lufc74 Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) My partner wants to put my name as owning her house, but isn't doing any thing with the land title, such as a lease. Are there any advantages of owning the house, but not leasing the land. What would my rights be if we ever split up, regarding using the house. Thanks in advance. Edited October 7, 2017 by lufc74 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEVUP Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 & the reason being you may own the house outright & will never own the land or have a say in it In the end it doesn't matter as the wife can do anything she likes with the land because that is all they are interested in IE: Mortgage, Sell ect Best of with a Usufrut as this shall give you occupancy for 30 yrs & make sure their is a clause so you can lease to another party & don't worry some loan shark will take it on, but the good thing is they can,t palm it off I've experienced it all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve187 Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 21 minutes ago, BEVUP said: & the reason being you may own the house outright & will never own the land or have a say in it In the end it doesn't matter as the wife can do anything she likes with the land because that is all they are interested in IE: Mortgage, Sell ect Best of with a Usufrut as this shall give you occupancy for 30 yrs & make sure their is a clause so you can lease to another party & don't worry some loan shark will take it on, but the good thing is they can,t palm it off I've experienced it all bitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikwiljou Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 If it's a wooden house than at least you could move the house if things go wrong. We have moved houses within Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sometimewoodworker Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 On 07/10/2017 at 10:19 PM, BEVUP said: & the reason being you may own the house outright & will never own the land or have a say in it In the end it doesn't matter as the wife can do anything she likes with the land because that is all they are interested in IE: Mortgage, Sell ect Best of with a Usufrut as this shall give you occupancy for 30 yrs & make sure their is a clause so you can lease to another party & don't worry some loan shark will take it on, but the good thing is they can,t palm it off I've experienced it all Usufructs are often lifetime, no 30 year limit, leases can not be longer than 30 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jip99 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, sometimewoodworker said: Usufructs are often lifetime, no 30 year limit, leases can not be longer than 30 years. I understand that Usufructs are always for life - unless specified otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEVUP Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 On 10/7/2017 at 8:41 PM, steve187 said: bitter & passing on experience ,but if you read post 4 he wont have a problem, as Ikwiljou has also passed on his/her experience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPFIT Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Having been through this myself put the house in your name the land in hers but do a usufruct. If I had not done this she would have sold the land and I would have probably lost my house and I was married. At least with a usufruct in place she can not sell the land without your consent. I have been divorced three times and the last one to a Thai cost me 60 K, so better to be safe than sorry. Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEVUP Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 5 minutes ago, JPFIT said: Having been through this myself put the house in your name the land in hers but do a usufruct. If I had not done this she would have sold the land and I would have probably lost my house and I was married. At least with a usufruct in place she can not sell the land without your consent. I have been divorced three times and the last one to a Thai cost me 60 K, so better to be safe than sorry. Good luck Sorry to say but the Usufrut only gives you the right to occupy the land It does not give you any legal saying (needing your consent ) for the owner of such land to Sell , or Mortgage such land I personally think what is mentioned by needing your consent is to Remove the Usufrut so there is absolutely no problem in selling the land. But believe me there is nothing stopping the land owner mortgaging or ect for a family if the other party is willing to take it on with you still being lodged as the Usufrutee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4MyEgo Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 27 minutes ago, BEVUP said: Sorry to say but the Usufrut only gives you the right to occupy the land It does not give you any legal saying (needing your consent ) for the owner of such land to Sell , or Mortgage such land I personally think what is mentioned by needing your consent is to Remove the Usufrut so there is absolutely no problem in selling the land. But believe me there is nothing stopping the land owner mortgaging or ect for a family if the other party is willing to take it on with you still being lodged as the Usufrutee No doubt he would have secure tenure on the house, however the value of the land would be effected in that part of the land has a "protected tenant" if I can use those words. Back in Australia, if there was a protected tenant in the house you were buying, mainly post world war 2, the value had to be discounted considerably because you could not evict the tenant, or raise their rental amount, and in some cases, the tenant could, if they had kids, pass on that protected tenancy to the kid/s, worthless, unless you were prepared to use a heavy to threaten them to leave or else, which would be cruel and against the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnehaha Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 hours ago, ikwiljou said: If it's a wooden house than at least you could move the house if things go wrong. We have moved houses within Thailand. LIKE ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgarbo Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 hours ago, ikwiljou said: If it's a wooden house than at least you could move the house if things go wrong. We have moved houses within Thailand. Not if the wife denies access to the property. That's trespass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catman20 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 (edited) just another Thai scam all this land nonsense. its all geared up here to benefit the Thais Edited October 9, 2017 by catman20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KBsinter Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 8 minutes ago, catman20 said: just another Thai scam all this land nonsense. its all geared up here to benefit the Thais "The law is the law"always to a Thais benefit,...............lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerbalEd Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 hours ago, JPFIT said: Having been through this myself put the house in your name the land in hers but do a usufruct. If I had not done this she would have sold the land and I would have probably lost my house and I was married. At least with a usufruct in place she can not sell the land without your consent. I have been divorced three times and the last one to a Thai cost me 60 K, so better to be safe than sorry. Good luck Congratulations for it costing only 60K. I assume 60K baht, but ever $60K would be cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sead Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Why does she want to put the house in your name?? Is it paid of or does she want you to sign and pay the rest in so saying that this way you get the house? Does she need money for something and this is her way to show you she trusts you. Whatever reason you can write usufruct, rental agreement , lease land agreement etc etc. None benefits you! If you seperate you will still have to finish the loan/repairs etc while she stays in the house. If you seperate you will have the right to50% bla bla but if transfered into your name you have to sell your part of house within xx months as foreigner. No1 wants to buy you part of the house since the land is in her name yada yada. All her family will move in after an eventual seperation and you will first then see how hostile her family can be. You wont dare sleep 1 night. So again we miss some more info. And all missinformation and grammatical errors are a gift from me to you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEVUP Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 hours ago, 4MyEgo said: No doubt he would have secure tenure on the house, however the value of the land would be effected in that part of the land has a "protected tenant" if I can use those words. Back in Australia, if there was a protected tenant in the house you were buying, mainly post world war 2, the value had to be discounted considerably because you could not evict the tenant, or raise their rental amount, and in some cases, the tenant could, if they had kids, pass on that protected tenancy to the kid/s, worthless, unless you were prepared to use a heavy to threaten them to leave or else, which would be cruel and against the law. Yes know all that as I have a Usufrut on a 3 mill house in a village just sitting empty owned by a loan shark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sometimewoodworker Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 3 hours ago, BEVUP said: Sorry to say but the Usufrut only gives you the right to occupy the land It does not give you any legal saying (needing your consent ) for the owner of such land to Sell , or Mortgage such land I personally think what is mentioned by needing your consent is to Remove the Usufrut so there is absolutely no problem in selling the land. But believe me there is nothing stopping the land owner mortgaging or ect for a family if the other party is willing to take it on with you still being lodged as the Usufrutee True that the land can be sold with an Usufruct on it, IF and it's a big if, anyone is willing to buy it. However it can not be mortgaged with any reputable bank or finance company. They will not offer any kind of loan with an Usufruct on the land as they would have to wait for the end of the term of the Usufruct before they easily sell the land to recover the loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEVUP Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 hour ago, sead said: Why does she want to put the house in your name?? Is it paid of or does she want you to sign and pay the rest in so saying that this way you get the house? Does she need money for something and this is her way to show you she trusts you. Whatever reason you can write usufruct, rental agreement , lease land agreement etc etc. None benefits you! If you seperate you will still have to finish the loan/repairs etc while she stays in the house. If you seperate you will have the right to50% bla bla but if transfered into your name you have to sell your part of house within xx months as foreigner. No1 wants to buy you part of the house since the land is in her name yada yada. All her family will move in after an eventual seperation and you will first then see how hostile her family can be. You wont dare sleep 1 night. So again we miss some more info. And all missinformation and grammatical errors are a gift from me to you! How true as TIT but not to forget that others have had success in such unfortunate circumstances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eloquent pilgrim Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 I think we all agree that a foreigner cannot own land in Thailand, and consequently cannot own a house unless it is on a development that has condominium status and is within the permitted 49% farang ownership rule. In your case, without knowing all the details, I believe that the only secure way for you to have the house in your name, is to also have the land in your name on a lease, usually 30 years, although I believe another poster said this can be longer (I have no knowledge of that) …… what is crucial here though, is that she has the Chanote (freehold document) to both the house, and more critically, the land, and that they are not in the possession of a bank, or any other third party that she has given them to as security on numerous loans …. personally I would stick with the status quo, but if you want to go ahead, a good English speaking solicitor is a must. I know a very good one in Hua Hin, but I don't know where you are located ….. the very best of luck to you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sometimewoodworker Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 4 hours ago, Jip99 said: I understand that Usufructs are always for life - unless specified otherwise. Then you misunderstand. An Usufruct is a contract. It is for the length of time specified in the contract. The time has to be specified, there is no default length of time. the Usufruct itself will terminate on the death of the holder if it comes before the end of the contract. There is a possibility that the holder of an Usufruct can grant a lease on the property and that any such lease will not terminate on the death of the Usufructee but at the end of the lease period. As a lease longer than 3 years has to be registered with the land office it is quite possible that they will not permit a long lease given by an Usufructee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foozool Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 I don't know anything abot OP life, but I guess she just want to get his trust. I hope for good. Otherwise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sometimewoodworker Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said: I think we all agree that a foreigner cannot own land in Thailand, and consequently cannot own a house unless it is on a development that has condominium status and is within the permitted 49% farang ownership rule. In your case, without knowing all the details, I believe that the only secure way for you to have the house in your name, is to also have the land in your name on a lease, usually 30 years, although I believe another poster said this can be longer (I have no knowledge of that) …… what is crucial here though, is that she has the Chanote (freehold document) to both the house, and more critically, the land, and that they are not in the possession of a bank, or any other third party that she has given them to as security on numerous loans …. personally I would stick with the status quo, but if you want to go ahead, a good English speaking solicitor is a must. I know a very good one in Hua Hin, but I don't know where you are located ….. the very best of luck to you You are clearly mistaken. True that a foreigner can't be the registered owner of land. Completely incorrect that they can't own the house on the land. They can, many do. Completely legal. No lease can be longer that 30 years Edited October 9, 2017 by sometimewoodworker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jip99 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 6 minutes ago, sometimewoodworker said: Then you misunderstand. An Usufruct is a contract. It is for the length of time specified in the contract. The time has to be specified, there is no default length of time. the Usufruct itself will terminate on the death of the holder if it comes before the end of the contract. There is a possibility that the holder of an Usufruct can grant a lease on the property and that any such lease will not terminate on the death of the Usufructee but at the end of the lease period. As a lease longer than 3 years has to be registered with the land office it is quite possible that they will not permit a long lease given by an Usufructee. Mine is for my lifetime...... seems pointless to have any other term in 'domestic' arrangement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eloquent pilgrim Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, sometimewoodworker said: You are clearly mistaken. True that a foreigner can't be the registered owner of land. Completely incorrect that they can't own the house on the land. Okay ..... I bow to your superior knowledge, it was just my understanding. So, are you saying that a foreigner can have the Chanote to a house without owning the land ..... which we all agree is not possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4MyEgo Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 59 minutes ago, BEVUP said: Yes know all that as I have a Usufrut on a 3 mill house in a village just sitting empty owned by a loan shark SO you mean the loan shark owns the land, but not the house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sometimewoodworker Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Just now, Eloquent pilgrim said: Okay ..... I bow to your superior knowledge, it was just my understanding. So, are you saying that a foreigner can have the Chanote to a house without owning the land ..... which we all agree is not possible No I am not. A Chanote is a document of land ownership (Nor Sor 4 Jor) that can not be registered to a non Thai. It has nothing to do with what is on the land Ownership of a house is totally separate from ownership of the land it is sitting on, and yes anyone can own that. It is not a Chanote document. Of course it is usual for the house and land to have the same owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eloquent pilgrim Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Just now, sometimewoodworker said: No I am not. A Chanote is a document of land ownership (Nor Sor 4 Jor) that can not be registered to a non Thai. It has nothing to do with what is on the land Ownership of a house is totally separate from ownership of the land it is sitting on, and yes anyone can own that. It is not a Chanote document. Of course it is usual for the house and land to have the same owner. A Chanote is not solely a document of land ownership ..... I own 2 Condos in Cha-am and I have a registered Chanote, in my name for both of them, as do many friends here, so you are clearly mistaken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEVUP Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 14 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said: SO you mean the loan shark owns the land, but not the house. owns the lot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfokevin Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 5 hours ago, ikwiljou said: If it's a wooden house than at least you could move the house if things go wrong. We have moved houses within Thailand. Yeah... Mai Ben Rai... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now