Jump to content

Phuket condo owners warned 'holiday rentals' less than 30 days risks fines, jail time


rooster59

Recommended Posts

As someone who is in a long term rental I support this. The residents where I live have to put up with transient people who having adopted the 'but I'm on holiday so it doesn't matter' mode show little consideration for others.

Drunks in the pool at 4 am are a pain in the backside- they can sleep in all day, we live 'normal lives. Screaming kids running around the pool all day can get on the nerves as well. One badly behaved child can hold an entire complex hostage

People initially bought the condos where I live on the premise that they would be for residents, not transients. Most have changed hands now, with those purchasing them as investment and income opportunities. This is what the Gov't is clamping down on and I see nothing wrong with it.

Some people will regard me as a misery guts for posting the above but hotels are there for a reason. This is my HOME not a holiday, why should I have it disrupted by people who would not behave the same way when they are HOME.

Its a factor people forget when they start bellyaching and all they can come up with 'well, if you don't like it...............'.

I don't understand you. If you don't want to be around people, what are you doing in a condo? You should have bought/rented a house outside the city, away from other houses. You shouldn't be upset about children being noisy etc. if you are living in a condo community.

If a person does or doesn't want to be around people, who am I to ask why? What a person "should have bought" seems to be the purchasers business, unless I pay their way. Should and shouldn't seem a poor choice of words, when directed to someone I have never met or have no influence over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

That is going to do the Condo market a lot of good. I assume the Thai's complained and are losing money.

I would imagine it's more like the hoteliers complaining. Thais will lose money too....they also own condos.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who is in a long term rental I support this. The residents where I live have to put up with transient people who having adopted the 'but I'm on holiday so it doesn't matter' mode show little consideration for others.

Drunks in the pool at 4 am are a pain in the backside- they can sleep in all day, we live 'normal lives. Screaming kids running around the pool all day can get on the nerves as well. One badly behaved child can hold an entire complex hostage

People initially bought the condos where I live on the premise that they would be for residents, not transients. Most have changed hands now, with those purchasing them as investment and income opportunities. This is what the Gov't is clamping down on and I see nothing wrong with it.

Some people will regard me as a misery guts for posting the above but hotels are there for a reason. This is my HOME not a holiday, why should I have it disrupted by people who would not behave the same way when they are HOME.

Its a factor people forget when they start bellyaching and all they can come up with 'well, if you don't like it...............'.

Fully agree, Psimbo and I support this too, when can they start enforcing this in Pattaya (where I am renting a condo on long term lease) and Hua Hin/Cha-am too ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am an, owner and rental agent of many non owned, properties in Portugal and have property in Thailand that is about to be rented out. There are a number of properties for holiday rental in that neighborhood and I totally agree that long term residents of a complex or neighborhood should not be subject to 'unruly' behavior of holiday makers. It is the responsibility of the owner - or his/her agent on their behalf - to ensure that the terms and conditions of such a rental include non detrimental/unsocial behavior clauses. And to enforce that if necessary. Only once in 12 years have I had to this by eviction. I fail to understand however why 30 days could be deemed as the cut off for such behavior. A group or family stay 29 days and potentially a disturbance? 30 days +, ok. I suspect this is being driven by lobbying of the hotel industry in Thailand. Occupancy rates are down despite the increase in tourist numbers so reliably reported by TAT. Those tourists paying the vast majority of their accommodation costs outside the Kingdom. Such tourists without a lot of interest in 'in-hotel' spending, which even in the largest and most high profile establishments, can make the difference between profit and loss. The better course of action in Thailand to be to regulate the privately rented sector. In terms of financial probity with the client, tax payments etc. With the dominance of sites such as Air BNB, Trip Advisor etc where anyone can stick their property up on line, without any upfront cost, and without any regard for quality, safety or tax compliance

Link to post
Share on other sites

My condo has had transients who have no commitment or long term investment. Badly behaved children, pool parties with techno, petty vandalism, rubbish left outside doors, loss of sense of community. This ruling gets my support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

always something new to amuse here in LOS, not renting, my friend stay for free, how on earth could such a rule even be enforced

Its one of those flavor of the month issues. In the news today business as usual tomorrow. I would presume this is a nation wide law. In our condo here in Chiang Mai its daily weekly rentals what is your desire. B2B anything goes.

This law has been on the books for a long time, just not been common knowledge.

Now when it is out and people know about it I'm sure that many owners, that live in their own condo, will make sure that the other owners stick to this rule. Heavy fines and jail time should be good enough deterrant to put a stop to this short time rental practis. There are hotels and serviced appartments that cater for this business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who is in a long term rental I support this. The residents where I live have to put up with transient people who having adopted the 'but I'm on holiday so it doesn't matter' mode show little consideration for others.

Drunks in the pool at 4 am are a pain in the backside- they can sleep in all day, we live 'normal lives. Screaming kids running around the pool all day can get on the nerves as well. One badly behaved child can hold an entire complex hostage

People initially bought the condos where I live on the premise that they would be for residents, not transients. Most have changed hands now, with those purchasing them as investment and income opportunities. This is what the Gov't is clamping down on and I see nothing wrong with it.

Some people will regard me as a misery guts for posting the above but hotels are there for a reason. This is my HOME not a holiday, why should I have it disrupted by people who would not behave the same way when they are HOME.

Its a factor people forget when they start bellyaching and all they can come up with 'well, if you don't like it...............'.

I don't understand you. If you don't want to be around people, what are you doing in a condo? You should have bought/rented a house outside the city, away from other houses. You shouldn't be upset about children being noisy etc. if you are living in a condo community.

If a person does or doesn't want to be around people, who am I to ask why? What a person "should have bought" seems to be the purchasers business, unless I pay their way. Should and shouldn't seem a poor choice of words, when directed to someone I have never met or have no influence over.

Unlike you, I have a pair of testicles and I can clearly state what someone should or shouldn't be doing. Someone who doesn't like noise should not be living close to other people. I had a friend back in farangland who rented an apartment near a bar...then he called the police every night complaining of the loud thump thump thump of the bass. He clearly should not have rented that apartment. Don't live in a condo if you don't like noise. Buy a piece of land on a rice farm in the middle of nowhere if you don't like people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So a friend want to hire it for 2 weeks not possible. Incredible but not surprising considering were we are.

If I had a friend who wanted to stop for two weeks I would take the cash in hand and have the (friend) understand that he is a guest saying with me (not that I would be there) and when he is leaving.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder what happens if someone initially wants to rent for a month, then decides once they are here that they will instead stay only for two weeks as the two weeks coincide with their flight plans. How does that get enforced if the initial contract was for a month to comply with the hotels act?

How does the Law looks at it, the renter had bought a 2-week roundtrip airline ticket so s/he knew was going to stay only two weeks but to stay within the law rented for 1-month and then cancelled after two weeks, this may work once or twice but on a regular basis it flies up against the wall. The airline ticket gives them away that they're pulling a shenengan. Then the farangs come to Thailand an immediately start complaining about the BIBs. These are the same farangs that are pulling the same [email protected]#$ in their own country with the Law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So where do airBNB rentals stand .... The website lists over 600 locations in Phuket Town and Patong alone?

Now that the hotel Lobby have had their knife in lets wait for the backlash from the apartment development industry lobby, not to mention the thousands of ordinary Thais who try to make a few dollars by renting out airBNB rooms followed by the inevitable govt backdown.

When will these guys learn about public consultation before they shoot themselves in the foot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am an, owner and rental agent of many non owned, properties in Portugal and have property in Thailand that is about to be rented out. There are a number of properties for holiday rental in that neighborhood and I totally agree that long term residents of a complex or neighborhood should not be subject to 'unruly' behavior of holiday makers. It is the responsibility of the owner - or his/her agent on their behalf - to ensure that the terms and conditions of such a rental include non detrimental/unsocial behavior clauses. And to enforce that if necessary. Only once in 12 years have I had to this by eviction. I fail to understand however why 30 days could be deemed as the cut off for such behavior. A group or family stay 29 days and potentially a disturbance? 30 days +, ok. I suspect this is being driven by lobbying of the hotel industry in Thailand. Occupancy rates are down despite the increase in tourist numbers so reliably reported by TAT. Those tourists paying the vast majority of their accommodation costs outside the Kingdom. Such tourists without a lot of interest in 'in-hotel' spending, which even in the largest and most high profile establishments, can make the difference between profit and loss. The better course of action in Thailand to be to regulate the privately rented sector. In terms of financial probity with the client, tax payments etc. With the dominance of sites such as Air BNB, Trip Advisor etc where anyone can stick their property up on line, without any upfront cost, and without any regard for quality, safety or tax compliance

It`s to do with the clauses of the block insurance policies and lease agreements. Official residential tenancy agreements are for a minimum of 30 days or sometimes 1 month and have to abide by the rules set for tenants, for people staying less then that are considered unauthorized occupants. Guests are people that stay in someone else`s home with the owners or tenants of the property present otherwise they are not guests but occupants. There is a world of difference between properties specially purpose built or converted for holiday lets and those built as residential homes.

If as you claim you are owner and rental agent of many properties, then I would had thought you should have known this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

“This type of operation may lead to loss of life and property"

cheesy.gif cheesy.gif cheesy.gif Mr Wisith, what planet do you call home? To experience that you don't need to rent out or hire a condo on the island.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a free market/democratic society it should be up to people themselves to decide who stays in their house and for how long and what they charge their guests. I guess some rich Thais who own hotels are hurting because of AirBnB so they make up a law to protect them. Of course it's annoying for long term renters/owners but that is not a reason to not allow it. Go and live in the countryside if you don't like strangers in 'your' pool. wink.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...