Can a foreigner register his or her Thai will at a local amphur?

[JimGant]

9 hours ago, Langsuan Man said:

And how,  without a Will,  is anyone in Thailand supposed to know who those statutory heirs are ? 

 

A lawyer could burn through a whole estate getting that information 

 

But more importantly, a Will is for emergencies, not for estate planning

You say that, without a Will, the lawyer "got everything." How could that be? He's not a statutory heir, which, by the way, you don't need a Will to establish that you have a mother, father, grandma, wife, and kiddies, i.e., statutory heirs. So, what do you mean, "how is anyone supposed to know who your statutory heirs are" without a Will? That seem nonsensical, although, sure, it might take the court awhile to sift through all of that. Certainly less messy with a Will.

 

And I disagree that a Will is for emergencies. It's for the orderly disposition of your assets, to the beneficiaries of your choosing. Without a Will, do you really want half of your assets to go to that wife who ran off with the pig farmer? (Ok, in that example, a Will *would* constitute an emergency ???? )

[bheard]

We discourage the use of abbreviations, I believe this is "Do It Yourself."  [emoji16]

How about adding coloquialisms to be discouraged, for example : amphur "chop". What is that?

Sent from my F3116 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[JimGant]

40 minutes ago, bheard said:

How about adding coloquialisms to be discouraged, for example : amphur "chop". What is that?
 

Quote

A seal, in an East and Southeast Asian context is a general name for printing stamps and impressions thereof which are used in lieu of signatures in personal documents, office paperwork, contracts, art, or any item requiring acknowledgement or authorship....The colloquial name chop, when referring to these kinds of seals, was adapted from the Hindi word chapa and from the Malay word cap[2] meaning stamp or rubber stamps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seal_(East_Asia)

Common term in the US military. Apparently not as widespread as I had thought. I'll try and be less gung ho about colloquialisms, especially those used by the Yanks, in the future.:)

[Langsuan Man]

17 hours ago, JimGant said:

You say that, without a Will, the lawyer "got everything." How could that be? He's not a statutory heir, which, by the way, you don't need a Will to establish that you have a mother, father, grandma, wife, and kiddies, i.e., statutory heirs. So, what do you mean, "how is anyone supposed to know who your statutory heirs are" without a Will? That seem nonsensical, although, sure, it might take the court awhile to sift through all of that. Certainly less messy with a Will.

 

And I disagree that a Will is for emergencies. It's for the orderly disposition of your assets, to the beneficiaries of your choosing. Without a Will, do you really want half of your assets to go to that wife who ran off with the pig farmer? (Ok, in that example, a Will *would* constitute an emergency ???? )

The lawyer churned the estate trying to find the heirs, which a Will would have prevented

 

And you can disagree all you want but any financial adviser will tell you that a Will does not replace estate planning

 

Here from a professional: 

https://www.estateplanning.com/Understanding-Living-Trusts/

 

 

[JimGant]

27 minutes ago, Langsuan Man said:

The lawyer churned the estate trying to find the heirs, which a Will would have prevented

So, when he found the heirs, just how did the lawyer profit? Presumably, if the lawyer was a crook, and somehow could make off with his client's assets, the last thing he would want to find is a statutory heir, who could cause all kinds of trouble by bringing the matter to the courts. Yeah, I share your distrust of lawyers; but most Wills have executors named, and hopefully that executor is aware of your Will. So, your story, of a lawyer feigning no knowledge of a Will, doesn't quite resonate -- unless, possibly, the Will had no named executor or that executor was not aware of the Will and/or the testator's demise. (Which brings us to rule #1: Make sure your executor knows he's your executor, and just where he can locate your Will. I'm sure I'm insulting a lot of intelligence by making such an obvious statement.)

 

Quote

And you can disagree all you want but any financial adviser will tell you that a Will does not replace estate planning

Here from a professional: 

https://www.estateplanning.com/Understanding-Living-Trusts/

I certainly understand living trusts. My parents had one, and it saved lots of bucks in taxes, as back then the rather paltry estate tax exemption required a living trust to, essentially, double the tax exemption for the combined parent's estate. Today, with 10 million dollar estate tax exemptions per family, living trusts have lost their utility. But, even in my parent's day, a Will was a part of the overall estate plan, by having a pourover clause to place assets, not previously named, into the trust.

 

And today, I don't even have a Will for my assets in the US. All assets are financial and escape the need for probate by having named beneficiaries or Pay on Death clauses naming beneficiaries. This latter vehicle is a so-called Totten Trust -- so, yeah, we're back to your premise that trusts replace Wills for comprehensive estate planning. At least they sure do in the States......

 

.......but we're in Thailand, where they don't allow trusts. You knew that, right? Thus, our hands are tied over here -- I can't even make a simple POD Totten Trust for the one asset I have of value -- my bank account, solely in my name for Immigration purposes. Thus, I need a Will, should that asset need to go thru probate (i.e., should the wife not be able to empty it out in a timely fashion).

 

So, please don't get your countries confused. Wills in Thailand are definitely for prudent estate planning, not just for emergencies. Yes, living trusts fit into some scenarios; but just not over here.

[ThaiBunny]

Just now, JimGant said:

So, when he found the heirs, just how did the lawyer profit?

The way lawyers and accountants in every country under the sun always feed off corpses, whether human or company - by charging huge "administration" costs. A company goes bust and do the creditors get paid? Not on your nelly - the liquidators get their fees first.  Any problem with the Will and the lawyers will have their clocks ticking

[scorecard]

The lawyer / law company will be charging fees to 'help' you get the correct documents from the court, etc etc., and for this 'help' some lawyers (as lawyers tend to do everywhere) will charge totally outrageous obscene fees. 

 

One example, my admin. manager, against my instructions hired a lawyer to get a work permit for a new employee. Then comes the bill from the law firm (in Bkk, part of a giant international law firm) was 200,000Baht.

 

I refused to authorize payment. Admin. manager got nowhere with requests for details of why 200,000Baht fees. I called them, eventually a reply in writing 'we had to send the English translation of the main letter to our Singapore office to check the English spelling and correct words, therefore 200,000Baht.' 

 

The WP had been completed, I told my admin. manager to pay the law firm 10,000Baht only. She did, never heard from law firm again.