Is there any law regulating condo rentals?

[Globalist]

Unfortunately, a number of CJPs in BKK have started to spread incorrect information about "Thai law" and rental duration.

Thai law, including the Thai Condominium Act, does not regulate the duration of rental agreements between co-owners of condos and their tenants.

In fact, it doesn't even mention rental at all.

It doesn't, but the hotel act seems to. And the condo act is quite clear about businesses only being allowed in areas of the building that are specifically designated for this, and also about co-owners being able to enjoy their property in peace and without disturbance.

It seems to me that short-term rentals by their very nature are indeed both a business and a nuisance. As such they should not take place in condo buildings.

No. The hotel act isn't applicable either, unless you have a significant number of units in the same building.

And what the condo act says about "business" has no bearing on the term of a rental contract.

It's understandable that people can see short term condo rental as a nuisance, but that's an opinion and not the law.

I advise those who want to regulate short-term rentals to influence the CJP bylaws and see if they can get a relevant majority on their side.

[huawei]

As far as I know anyone doing short term rentals has to either get a hotel licence (for more than x rooms) or at least register as a hotel (for less than x rooms). This is stipulated by the hotel act.

The condo act and all building regs I have ever seen prohibit commercial activity outside of specific areas.

This is the extract from the condo act:

Section 17/1 In the case where a space in the condominium is set aside as a place to carry out the business, the system on entering and exiting such area shall be specifically set up in order to prevent the disturbance on the peaceful enjoyment of the joint owners.

No person shall be permitted to engage in any trade transactions in the condominium except it is a trade transaction in the area of the condominium designated in accordance with paragraph one.

I think the condo act should be much more specific about rentals and that all rentals of less than perhaps 6 or 12 months should be totally banned in residential condos. They are a menace.

Not if you buy into a condo that is primarily for holidays and vacations and has only a few residents , there are quite a few of these. Leave it up to the committee and co- owners to decide.

If it is residential Bangkok of course short term rentals are a no no. If the condo is by the beach almost unoccupied for great parts of the year...why not..

There are several specific options for those looking for short-term accommodation: hotels, serviced apartments, guest houses, B&Bs. Condos really have nothing to do with this market as far as I can see.

Cheaper and more spacious option for families especially with children. Need 3 beds..condo probably the best option.

Long term retirees want 6 months break from the cold weather.Economical plus independence plus more space..a condo..

Provides more options and more affordable also.

[KittenKong]

There are several specific options for those looking for short-term accommodation: hotels, serviced apartments, guest houses, B&Bs. Condos really have nothing to do with this market as far as I can see.

Cheaper and more spacious option for families especially with children. Need 3 beds..condo probably the best option.

Long term retirees want 6 months break from the cold weather.Economical plus independence plus more space..a condo..

Provides more options and more affordable also.

Large serviced apartments exist as well. And if there was a big demand for them more would become available.

6-month winter rentals are hardly "short term" which is what the discussion here is about.

[KittenKong]

Unfortunately, a number of CJPs in BKK have started to spread incorrect information about "Thai law" and rental duration.

Thai law, including the Thai Condominium Act, does not regulate the duration of rental agreements between co-owners of condos and their tenants.

In fact, it doesn't even mention rental at all.

It doesn't, but the hotel act seems to. And the condo act is quite clear about businesses only being allowed in areas of the building that are specifically designated for this, and also about co-owners being able to enjoy their property in peace and without disturbance.

It seems to me that short-term rentals by their very nature are indeed both a business and a nuisance. As such they should not take place in condo buildings.

No. The hotel act isn't applicable either, unless you have a significant number of units in the same building.

And what the condo act says about "business" has no bearing on the term of a rental contract.

It's understandable that people can see short term condo rental as a nuisance, but that's an opinion and not the law.

I advise those who want to regulate short-term rentals to influence the CJP bylaws and see if they can get a relevant majority on their side.

The hotel act is applicable as even with just one room you are supposed to register yourself, though you dont have to obey all the rules concerning hotels.

What the condo act has to say about businesses is definitely applicable as short-term rentals are by definition a business, which is why the

hotel act applies to them.

Businesses are not legal in condos outside of specific areas in the building that are set aside for businesses. I see no need to look any further.

[trogers]

There are several specific options for those looking for short-term accommodation: hotels, serviced apartments, guest houses, B&Bs. Condos really have nothing to do with this market as far as I can see.

Cheaper and more spacious option for families especially with children. Need 3 beds..condo probably the best option.

Long term retirees want 6 months break from the cold weather.Economical plus independence plus more space..a condo..

Provides more options and more affordable also.

Large serviced apartments exist as well. And if there was a big demand for them more would become available.

6-month winter rentals are hardly "short term" which is what the discussion here is about.

One of my condo unit has been let out on a 6-month lease, extended 11x...?

[Globalist]

Unfortunately, a number of CJPs in BKK have started to spread incorrect information about "Thai law" and rental duration.

Thai law, including the Thai Condominium Act, does not regulate the duration of rental agreements between co-owners of condos and their tenants.

In fact, it doesn't even mention rental at all.

It doesn't, but the hotel act seems to. And the condo act is quite clear about businesses only being allowed in areas of the building that are specifically designated for this, and also about co-owners being able to enjoy their property in peace and without disturbance.

It seems to me that short-term rentals by their very nature are indeed both a business and a nuisance. As such they should not take place in condo buildings.

No. The hotel act isn't applicable either, unless you have a significant number of units in the same building.

And what the condo act says about "business" has no bearing on the term of a rental contract.

It's understandable that people can see short term condo rental as a nuisance, but that's an opinion and not the law.

I advise those who want to regulate short-term rentals to influence the CJP bylaws and see if they can get a relevant majority on their side.

The hotel act is applicable as even with just one room you are supposed to register yourself, though you dont have to obey all the rules concerning hotels.

What the condo act has to say about businesses is definitely applicable as short-term rentals are by definition a business, which is why the

hotel act applies to them.

Businesses are not legal in condos outside of specific areas in the building that are set aside for businesses. I see no need to look any further.

"short-term rentals are by definition a business"

Is that so?

As you may be aware, the vast majority of owners of new condos in Bangkok (especially Thais but also non-Thais) buy to let.

Are you saying that there's a specific "magic" rental contract duration, below which the renting action by these owners suddenly turns into a "business", while it's not to be seen as a "business" above that limit?

Why exactly would it not be a "business" above a certain limit? What might that magical limit be? And where might it be stipulated?

Again, while agree with you about the problems with short-term rentals, please distinguish between own opinions and actual law. The OP asked about the law.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Globalist

[Media1]

You can not rent rooms short time..is a serious offence. You are not a licensed hotel and are stealing business from licensed paid up Thai operators period