Is this condo legitimately owned ?

[beautifulthailand99]

A friend of the missus has bought a condo which was owned by a farang (the signing director of the company) who bought it on the Thai side by the company method 9 years ago. With the help of an agent who is her friend and has contacts in the land office, she was able to buy the condo and get Thai chanote and pay all of the consequential sales taxes - as part of the process, she got documents from the condo management stating that the bills were paid and up to date. Also, the regional tax office was also contacted and confirmed that taxes had been paid correctly and were up to date as well. There were 3 thai names on the company document but the land office were convinced from the original company documents the farang was able to produce that he was the legitimate owner of the company and legally able to sell the condo. She has moved into the condo for two months and now has tabien bahn. My question is since the other three nominees  (if that is what they were) were not consulted during the process and so signed nothing (he doesn't trust them and found out during the process had he died then they would have inherited the condo) has my wife's friend got a condo with no future comebacks ?

[blackcab]

It is impossible to answer this question without seeing all the same documents that the land office saw.

 

Sorry I can't give you a better answer, but this cannot be answered based on hearsay.

[Trembly]

From the info presented by you, he never owned the condo, his company did. If he died it would have still belonged to the company, a company run by three other shareholders minus him. 

If the articles of incorporation for his company (most likely written by his lawyer) authorises him to sign off on all company business without having to consult any of the other shareholders, and he duly signed the condo over to your friend's wife, then the condo is no longer anything to do with the company or any of its shareholders because it was legally signed over to your friend's wife. 
 

[beautifulthailand99]

1 minute ago, blackcab said:

It is impossible to answer this question without seeing all the same documents that the land office saw.

 

Sorry I can't give you a better answer, but this cannot be answered based on hearsay.

Thanks for the quick reply as a rule if the land office has issued chanote then and the 'owner' has possession then I would guess in the murky world of Thai real estate then that is as good as it gets?

[beautifulthailand99]

1 minute ago, Trembly said:

From the info presented by you, he never owned the condo, his company did. If he died it would have still belonged to the company, a company run by three other shareholders minus him. 

If the articles of incorporation for his company (most likely written by his lawyer) authorises him to sign off on all company business without having to consult any of the other shareholders, and he duly signed the condo over to your friend's wife, then the condo is no longer anything to do with the company or any of its shareholders because it was legally signed over to your friend's wife. 
He never owned the condo, his company did. If he died it would have still belonged to the company, a company run by three other shareholders minus him. 

If the articles of incorporation for his company (most likely written by his lawyer) authorises him to sign off on all company business without having to consult any of the other shareholders, and he duly signed the condo over to your friend's wife, then the condo is no longer anything to do with the company or any of its shareholders because it was legally signed over to your friend's wife. 

Thanks sounds like the land office wouldn't have gone ahead if he wasn't legally able to sign off the sale. 

[Trembly]

12 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Thanks sounds like the land office wouldn't have gone ahead if he wasn't legally able to sign off the sale. 

Quite. 

A chanote is equivalent to a freehold title deed in the UK, so it is as good as it gets in terms of land / property rights. 

As long as the authorising director of the company didn't fraudulently present false documentation to the land office and sold off company property without the knowledge or consent of other directors who are supposed to counter-sign, your friend / his wife can rest easy. Even then, there are laws to protect people who bought in good faith property that was fraudulently sold, which doesn't really sound like the case considering what you wrote above. 

[moontang]

Did a bank issue a new mortgage?  That would just be further piece of mind...but if she paid cash..as long as things werent forged...no pompom..but having to declare friendship at the land office is no way to go through life...ask her how much she scammed on transfer taxes..

[beautifulthailand99]

12 minutes ago, moontang said:

Did a bank issue a new mortgage?  That would just be further piece of mind...but if she paid cash..as long as things werent forged...no pompom..but having to declare friendship at the land office is no way to go through life...ask her how much she scammed on transfer taxes..

Paid cash - all the bills were invoiced and she gave her friend 10k as a gift when all the paperwork was completed. 

[moontang]

always avoid grey areas...if there was fraud committed at the land office, then her gift is just evidence that she was a party to it...and if you were the one providing the cash..numerous laws were broken.  In a condo at full quota, a thai owned unit is worth 10-20%  less....so when it is time to sell..you are back at square one.  Why on earth would you want favors at the land office?  And there is a huge paper trail on understatement of sales price.

[beautifulthailand99]

7 minutes ago, moontang said:

always avoid grey areas...if there was fraud committed at the land office, then her gift is just evidence that she was a party to it...and if you were the one providing the cash..numerous laws were broken.  In a condo at full quota, a thai owned unit is worth 10-20%  less....so when it is time to sell..you are back at square one.  Why on earth would you want favors at the land office?  And there is a huge paper trail on understatement of sales price.

Good advice on grey areas. No fraud was committed at the land office - this is her friend of long standing and the payment was to her not officials for helping her expedite all the processes and paperwork at both the condo and land office. 

 

[moontang]

a 1000 note is common when there are crowds...each land office has their own games....but considering how high taxes are anyways....I would rather pay full fare and let them do their job.  There is no title insurance here, but the chinote system is pretty sound.  

[baansgr]

Sounds like a simple transfer of company owned property into a Thai owned property. Nothing murky or illegal, happens on a daily basis. Her name is on the chanote as owner. Its upto the previous guy to deal with closing the company.

[Langsuan Man]

52 minutes ago, baansgr said:

Its upto the previous guy to deal with closing the company.

Exactly.  The new owner is covered and dollars to donuts the seller never closes the company

 

There is a common misconception that you can get away with not legally closing a company.  That is a serious mistake and could be very costly in the future.  When you either formed a company or took one over , part of the process is to provide the Department of Business Development with your identity documents, in the case of a farang, that is your passport face page and Visa (or permission to stay).  Since the company structure is a civil matter any problems, like not properly closing the company or not paying taxes, is handled by the DBD in civil court to collect any taxes or fees owed

 

 If anyone has ever had any dealings with tax authorities, in any country, you know you can't win and they never forget 

[beautifulthailand99]

14 hours ago, baansgr said:

Sounds like a simple transfer of company owned property into a Thai owned property. Nothing murky or illegal, happens on a daily basis. Her name is on the chanote as owner. Its upto the previous guy to deal with closing the company.

Thanks sounds like that is what it was. Needless to say the farang was shocked and surprised to find out at sale time that in the event of his death the 'sleeping' Thai nominees would have got control of the condo rather than his designated heirs. The office that he bought from has sold countless numbers of farang 'Thai company owned condos' going back a couple of decades apparently. The owner has set up countless 'seeds' which only hatch when the hapless farang dies and three family members are named as directors. In the meantime, they sell on the companies and pad out the fees for sales and annual company accounts maintenance. The family must be pretty rich now on what in all accounts not an illegal practice. Indeed he saw the company as his trusted 'friend'. They sell predominantly to farang and sell and maintain the condo and house companies as their core business so rarely do these transactions touch the Land Office.  

[smutcakes]

Why would anyone buy a condo in a company name, it makes zero sense and goes against every possible sane reason for condo ownership, the main and overriding one being a farang can own it 100% in their own name, 100% legally. The lawyer i went through on my condo purchase, when i asked about the pros and cons of buying a company name, said there is literally zero benefit of buying in a company name.

[beautifulthailand99]

1 hour ago, smutcakes said:

Why would anyone buy a condo in a company name, it makes zero sense and goes against every possible sane reason for condo ownership, the main and overriding one being a farang can own it 100% in their own name, 100% legally. The lawyer i went through on my condo purchase, when i asked about the pros and cons of buying a company name, said there is literally zero benefit of buying in a company name.

In this case the condo was offered at much below market value (compared to other apartments for sale at the time) by a farang desperate to sell and the thai woman wanted to transfer to thai chanote.  She loved the block and at any buying 'window' there is only available what is available. 

[Delight]

On 4/18/2019 at 5:21 PM, smutcakes said:

y. The lawyer i went through on my condo purchase, when i asked about the pros and cons of buying a company name, said there is literally zero benefit of buying in a company name.

 The benefit of buying a condo in a company is that it gives the purchaser some where to live -in a location of his/her choice.

The company option is typically only used when the 49% foreighn ownership has gone.

The downside to company is the need to audit.

The major advantage of company is the ease of succession. Almost impossible with a foreigned owned.My condo is in a foreign name. At current exchange rates my son would need to find £90K  for reasons FET. Luckily he does not want it anyway -and my Thai wife  does-simple

Also selling  a condo in a company is very cheap -no transfer charges

 

The major benefit for Thailand is that condos continue to be built. Without the company option that process would simply stop.

Given that, does anybody seriously think that the Thai authorities will end the process. Not a chance

 

 

[KittenKong]

8 hours ago, Delight said:

Given that, does anybody seriously think that the Thai authorities will end the process. Not a chance 

Just look at all the other things they have put a lid on over the last 50 years, or even just the last 10 years. Why should this be any different?

[Happy Grumpy]

If the chanote is legit, it's legit.

 

If stuff was forged, then probably not.

 

The 3 Thais wuold have been majority shareholders of the company, if they come together saying that a company asset has been sold off without their legal consent, then they have a case against the share holder that sold it.

[beautifulthailand99]

 

 

 

 

 

4

1 hour ago, Happy Grumpy said:

If the chanote is legit, it's legit.

 

If stuff was forged, then probably not.

 

The 3 Thais wuold have been majority shareholders of the company, if they come together saying that a company asset has been sold off without their legal consent, then they have a case against the share holder that sold it.

I've heard of no evidence that anything was forged. In most 'legit' cases of company-owned property the farang (49% minority shareholder) has sole signature rights and therefore has full control of the legal affairs and assets of the company. In this case, what do the majority shareholders have - apart from it would appear control of the company should the minority shareholder die? Can they will these rights to a benefactor in the case of their death?

[Delight]

14 hours ago, KittenKong said:

Just look at all the other things they have put a lid on over the last 50 years, or even just the last 10 years. Why should this be any different?

Money makes the world go around. For world read Thailand