50 minutes ago, Baba Naba said:

If it was a replacement deed, then it was not forged, just duplicated and it was a legal document.  

Am I missing something?

Yes. He was duplicating it fraudulently. That's illegal, yes?

47 minutes ago, Thaindrew said:

Presumably the new deed was only in his name hence he could sell the land, so he fraudulently removed the other “owner”

How could the new deeds be in the name of the foreigner. Isn't the legal owner the company?

33 minutes ago, ronnie50 said:

It gets worse than that. If married (to a Thai) and your spouse runs up huge credit card debts or bank loans (with or without your knowledge), the creditors can come after you to recover 100% of the debts if she won't/can't pay. Like so many things here, what should just be a civil court matter, can also become a criminal matter. 

I think they threaten but what can they really do? If they put you in jail then you're really not going to pay your debts. My wife has credit card debit and she's always worried about the summons and got me to pay a couple times (I was pissed). I wasn't prepared to split over debts but all things being equal you should always avoid the women with debt.

So this guy sold the business and kept 100% of the profit even though we want' the full owner? That's a good question, if you setup one of these nominee businesses don't you lose 50% of the money when it comes time to sell? That's a deal breaker right there for me.

1 hour ago, bradiston said:

Whoever the alleged buyer was, was also being deceived. He wouldn't have been able to sell the land without the authorisation of the company directors. All of them. And the company secretary.

It does raise questions as to how he managed to sell the land on his own without all other signatories being present.

Another Wacko dude, who have no clue about business law in Thailand.

1 hour ago, dpeti73 said:

This happening when you buy something here for 100% price but you can own only 49% and the relationship going wrong

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the Thai person who usually owns the 51%

1 hour ago, Baba Naba said:

If it was a replacement deed, then it was not forged, just duplicated and it was a legal document.  

Am I missing something?

The police document (loss or theft) used to obtain the ‘replacement’ deed was forged. There may also have been something shady going on at the Land Office when the deed was transferred to the new owner.The Land Office can be surprisingly diligent or asleep depending on the incentive.

1 hour ago, Thingamabob said:

Good point.

You are missing that the replacement document was likely forged after the guy got his hands on it. Unlikely that he could sell anything without proof of majority ownership. The original was probably kept safe by his wife. This presumes that this was the typical 51-49 split with the Thai person having majority. He likely only had to change those numbers, which would generally be a simple thing.

You'd need to be a complete moron to return here after doing that hope he rots in the Hilton. 

54 minutes ago, cheerz said:

Agreed 100%

Agreed, agree,  but why I did not have this advice 23 yrs ago

1 hour ago, Baba Naba said:

If it was a replacement deed, then it was not forged, just duplicated and it was a legal document.  

Am I missing something?

I would guess is was a duplicate so he could sell with out the wife finding out, however being a partner and shareholder she would have to co-sign for it to be legit. Perhaps he was trying to scam both and flee with the money. 

3 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

I would guess is was a duplicate so he could sell with out the wife finding out, however being a partner and shareholder she would have to co-sign for it to be legit. Perhaps he was trying to scam both and flee with the money. 

 

Perhaps(almost definitely) it was all his money in the first place. He had already flown. He was returning.

As you folks may know, it is equally often that the Thai wife steals everything from the gullible and trusting husband, google Ian Rance to get the story of one guy. He fought back with lawsuits and got himself into quicksand, yet he ultimately prevailed with an excellent Thai law firm (maybe a few brown envelopes) But he went through emotional heII, with his passport confiscated etc. Fortunately she didn't take everything and had the money to pursue this through Thai courts. 

1 hour ago, Issanraider said:

Allegedly he forged her signature on documents to obtain a duplicate title deed when the original deed had not been lost.

He then allegedly forged her signature in order to sell the company in who’s name the title was registered.

 

Show me where it says any of that in the news source. 

8 minutes ago, Jonathan Swift said:

As you folks may know, it is equally often that the Thai wife steals everything from the gullible and trusting husband,

 

And I have such a feeling that this is the case here.

Pretty sure the property was paid for by the foreigner, but he was forced to get a duplicate, because he didn't have access to the title deed.

I can very well imagine why

14 minutes ago, Centigrade32 said:

 

Perhaps(almost definitely) it was all his money in the first place. He had already flown. He was returning.

I must have misread.

2 hours ago, Dave0206 said:

She probably found out when she went to sell it whilst he was out of the country. She thought she was fly but he was 2 fly.

 

But not fly enough to avoid coming back... 

Would be interesting to know who put up the initial 20m. Baht

2 hours ago, Dave0206 said:

She probably found out when she went to sell it whilst he was out of the country. She thought she was fly but he was 2 fly.

Not "probably", possibly!

This guy looks young and probably has a good future ahead of him.Nice sleight of hand unfortunately didn't pay off this time.Don't let it put you off kiddo.

 

2 hours ago, Baba Naba said:

If it was a replacement deed, then it was not forged, just duplicated and it was a legal document.  

Am I missing something?

Hmm!..how about Fraud just for starters.

Love hath no fury like a woman scorned!

Who initially paid for the land and why would they need 20 million worth for headquarters unless it was a development.

Says he sold company shares so are they classing the land as shares ? 

3 hours ago, dpeti73 said:

This happening when you buy something here for 100% price but you can own only 49% and the relationship going wrong

 

like non-thais are setup from day 1 to be scammed out of at least half

3 hours ago, Samh said:

I was told that Thais are not allowed to be sleeping partners in a business, ie a 51% share holder has to put in 51% of the initial investment. My guess the Thai put up nothing. Does that make the setting up of the company by the Thai illegal?

That's right, they can't just be a 'nominee', not legally.

2 hours ago, ruddick said:

Couldn't agree more with the above. I am also speaking from painful and costly experience.

I never seen my 49%. Another life lesson learned. 😀😃

Never bought anything or owned anything here as we foreigner do not have the rights and I do not trust anyone of them when it comes to money and assets. Looking for disaster to happen sooner than you can blink by scammer

3 hours ago, Baba Naba said:

If it was a replacement deed, then it was not forged, just duplicated and it was a legal document.  

Am I missing something?

........and instructing officials to record false information in official documents.?

Authorities were tipped off about his arrival Omg 😲 .

Who on earth could that be ?

1 hour ago, CallumWK said:

 

 

Pretty sure the property was paid for by the foreigner,

 

He seemed to be a bit young to have the odd £465,000 kicking around.