The 30+30+30 leasing contacts in Phuket is over

[norsurin]

The high court in Phuket have ruled that the 30+30+30 year leasing is not legal.That means that there are many owners who now dont have a legal contract there and their actually not have a rigth to stay there anymore.This is a scam that property agents have lured the investors with for decades.Im not surprised at all.

[treetops]

Not the first time.

 

https://www.thephuketnews.com/phuket-law-long-term-leases-unenforceable-again-62140.php#b4Cx7UwMzhdLkiDy.97

[norsurin]

11 minutes ago, treetops said:

Not the first time.

 

Link from 2017

According to mr Simon who is a spaltist in Phuket news this just happened few days ago.Thats all I know so far 

[treetops]

Sorry, who is Mr. Simon and what's a spaltist?

 

PS.  I've edited the link as it didn't appear to be showing.  Lots of other historical cases if you look for them.

[NickyLouie]

So existing contracts are not grandfathered in ?

 

Leases were 'more legal' than ownership through a company.

 

[norsurin]

 

SIMON CAUSTON IS THE FOUNDER OF CITADEL PHUKET AND THE WRITER FOR THE NEWSLETTER THE PHUKET PERIODICAL.

TWITTER:@ simoncauston

He have this information.

[simon43]

30+30+30 leases were NEVER legal!!  They were just another 'con' by Thai lawyers on naive foreigners 🙂

[norsurin]

Just now, simon43 said:

30+30+30 leases were NEVER legal!!  They were just another 'con' by Thai lawyers on naive foreigners 🙂

Rigth

[ronnie50]

I read the article. It said the court couldn't find any 'precedence' for forcing the freeholders to renew the leases. Here's my question - when did Thailand's judiciary ever refer to precedence? It doesn't follow English Common Law's rules of precedence (the system used by UK, US (yes US  has always followed the system of English Common Law), Canada and various other countries.

 

Of course this isn't a 'criminal' case - it's a civil case. A Thai lawyer can better explain this - but my understanding is Thailand's judiciary can rule any way they want, regardless of previous similar rulings. Maybe in civil cases too?

 

In any case, it was always a naive notion to believe the 30/30/30 system was lawful.

[Dan O]

56 minutes ago, norsurin said:

The high court in Phuket have ruled that the 30+30+30 year leasing is not legal.That means that there are many owners who now dont have a legal contract there and their actually not have a rigth to stay there anymore.This is a scam that property agents have lured the investors with for decades.Im not surprised at all.

It wasn't legal before this either and hasn't been for quite some time. Ranks right up there with starting a business to try and buy a house, not legal in 99.9 % of the cases

[ronnie50]

3 minutes ago, Dan O said:

It wasn't legal before this either and hasn't been for quite some time. Ranks right up there with starting a business to try and buy a house, not legal in 99.9 % of the cases

You gotta empathize with people who leased thinking they'd be able to pass on the lease when they passed themselves, and at least they didn't try to form a company with Thai nominees to purchase a house with land. I wonder what effect this ruling in Phuket will have on the rest of the country? Does it need to be challenged in each province?

[treetops]

Just now, ronnie50 said:

You gotta empathize with people who leased thinking they'd be able to pass on the lease when they passed themselves, and at least they didn't try to form a company with Thai nominees to purchase a house with land. I wonder what effect this ruling in Phuket will have on the rest of the country? Does it need to be challenged in each province?

 

When I was looking for the source of the OP I came across one link that mentioned a Supreme Court ruling (in Bangkok?) which might indicate it's country wide.

[Dan O]

3 minutes ago, ronnie50 said:

You gotta empathize with people who leased thinking they'd be able to pass on the lease when they passed themselves, and at least they didn't try to form a company with Thai nominees to purchase a house with land. I wonder what effect this ruling in Phuket will have on the rest of the country? Does it need to be challenged in each province?

Its not legal so challenge all you want it won't stand

[norsurin]

2 minutes ago, treetops said:

 

When I was looking for the source of the OP I came across one link that mentioned a Supreme Court ruling (in Bangkok?) which might indicate it's country wide.

If its nationwide its terrible for the people who get infected by this.I build a house in surin about 20 years ago.When we divorced i just gave it to my exwife.We have 2 kids together but they all live in my country.I go visit my kids grandparents everytime im in Thailand.My exwife and her new husband have build a new house and her parents live in the house i build.Not a big moneyloss for me.I see some houses in surin that costs millions of baht and I just wish them good luck.I will not invest anything in Thailand again.U cant trust this country at all.When im there i renting the time i stay and give the keys when i check out. No headache after i left.

[ronnie50]

7 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Its not legal so challenge all you want it won't stand

I know. I mean is the Phuket ruling/clarfication country-wide? Or could some developer try to say 'oh, that was just phuket.'?

[ronnie50]

13 minutes ago, treetops said:

 

When I was looking for the source of the OP I came across one link that mentioned a Supreme Court ruling (in Bangkok?) which might indicate it's country wide.

Yes, thanks. OK must be nationwide legal clarification then. They need to go after the fake company nominees next - I doubt they will though, or maybe they will ask for 'tea money' to ignore each home 'owner' .

[NativeBob]

How cute!
So let me get this straight - Mr.A. bought some property in Phuket being promised 90 years of lease by real estate company's manager/owner. 

Later he found that deal was "fake" a.k.a. "not completely correct"

So Mr.A. feels kinda "fooled" and "upset" and later he decides to cancel the deal. 

Real estate agency got 2-3%, owner 95%, the rest went into expenses.

Now, Mr.A. requests to annul the deal and his money back, but most of the money gone.

What options left to him?

1. Bring crooked agency to the court? Useless

2. Threaten the owner? Hm. Tough job

3. Bite the bullet and admit his fault?

4. Cry to every forum and newsgroups on Reddit about TH?

5. Find some farang ding-dong and sell the property to him? <<<< best choice, imno. 

 

Any other options?

[norsurin]

20 minutes ago, NativeBob said:

How cute!
So let me get this straight - Mr.A. bought some property in Phuket being promised 90 years of lease by real estate company's manager/owner. 

Later he found that deal was "fake" a.k.a. "not completely correct"

So Mr.A. feels kinda "fooled" and "upset" and later he decides to cancel the deal. 

Real estate agency got 2-3%, owner 95%, the rest went into expenses.

Now, Mr.A. requests to annul the deal and his money back, but most of the money gone.

What options left to him?

1. Bring crooked agency to the court? Useless

2. Threaten the owner? Hm. Tough job

3. Bite the bullet and admit his fault?

4. Cry to every forum and newsgroups on Reddit about TH?

5. Find some farang ding-dong and sell the property to him? <<<< best choice, imno. 

 

Any other options?

I would go for #5 for sure.First i would lure the foreigner to buy it from me using my mistress who "love him to much"and after just run away.

[Dan O]

10 hours ago, ronnie50 said:

I know. I mean is the Phuket ruling/clarfication country-wide? Or could some developer try to say 'oh, that was just phuket.'?

Nope its the same law everywhere and always has been. Thailand's judicial system doesn't use precedence in legal rulings. They can argue for precedence but its not like western law

[ChipButty]

As far as I am aware the land office in Phuket will not register a lease with 30+30+30, some dodgy builders and lawyers, I have had farangs tell me they are buying a house under them terms, I have to break the bad news to them. bring the builder and the lawyer here and tell me to my face, 

[norsurin]

6 hours ago, ChipButty said:

As far as I am aware the land office in Phuket will not register a lease with 30+30+30, some dodgy builders and lawyers, I have had farangs tell me they are buying a house under them terms, I have to break the bad news to them. bring the builder and the lawyer here and tell me to my face, 

I guess they want believe whatever u tell them.2 of my friends lost their houses in hua-hin that they believed was their property for more then 15 years Now they find out that all the papers and the ownership was a lie from the agent.They tried to take it to court but it didn't help at all.They also tried to get their money back and didn't get anything.

[NativeBob]

2 hours ago, norsurin said:

They also tried to get their money back and didn't get anything.

Never works, unless use some vicious technics. But who would decide to go ballistic? 

 

Very upset Mr.S. had to hire fellas from "The Country of Many Rivers, Seas and Oceans" for 40% + 10% advance

 

And yes, "Triple Thirty" is still the most popular BS in farang-oriented real estate market. 20% ROI and 3X30