Usufruct

[brianthainess]

Can anyone please give me a list if docs required by the Land Office, to make a USUFRUCT and how long the process takes. married and in Trat which i am led to believe they will do this, we have a Thai friend with knowledge of law, and good english, whom we can trust and will take her along, so she can explain and ask questions for me. Thanks in advance.

[Kwasaki]

https://www.siam-legal.com/realestate/Usufructs.php

[Langsuan Man]

Depends upon the Land Office you have to deal with :

 

Quote

There is nothing there is stated that restricts the grants of such usufructs. However, like all other rights in relation to property, it must be noted once again that the registration of such a right is upon the discretion of the Land Officer at the Land Department and may vary between locations. It is advisable that you contact a Lawyer or Solicitor to discuss your options in regards to you specific circumstances.

 This is Thailand where every government office is it's own little fiefdom 

[scorecard]

24 minutes ago, Langsuan Man said:

Depends upon the Immigration office you have to deal with :

 

 This is Thailand where every government office is it's own little fiefdom 

Why are you mentioning immigration office? Surely this is a Thai lands titled office matter?

 

 

I'm hoping the OP has stated clearly to his/her lawyer what they are trying to achieve through putting a usufruct on the land title. 

 

My Thai son put a usufruct on the land title for his house and land. Our lawyer prepared some documents and went with my son to the Chiang Mai land office to seek the LTO officers advice.

 

Ultimately, the document states:

- I can live in the house until I die, at no cost.

- The house/land cannot be sold without my signature to allow a sale.

- When I die it automatically cancels.

 

Our lawyer asked the land officer what would apply if son passed away and the property is bequeathed to:

 

a. Son's wife and/or children.

b. A person not associated with family.

 

Land officer said quickly 'according to the Thai law it makes no difference, the usufruct content is still totally valid'.

 

However, as already mentioned it seems some land officers refuse to accept the whole idea of usufruct, other officers use their own interpretation/extent of what it means. All needs to be checked locally. 

 

 

[Langsuan Man]

10 minutes ago, scorecard said:

Why are you mentioning immigration office? Surely this is a Thai lands titled office matter?

Typo

[Bender Rodriguez]

On 6/8/2020 at 10:19 AM, brianthainess said:

USUFRUCT

after divorce is more than probably void

 

after death of thai wife, the family will do everything to get the free house / land

[Trillian]

8 minutes ago, Bender Rodriguez said:

after divorce is more than probably void

 

after death of thai wife, the family will do everything to get the free house / land

The usufruct remains valid for as long as the holder of the usufuct is alive, not the issuer.

 

If there is a Thai will in place the family have no claim, even without a Thai will the usufruct holder maintains the right allow or disallow who lives in the house..

 

 

[verticalift]

When I purchased my home in Phuket back in 2003, I had my lawyers insure that an USUFRUCT was drafted and issued for my home. I have my name in the Yellow Book Tambian Baan, while my wife has her name on the Chanote. Should the marriage ever fail, I still own the house and can continue living there until I pass away. The home could then be willed to my beneficiary, or revert to the owner of the Chanote, my wife.
 

Owning the structure/house and having your name in the Tambian Baan is a requirement for issuance of the Thai Pink I.D. Card, should you ever want one. Over the years I have found that the Pink I.D. Card is a valuable “Supporting” document to have in T’land, adding much weight to your being domiciled in the country, especially when dealing with Customs Immigration officials etc...

[roath]

Unless you are able to draft the Usufruct yourself (in Thai and English), and also navigate the local Land Office, then you will in reality need the services of a local lawyer

 

You can get draft Usufructs online, but really I would only recommend that you do this is you are quite comfortable with the amendment of legal documentation.

 

There must be consideration for the grant of the Usufruct otherwise it is unlikely that the Land Office will register the instrument (not least as there has to be a value for them to impose a tax).

 

I drafted my own and did the registration process myself but I am a lawyer by profession and I do speak and read some Thai which makes the process easier. 

 

If you are married, then the instrument is technically voidable during the currency of the marriage (so if you divorce, it doesn't give you protection necessarily) but it is far better to have even if married than not and of course as others have said if your wife pre-deceases you then you are protected until your death

 

You should also do mutual wills with your wife and also powers of attorney as part of the documentation to support and protect your rights. You can inherit land under Thai law, but you will need to transfer the land into a Thai name within a period of time

 

Once you get the Usufruct granted you should make sure that the Chanote is kept in a safe place. If you have any concerns about your wife, you would be advised to keep it someone safe that you can only access. 

 

As someone else has mentioned, once you get your name on the Chanote, apply for a Yellow Book and a Pink ID card. They are not essential but are useful

 

 

[roath]

2 hours ago, verticalift said:

When I purchased my home in Phuket back in 2003, I had my lawyers insure that an USUFRUCT was drafted and issued for my home. I have my name in the Yellow Book Tambian Baan, while my wife has her name on the Chanote. Should the marriage ever fail, I still own the house and can continue living there until I pass away. The home could then be willed to my beneficiary, or revert to the owner of the Chanote, my wife.
 

Owning the structure/house and having your name in the Tambian Baan is a requirement for issuance of the Thai Pink I.D. Card, should you ever want one. Over the years I have found that the Pink I.D. Card is a valuable “Supporting” document to have in T’land, adding much weight to your being domiciled in the country, especially when dealing with Customs Immigration officials etc...

For most offices, it is NOT a requirement to be married or to own any structure/house. There are even reports of people getting yellow books on tourist visas, but that would be exceptional to be fair. You cannot have your name in a Blue Tabien Baan unless you are Thai or have PR but can be issued a Yellow Tabien Baan (a Yellow Book) which as you rightly say is a requirement for the issue of a Pink ID card as the process for applying for a Yellow Book provides you with the 13 digit ID number which is required for any Pink ID card

 

An usufruct is invariably a personal right so cannot be transferred during your lifetime and cannot be willed to any beneficiary. Only a lease can do that as a lease is not a personal right but a right in rem. 

 

Any contract entered into after marriage is voidable under Thai law so if you divorce then there is not necessarily a right to continue to live in the house. You would however be entitled to half of any proceeds of sale and indeed any other marital assets (and of course your wife the converse)

 

it doesn't sound as if you have been given proper legal advice by your lawyers, or perhaps you misunderstood

 

https://www.samuiforsale.com/family-law/thai-marriage-and-contracts-between-husband-and-wife.html

https://www.thaicontracts.com/ask/25-real-estate-contracts/17-can-i-do-a-usufruct-contract-with-my-thai-wife.html

 

[roath]

On 6/9/2020 at 7:41 AM, scorecard said:

Why are you mentioning immigration office? Surely this is a Thai lands titled office matter?

 

 

I'm hoping the OP has stated clearly to his/her lawyer what they are trying to achieve through putting a usufruct on the land title. 

 

My Thai son put a usufruct on the land title for his house and land. Our lawyer prepared some documents and went with my son to the Chiang Mai land office to seek the LTO officers advice.

 

Ultimately, the document states:

- I can live in the house until I die, at no cost.

- The house/land cannot be sold without my signature to allow a sale.

- When I die it automatically cancels.

 

Our lawyer asked the land officer what would apply if son passed away and the property is bequeathed to:

 

a. Son's wife and/or children.

b. A person not associated with family.

 

Land officer said quickly 'according to the Thai law it makes no difference, the usufruct content is still totally valid'.

 

However, as already mentioned it seems some land officers refuse to accept the whole idea of usufruct, other officers use their own interpretation/extent of what it means. All needs to be checked locally. 

 

 

Unless there is a specific prohibition in the Usufruct (on which I am not sure about the validity in Thai law or practice), then generally speaking an Usufruct being registered on the chanote isn't in itself a bar to the freehold property being sold subject to the usufruct. The best method of ensuring that the freehold isn't sold to someone else is to retain the chanote document in your possession. 

 

Saying that, Land Offices do tend to be very circumspect in an application to issue a new chanote and/or sell the freehold without the consent of the usufructary. There have been cases (Phuket seemed to have problems in this regard) but tend to be very isolated these days, particularly since computerisation of the database 

 

In all cases of an usufruct being issued/granted, you should in addition prepare a mutual will with your wife (or the person with whom you have entered into the agreement) as well as a power of attorney to deal with sale of the property. The usufruct will give you protection, but the other document will minimise any potential future difficulties you may encounter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[scorecard]

13 minutes ago, roath said:

Unless there is a specific prohibition in the Usufruct (on which I am not sure about the validity in Thai law or practice), then generally speaking an Usufruct being registered on the chanote isn't in itself a bar to the freehold property being sold subject to the usufruct. The best method of ensuring that the freehold isn't sold to someone else is to retain the chanote document in your possession. 

 

Saying that, Land Offices do tend to be very circumspect in an application to issue a new chanote and/or sell the freehold without the consent of the usufructary. There have been cases (Phuket seemed to have problems in this regard) but tend to be very isolated these days, particularly since computerisation of the database 

 

In all cases of an usufruct being issued/granted, you should in addition prepare a mutual will with your wife (or the person with whom you have entered into the agreement) as well as a power of attorney to deal with sale of the property. The usufruct will give you protection, but the other document will minimise any potential future difficulties you may encounter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"then generally speaking an Usufruct being registered on the chanote isn't in itself a bar to the freehold property being sold subject to the usufruct."

 

I'm not sure that's correct.

 

Our lawyer checked this very well before my son went ahead with putting the usufruct on the chanote for his property at the CM land titles office.

 

Your comment above prompted me to ask my son some further questions and a few minutes ago he called the family lawyer to check, response:

 

- A usufruct has to be recorded on the back of the chanute to be valid. (In other words writng it at home and keep it in safe etc., at home has no validity whatever).

 

- If there is a usufruct recorded on the chanote then the LTO cannot change the owner details on the chanote, therefore, legally there cannot be a change of ownership/there is no new owner.

 

My son does have a valid will, which bequeaths his land and house, and all his assets, jointly/equally to his three daughters.

 

His wife does not benefit directly from the will. Our lawyer checked that this valis and it is.

 

Why? Son and his wife don't doesn't trust his wife's siblings (both 10 - 15 years older). Both son and his wife feared that if his wife was the beneficiary his wife's older siblings would seriously harass her to sell the property and give them the majority of the proceeds or transfer ownership to her oldest sibling (her brother). And son's wife is quite frightened of her siblings. 

 

Both of her siblings have tried other 'schemes' before, e.g. son bought a second vehicle Honda SUV.

 

Son's BIL turned up at son's house 2 weeks later, took the keys and drove away with his wife following, driving their own car.  Son and his wife demanded they return the SUV, they laughed, son went with family lawyer to CM police regional office. 

 

Twenty four later the SUV was parked outside son's house early morning and the driver ran away. And more...

 

[Tony125]

4 hours ago, verticalift said:

When I purchased my home in Phuket back in 2003, I had my lawyers insure that an USUFRUCT was drafted and issued for my home. I have my name in the Yellow Book Tambian Baan, while my wife has her name on the Chanote. Should the marriage ever fail, I still own the house and can continue living there until I pass away. The home could then be willed to my beneficiary, or revert to the owner of the Chanote, my wife.
 

Owning the structure/house and having your name in the Tambian Baan is a requirement for issuance of the Thai Pink I.D. Card, should you ever want one. Over the years I have found that the Pink I.D. Card is a valuable “Supporting” document to have in T’land, adding much weight to your being domiciled in the country, especially when dealing with Customs Immigration officials etc...

Your information is incorrect, see Roath's post #10  and the links he posted.   A Usufruct gives you some protecttion but if the marriage goes bad  the Usufruct can be voided

 

Marriage and contracts between husband and wife.

 

You could do a usufruct with your Thai wife over a property that is registered as her personal property. It gives some protection in different situations. However, and this is mainly because of the special relationship between husband and wife, matrimonial propertry laws give in section 1469 of the Civil and Commercial Code both spouses the right to void any agreement concluded between them during marriage (without grounds). This also applies to the agreed usufruct.

[Trillian]

Contracts made between husband and wife, yes, contracts made between two people who later become husband and wife, no.

[roath]

1 hour ago, scorecard said:

"then generally speaking an Usufruct being registered on the chanote isn't in itself a bar to the freehold property being sold subject to the usufruct."

 

I'm not sure that's correct.

 

Our lawyer checked this very well before my son went ahead with putting the usufruct on the chanote for his property at the CM land titles office.

 

Your comment above prompted me to ask my son some further questions and a few minutes ago he called the family lawyer to check, response:

 

- A usufruct has to be recorded on the back of the chanute to be valid. (In other words writng it at home and keep it in safe etc., at home has no validity whatever).

 

- If there is a usufruct recorded on the chanote then the LTO cannot change the owner details on the chanote, therefore, legally there cannot be a change of ownership/there is no new owner.

 

My son does have a valid will, which bequeaths his land and house, and all his assets, jointly/equally to his three daughters.

 

His wife does not benefit directly from the will. Our lawyer checked that this valis and it is.

 

Why? Son and his wife don't doesn't trust his wife's siblings (both 10 - 15 years older). Both son and his wife feared that if his wife was the beneficiary his wife's older siblings would seriously harass her to sell the property and give them the majority of the proceeds or transfer ownership to her oldest sibling (her brother). And son's wife is quite frightened of her siblings. 

 

Both of her siblings have tried other 'schemes' before, e.g. son bought a second vehicle Honda SUV.

 

Son's BIL turned up at son's house 2 weeks later, took the keys and drove away with his wife following, driving their own car.  Son and his wife demanded they return the SUV, they laughed, son went with family lawyer to CM police regional office. 

 

Twenty four later the SUV was parked outside son's house early morning and the driver ran away. And more...

 

As a general rule a subordinate right (in this case an usufruct) would not (and should not) prevent the disposal of the superior right (the freehold), not least as the sale of the freehold would not affect any rights already granted. 

 

Certainly, it is very much the case that Land Offices tend to be highly circumspect when they are dealing with Chanotes subject to a usufruct for obvious reasons (i.e. they know that the reality is that the person to whom the usufruct is granted is the true owner of the property regardless of what the chanote says) and that may be the reality (but not necessarily the law)

 

There may in fact be a provision in the Civil and Commercial code that clearly states that not to be the case, in which case, kindly quote it as of course my understanding may be wrong. 

 

There may also be a provision in the Usufruct, although I would be surprised as that would arguably be suggestive that the usufruct is a proxy agreement which is illegal under Thai law. Typically again, as a general principle of law, those with subordinate rights can't bind superior rights. Even if there was a provision in the usufruct, that would be a breach of agreement but not necessarily give you the right to void the transaction so problematic legally and practically (IMHPO). 

 

Equally if the owner of the land died, are you suggesting that the ownership couldn't be changed pursuant to the will or the intestacy provisions of the law? So again, I don't believe that you are correct in that assertion, respectfully. 

 

 

 

 

[Trillian]

"If there is a usufruct recorded on the chanote then the LTO cannot change the owner details on the chanote, therefore, legally there cannot be a change of ownership/there is no new owner".

 

Someone who is deceased cannot be the owner so surely the LO must have the ability to change the owners name, especially if it doesn't affect the usufruct and the usufrtee's rights?

[roath]

Just as a quick note, it is not correct to say that an usufruct is not valid if not registered. It would be a valid document, but would not be effective as it would not bind any third party.

 

Perhaps that's me being technical, but there is a big different in law and practice between something not being valid and not being effective and it is better not to be making statements that are potentially misleading. 

For example if you lent your friend 5 million baht to buy a house and drew up an agreement between you, that agreement would be valid per se. If you register that loan, then it would become a mortgage and secured against the property which means that the property could not be sold without your permission as the loan is secured against the property. You could not stop the sale of the property (as you are not the owner) but you could make sure that the sale doesn't take place without your being repaid the loan. If you didn't register the mortgage then it is an unsecured loan and perfectly valid but would be unsecured and you would have in this example, no rights to prevent the sale of the property for which the money was lent to purchase or indeed insist that the money from the sale be paid to you unless there was a specific provision in the agreement. you can see that there is a big difference therefore between what is valid and what is effective. 

 

 

 

 

[roath]

2 hours ago, Tony125 said:

Your information is incorrect, see Roath's post #10  and the links he posted.   A Usufruct gives you some protecttion but if the marriage goes bad  the Usufruct can be voided

 

Marriage and contracts between husband and wife.

 

You could do a usufruct with your Thai wife over a property that is registered as her personal property. It gives some protection in different situations. However, and this is mainly because of the special relationship between husband and wife, matrimonial propertry laws give in section 1469 of the Civil and Commercial Code both spouses the right to void any agreement concluded between them during marriage (without grounds). This also applies to the agreed usufruct.

It's definitely better to have this agreement than not as even if the wife voided the agreement she would effectively have to get a court order to get you or sell the property at which point you could apply for an order yourself to make sure that she doesn't sell and disappear with the profits (in an example where things were really bad) and as mentioned previously, Land Offices tend to be very circumspect in transferring properties subject to a Chanote without you being present (yes you can fake powers of attorney, but the Land Office may not accept it at face value without other specific documentation in support and/or without a lawyer present etc.) so examples of this happening tend to be rare and less and less recent

 

If you have no agreement then in theory she could kick you out, sell the house and disappear with the proceeds. You can of course get an order from the court to try to prevent this, but considering that you can transfer a property in literally a matter of hours here, you could be kicked out in the morning and the house in different ownership by lunchtime.

 

 

 

 

[BEVUP]

Hows this one, have mentioned before

Get Usufrut on GF Chanote (now wife) 

Had  Lawyer do 

Under thai Law owner can sell or Mortgage - only need to notify you if their are clauses attatched I guess

Guess what she mortgaged for family & lost the house to the LOANER with me still as Usurfrutee 

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, roath said:

As a general rule a subordinate right (in this case an usufruct) would not (and should not) prevent the disposal of the superior right (the freehold), not least as the sale of the freehold would not affect any rights already granted. 

 

Certainly, it is very much the case that Land Offices tend to be highly circumspect when they are dealing with Chanotes subject to a usufruct for obvious reasons (i.e. they know that the reality is that the person to whom the usufruct is granted is the true owner of the property regardless of what the chanote says) and that may be the reality (but not necessarily the law)

 

There may in fact be a provision in the Civil and Commercial code that clearly states that not to be the case, in which case, kindly quote it as of course my understanding may be wrong. 

 

There may also be a provision in the Usufruct, although I would be surprised as that would arguably be suggestive that the usufruct is a proxy agreement which is illegal under Thai law. Typically again, as a general principle of law, those with subordinate rights can't bind superior rights. Even if there was a provision in the usufruct, that would be a breach of agreement but not necessarily give you the right to void the transaction so problematic legally and practically (IMHPO). 

 

Equally if the owner of the land died, are you suggesting that the ownership couldn't be changed pursuant to the will or the intestacy provisions of the law? So again, I don't believe that you are correct in that assertion, respectfully. 

 

 

 

 

I have no argument with any of the points you make, good interesting points with good arguments.

 

I don't have an easily accessible copy of the Thai Commercial Code. Myself and my son did have detailed discussions with our lawyer who certainly has good knowledge of the law and he has our trust, and whatever the subject is he always checks with an appropriate respected expert person to ensure he is not making incorrect assumptions.

 

One point is that usufruct can (from my understanding) provide a form of protection, which in our case was the real reason why my son wanted to put the usufruct on the chanote, as a protection for me and for his kids, for no other reason . Perhaps that's why is seems to override the selling situation. 

 

 

[BEVUP]

15 minutes ago, scorecard said:

I have no argument with any of the points you make, good interesting points with good arguments.

 

I don't have an easily accessible copy of the Thai Commercial Code. Myself and my son did have detailed discussions with our lawyer who certainly has good knowledge of the law and he has our trust, and whatever the subject is he always checks with an appropriate respected expert person to ensure he is not making incorrect assumptions.

 

One point is that usufruct can (from my understanding) provide a form of protection, which in our case was the real reason why my son wanted to put the usufruct on the chanote, as a protection for me and for his kids, for no other reason . Perhaps that's why is seems to override the selling situation. 

 

 

I think you may find that a Usufrut may be removed if it is concluded in a court of law (obviously with you present ) that you have Degraded the property / & or not paid taxes (don't quote me on this bit )

Usufrut = The use of such property in the maintained state 

[KhaoYai]

3 hours ago, roath said:

Equally if the owner of the land died, are you suggesting that the ownership couldn't be changed pursuant to the will or the intestacy provisions of the law? So again, I don't believe that you are correct in that assertion, respectfully. 

A usufruct remains in place when the land owner dies. Any future owner of the land is bound by law to comply with the terms of the usufuct. Only the death of the usufructuary cancells the agreement.

 

However, some usufucts have been cancelled by the courts because they were not constructed according to the law in the first place. The OP would be well advised to use a lawyer (and one who really understands usufructs) to both write the usfruct and to register it on the chanotte at the Land Office.

[KhaoYai]

3 hours ago, Trillian said:

"If there is a usufruct recorded on the chanote then the LTO cannot change the owner details on the chanote, therefore, legally there cannot be a change of ownership/there is no new owner".

 

That is actually untrue. The usufruct can be written in such a way that a change of ownership can be made but any new owner must uphold the agreement.

 

The whole point of a usufruct is to give a usufructuary (tenant) full rights to enjoy a property, profit from it, even rent it out. They cannot damage, destroy or make the propery inaccesible and it is their duty to protect the owner from any charges or taxes on the property.

 

Although the usufructuary can profit from the property they cannot profit from its sale, alteration or destruction - in other words its akin to owning the property without the ability to sell or alter it. Therefore, provided the usufructuary agrees to it, a clause can be inserted allowing sale of the land subject to the continuance of the usufruct.

 

In practical terms a transfer of ownership may mean that a new usufruct has to be formed and provided the terms are the same the owner cannot object to it - not are they able to make any charge for it.

[BEVUP]

23 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

That is actually untrue. The usufruct can be written in such a way that a change of ownership can be made but any new owner must uphold the agreement.

 

The whole point of a usufruct is to give a usufructuary (tenant) full rights to enjoy a property, profit from it, even rent it out. They cannot damage, destroy or make the propery inaccesible and it is their duty to protect the owner from any charges or taxes on the property.

 

Although the usufructuary can profit from the property they cannot profit from its sale, alteration or destruction - in other words its akin to owning the property without the ability to sell or alter it. Therefore, provided the usufructuary agrees to it, a clause can be inserted allowing sale of the land subject to the continuance of the usufruct.

 

In practical terms a transfer of ownership may mean that a new usufruct has to be formed and provided the terms are the same the owner cannot object to it - not are they able to make any charge for it.

Correct in a sence 

The still holds the right to sell or mortgage the property 

This means the new owner must agree to the existing Usufrut

[roath]

21 hours ago, BEVUP said:

Hows this one, have mentioned before

Get Usufrut on GF Chanote (now wife) 

Had  Lawyer do 

Under thai Law owner can sell or Mortgage - only need to notify you if their are clauses attatched I guess

Guess what she mortgaged for family & lost the house to the LOANER with me still as Usurfrutee 

In that situation, it seems unlikely that the bank (presuming it was a bank giving the mortgage) would be able to remove you until you died (or you were in substantive  breach of any of the terms).

 

For that reason it is highly unusual for a bank to take out a mortgage as the property is worth barely anything (in legal terms, it is referred to as the reversionary value). Most legitimate banks won't took a property subject to an usufruct or lease unless the value of the loan reflects the reversionary value (e.g. 10 to 20% of the unencumbered value)

[roath]

In theory, you don't need a new usufruct as whoever is buying the land is subject to the existing agreement

 

However in practice land offices don't like the practice (not least because of the potential for fraud) so prefer that the old agreement is voided and a new agreement is entered into

[roath]

21 hours ago, BEVUP said:

I think you may find that a Usufrut may be removed if it is concluded in a court of law (obviously with you present ) that you have Degraded the property / & or not paid taxes (don't quote me on this bit )

Usufrut = The use of such property in the maintained state 

yes of course you need to comply with the terms of the usufruct which normally provide that you will maintain the land and pay any relevant property taxes etc. and if you are in substantive breach, a court order can be made to terminate the agreement (probably though you would be given notice to comply with the usufruct first though and put things right)

 

Your attendance at court would not neccessarily be required and provided that the court is satisfied that you were aware of the proceedings and had no reasonable excuse not to be there, they may proceed in your absence. typically, the first time you didn't attend there would be likely to be an adjournment but if you continued to fail to attend, the court can make an order in your absence

[roath]

21 hours ago, scorecard said:

I have no argument with any of the points you make, good interesting points with good arguments.

 

I don't have an easily accessible copy of the Thai Commercial Code. Myself and my son did have detailed discussions with our lawyer who certainly has good knowledge of the law and he has our trust, and whatever the subject is he always checks with an appropriate respected expert person to ensure he is not making incorrect assumptions.

 

One point is that usufruct can (from my understanding) provide a form of protection, which in our case was the real reason why my son wanted to put the usufruct on the chanote, as a protection for me and for his kids, for no other reason . Perhaps that's why is seems to override the selling situation. 

 

 

any form of agreement which is registered on the chanote gives (varying) degrees of protection

 

for sure as i have said several times, it is far better to have a chanote than not and the absence of a chanote gives zero protection so a no-brainer in my view.

 

the technicalities of usufruct in thailand are not as clear as in western countries as frankly the legal system here is not as advanced (e.g.the concept of trust law is non-existent here which is massively problematic) and there is of course corruption unfortunately which is problematic as well as the fact that even a legally registered chanote is subject to challenge as in nearly every case they amount to a proxy purchase in reality (the money comes from the husband but the property is put in the wife's name with a usufruct granted to the husband). Really Thailand needs to tidy up the laws and provide better protection for those who are living here and invest here but let's not hold our breath....