i have certainly never told you...only once did i jokingly.. say [get your checkbook out] ..... and i stand by my comment..today if i tried to sell i would be lucky to get my money back.... and my house would still be good value...but i dont need to sell... i only try to post info on what i know and thats.. all it is...if it is advice ..that to is all it is..

[LivinLOS]

That's where I believe the confusion comes from. People who are desperate to own a property and have it be exactly the same as it would be in the West, a secure, apreciating investment. That's not going to work here, so you need to change that mind set or forget about it all together.

However theres an entire industry out there.. Propagating that 'confusion' !! And market value is always a combination of many factors which includes risk, so many of the parties involved, agents, lawyers, sellers, etc etc all downplay this precise aspect.

[BangTaoBoy]

That's where I believe the confusion comes from. People who are desperate to own a property and have it be exactly the same as it would be in the West, a secure, apreciating investment. That's not going to work here, so you need to change that mind set or forget about it all together.

However theres an entire industry out there.. Propagating that 'confusion' !! And market value is always a combination of many factors which includes risk, so many of the parties involved, agents, lawyers, sellers, etc etc all downplay this precise aspect.

That's true, but you know what they say about a fool and his money! I'm not condoning fraudulant, immoral behaviour, but I have limited sympathy for people who don't research things properly and get suckered. Don't get me wrong, there are genuine con men out there that are good at what they do, and we could all fall victim to them, but the buying/leasing laws here are very transparant, if you just take the time to look and understand them.

[Old Croc]

PETER Like i said before i think you know what you want to buy and at what price..yet all you seem to want to do is argue with all the other posters opinions...buy a house soon then you wont need our opinions...if your such a shrewd real estate guy with all your experiance buy one....

Barka check your post #13, where you say you would be lucky to get your money back after 4 years of owning a house

I will buy a house when i am ready and i will not lose money on it

I have also received a lot of useful information from some people on this forum, some through PM and some through posts

We have moderators and if i do anything wrong i am sure i will be told, i do not need you to tell me what to do

im sorry you feel this way about my posts...i never tell poeple what to do.. and i have certainly never told you...only once did i jokingly.. say [get your checkbook out] ..... and i stand by my comment..today if i tried to sell i would be lucky to get my money back.... and my house would still be good value...but i dont need to sell... i only try to post info on what i know and thats.. all it is...if it is advice ..that to is all it is..

Some people think they are simply advising, while a reader may perceive their tone as being patronistic and instructing.

I bit some guys head off a while back because he felt the need to talk to me like I was a naughty school boy and continued to berate me (making use of multiple exclamation marks) long after I had admitted I had made an error in judgement and wouldn't do the same again.

I guess on forums like this there are always schoolteachers, and grumpy old men, and they don't always see things the same.

[barka]

Some people think they are simply advising, while a reader may perceive their tone as being patronistic and instructing.

I bit some guys head off a while back because he felt the need to talk to me like I was a naughty school boy and continued to berate me (making use of multiple exclamation marks) long after I had admitted I had made an error in judgement and wouldn't do the same again.

I guess on forums like this there are always schoolteachers, and grumpy old men, and they don't always see things the same.

I am a.... GRUMPY OLD MAN......GOMS

[steelepulse]

No no, grumpyoldman is GOM.

Edited January 4, 2011 by steelepulse

[katabeachbum]

Buying a property, agree on a price, and the lease is a formality to enable you and your next to control it for an agreed time, or until you can become freehold owner or until you establish a co ltd, or until someone want to lease it for 30 years

I dont know how many Phuket lawyers register 30 and 30 years, but at least Sam in International Law office has done it. Dowroong, Phuket town office

Absolutely false.

The 2nd 30 years is not at all registered even if the lease within which it is mentioned is registered.

We disagreed on this a year ago, and we disagree today. I still have Chanote with 2x30 years on the back

[Valentine]

No no, grumpyoldman is GOM.

He should have said he is a member of GOMS (grumpy old men's society).

[barka]

Buying a property, agree on a price, and the lease is a formality to enable you and your next to control it for an agreed time, or until you can become freehold owner or until you establish a co ltd, or until someone want to lease it for 30 years

I dont know how many Phuket lawyers register 30 and 30 years, but at least Sam in International Law office has done it. Dowroong, Phuket town office

Absolutely false.

The 2nd 30 years is not at all registered even if the lease within which it is mentioned is registered.

We disagreed on this a year ago, and we disagree today. I still have Chanote with 2x30 years on the back

i have also got a chanote title with 30 year + on mine to..but i dont know the true legality of it...

[NamKangMan]

Buying a property, agree on a price, and the lease is a formality to enable you and your next to control it for an agreed time, or until you can become freehold owner or until you establish a co ltd, or until someone want to lease it for 30 years

I dont know how many Phuket lawyers register 30 and 30 years, but at least Sam in International Law office has done it. Dowroong, Phuket town office

Absolutely false.

The 2nd 30 years is not at all registered even if the lease within which it is mentioned is registered.

We disagreed on this a year ago, and we disagree today. I still have Chanote with 2x30 years on the back

One thing is for sure, there will be disagreements between farang lease holders and Thai land owners, or their heirs, on the validity of the +30+30 clause. These disagreements should start surfacing in the next few years.

When they do, the Thai Court will eventually have to decide if they rule in favour of "Thaiwanderer" or "Katabeachbum" in this example.

A lot of farang lease holders probably have agreeable Thai land owners at the moment but, once the word gets out that you do not have to honour the +30+30 clause and you can re-lease the land, then it's going to be on for young and old.

Even if you take your Thai land owner to Court, it appears you can't stay in your own home till the matter is settled. So, at the very worst for the Thai land owner, he gets to rent YOUR house out for anywhere from 5 to 10 years, possibly longer if he stalls proceedings very well, not to mention the flood of these cases heading to Court and creating a backlog.

I'm sure the first "test case" will be watched with much interest by lease holders, Thai land owners, the media, investors, real estate etc etc.

[NamKangMan]

To answer your question, NamKangMan: "The math" doesn't come into it for me.

Whatever house I live in is, and always has been, for as long as I can remember, a very, very important part of my life. I would be very unhappy and uncomfortable living in a house that was owned and/or designed by someone else. I like a house to be designed to suit me, and I like to know I can modify it in any way I choose. So, renting is not for me not interested.

Of course I realise I am lucky to be financially able to build a house that suits me, and that is what I have done.

I, and no one else, knows if it will turn out to be a good investment, but that is not why I built it. I built it to live in and enjoy.

I could have written the exact same, but, you did it already. Good post.

i agree... most of us who live here bought our houses to live in and enjoy i know i did..and if after 30 years some thing changes so what..i will be well gone...i am not a peculator..my house i s my..HOME..

I have no problems with this approach to getting into property here, however, after such an outlay of cash, it would be nice to leave your missus and/or kids with something, rather than the property just reverting back to the Thai land owner after 30 years or your death. That's if you do not have a Thai missus and 50/50 farang/Thai kid/s.

A lot of farang just have a Thai girlfriend living with them and adult farang kids back home.

Edited January 5, 2011 by NamKangMan

[LivinLOS]

One thing is for sure, there will be disagreements between farang lease holders and Thai land owners, or their heirs, on the validity of the +30+30 clause. These disagreements should start surfacing in the next few years.

When they do, the Thai Court will eventually have to decide if they rule in favour of "Thaiwanderer" or "Katabeachbum" in this example.

A lot of farang lease holders probably have agreeable Thai land owners at the moment but, once the word gets out that you do not have to honour the +30+30 clause and you can re-lease the land, then it's going to be on for young and old.

Even if you take your Thai land owner to Court, it appears you can't stay in your own home till the matter is settled. So, at the very worst for the Thai land owner, he gets to rent YOUR house out for anywhere from 5 to 10 years, possibly longer if he stalls proceedings very well, not to mention the flood of these cases heading to Court and creating a backlog.

I'm sure the first "test case" will be watched with much interest by lease holders, Thai land owners, the media, investors, real estate etc etc.

But again.. Thailand doesnt operate precedent case law.. So having a test case, which defines the law, as we do in the west (with appeals taking to the high court etc) isnt the way Thai law works.

So because one case wins, or one case loses, each case will be decided by a judge with free reign to choose.

Just a murkey mess that can go on for years.

[Will1]

Phuket foreign property sales to grow 25% this year 2011

According to the article in the Phuket Gazette today!!!

[thaiwanderer]

Buying a property, agree on a price, and the lease is a formality to enable you and your next to control it for an agreed time, or until you can become freehold owner or until you establish a co ltd, or until someone want to lease it for 30 years

I dont know how many Phuket lawyers register 30 and 30 years, but at least Sam in International Law office has done it. Dowroong, Phuket town office

Absolutely false.

The 2nd 30 years is not at all registered even if the lease within which it is mentioned is registered.

We disagreed on this a year ago, and we disagree today. I still have Chanote with 2x30 years on the back

i have also got a chanote title with 30 year + on mine to..but i dont know the true legality of it...

Doesn't matter, the 2nd 30 years simply is not registered.

And even if by error or fraud it has been written on the chanote itself there is no liability for or protection arising from the incorrect actions of land office officials.

So how exactly is the 2nd 30 years registered as you claim?

In a lease that is attached to the chanote? = this does not mean the 2nd 30 years is registered.

Written onto the chanote itself? If so what's the precise wording? = no matter what it says the land office official's error doesn't provide any protection whatsoever and the 2nd 30 years isn't registered.

(the original intention may thereby be evidenced but that is not registration which will need to take place 30 years later with the co-operation of the land owner at that time).

Edited January 5, 2011 by thaiwanderer

[katabeachbum]

Doesn't matter, the 2nd 30 years simply is not registered.

And even if by error or fraud it has been written on the chanote itself there is no liability for or protection arising from the incorrect actions of land office officials.

So how exactly is the 2nd 30 years registered as you claim?

In a lease that is attached to the chanote? = this does not mean the 2nd 30 years is registered.

Written onto the chanote itself? If so what's the precise wording? = no matter what it says the land office official's error doesn't provide any protection whatsoever and the 2nd 30 years isn't registered.

(the original intention may thereby be evidenced but that is not registration which will need to take place 30 years later with the co-operation of the land owner at that time).

it is registered and written on the back of the Chanotes (my copy and the copy filed in Land Office) like any other lease, except it expires year 2612 as I recall, and of course supported by an official tax reciept

end of discussion for me, you dont believe it and I dont care if you do, and you prefere to use words like fraud about land office employees to make your case

[thaiwanderer]

Doesn't matter, the 2nd 30 years simply is not registered.

And even if by error or fraud it has been written on the chanote itself there is no liability for or protection arising from the incorrect actions of land office officials.

So how exactly is the 2nd 30 years registered as you claim?

In a lease that is attached to the chanote? = this does not mean the 2nd 30 years is registered.

Written onto the chanote itself? If so what's the precise wording? = no matter what it says the land office official's error doesn't provide any protection whatsoever and the 2nd 30 years isn't registered.

(the original intention may thereby be evidenced but that is not registration which will need to take place 30 years later with the co-operation of the land owner at that time).

it is registered and written on the back of the Chanotes (my copy and the copy filed in Land Office) like any other lease, except it expires year 2612 as I recall, and of course supported by an official tax reciept

end of discussion for me, you dont believe it and I dont care if you do, and you prefere to use words like fraud about land office employees to make your case

Whether the error was intentional or not it is plainly illegal, regardless of chanote and tax receipt which provide zero protection on this issue.

If you don't want to discuss it any further that's fine but (and this is not a personal criticism) you don't have the protection you think you have.

Edited January 5, 2011 by thaiwanderer

[katabeachbum]

Doesn't matter, the 2nd 30 years simply is not registered.

And even if by error or fraud it has been written on the chanote itself there is no liability for or protection arising from the incorrect actions of land office officials.

So how exactly is the 2nd 30 years registered as you claim?

In a lease that is attached to the chanote? = this does not mean the 2nd 30 years is registered.

Written onto the chanote itself? If so what's the precise wording? = no matter what it says the land office official's error doesn't provide any protection whatsoever and the 2nd 30 years isn't registered.

(the original intention may thereby be evidenced but that is not registration which will need to take place 30 years later with the co-operation of the land owner at that time).

it is registered and written on the back of the Chanotes (my copy and the copy filed in Land Office) like any other lease, except it expires year 2612 as I recall, and of course supported by an official tax reciept

end of discussion for me, you dont believe it and I dont care if you do, and you prefere to use words like fraud about land office employees to make your case

Whether the error was intentional or not it is plainly illegal, regardless of chanote and tax receipt which provide zero protection on this issue.

If you don't want to discuss it any further that's fine but (and this is not a personal criticism) you don't have the protection you think you have.

There is no error, there are Chanotes with 2 leaseterms to 2 different individuals at 2 different times registered.

Do you care to explain to TV readers why you consider 2 individuals to lease one property for 30 years each at 2 different times illegal, and why you accuse Phuket Landoffice or some of their higher ranking officers for being fraudent and involved in illlegal activities? Do you consider all Landoffices in Thailand issuing lease beyond 30 years from today to be fraudent too?

Would you care to present your claims directly to a Land office, or only on TV?

[thaiwanderer]

Doesn't matter, the 2nd 30 years simply is not registered.

And even if by error or fraud it has been written on the chanote itself there is no liability for or protection arising from the incorrect actions of land office officials.

So how exactly is the 2nd 30 years registered as you claim?

In a lease that is attached to the chanote? = this does not mean the 2nd 30 years is registered.

Written onto the chanote itself? If so what's the precise wording? = no matter what it says the land office official's error doesn't provide any protection whatsoever and the 2nd 30 years isn't registered.

(the original intention may thereby be evidenced but that is not registration which will need to take place 30 years later with the co-operation of the land owner at that time).

it is registered and written on the back of the Chanotes (my copy and the copy filed in Land Office) like any other lease, except it expires year 2612 as I recall, and of course supported by an official tax reciept

end of discussion for me, you dont believe it and I dont care if you do, and you prefere to use words like fraud about land office employees to make your case

Whether the error was intentional or not it is plainly illegal, regardless of chanote and tax receipt which provide zero protection on this issue.

If you don't want to discuss it any further that's fine but (and this is not a personal criticism) you don't have the protection you think you have.

There is no error, there are Chanotes with 2 leaseterms to 2 different individuals at 2 different times registered.

Do you care to explain to TV readers why you consider 2 individuals to lease one property for 30 years each at 2 different times illegal, and why you accuse Phuket Landoffice or some of their higher ranking officers for being fraudent and involved in illlegal activities? Do you consider all Landoffices in Thailand issuing lease beyond 30 years from today to be fraudent too?

Would you care to present your claims directly to a Land office, or only on TV?

I made no such allegation of fraud - it was one possible explanation for the invalid registration - an error has been made intentionally or otherwise (If indeed the excess period has been 'registered' as you suggest - see my previous distinction).

(have you not heard of flying chanotes - were they legitimised by being 'registered'? no).

You hadn't mentioned 2 'separate' leases but unless i misunderstand your posts you are saying one of the leases has an expiry date longer than 30 years in the future from when it was presented at the land office. Whether that's defined as a 30 year lease starting after the expiry of the current lease or a 30 year lease starting in say 10 years from date of presentation - that is simply invalid as a registered interest (unless a commercial property in which case the maximum is 50 years but otherwise the rest remains true for those also).

A residential lease regsitered today simply cannot be more than 30 years. If for whatever reason the land office register it (and tax is paid etc) the excess period is nonetheless invalid.

Edited January 6, 2011 by thaiwanderer

[NamKangMan]

My understanding was that he has a 30 year lease in his name and he is currently residing in his premises. The very day his 30 year lease expires, the next 30 year lease starts, so, there are not two leases "active" at the one time and the second 30 year lease is a completely new lease. From memory, I think he mentioned it maybe in his son's name - not sure. I would assume all the papers are signed already etc etc - all he has to do is present them to the land office at the end of his 30 year lease.

I would ask the question though, at the end of his 30 year lease, what if the documents required for registration change, what if the Thai land owner sells or gifts the land, what if the Thai land owner dies etc. You would be presenting documents with names and signatures from a previous owner. How does that work?

Maybe I have misunderstood your post as well. The only way around that would be to register the second lease at the same time you registered your first lease and I thought that couldn't be done as well, otherwise, everyone would be doing it and it would be standard practice.

Edited January 6, 2011 by NamKangMan

[thaiwanderer]

If you doubt my knowledge or intentions and do not wish to take decent legal advice perhaps transfer this thread to the real estate section and see what some of the frequent more sensible posters there make of it.

I am not having a go at you at all. You have either been misinformed or you do not understand exactly what has actually been registered.

There is simply no way you have a (valid) regsitered residential lease term that ends more than 30 years after the date of registration - if you have what appears to be that then the 'registration' itself is worthless and provides absolutely no protection for anything beyond 30 years after the registration date.