Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

<unrelated link removed>

http://www.civilandcomercialcode.html

This will tell you the facts without listening to jail house lawyers that don't know how to go about obtaining a Thai divorce.

Good luck.

Just for reference: I have gone through a Thai divorce and had my marriage reg with the US embassy etc. None of my assets were touched in the US. The Thai court stated and I quote. "We deal with only Thai law since you are in this court room. The only thing we look at is what you both have in Thailand. What the farang has in his country is not our concern. If you want to divorce in his country then you must go to his country. But, remember you were married here in Thailand and his country will tell you since you have never lived in his country that you will need to divorce in Thailand. Also, you will need a Visa to go to his country. Can you get this visa without his help. Will the Embassy give you a visa since you do not have a job. Think before you listen to jail house lawyers telling you you can get this or that. You live in Thialand not America. So, now do you want the divorce or not. It's your time and money that we are waisting. What do you want to do?

To the jail house lawyers. Might I suggest that you first read the Thai laws before trying to help a poor Thai lady obtain a divorce and telling her she can get this and that because he is from another country. You build up hopes that will never come to life.

Might I also suggest if you do obtain a Thai divorce stand ferm and say that you are not giving anything more. Cause they will try and milk you for everything you have. Say no to every request. I did and they could not do anything since everything I had was in America.

Good Luck,

The Watchdog for 2008

Edited by Maestro
Link removed.
Posted

That you or anyone else managed to deny a Thai wife rights to representation infront of a US/UK court in a divorce is not proof that it is not possible for a foreigner to persue a US/UK citizen in their respective national courts.

You perhaps did very well to keep the divorce in Thailand, but if your wife had been granted access to the US court system the outcome might very well have been different.

Posted
That you or anyone else managed to deny a Thai wife rights to representation infront of a US/UK court in a divorce is not proof that it is not possible for a foreigner to persue a US/UK citizen in their respective national courts.

You perhaps did very well to keep the divorce in Thailand, but if your wife had been granted access to the US court system the outcome might very well have been different.

And if my Auntie had a pair of something else it would be my Uncle ! :o

Posted

The Civil and Commercial Code of Thailand



Books 1-6

Chapter II

Condition of Marriage

(Ed. note: This Chapter extends from Sections 1448-1460.)



CHAPTER 11 CONDITIONS OF MARRIAGE

(Ed. Note: This chapter extends from Section 1448-1460)

Section 1448. A marriage can take place only when the man and woman have completed their seventeenth year of age. But the Court may, in case of having appropriate reason, allow them to marry before attaining such age.

Section 1449. A marriage cannot take place if either the man or the woman is an insane person or adjudged incompetent.

Section 1450. A marriage connot take place if the man and woman are blood relations in the direct ascendant or descendant line, or brother or sister of full or half blood. The said relationship shall be in accordance with blood relation without regard to its legitimacy.

Section 1451 . An adopter cannot marry the adopted.

Section 1452. A marriage cannot take place if the man or woman is already the spouse of another person.

Section 1 453. In case of the woman whose husband died or whose marriage has become terminated, the marriage can only take place if not less than three hundred and ten days have elapsed since the termination of her previous marriage; unless

(1) a child has been born during such period;

(2) the divorced couple remarry;

(3) there is a certificate issued by a qualified doctor who is a lawful physical practitioner in medicine showing that the woman is not pregnant;

(4) there is an order of the Court allowing the woman to marry.

Section 1454. In case of marriage of a minor, the provisions of Section 1436 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Section 1455. Giving consent to the marriage may be made:

(1) by affixing signature of the person giving consent in the Register at the time of registration of the marriage;

(2) by a consent document stating the names of the parties to the marriage and signed

by the person giving consent;

(3) by verbal declaration before at least two witnesses in case of necessity.

Te consent having been given cannot be revoked.

Section 1456. In case where there is no person having the power to give consent under Section 1454, or if the person refuses to give consent or is in the position of being unable to give consent, or the minor cannot, in such circumstances, ask for the consent, the minor may file an application with the Court for giving consent to the marriage.

Section 1457. Marriage under this Code shall be effected only on registration being made.

Section 1458. A marriage can take place only if the man and woman agree to take each other as husband and wife, and such agreement must be declared publicly before the Registrar in order to have it recorded by the Registrar.

Section 1459. A marriage in foreign country between Thai people or between a Thai people and a foreigner may be effected according to the form prescribed by Thai law or by the law of the country where it takes place.

If the spouses desire to have the marriage registered according to Thai law, the registration shall be effected by a Thai Diplomatic or Consular Officer.

Section 1460. In case where there exists special circumstances that make the marriage registration by the Registrar unable because either or both of the man and woman were in imminent danger of death or in the state of armed conflict or war, if a declaration of intention to marry has been made by the man and woman before a person of sui juris living there, who would have noted down as an evidence such intention, and if the registration of marriage between the man and woman was effected thereafter not later than ninety days as from the date of first possible opportunity to apply for registration of marriage with production of the evidence of the intention in order to have the date and place of declaration of intention to marry and the special circumstances recorded by the Registrar in the Marriage Register, the day on which declaration of intention to marry has been made to the said person shall be deemed as the date of registration of marriage.

The provisions of this Section shall not apply to the marriage that is void if it should take place on the date of declaration of intention.





CHAPTER III

RELATIONSHIP OF HUSBAND AND WIFE

(Ed. Note: This chapter extends from Section 1461-1464/1.)

Section 1461. Husband and wife shall cohabit as husband and wife.

Husband and wife shall maintain and support each other according to his or her ability and condition in life.

Section 1462. Where the physical or mental health or happiness of either spouse is greatly imperiled by continuance of cohabitation, the spouse so imperiled may apply to the Court for authorization to live apart while the danger persists; and in such case, the Court may order such amount of maintenance to be furnished by one of the spouses to the other as may be proper according to the circumstances.

Section 1463. If one of the spouses is adjudged incompetent or quasi-incompetent, the other becomes guardian or curator by operation of law. But on application of any interested person or of Public Prosecutor, the Court may on substantial grounds, appoint another person as guardian or curator.

(1) Section 1464. If one of the spouse becomes insane, irrespective of whether he or she has been adjudged incompetent or not, and the other fails to give proper maintenance to the insane spouse under Section 1461 paragraph two, does or fails to do any thing to the extent that il plunges the insaw spouse into the position which is likely endangering the latter's body or mind, or causing any undue loss to the latter's property, the persons as specified in Section 28* or the guardian may enter an action against the other claiming maintenance for the insane spouse, or apply for any order of the Court to protect the insane spouse.

If, in case of entering the action for maintenance under paragraph one, no order has yet been given to effect the insane spouse to become incapacitated person, an application shall be made 10 the Court in the same case for an order effecting such insane spouse to be an incapacitated person and to appoint the applicant himself or herself as the guardian. If such order effecting the incapacitated person on the insane spouse has been given, an application for removal of the old guardian and appointment of a new one may be made.

In applying for any order of the Court for protecting the insane spouse without claiming maintenance, the applicant may not request the Court to order effecting the insane spouse to be an incapacitated person or to change the quardian. If the measures for protection as requested, in the opinion of the Court, requires an appointment or change of the guardian, the Court shall firstly give an order effecting the carrying out of the similar activities as provided in paragraph two, and then give a protection order as it is deemed suitable.

(2)Section 1464/1 During the Court trial under Section 1464, the Court may, upon request, determine any temporary measures concerning the maintenance or protection of the insane spouse as it is deemed suitable. If it is a case of emergency, the provisions on the request in case of emergency under the Civil Procedure Code shall apply.

Chapter VI

Termination of Marriage

(Ed. note: This Chapter extends from Sections 1501-1535.)

Section 1501: Marriage is terminated by death, divorce or being cancelled by the Court.

Section 1502: A voidable marriage terminates upon cancellation decided by judgment of the Court.

Section 1503: An application to the Court for cancellation of marriage on the ground of its avoidable shall be made only in the case where the spouses have not complied with Section 1448, Section 1505, Section 1506, Section 1507, and Section 1509.

Section 1504: An interested person other than the parents or guardian who have given their consent to the marriage is entitled to apply for cancellation of the marriage on the ground of its voidability.

If the court has not cancelled the marriage until both man and woman have completed the age required under Section 1448 or if the woman has become pregnant before such completion, the marriage shall be deemed to be valid from the time it was made.

Section 1505: A marriage which is made on account of mistake as to the identity of the other spouse shall be deemed to be voidable.

The right to apply for cancellation of the marriage on account of mistake as to the identity of the spouse shall be terminated after the lapse of ninety days from the date of marriage.

Section 1506: A marriage is voidable if it is made by the spouoses on account of fraud to such an extent that without it the marriage would not have been made.

Section 1507: A marriage s voidable if it is made by the spouses on account of duress to such an extent that without it the marriage would not have been made.

The right to apply for cancellation of the marriage on account of duress shall be terminated after the lapse of one year from the day on which the spouse is free from duress.

Section1508: Where the marriage is voidable on account of mistake as to the identity of the spouse, fraud or duress, only the spouse who mistook the identity of the other, or was induced by fraud or duress to contract the marriage may apply for the cancellation of such marriage.

In case where the person entitled to apply for the cancellation of the marriage has been adjudged incompetent, the person who may apply to the Court for an order effecting an insane person to be an incapacitated person under Section 29, may also apply for the cancellation of such marriage. Where the person entitled to apply for the cancellation of the marriage is an insane person not yet adjudged incompetent, the said person may apply for the cancellation of such marriage but must apply concurrently to the Court for an order effecting him to be an incapacitated person. If the Court gives an order revoking the application for an order effecting him to be an incapacitated person, the Court shall also order revoking the application made by the said person for the cancellation of the marriage.

The order of the Court revoking the application made by the person for cancellation of the marriage under paragraph two does not effect the right of the spouse to apply for the cancellation of the marriage; provided that the spouse exercise his or her right within the remaining period of time. If the remaining period of time is less than six months as from the day on which the order of the Court revoking the application made by the said person for cancellation of the marriage is given, or if there remains no such period, the period of time shall correspondingly be extended to the completion of six months as from the day on which the order of the Court revoking the application made by the said person for the cancellation of the marriage is given.

Section 1509: The marriage made without consent of the persons mentioned in Section 1454 is voidable.

Section 1510: Where the marriage is voidable on account of having been made without consent of the persons mentioned in Section 1454, only the person who can give the consent under Section 1454 may apply for the cancellation of the marriage.

The right to apply for the cancellation of the marriage under this Section is extinguished when the spouse has completed the age of twentieth year or when the woman has become pregnant.

The action for the cancellation of the marriage under this Section is barred by prescription after one year from the day where the marriage is known.

Section 1511: The marriage which is cancelled by judgment of the Court shall be deemed to have terminated on the day when the judgment becomes final; provided, however, that it may not be set up to the prejudice of the rights of third persons acting in good faith unless the cancellation of the marriage has been registered.

Section 1512: The provisions concerning the result of divorce by judgment of the Court shall apply to the result of cancellation of the marriage mutatis mutandis [Ed. Latin, the necessary changes having been made].

Section 1513: If it appears that the spouse sued on cancellation of the marriage has known of the ground of the avoidability, such spouse is required to make compensation for the damage to the body, reputation or property of the other arising from such marriage, and the provisions of Section 1525 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

If the other spouse becomes destitute due to the cancellation of the marriage under paragraph one and derives insufficient income out of his or her property of business which used to be carried on during the marriage, the spouse against whom the action has been brought is also required to be liable to living allowances as provided in section 1526.

Section 1514: Divorce may be effected only by mutual consent or by judgment of the Court.

Divorce effected by mutual consent must be made in writing and certified by the signatures of at least two witnesses.

Section 1515: Where marriage has been registered as provided by this Code, divorce by mutual consent is valid only if the registration thereof is effected by both the husband and wife.

Section 1516: Grounds of action for divorce are as follows:

(1) the husband has given maintenance to or honored such other woman as his wife, or the wife has committed adultery, the other spouse may enter a claim for divorce;

(2) one spouse is guilty of misconduct, notwithstanding whether such misconduct is a criminal offence or not, if it causes the other:

(a) to be seriously ashamed;

(B ) to be insulted of hated [sic] or account of continuance of being husband or wife of the spouse having committed the misconduct; or

© to sustain excessive injury or trouble where the condition, position and cohabitation as husband and wife are taken into consideration; the latter may enter a claim for divorce;

(3) one spouse has caused serious harm or torture to the body or mind of the other, or has seriously insulted the other or his or her ascendants, the latter may enter a claim for divorce;

(4) one spouse has deserted the other for more than one year, the latter may enter a claim for divorce;

(4/1) one spouse had been sentenced by a final judgment of the Court and has been imprisoned for more than one year in the offence committed without any participation, consent or in the knowledge of the other, and the cohabitation as husband and wife will cause the other party sustain excessive injury or trouble, the latter may enter a claim for divorce;

(4/2) the husband and wife voluntarily live separately because of being unable to cohabit peacefully for more than three years, or live separately for more than three years by the order of the Court, either spouse may enter a claim for divorce;

(5) one spouse has been adjudged to have disappeared, or as left his or her domicile or residence for more than three years and being uncertain whether he or she is living or dead;

(6) one spouse has failed to give proper maintenance and support to the other, or committed acts seriously adverse to the relationship of husband and wife to such an extent that the other has been in excessive trouble where the condition, position and cohabitation as husband and wife are taking into consideration, the latter may enter a claim for divorce;

(7) one spouse has been an insane person for more than three years continuously and such insanity is hardly curable so that the continuance of marriage cannot be expected, the other may enter a claim for divorce;

(8) one spouse has broken a bond of good behavior executed by him or her, the other spouse may enter a claim for divorce;

(9) one spouse is suffering from a communicable and dangerous disease which is incurable and may cause injury to the other, the latter may file a claim for divorce;

(10) one spouse has a physical disadvantage so as to be permanently unable to cohabit as husband and wife, the other may enter a claim for divorce.

Section 1517. No action for divorce may be instituted by the husband or wife, as the case may be if such spouse has consented to or connived at the acts under Section 1516 (1) and (2) upon which the actio for divorce is based.

If the ground of action for divorce under Section 1516 (10) has resulted from the act of the other spouse, the action for divorce based upon such ground may not be instituted by such other spouse.

Where the action for divorce based upon the ground under section 1516 (8) has been instituted, the Court may not pronounce judgment to effect the divorce if the bahavior of the nusband or wife that causes the bond to have been executed is a minor cause or of no imprtance in relation to peacful cohabitation as husband and wife.

Section 1518. The right to institute an action for divorce would be terminated if the spouse entitled thereto has committed any act showing his or her forgiveness to the act done by the other that has caused the right to institute the action for divorce.

Section 1519. In case where one spouse is an insane person and if there gives rise to the ground of action for divorce irrespectiv e of whether it arises before or after the insanity, the person entitled to apply to the Court for an order effecting the instance person to be an incapicitated person under Sectoin 28* shall have the power to enter an action against the other spouse for divorce and liquidation of the property. In such a case if no order of the Court effecting the insance spouse to be an incapacitated person has yet been given, the said person shall apply to the Court in the same case for an order effecting the insane spouse to be an incapacitated person.

The said person may, if deemed suitable, also apply to the Court for giving the order under Section 1526 and Section 1530.

In case where the spouse alleged to be an insance person has not yet been adjudged incompetent, and if the Court deems that such spouse should not be judged incompetent, the case shall then be dismissed. If the spouse is deemed suitable to be adjudged incompetent but an order to effect the divorce should not yet be given as yet, the Court shall adjudge the spouse to be an incapacitated person and may not give order concerning the gurarian or appointing other person to be guardian under Section 1463 while the application for divorce will be dismissed, and the Court may in this connection give an order determinng living allowances. In case where the spouse is deemed to be insane and should be adjudged incompetent by the Court and the application for divorce should also be granted, the Court shall issue an order n the judgment effectng such spouse to be an incapacitated person, appointing a guardian and allowing the divorce.

In case there the Court deems that the ground upon which the claim for divorce is based is not proper to the condition of the incapacitated spouse who is going to divorce the other spouse, ir it is not proper under such circumstances that divorce should be allowed, the Court may not pronounce the judgment to effect the divorce.

Section 1520. In case of divorce by mutual consent, the spouses shall make an agreement n writing for the exercise of parental power over each of the children. In the absence of such agreement or an agreement thereon cannot be reached, the matter shall be decided by the Court.

In case of divorce by judgment of the Court, the Court trying the divorce case shall also order that the parental power over each of the children belongs to any party. If, in such trial, it is deemed proper to deprive that spouse of the parental power under Section 1582, the Court may give an order depriving that spouse of the same and appointing a third person as a guardian, by taking into consideration the happiness and interest of the child.

Section 1521. If it appears that the person exercising parental power of the guardian under Section 1520 behaves himself or herself improperly or there is a change of circumstances after the appointment, the Court has the power to give an order appointing a new guardian by taking into consideration the happiness and interest of the child.

Section 1522. In case of divorce by mutual consent, an arrangement shall be made and contained in the agreement of divorce as to who, both of the spouses or either spouse, will contribute to the maintenance of the children and how much is the contribution.

In case of divorce by judgment of the Court or in case the agreement of divorce contains no provisions concerning the maintenance of the children, the Court shall determine it.

Section 1523. In case of divorce by judgment of the Court on the ground as provided in Section 1516 (1), the husband or wife is entitled to compensation from the husband or wife and other woman or adulterer, as the case may be.

The husband is entitled to claim compensation from any person who has wrongfully taken liberties with his wife in an adulterous manner, and the wife is entitled to claim compensation from other woman who has openly shown her adulterous relations with the former’s husband. However, the husband or wife is not entitled to claim compensation if he or she has consented to or connived at the act done by other party under Section 1516 (1) or allowed other person to act as provided in paragraph two.

Section 1524. If the ground of action for divorce under Section 1516 (3), (4) or (6) has arisen through an act of the party at fault with the intention to make the other party so intolerable that action for divorce has to be entered, the other party is entitled to compensation from the party at fault.

Section 1525. The compensation under Section 1523 and Section 1524 shall be decided by the Court according to the circumstances, and the Court may give an order for a single payment thereof or payment in instalments as may be deemed suitable by the Court.

In case where the person who has to make the Compensation is a spouse of the other party, the share of the property received by the former from the liquidation of the Sin Somros on account of divorce shall also be taken into consideration.

Section 1526. In a case of divorce, if the ground for divorce has derived from the guilt of only one party, and the divorce will make the other become destitute deriving insufficient income out of his or her property or business which used to be carried on during the marriage, the latter is entitled to apply for the living allowances to be paid by the party at fault. The Court may decide whether the living allowances be granted or not by taking the ability of the grantor and the condition in life of the receiver into consideration, and the provisions of Section 1598/39, Section 1598/40 and Section 1598/41 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

The right to claim the living allowances is extinguished if it is not raised in the plaint or counter-claim in the action for divorce.

Section 1527. If a divorce is effected on the ground of insanity under Section 1516 (7) or on the ground of suffering from a communicable and dangerous disease under Section 1516 (9), the other spouse shall furnish living allowances to the spouse who is insane or is suffering from the disease, according to Section 1526, mutatis mutandis.

Section 1 528. If the party receiving living allowances remarries, the right to receive living allowances is extinguished.

Section 1529. Rights of action based upon any of the grounds provided in Section 1516 (1), (2), (3) or (6), or Section 1523 are extinguished after one year when the fact which can be alleged by the claimant has been known or should have been known to him or her.

Grounds upon which a claim for divorce can no longer be based may still be proved in support of another claim for divorce based upon other grounds.

Section 1530. Where an action for divorce is pending, the Court may, on application of either party, make any provisional order which it thinks proper such as those concerning the Sin Somros, the lodging, the maintenance of the spouses and the custody and maintenance of children.

Section 1531. In case where a marriage has been registered according to law, divorce by mutual consent takes effect from the time of registration.

Divorce by judgment of the Court takes effect on and from the time when the judgment becomes final; however, such judgment may not be set up to the prejudice to the rights of third persons acting in good faith unless the divorce has been registered.

Section 1532. After divorce, the property of the husband and wife shall be subject to liquidation.

But as between the spouses,

(a) in case of divorce by mutual consent, the liquidation shall apply to the property of

the husband and wife as it was on the date of registration of divorce;

(B ) in case of divorce by judgment, the liquidation shall apply to the property of the

husband and wife as it was on the day when the action for divorce was entered in Court.

Section 1533. Upon divorce, the Sin Somros shall be divided equally between man and woman.

Section 1534. Where either spouse has made disposal of the Sin Somros for his or her exclusive benefit, or has made disposal thereof with an intention to cause injury to the other, or has made disposal thereof without the consent of the other in the case where such disposal is required by law to have consent of the other, or has wilfully destroyed it, it shall, for the purpose of division of the Sin Somros under Section 1533, be regarded as if such property had still remained. If the share of the Sin Somros that the other will receive is not complete to what he or she should have received, the party at fault is required to make up for the arrears from his or her share of the Sin Somros or his or her Sin Suan Tua.

Section 1535. Upon termination of the marriage, the man and woman shall be liable for common debts equally.



Posted

Indeed, but you are missing the point.

In the US the government is considering enacting laws to regulate introduction agencies offering 'overseas brides', the proposal being that the agencies should provide information on such things as the criminal records of men seeking brides from overseas.

In the UK the proposal is that foreigners marrying British citizens would be provided with information on and access to their legal rights witnin the UK in the event of divorce.

The OP (welcome by the way), missunderstands to significance of 'Domicile', not just as it applies to the individual in a marriage/divorce but as it applies to assets within the marriage.

Perhaps we can look forward to the 'no win no fee' divorce, who knows, there has to be money in that somewhere.

Posted
That you or anyone else managed to deny a Thai wife rights to representation infront of a US/UK court in a divorce is not proof that it is not possible for a foreigner to persue a US/UK citizen in their respective national courts.

You perhaps did very well to keep the divorce in Thailand, but if your wife had been granted access to the US court system the outcome might very well have been different.

Why would I grant her access to the US court system when I was married in Thailand and lived in Thailand and she never ever went to the US.

Posted
Indeed, but you are missing the point.

In the US the government is considering enacting laws to regulate introduction agencies offering 'overseas brides', the proposal being that the agencies should provide information on such things as the criminal records of men seeking brides from overseas.

In the UK the proposal is that foreigners marrying British citizens would be provided with information on and access to their legal rights witnin the UK in the event of divorce.

The OP (welcome by the way), missunderstands to significance of 'Domicile', not just as it applies to the individual in a marriage/divorce but as it applies to assets within the marriage.

Perhaps we can look forward to the 'no win no fee' divorce, who knows, there has to be money in that somewhere.

I'm not missing the point. If she is my wife then I should not have to pay for a visa and go through the US. Embassy for some bull shit interview.

Now if the US wants to be fair with a divorce then let the wifes come to the US without the bull shit. Then maybe I would have been fair. Get the point?????? I hope so.

Posted (edited)

Very good watchdog, but again you are missing the point.

It does not matter what Thai law says. If you or any part of your marrital wealth is domiciled in the US or the UK (in the UK this includes property and pensions) then the courts back home will almost certainly have jurisdiction.

It only needs for the foreign spouse to be aware of their rights to petition the courts back home and be given access/assistance in doing so.

Borris Becker learned this lesson.

Of course you are correct that if you are resident in Thailand and all your assets are in Thailand then only Thai law would apply.

(You've caught on quick for a new member - well done)

I also agree in principle with your point about visas for wives, unfortunately as I am sure you are aware, relaxing the visa rules is not always good for women travelling as wives. Wive's visas have a sorry history of abuse by people traffickers.

Edited by GuestHouse
Posted
Very good watchdog, but again you are missing the point.

It does not matter what Thai law says. If you or any part of your marrital wealth is domiciled in the US or the UK (in the UK this includes property and pensions) then the courts back home will almost certainly have jurisdiction.

It only needs for the foreign spouse to be aware of their rights to petition the courts back home and be given access/assistance in doing so.

Borris Becker learned this lesson.

Of course you are correct that if you are resident in Thailand and all your assets are in Thailand then only Thai law would apply.

(You've caught on quick for a new member - well done)

Understand, if what I had before I moved to Thailand of which is in the US and stays in the US then by US laws she gets nothing that is in America. That's the American law. Not sure where you are from. But, some of us use our heads that are on top of our shoulders before we dive into the pool of lust.

What was earned before the marriage and stays in American is ours to keep......

It does not matter what they are working on at present. I am not dealing with what is to come. I am done and finished with the divorce and I kepted everthing I earned that stayed in American. Thai law,. Thai couts system.

If the US courts wanted her to have money then they would have granted her a visa. To bad for her and good luck for me. All I can say is thank you to the US Embassy for not giving her a visa.

As they say money talks. Of course I had one of the best Thai lawyers money can buy.

Posted

I think that Watchdog2008 could have presented his OP in a better, more sympathetic manner, nevertheless, what he has stated is correct. Under US law, any assets that are fully owned (i.e. no lien exists on the asset) by the man (or woman) prior to marriage are not up for grabs in a divorce settlement. Any assets (property acquisitions, income, etc) that are earned after marriage is subject to review.

Watchdog2008 has indicated that since he was married, he has resided in Thailand. No where did he state whether or not he earned any income. For all we know he might have been a 50+ year old retiree. If he hasn't earned any income (assets), then it is correct to assume that his spouse (ex-wife now) shouldn't get anything. If there were kids involved, then of course that would be entirely different. Or if he were in the US, then the legal sharks might have a field day --- but they still wouldn't be able to touch the assets he had prior to the marriage.

I only wish I had researched the topic on an overseas divorce much sooner before. It cost me dearly when I was divorced. Fortunately it does not cost me on a month-to-month basis.

Posted
Very good watchdog, but again you are missing the point.

It does not matter what Thai law says. If you or any part of your marrital wealth is domiciled in the US or the UK (in the UK this includes property and pensions) then the courts back home will almost certainly have jurisdiction.

It only needs for the foreign spouse to be aware of their rights to petition the courts back home and be given access/assistance in doing so.

Borris Becker learned this lesson.

Of course you are correct that if you are resident in Thailand and all your assets are in Thailand then only Thai law would apply.

(You've caught on quick for a new member - well done)

Understand, if what I had before I moved to Thailand of which is in the US and stays in the US then by US laws she gets nothing that is in America. That's the American law. Not sure where you are from. But, some of us use our heads that are on top of our shoulders before we dive into the pool of lust.

What was earned before the marriage and stays in American is ours to keep......

It does not matter what they are working on at present. I am not dealing with what is to come. I am done and finished with the divorce and I kepted everthing I earned that stayed in American. Thai law,. Thai couts system.

If the US courts wanted her to have money then they would have granted her a visa. To bad for her and good luck for me. All I can say is thank you to the US Embassy for not giving her a visa.

As they say money talks. Of course I had one of the best Thai lawyers money can buy.

I dont know where in the us you are from but to secure yourself make sure you know the local (state)laws that apply to you as they tend to change and be a little different from state to state.

even if she is denied or refused a visa she can still take you to court.

all she needs to do is contact a good lawyer in the US through the internet and he can file the divorce on her behalf in the US.

this will leave you leagaly "exposed" in the states and such a case will involve listing all your assets and the lawyer on her behalf will do everything to put the sqeeze on you.

the fact that you were leagaly seperated in thailand does not dispute her rights in an American court. and she can persue them using a nominee lawyer.

Posted
Very good watchdog, but again you are missing the point.

It does not matter what Thai law says. If you or any part of your marrital wealth is domiciled in the US or the UK (in the UK this includes property and pensions) then the courts back home will almost certainly have jurisdiction.

It only needs for the foreign spouse to be aware of their rights to petition the courts back home and be given access/assistance in doing so.

Borris Becker learned this lesson.

Of course you are correct that if you are resident in Thailand and all your assets are in Thailand then only Thai law would apply.

(You've caught on quick for a new member - well done)

Understand, if what I had before I moved to Thailand of which is in the US and stays in the US then by US laws she gets nothing that is in America. That's the American law. Not sure where you are from. But, some of us use our heads that are on top of our shoulders before we dive into the pool of lust.

What was earned before the marriage and stays in American is ours to keep......

It does not matter what they are working on at present. I am not dealing with what is to come. I am done and finished with the divorce and I kepted everthing I earned that stayed in American. Thai law,. Thai couts system.

If the US courts wanted her to have money then they would have granted her a visa. To bad for her and good luck for me. All I can say is thank you to the US Embassy for not giving her a visa.

As they say money talks. Of course I had one of the best Thai lawyers money can buy.

I dont know where in the us you are from but to secure yourself make sure you know the local (state)laws that apply to you as they tend to change and be a little different from state to state.

even if she is denied or refused a visa she can still take you to court.

all she needs to do is contact a good lawyer in the US through the internet and he can file the divorce on her behalf in the US.

this will leave you leagaly "exposed" in the states and such a case will involve listing all your assets and the lawyer on her behalf will do everything to put the sqeeze on you.

the fact that you were leagaly seperated in thailand does not dispute her rights in an American court. and she can persue them using a nominee lawyer.

No one has mentioned seperated as you have. The divorce is completed and no matter where you live in the states, in order to file for a divorce one must live 6 months in that state. No way can one hire a legal Lawyer to file a divorce unless they have lived in that state for 6 months.

Posted
<snip>None of my assets were touched in the US. The Thai court stated and I quote. "We deal with only Thai law since you are in this court room. The only thing we look at is what you both have in Thailand. What the farang has in his country is not our concern. <snip>

I beg to differ on this statement.

I too have been through the Thai divorce court system. Submissions of foreign assets obtained during marriage and proof of asset division were accepted into court as evidence. This evidence of foreign assets was taken into account when the court made its ruling which included additional payments based on foreign assets. The court of appeal upheld the original court ruling.

I do agree with your statement to stand firm on requests for additional payments.

Legal advice given to me after the ruling was that the Thai divorce courts have no jurisdiction over foreign assets or power to enforce payments.

Posted

I have one qustion. You said that you registered your marriage in US embassy. Did you also register your divorce in US embassy? Or is that necessary at all?

Posted (edited)
Borris Becker learned this lesson.

Of course you are correct that if you are resident in Thailand and all your assets are in Thailand then only Thai law would apply.

I am confused as to the Boris Becker lesson.

His wife, was German, born in Germany, and most likely held a US passport as her father was American. Prior to their divorce, she took the kids and moved to Florida, and established residency. That, is the only way I can see how she could divorce him in the US. There is just no way she could have filed a divorce from Germany in the US without having residency. In NO STATE!

There are a lot of little fine details in the US law.. that people seem to think do not exist but they do.

Under US law, any assets that are fully owned (i.e. no lien exists on the asset) by the man (or woman) prior to marriage are not up for grabs in a divorce settlement. Any assets (property acquisitions, income, etc) that are earned after marriage is subject to review.

--- but they still wouldn't be able to touch the assets he had prior to the marriage.

This is also 100% true. Any monies or property aquired prior to marriage that are paid in full are 100% yours.. They do not get split.

Monies aquired DURING marriage .. is what the lawyers can legally go after.

To get his pension, they need to have been married for (if I am not mistaken, 10 years).

To get his social security they have to be married 10 years.. and not even 9 years and 360 days! Does not work, does not count.

Totally untouchable..

401K I am not sure.. but my guess it has a 10 year span of marriage also.

Now if he owned a house, prior to marriage, and she fixed the sink with her own money.. then she would have a 50/50 claim on it.

Now if he owned a buisness and she worked in the buisness for FREE, no salary, then she would have a 50/50 claim on it.

Anything that she does, to up the value of his property, makes her a co-owner.

Now if he inherits property.. it is his 100%. If he sells the property.. then it becomes community property.

Inherited property in the US is 100% yours untill you change the form in which it was will-ed to you.

Edited by LaReina
Posted

http://www.divorcesource.com/info/divorcel...eq/states.shtml

This link shows all the states not that I counted.. and it tells you the residency requirements for each of the states..

I clicked on a few and they all said the same thing.. no residency met, no divorce will be heard.

So.. sure she may have paid money to some online lawyer who would have billed her and after 6 months, would have told her.. she needs to be in the state to file.

And like the OP said, she would not have had a way to reach there, , no way to support herself.. no possible visa granted.. so .. case closed.

Plus I am willing to bet if she went to the embassy and said she needed to go to the US for 3-6 months to establish residency so as to divorce her husband whom she married in thailand, so that she could lay claim on to properties he may have already in the US, they would not give her the visa.

Posted (edited)

I find this US 'residencey' thing a bit odd - not that I am saying it is not correct.

But are you saying for example that a formily registered child of a US Citizen living overseas and below the age of majority is denied representation of its rights in the divorce of its parents because the child is not resident in the US?

That would be very odd (Particularly if one of the parents (who stood to loose financially by the child's rights being heard in court) acted to deny the child its rights.

It certainly is not true in the UK - Under English and Scottish law the court has jurisdiction if any person in the marriage or any asset of the marriage is domiciled in the UK. There is not even a need to attend court in person.

Edited by GuestHouse
Posted
I find this US 'residencey' thing a bit odd - not that I am saying it is not correct.

But are you saying for example that a formily registered child of a US Citizen living overseas and below the age of majority is denied representation of its rights in the divorce of its parents because the child is not resident in the US?

That would be very odd (Particularly if one of the parents (who stood to loose financially by the child's rights being heard in court) acted to deny the child its rights.

It certainly is not true in the UK - Under English and Scottish law the court has jurisdiction if any person in the marriage or any asset of the marriage is domiciled in the UK. There is not even a need to attend court in person.

Guesthouse...................................

Read the post from the start. No one has ever mentioned a child. If a child was in the middle of a divorce then the divorce takes a different turn.

As I stated before. Married in Thailand ---divorce in Thailand. No way can the X obtain what is in America. There is no way the Embassy is going to grant a visa for here to stay in the states for 6 months to get the guys money that he worked all of his life to save.

What is done in the UK is the UK-s problem and I feel sorry for the guys. But, that is life.

I am talking about an American married in Thailand and divorced in Thailand.

Posted
Read the post from the start. No one has ever mentioned a child. If a child was in the middle of a divorce then the divorce takes a different turn.

Now you've got me really confused.

Are you saying that the US Embassy would deny a visa to the wife of a US Citizen seeking to enter the US in order to obtain her rights in a divorce before a US Court, but things would be different if she had a child?

How does the child obtain his/her rights if the mother is denied hers?

Posted

Ummm .... I have had a divorce from a Thai wife in Thailand. And have two Thai daughters. Maybe because mine was not contested it was simple matter of going to an Amphur's office, declaring our intention, waiving any claims upon each other and within an hour we each had a copy of the divorce certificate. The issue of UK's involvement was avoided by not registering the divorce with the Embassy as it felt that that my daughter's dual passports might have been affected. I think that was a false worry but so be it.

Posted
I find this US 'residencey' thing a bit odd - not that I am saying it is not correct.

But are you saying for example that a formily registered child of a US Citizen living overseas and below the age of majority is denied representation of its rights in the divorce of its parents because the child is not resident in the US?

A child is a TOTALLY different ball game, but is not relevant in the divorce between two people. You still have to establish residency.

Now, if a divorce is granted in another country, the spouse can always go to the US, and file for child support. In which case, the mans assets will be looked at in TOTAL and monies will be granted to the CHILD and not the SPOUSE.

But then again, she may be able to file for child support from her own country without having to go to the US. That I am not 100% sure. Though the court may want to physically see the kid.

But being that the spouse is care taker for the child, then she gets the money by default.

So you are mixing chilld welfare/ support with divorce. Two different issues.

And in the case of death, if the parent with the money does not indicate how the child (assuming the child is a minor) is going to for the child(monitarily), then any child, even one out of wedlock, but proven by paternity, inherits property. If the man has re-married, then the child gets a 50/50 split with the new spouse. No spouse and the child gets it all.

So basically if you have kids, write a will and make provisions for them. And if the state has to hire an attorney to act in the best interests of the child, you can rest assured, the kid will inherit very little after the lawyer takes his fees.

Now I know this applies to some states, not sure about all 50.

Posted
Are you saying that the US Embassy would deny a visa to the wife of a US Citizen seeking to enter the US in order to obtain her rights in a divorce before a US Court, but things would be different if she had a child?

In reality the mother has no legal rights in the US. Just does not. Even if her child was living in the US as a minor, she could not go to the embassy and demand a visa to visit the child. When the child is 18 the child can then legaly apply for the parent to live and what not in the US.

There was a case in the 90's, an african woman, with american born kids (girls). Her husband wanted her gone, back to her country. She didn't want to leave and she did not have a green card (for some odd reason). She said she was the caretaker of the kids, and the govt said, then you can TAKE THE KIDS with you.

She responded that if the children, american citizens, returned to her native country, they would be circumcised. Because of the claim (and a spot on 60 minutes or was it 20/20) and the national attention it drew and all the womens organizations up in arms, she was allowed to remain in the country.

Posted
Read the post from the start. No one has ever mentioned a child. If a child was in the middle of a divorce then the divorce takes a different turn.

Now you've got me really confused.

Are you saying that the US Embassy would deny a visa to the wife of a US Citizen seeking to enter the US in order to obtain her rights in a divorce before a US Court, but things would be different if she had a child?

How does the child obtain his/her rights if the mother is denied hers?

How can you be confused?????? There was no mention of a child in the divorce. Plan and simply.

The Embassy cannot and would not allow a women to obtain a visa just for a divorce. We are not talking about a child. She has no rights in a US Court for a divorce unless she is living in the US.

I will say again, Living in Thailand, married in Thailand and now divorced in Thailand. She signed the papers and has no rights to come to the US to seek anything. Case closed. NO child was brought into this world.

To answer you question about a child. I have no idea. Didn't have any. Just me and her and now it's just me.

Posted
"What the farang has in his country is not our concern" - what about bank accounts that are accessed in thailand?

Reference to bank account: If the farang was smart and knowing he was going to get a divorce then he would not transfer anymore funds to Thailand.

No money in the account for the courts to be accessed etc.

The smarter you are the safer you are.

Posted

I need to correct my pension and 401K statements.

"Accrued or vested retirement benefits earned during the marriage are community property. Therefore, they are subject to division in a dissolution action, and each spouse is entitled to half. The retirement benefits which are subject to this community property application include military pensions, veterans educational benefits, ERISA funds, IRAs, Keoghs, Employee Stock Option Plans (ESOPS), 401K plans, etc.

Certain retirement benefits are not considered community property. They include railroad retirement benefits, social security payments, compensation for military injuries, and worker's compensation disability awards."

However, the amount given can vary based on if the state is not a community property state. In which case length of marriage may be taken into consideration. It is not a flat out 10 yr deal like Social Security.

Posted (edited)

Not quite the same but maybe useful to know.

I'm helping a Thai lady who was abandoned with her son back in the UK. Her husband believes she can't do anything. Can't divorce him, can't make a claim over the child because their marriage took place in Thailand and the child was born there, and neither the marriage or child was registered at the BE. However, because she lived in the UK for nearly 2 years she does have a claim. She is entitled to half of everything the man has, property etc. And although the CSA can't get involved, through the divorce court they will force him to pay child maintainance.

Thanks to GuestHouse for pointing me in the right direction for her.

Edited by TommyGun
Posted

I don't understand why you are so eager to do away with what little protection you have in place, to protect you from getting fleeced, by the greed of women who will not or are incapable of supporting themselves.Who expect some guy to take care of their needs for the rest of their lives,to acquire property and money which they themselves have not worked for.All because they entered willingly into a relationship which later didn't work out.Men with this belief I'm sure need some sort of approval which only an incompetent would give.

Let me further assure you that that no court in the USA would allow a women custody of a child(an American citizen if the father is American) in order to reside in a 3rd world country,not even if she claims to have a good job.In which case she wouldn't need to be in front of a US. court trying to milk her husband.She would most likely loose custody that very day.

The 10 years of marriage in order to qualify for retirement benefits was put there as protection for most males who are known to let the wrong head do their thinking for them,a common mistake understood by lawmakers, who also seem to have had the same problem from time to time.A gold digger shield.

In the event any of the great humanitarians with exceedingly high moral character,with no concern of self preservation,a truly pure life form,should encounter disharmony with your significant other.Please, by all means give away all your worldly possessions and free yourself of that burden.I'm sure that someone will give you 10 Baht to start a new thread on the forum to tell us about it.Of course if your thrown out of the country for being broke,you'll be relieved to know you can use a computer for free at any public library in the states,even without residency.

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Topics

  • Latest posts...

    1. 178

      Trump's 'huge lie' shows 'he’s taking everyone for an idiot': analysis

    2. 5

      Renew Thai DL on METV (Now that Embassy no longer gives POR)

    3. 0

      U.S. Senators Introduce Legislation to Counter UN Actions Against Israel

    4. 0

      Essex Police Under Scrutiny for Domestic Abuse Failures Amid Investigation of Allison Pears

    5. 0

      Accusations of Hypocrisy as Private Jet use Doubles Travelling to Cop29

    6. 0

      Council Tax Bills to Increase by Over £100 in April Amid Cap Freeze

    7. 0

      Elon Musk Embraces New Role as the ‘George Soros of the Right’ Alongside Trump

  • Popular in The Pub


×
×
  • Create New...