NovBuying an apartment that someone already occupies
What changes when a home is sold with an occupant in place: viewing limits, the lease, belongings, timing and the handover the buyer is actually expecting.
This article reflects the named expert’s practical perspective. See NovAsia’s editorial policy for how material is prepared and reviewed.
An occupied apartment can look convenient, especially to a buyer who does not plan to move in immediately. There is already someone living there, the home is being used and the seller may even show a payment history. I do not treat that as either an automatic advantage or a warning sign. The presence of an occupant changes the questions that need answering before the buyer knows what is actually being purchased.
Two stories are running at the same time. One is the sale of the apartment. The other is the existing relationship with the person who occupies it. The purchase price does not explain the lease, and the lease does not prove the seller’s title or settle the condition of the unit. Both strands have to be understood without letting one stand in for the other.
A viewing has to respect the fact that somebody lives there
The first practical difference is access. An occupied home contains somebody else’s possessions, routines and privacy. Furniture can hide finishes, cupboards may not be available to inspect and some rooms may be difficult to see at the seller’s preferred time. The viewing scope needs agreeing in advance because a property for sale has not stopped being somebody’s home.
The buyer still needs a reliable understanding of condition. If important surfaces are covered, that does not make the question disappear. Earlier photographs, an inventory, renovation records or a later inspection after the occupant leaves may be appropriate depending on the transaction. What cannot be seen should remain an open item until there is a better basis for an answer.
Ownership of the contents also needs separating carefully. A sofa, television, washing machine, curtains or even a dining set may belong to the seller, to the tenant, or be subject to a particular arrangement under the tenancy. “Sold furnished” is especially ambiguous when someone is still living in the unit. The buyer needs a clear list of what transfers with the apartment and what the occupant is entitled to remove.
The lease is its own document, not a footnote to the sale
Timing is where assumptions become expensive. If the buyer wants the apartment vacant, “the tenant is leaving soon” still leaves the vacant-handover date unresolved. The current lease, termination provisions, notices and applicable law need checking. If the buyer wants the tenant to remain, a different set of questions arises: what continues after ownership changes, who holds the deposit, how rent is paid and what obligations are already outstanding.
Cambodia’s Civil Code is important here. Article 598 states that, in certain circumstances, a lease of immovable property can be asserted against a subsequent acquirer where the lessee occupies and continuously uses the property. That is precisely why a buyer should not be promised that a tenant can simply be removed because the apartment has been sold. The effect in a specific transaction belongs with a lawyer reviewing the actual documents and facts.
The sale needs one agreed handover state
The buyer also needs to know what kind of handover is being agreed. One possibility is a vacant apartment with keys delivered after the occupant has left. Another is a sale with the tenancy continuing. A third may involve a transition period. Each can be workable. Problems arise when the seller speaks as though all three are interchangeable.
Money already held needs a clear destination
If the tenancy continues, the security deposit and any advance rent require attention. Who holds the money on completion? What records show the balance? Has any part already been applied to repairs or rent? The answers affect both the occupant and the new owner. A buyer should not inherit a promise to return money without knowing whether that money is actually being transferred with the landlord’s obligations.
Rent itself needs the same discipline. The current amount tells us what one tenant pays under one agreement. It does not prove what the apartment will achieve on renewal or with a future tenant. The history can be useful evidence, but it should not be converted into a permanent market assumption.
Vacant handover still needs a final condition check
If the apartment is meant to be empty at completion, the departure date is only part of the handover. What furniture stays? What happens if damage is discovered after belongings are removed? When does the buyer get a final look? How is the tenant’s deposit dealt with? Who is responsible for a repair that relates to a period before the sale?
These questions are not reasons to avoid occupied property. They simply make the transition visible. A well-documented occupied apartment may be easier to understand than an empty one with no history at all. But the buyer should know whether they are acquiring a home that will be vacant, a home with an ongoing tenancy, or a home in the middle of becoming one of those things.
The best outcome is very concrete: the buyer knows who occupies the apartment at completion, on what basis, what happens to the lease, which belongings remain, how deposits and payments are handled, and what condition is expected at handover. Until those points are settled, “already rented” is not a complete description of the purchase.
Sources
- Civil Code of the Kingdom of Cambodia — Article 598, Conditions for perfection of lease of immovable: addresses circumstances in which an immovable lease may be asserted against a subsequent acquirer; English translation available through ADB/JICA materials, checked 30 September 2026.
- Council for the Development of Cambodia — Land Law and Civil Code guidance: notes the need to refer to Civil Code provisions for sale, purchase, transfer of ownership and leases of immovable property; checked 30 September 2026.