Jump to content
BANGKOK 24 April 2019 17:20
webfact

New laws provide greater protection for people who rent property in Thailand

Recommended Posts

  The interesting thing to me is that if you are leasing 5 or more properties you are deemed to be operating a 'residential property leasing business'.  Which means that if you are a farang you will likely need a work permit--or risk being turned in by an unhappy tenant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, smutcakes said:

Some of it is good, some of it is impractical and stupid. There are incredibly poor tenants as well as poor landlords, so landlords need protection as well.

I had Chin*** rent my condo and they trashed it. Over 300,000 baht plus in damages and only 50K bond. Always late in paying rent sometimes up to 2 months outstanding. Electricity was cut off several times and needed to be put back on.

After getting it ready I sold it.

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, swoods58 said:

I live in a condo complex in Hua Hin with maybe 20 rooms rented on longer term contracts to Farangs and many others on hotel like arrangements. Is the owner of the building considered to own more than 5 properties as he has more than 5 leases or is the building one property? I too pay about 50% higher than the PEA rate for electricity and would like it to be reduced.

 

The owner of the building is considered to own more than 5 properties if they lease or sublease:

 

  • Five units of property or more
  • Regardless of whether or not the units are in the same building
  • To individual lessees
  • For residential purposes
  • In exchange for a fee collected by the business operator

So to answer your question, yes, they are bound by this law. Of course if they don't comply then someone will have to complain and see what effect it has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the fly in my cocktail is that most if not all the condo's are residential (comes under the condo act) and so renting condo's out (comes under the Hotel act).

 

Condos rented out are commercial and restricted to the ground floor -  ie the shops, laundry, restaurants.

 

Imagine if this law wasnt in place then you would have a laundry mat next to you on the 20th floor or a restaurant.

 

Technically if a short term renter injures themselves then the building may pay as it is insured as far as the common area is concerned. 

 

Inside the condo is the Landlords business to insure the tenants and if they injure themselves can sue you.

 

The insurance co can worm out of payment as you are renting like a hotel or guest house and different insurance is required.

 

Can of worms me thinks

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SunsetT said:

Yes I was wondering the same; will it be more than 5 apartments or 5 apartment blocks? And yes it will be great if the rip off 8thb to 10thb per unit apartment rates are reduced to the rate that people pay when billed direct from the electricity company.

 

Five individual units (whether room, condo, flat, etc) as long as they are all rented to individuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlackJack said:

the fly in my cocktail is that most if not all the condo's are residential (comes under the condo act) and so renting condo's out (comes under the Hotel act).

 

Condos rented out are commercial and restricted to the ground floor -  ie the shops, laundry, restaurants.

 

Imagine if this law wasnt in place then you would have a laundry mat next to you on the 20th floor or a restaurant.

 

Technically if a short term renter injures themselves then the building may pay as it is insured as far as the common area is concerned. 

 

Inside the condo is the Landlords business to insure the tenants and if they injure themselves can sue you.

 

The insurance co can worm out of payment as you are renting like a hotel or guest house and different insurance is required.

 

Can of worms me thinks

The Hotel Act only comes into play if the condo is rented for less than 30 days, which is illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is good news for people who rent.  It's about time.

11. Any term making the lessee liable for damages incurred due to ordinary wear and tear from usage of the property’s contents and equipment;

 

Number 11 is exactly why our last landlord keep out security deposit.  The on-demand shower heating element was burnt out.  It was a very old unit. 
"Shower heat no work - you paid."  It's predatory nonsense.   So nice to see some reasonable limits set on landlords. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

You think every landlord is rich ? 

Some people buy an investment property as a retirement plan and rent it out. Rent doesn't necessarily make the owner a profit, just covers costs. Some landlords end up very much out of pocket, due to bad tenants !!

i kid you not. just tried to google the news article but can't find it. we rent out a place in sw london and yes 100% it had to be subsidized by us every month and if it lay empty for a month it was alot of money lost. especially with agent fees. anyway. we had tenants in there in a 2 bed place and one rented out to another through a very well known estate agent that apparently did references etc. one day i get an email out of the blue and didn't recognize his name. the email went a bit like this. you don't know me but my son is living in your property and heres a link. the link was to a newspaper that had named the other tenant as being prosecuted for grooming girls online and making indecent images of kids. the dad of the other bloke said i hope you understand i don't want my son living there and i hope you will honour the deposit, which i did. now the little nonce boy, only around 25 gets taken into protective custody. i call the police on knowing this and was basically given a big F Off. he was taken into police protection and i could not even get my rent back. unbelievable. an in the new paper article they mentioned the building so always had ID in case someone mistook him for me. not long before that there was a paedo nearby living in a caravan and they locked him in and set it on fire. long story i know but we aren't rich and that property needs to be rented or we pick up the bill. seems the UK thought it ok he didn't need to pay his. rant over. really <deleted> me off

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like everything else here, the minimum wage, the max. working hours, the buyers protection laws etc. 
In my opinion a waste of ink as trying to enforce the law will grind everything to a screeching halt. Anything below a few hundred thousand Baht is legally possible but objectively speaking a total waste of time and resources. 
A word to the wise; if you intend to move out then stop paying the last monthly rent as in (my) all cases I never saw the deposit for reasons like "could not find a consequent tenant" or "wait until I find a new tenant". They will boil but it puts you into the driver's seat and - once all is done, settled and cleared, then pay up what you still own the landlord. Common sense, regretfully a scare commodity here .... 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, stud858 said:

It seems the regulations not always enforced to the exact description. I've taken this approach.  I'm a foreigner. I go to report TM30 for anytime away from my apartment more than 24 hours. No exceptions.  Can't lose that way.  Except for your wasted time. 

If you leave your apartment for more than 24 hours, how would Immigration find out ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a shame they limited this to only landlords with 5 or more properties.

 

They've identified a lot of problems (e.g., deposits not being returned), but they are allowing those problems to continue except with certain landlords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, swoods58 said:

I live in a condo complex in Hua Hin with maybe 20 rooms rented on longer term contracts to Farangs and many others on hotel like arrangements. Is the owner of the building considered to own more than 5 properties as he has more than 5 leases or is the building one property? I too pay about 50% higher than the PEA rate for electricity and would like it to be reduced.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

I am not an attorney, and not offering legal advice but as a formal owner of 11 condominium units each unit in my case was considered a separate property even though we marketed them as a single complex. My attorney explained that the purpose of condo conversion is to separate each unit into separate individual units. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Sydebolle said:

A word to the wise; if you intend to move out then stop paying the last monthly rent as in (my) all cases I never saw the deposit for reasons like "could not find a consequent tenant" or "wait until I find a new tenant". They will boil but it puts you into the driver's seat and - once all is done, settled and cleared, then pay up what you still own the landlord. Common sense, regretfully a scare commodity here .... 

4

 

Most contracts now will say something along the lines of "deposit will not be used as rent" so you would in effect be in breach of contract and the owner has the right to keep the deposit once the time stated in the contract has passed, usually, 14 days after rent is due.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...