5 hours ago, baansgr said:

Yes, it's how they do it....you should ask yourself why?....

 

I know why, since it's not fully legal ???? Then again there are thousands, if not tens of thousands of houses done like this since already more than 30 years. 

 

8 hours ago, WhatsNext said:

 

I know why, since it's not fully legal ???? Then again there are thousands, if not tens of thousands of houses done like this since already more than 30 years. 

 

Yes, I know people that have houses for 20 years, others that have bought and sold without problems...also a few that have passed away and properties grabbed by the lawyers regardless of their wills. There has been sabre rattling about company set ups for 15 years or more...as you already know why it's done like this....you throw ya dice and take ya chances as we have all seen how instantly things here can change.

16 hours ago, baansgr said:

Yes, I know people that have houses for 20 years, others that have bought and sold without problems...also a few that have passed away and properties grabbed by the lawyers regardless of their wills. There has been sabre rattling about company set ups for 15 years or more...as you already know why it's done like this....you throw ya dice and take ya chances as we have all seen how instantly things here can change.

 

Sure, if the company setup ever goes away, ill just move the land/house to the gf and lease from her. The lawyer cannot grab the property as there won't be anything in her name. Nothing, zero, nada.

 

Why i don't lease straight away ? : more costs, and more difficult to sell as a house in a company.  And very very important, if the relationship goes sour, no problem with a company and a world of potential complications with a lease.

 Do you think that Pattaya Land office would accept a situation where the foreigner only owned 1% of the share allocation-but 100% of the voting rights?

7 hours ago, Delight said:

 Do you think that Pattaya Land office would accept a situation where the foreigner only owned 1% of the share allocation-but 100% of the voting rights?

 

No, they don't accept anything that's why the lawyer work around is used. It's not up to the land office what is done with the company after the original transfer to the lawyer.

 

This is the same as the police checking walking street for prostitution and proclaiming that there isn't any.  Everyone knows there are holding companies and everyone pretends they are not there. This is Thailand, don't expect any logic