30 Year Land Lease

[manao1]

Dear sirs, 7 years ago we entered into a 30 year lease. On this land there was no well. The Thai owner of the area which has about 8 houses on it, said he does not want us to put a well on our part of the leased land as his total land there are all ready three wells on it. So our contract saids we can not put a well on our leased section but for the term of the lease can hook up pumps electri etc. to bring water to our leased area from other areas of the lessors land. The problem is this, the piece where we are now connected has been leased out to another party for 60 years and they do not want us any more taking water from there leased well. No where in there contract does it say they have to let us contiue to get water from there leased land. When I went to the owner of the other parts of land that are in control of the Thai family we orginaly leased from where there are 2 more wells they refuse to let us connect. The orginal contract said that for the 30 years we can connect to a well on any part of the lessors land it no where saids only this one well that we orginaly connected to. The lessor saids if we take water from another well they will take us to court in breach of contract and take there land back along with are house. Can some one please tell me if this is true.

Best regard Mark, with out water.

[Dragonman]

Dear sirs, 7 years ago we entered into a 30 year lease. On this land there was no well. The Thai owner of the area which has about 8 houses on it, said he does not want us to put a well on our part of the leased land as his total land there are all ready three wells on it. So our contract saids we can not put a well on our leased section but for the term of the lease can hook up pumps electri etc. to bring water to our leased area from other areas of the lessors land. The problem is this, the piece where we are now connected has been leased out to another party for 60 years and they do not want us any more taking water from there leased well. No where in there contract does it say they have to let us contiue to get water from there leased land. When I went to the owner of the other parts of land that are in control of the Thai family we orginaly leased from where there are 2 more wells they refuse to let us connect. The orginal contract said that for the 30 years we can connect to a well on any part of the lessors land it no where saids only this one well that we orginaly connected to. The lessor saids if we take water from another well they will take us to court in breach of contract and take there land back along with are house. Can some one please tell me if this is true.

Best regard Mark, with out water.

Without having view of your lease it is difficult to be definitive. However from what you say it is the lessor who is in breach of contract. He, or his lawyers have made a big mistake by not retaining rights on the land now leased to other parties. You must employ a lawyer to write and advise him of his contractual liabilities and ask how he will remedy the situation before the prospect of Civil proceedings are considered. Personally I would apply to Court for an Interlocutory Injunction to allow you to take water from one of his wells until the case proceeds. But it's up to your lawyer.

[manao1]

Dear sirs, 7 years ago we entered into a 30 year lease. On this land there was no well. The Thai owner of the area which has about 8 houses on it, said he does not want us to put a well on our part of the leased land as his total land there are all ready three wells on it. So our contract saids we can not put a well on our leased section but for the term of the lease can hook up pumps electri etc. to bring water to our leased area from other areas of the lessors land. The problem is this, the piece where we are now connected has been leased out to another party for 60 years and they do not want us any more taking water from there leased well. No where in there contract does it say they have to let us contiue to get water from there leased land. When I went to the owner of the other parts of land that are in control of the Thai family we orginaly leased from where there are 2 more wells they refuse to let us connect. The orginal contract said that for the 30 years we can connect to a well on any part of the lessors land it no where saids only this one well that we orginaly connected to. The lessor saids if we take water from another well they will take us to court in breach of contract and take there land back along with are house. Can some one please tell me if this is true.

Best regard Mark, with out water.

Without having view of your lease it is difficult to be definitive. However from what you say it is the lessor who is in breach of contract. He, or his lawyers have made a big mistake by not retaining rights on the land now leased to other parties. You must employ a lawyer to write and advise him of his contractual liabilities and ask how he will remedy the situation before the prospect of Civil proceedings are considered. Personally I would apply to Court for an Interlocutory Injunction to allow you to take water from one of his wells until the case proceeds. But it's up to your lawyer.

[manao1]

Thank You for you fine information, Do you think it is possible to put the lessor on the defensive buy just taping into the water source. No where in my lease contract does it say I must ask first.

There is even an area of water pipe coming from one of the other wells within 10 meters from my leased land that I can tap into and no one may ever even know. If they do find out and want to begin legal action they are the first ones to spend money on a lawyer and I perhaps can call ther bluff. The Thai man has a long history of trying to tell the leasees what they can and cannot do. Most just do what they feel is in there right and he learns to live with it. Six other house share the other two wells, I have asked each leasee if they mindif I connect they all say its fine with them I just need to share the cost of the electric and maintaing of the pumps as one leasee is in charge of paying. Also the neigbor who no longer wants me to use his leased well(it is a small well and only enought water all year for one house) Is thinking about sueing because he was not informed about the situation and feels the land was misrepresented can he get his lease money back plus damages perhaps that threat would give the thai owner a wake up call.

Thank You Again for your wise words

Best Regards Mark

[Dragonman]

Thank You for you fine information, Do you think it is possible to put the lessor on the defensive buy just taping into the water source. No where in my lease contract does it say I must ask first.

There is even an area of water pipe coming from one of the other wells within 10 meters from my leased land that I can tap into and no one may ever even know. If they do find out and want to begin legal action they are the first ones to spend money on a lawyer and I perhaps can call ther bluff. The Thai man has a long history of trying to tell the leasees what they can and cannot do. Most just do what they feel is in there right and he learns to live with it. Six other house share the other two wells, I have asked each leasee if they mindif I connect they all say its fine with them I just need to share the cost of the electric and maintaing of the pumps as one leasee is in charge of paying. Also the neigbor who no longer wants me to use his leased well(it is a small well and only enought water all year for one house) Is thinking about sueing because he was not informed about the situation and feels the land was misrepresented can he get his lease money back plus damages perhaps that threat would give the thai owner a wake up call.

Thank You Again for your wise words

Best Regards Mark

You can of course connect to the other supply if you have permission of the leaseholder and they are happy that their lease does not prevent this. You take the risk that the lessor will take legal steps to prevent this, but if he starts action you can then ask a lawyer whether he feels the lease covers you. It would not be worth your neighbour taking legal action unless you were successful in any action you took, and the Judge said the lessor must give you access to this well.

[manao1]

The water pipe I would connect to is not on any leased land but on a small strip of land that is between two leased sections. This small strip is in the lessors name and has never been leased out. Of course if I ask him he will say no I cannot connect as he already has said no water. So if I connect I´would not ask as my contract does not say I have to ask permission from the lessor only that I can connect to water on other parts of the lessors land. Again thank you for your time and thoughts. We appricate it. What about that they say they can take the land back is that possible for just connecting to water would a judge say I broke the terms of the lease and really give them the land back? With a house on it.

[Dragonman]

The water pipe I would connect to is not on any leased land but on a small strip of land that is between two leased sections. This small strip is in the lessors name and has never been leased out. Of course if I ask him he will say no I cannot connect as he already has said no water. So if I connect I´would not ask as my contract does not say I have to ask permission from the lessor only that I can connect to water on other parts of the lessors land. Again thank you for your time and thoughts. We appricate it. What about that they say they can take the land back is that possible for just connecting to water would a judge say I broke the terms of the lease and really give them the land back? With a house on it.

As long as your lease states as you say, the lessor cannot take the land back, and certainly not if the house on it is yours under a building agreement contained within the lease. The best he could get , if successful, is a judgement for you to disconnect from the water supply.

[GuestHouse]

Offer an additional payment. A) He may take it and save problems later. If he refuses seek good legal advice regarding the issue of has he broken your lease agreement with him. You will have demonstrated that you are being reasonable which can go a long way when settling a dispute in Thailand where the 'middle way' is valued.

DO NOT seek advice from local lawyers who may have connections to the land owner, or may hope to make connections with the land owner, and grass your plans up to him.

[manao1]

I had the house built myself seven years ago. Have all the paper work to show I paid for it and had a contract with the builder. The only thing is back then the lessor was the one to appy for the address number. So do you think his name is recorded as the owner at the land office. Is this a paper I should make sure he tranfers into my name? Will there be a cost involved a transfer tax for the house itself at the land office. I also have the book thats Thais use to show where they live there is no name in it. I was told by a lawyer in the past I do not need to put the house in my name at the land office as I have plenty of proof I paid for it to be built. please advise. And again thanks for the wise words.

[GuestHouse]

Again, go to your lease. Does it give you permission to build on the land and use all that is on the land? If so then the lease defines your rights to live in your home.

I'd still go and make a cash offer to have the right to take water from one of these other wells. Alternatively, consider rain harvesting.

[Mobi]

Offer an additional payment. A) He may take it and save problems later. If he refuses seek good legal advice regarding the issue of has he broken your lease agreement with him. You will have demonstrated that you are being reasonable which can go a long way when settling a dispute in Thailand where the 'middle way' is valued.

DO NOT seek advice from local lawyers who may have connections to the land owner, or may hope to make connections with the land owner, and grass your plans up to him.

Guesthouse's advice is very good, in all respects. Please be very careful with your lawyer and make sure he will act for you, and not the other party - it happens so often when farangs are involved.

Assuming you have a good lawyer, it sometimes works well to have him go and talk to the owner - they can often work out a compromise where he doesn't lose face, and it doesn't cost you too much.

You very clearly have the law on your side.

Good luck.

[Dragonman]

I had the house built myself seven years ago. Have all the paper work to show I paid for it and had a contract with the builder. The only thing is back then the lessor was the one to appy for the address number. So do you think his name is recorded as the owner at the land office. Is this a paper I should make sure he tranfers into my name? Will there be a cost involved a transfer tax for the house itself at the land office. I also have the book thats Thais use to show where they live there is no name in it. I was told by a lawyer in the past I do not need to put the house in my name at the land office as I have plenty of proof I paid for it to be built. please advise. And again thanks for the wise words.

As the property has not been registered at the Land Office official records will show it is his! Thus he could sell the land and house unencumbered. However since, hopefully, you will have registered the lease at the Land Office, any search will show permission to build on the lease. You do not mention if this is implicit within the lease. Thus your lawyer was strictly correct in that if you have,receipts, permission to build and a registered lease stating such, you are covered by Thai Law. However I would still advise registering your property interest.

[manao1]

Thankyou again, We did register the lease 7 years ago. And the lease does state we can erect house buildings for rental living buisness etc can sub lease also. I agree I need to ck. to see if he has regestered the house and if he has transfer it to my name as I am the one who built it. But will this intail a transfer fee and if so do you know how they come up with the fee? If he regestered the house in his name would not his name being a Thai be in the tabian ban book. There is no name in it. Other wise would he not be paying tax every year on this house as a rental. Thanks again for your time to all.

[Dragonman]

Thankyou again, We did register the lease 7 years ago. And the lease does state we can erect house buildings for rental living buisness etc can sub lease also. I agree I need to ck. to see if he has regestered the house and if he has transfer it to my name as I am the one who built it. But will this intail a transfer fee and if so do you know how they come up with the fee? If he regestered the house in his name would not his name being a Thai be in the tabian ban book. There is no name in it. Other wise would he not be paying tax every year on this house as a rental. Thanks again for your time to all.

He would not have registered the house in your name, only you can do that. Only the chanote will show his name, the tabien baan only shows people living there and does not prove any ownership. There should only be a small fee for registering your house. Check with the local Land Office requirements, as they all vary. The tax he pays will be assessed by Revenue, based on rental value. If he declares it!

[manao1]

is it possible he regerested the house in his name at the land office as he was the one that recived the address number or is that again something differn't. If he did will he have to go to the land office with me to transfer or will showing my lease contract and contract with the builder be enought for them to transfer to me with out getting him involved?

[Mobi]

He would not have registered the house in your name, only you can do that. Only the chanote will show his name, the tabien baan only shows people living there and does not prove any ownership. There should only be a small fee for registering your house. Check with the local Land Office requirements, as they all vary. The tax he pays will be assessed by Revenue, based on rental value. If he declares it!

Even if he has declared it - which would seem unlikely given the character you have portrayed - it probably isn't the full amount.

This potentially gives you another hold over him. That is why I strongly recommend a friendly visit by a smart lawyer who can allude to some of these issues, and persuade him to come to a sensible compromise.

[Dragonman]

is it possible he regerested the house in his name at the land office as he was the one that recived the address number or is that again something differn't. If he did will he have to go to the land office with me to transfer or will showing my lease contract and contract with the builder be enought for them to transfer to me with out getting him involved?

No he would not be able to register without receipts, etc., but in fact would not have to, as all property on the land is considered the land owner's unless specifically protected under thai law.

It again depends on the rules of the local Land Office, but normally receipts, the lease and posting for objections on the property for 30 days is sufficient. They of course will contact the owner before registration on the chanote. I would wait until after you sort out the water before doing this.

[manao1]

Are you saying the house is registered on the chanote. My name is on the chanote for the land for the 30 years. But the only proof I have the house is mine is the contract with the architect, and the builder. I am under the understanding there is a differnt paper showing the houses owner registered with the land office. If I ever sell the house and sublease the land the new owners will want me to, are they will want to register the house in there name as a foreigner may own a house but not the land. Correct? Thanks again.

[Dragonman]

Are you saying the house is registered on the chanote. My name is on the chanote for the land for the 30 years. But the only proof I have the house is mine is the contract with the architect, and the builder. I am under the understanding there is a differnt paper showing the houses owner registered with the land office. If I ever sell the house and sublease the land the new owners will want me to, are they will want to register the house in there name as a foreigner may own a house but not the land. Correct? Thanks again.

No the house will not be registered on the chanote, but the lease will. The house may be registered separately by the person paying for the construction, in this case you.It is not essential for all houses to be registered. If you ever sell the land lease and the house, they can be transferred to the new owner. That is why it is better to register, rather than as your lawyer suggested.

[manao1]

Great thankyou very much for all your advice, so the best thing I can do is go to the land office with my lease papers(the land is already registered) bring along my builders contract and register the house in my name, then when I go to sell it should be an easy transfer to the new owners for both the land and house. If I sub lease will the land office register the remaining term of the lease say 21 years to the new owners? Thank again for you time.

[Dragonman]

Great thankyou very much for all your advice, so the best thing I can do is go to the land office with my lease papers(the land is already registered) bring along my builders contract and register the house in my name, then when I go to sell it should be an easy transfer to the new owners for both the land and house. If I sub lease will the land office register the remaining term of the lease say 21 years to the new owners? Thank again for you time.

They should just change the name of the leaseholder if you sell the lease. Sub leasing is different, in that you will still hold the main lease which is registered, but will issue a sub lease yourself, which does not need to be registered, as you are still responsible for the terms in the main lease. Sub leasing is only normally used for short term lets.