@glegolo18 Since she filed bankruptcy, then she's probably aware of the 'prescription period' (statue of limitations) to collect the debt.

You may want to wait till after the date to marry and or have any joint accounts, assets in her name. Since she did file bankruptcy, then her debt was 1M+. Depending on type of contract, expiration of prescription period differs, 2-5-10 yrs.

https://www.google.com/search?q=what%27s+the+statue+of+limitations+for+debt+collection+thailand&oq=what%27s+the+statue+of+limitations+for+debt+collection+thailand&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCjE4MjY1ajBqMTWoAgiwAgHxBUkBwJ41GUy8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

40 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Since she filed bankruptcy, then she's probably aware of the 'prescription period' (statue of limitations) to collect the debt.

You may want to wait till after the date to marry and or have any joint accounts, assets in her name. Since she did file bankruptcy, then her debt was 1M+. Depending on type of contract, expiration of prescription period differs, 2-5-10 yrs.

https://www.google.com/search?q=what%27s+the+statue+of+limitations+for+debt+collection+thailand&oq=what%27s+the+statue+of+limitations+for+debt+collection+thailand&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCjE4MjY1ajBqMTWoAgiwAgHxBUkBwJ41GUy8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

for giving advice to others on a thread, asking for advice. Too funny.

Some more free advice, seek help, as you're obsessing over me, and has to be as unhealthy as those obsessing over DJT.

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

for giving advice to others on a thread, asking for advice. Too funny.

Some more free advice, seek help, as you're obsessing over me, and has to be as unhealthy as those obsessing over DJT.

Clearly your post deserved a thumbs down. 😆

2 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Clearly your post deserved a thumbs down. 😆

I even speak from experience, as wife had a 'collector' issue with a motorbike loan, jointly signed with her ex. Researched it, and harassment period had already passed.

Next time they called, she pointed that out to them, that they have no legal right to pursue repayment of any balance, so stop wasting your time. And they did.

Thumbs downs are crack up, especially when it's not about an opinion or bad advice. Mental illness is ripe on AN.

Thai law is one thing, and loan sharks are another.

Still, you are not responsible for your wife’s earlier debts unless you were foolish enough to sign something making yourself jointly liable.

For example, if you own an apartment in your own name, marriage alone does not make her a coowner.

Marrying someone who is in bankruptcy is simply asking for troubles. So many fish in the sea, don't marry one that the sharks are circling. They'll eat you too.

A lot of good advice about seeking help from lawyer.

Some laws, statues, etc can be written vaguely and interpreted differently by different judges or districts.

I agree, what's the rush. Wait until things are settled and finalized. Have her sign prenup any other documents to protect your assets and then get married.

Marry away...but never, ever, sign as a guarantor on ANYTHING, in this case.

Otherwise...

If he marries a woman like this, 100% every loan shark in a 100 mile radius will be forming a disorganised queue to her house, married to a farang offer what ever she wants, he will pay, this man should be running away as fast as his honda click will go

57 minutes ago, howerde said:

If he marries a woman like this, 100% every loan shark in a 100 mile radius will be forming a disorganised queue to her house, married to a farang offer what ever she wants, he will pay, this man should be running away as fast as his honda click will go

You can't bankruptcy to avoid 'loan sharks', so assuming her debt was with legal banks & loan agencies. Smart move on her part.

Safe to marry her, just don't put her name on any assets afterwards.

15 hours ago, glegolo18 said:

Hi guys,

I have a friend whos wife (villiage-marriage) went into bankrupcy for a year ago. Now

he is really scared to marry this wife for real at Amphue. Reason being that he is scared

that Thailand will take money from his pension to cover for the ladies bankrupcy??

Do anyone of you guys have any knowledge of this??

Appreciate all answers of course.

Glegolo

Don't EVER EVER EVER come to a public forum like this for legal or medical or any other kind of serious professional advice. You need to talk to a Thai lawyer. End of story.

5 minutes ago, Jonathan Swift said:

Don't EVER EVER EVER come to a public forum like this for legal or medical or any other kind of serious professional advice. You need to talk to a Thai lawyer. End of story.

Or simply do a wee bit of research, to find out how things work, and what to do.

Apparently she has done just that, filed bankruptcy, so now just a waiting game, then she can start to rebuild her credit, if wanting. She's smarter than he gives her credit for.

The simple fact she already filed bankruptcy is a clue she knows what she's doing.

Do agree, asking idiots for help on AN is useless. 40+ replies, and 35+ replies nothing but Thai bashing. At least nobody blamed it on DJT.

It would be really foolish to mary a woman going bankrupt in the west. So as a falang in Thailand, it could be even worse for the guy.

Never buy in Thailand when it comes to women. Only rent. 🤣

16 hours ago, BilllyGOAT said:

In that case, she must clearly be "special" and "different".

Two of the main reasons foreigners often choose one Thai girl over another.

two of the main reasons that anybody chooses one girl over another REGARDLESS of nationality

On 4/22/2026 at 9:49 AM, BritManToo said:

5 years with her owning no property, vehicle or bank account then gone.

My wife had the same problem when I married her.

It's no big deal, and my wife got a mortgage loan 2 months after the time expired.

She'll get a letter every year asking for the money, but that's it.

This bloke would want to find out the full story about why his blushing bankrupt bride got herself in this mess. If she has a gambling problem for example then he should forget about it straight away because she would want a big chunk of poor old Pensioner Pete's pension and that's beside any liability he may have from her existing debts.

Perhaps it is his lucky day to say no to marriage 🤔

1 hour ago, wavodavo said:

This bloke would want to find out the full story about why his blushing bankrupt bride got herself in this mess. If she has a gambling problem for example then he should forget about it straight away because she would want a big chunk of poor old Pensioner Pete's pension and that's beside any liability he may have from her existing debts.

It's always car loans, or cosigning for a car loan.

Gains and losses existing before marriage never count from marriage. Secondly there is no enforcement abroad, Thai courts are barely even recognized unless it is about a serious murder case. Last but not least if it is obviously proven to be one partners doing, it can be resolved within Thai law system itself for domestic issues too.

Unlike al the cowboy stories out there, plenty of guys even seized back the money after forced land sales, when girlfriends try to run off with it within 1-2 years after getting it from them. The law system itself here is as good as it is in the west, it is just the enforcement part, if depending on that end, that is mostly corrupt and non existent only. E.g. you win a case but to the enforcement of a verdict depending on corrupt or lazy civil workers that not do their job. Then again, knowing it works like that, you just need to play the same and bid high.

I always go to the forums for my legal advice. Medical advice too for that matter. 😆😂😆

5 minutes ago, Front Row said:

I always go to the forums for my legal advice. Medical advice too for that matter. 😆😂😆

The only sane answer we can give, is to leave!

Got one not so far from me, where wife had many husbands and kids before, used drugs, drinking with friends, fighting, and there is always trouble, but he do not give up on her or her kids. Amazing, so good luck.

As long there is no kids involved, there is no reason to stay, and by that meaning, your own bloodline.

Not a lawyer but have carefully read Thai marital property law.

Debts incurred by either spouse prior to marriage are not the legal responsibility of the other spouse.

Debts incurred by either spouse during the marriage are the legal responsibility of both spouses PROVIDED the debt was incurred with the knowledge of both parties AND the debt was incurred for the benefit of the household, and not just for the benefit of one party.

You can research this for yourself in the Thai civil law code under the definitions of what constitutes marital property vs what constitutes individually owned property.

Well he is not married legally then, so no problem?

ANd if marry, all brought in from pre marriage still belongs to the person, who owns it.

SO would be the same with debts. It is purely on woman's name. Pre mariage.

4 hours ago, Gecko123 said:

Not a lawyer but have carefully read Thai marital property law.

Debts incurred by either spouse prior to marriage are not the legal responsibility of the other spouse.

Debts incurred by either spouse during the marriage are the legal responsibility of both spouses PROVIDED the debt was incurred with the knowledge of both parties AND the debt was incurred for the benefit of the household, and not just for the benefit of one party.

You can research this for yourself in the Thai civil law code under the definitions of what constitutes marital property vs what constitutes individually owned property.

I would simply put it this way. The law in Thailand might say one thing, but proper enforcement is often inconsistent. In practice, that matters more than what is written on paper.

If you marry someone who has unresolved legal issues involving unpaid debts, there is a real risk that creditors could try to involve you. Even if you are not legally responsible, you may still end up dealing with disputes, pressure, or legal hassle and costs just to prove you have no personal liability in the situation.

That kind of stress and potential cost is avoidable. From a practical standpoint, the safest option is to just step away and look for a better situation.

I'm pretty sure anything that happened before the wedding is not joint. Anything she does after the wedding, they will be both responsible for.

Same for owned assets. Some farangs are scared of losing their house back home etc. – if they bought it before they married their Thai wife, then she has no right over it as far as I know. If they bought a house together in Thailand then it's 50/50, and that works in favour of the farang as I have heard of cases where assets were liquidated after divorce and the Thai courts were very fair: married = 50/50 even if one spouse is foreign.

On 4/21/2026 at 5:02 PM, BilllyGOAT said:

Who wouldn’t jump at the chance to marry someone who’s filed for bankruptcy? Clearly a flawless track record with money, what could possibly go wrong down the line? Honestly, sounds like top tier material.

Depends on what is meant exactly by 'bankruptcy'. Did she own a company which went into liquidation due to external economic circumstances? Or is it more a case of being irresponsible with money? Both very different things.

Huge difference if there are loan sharks involved or not.

I would ask the wife (if you can trust her) or lawyer to trace the debt to make sure there are no loans from shady characters involved first. But what do I know? Never been in such a situation.

35 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

I'm pretty sure anything that happened before the wedding is not joint. Anything she does after the wedding, they will be both responsible for.

Same for owned assets. Some farangs are scared of losing their house back home etc. – if they bought it before they married their Thai wife, then she has no right over it as far as I know. If they bought a house together in Thailand then it's 50/50, and that works in favour of the farang as I have heard of cases where assets were liquidated after divorce and the Thai courts were very fair: married = 50/50 even if one spouse is foreign.

It isn’t correct, legally speaking, that everything purchased during the marriage automatically gets split 50/50.

Thai law says that everything that is acquired during the marriage is marital property and should be split 50/50, but there are huge caveats to this which are spelled out in the definition of what constitutes individually owned property.

The verb used in the definition of marital property in the Thai law is ได้ which from a legal standpoint is extremely imprecise as it translates to “gets” or “obtains”. But there is a second definition in the law that defines what non marital or individually owned property is. That definition states that all property one party owned prior to the marriage is owned by that party AND if that property is used to purchase other property during the marriage, then that newly purchased property remains individual property and does not suddenly become marital property and have to be split 50/50!!!

For example if a spouse, let’s say a retired foreign man, uses savings he accrued before marriage to purchase property during the marriage then that newly purchased property, according to Thai marital property law remains individual property of the foreign man NOT marital property.

I am well aware that Thai land law which prohibits ownership of land by foreigners can complicate a foreigner’s attempt in the event of divorce to recover these funds on the grounds that it is his personal property in the event of divorce. My only point in taking the time to explain this is that the so often-repeated bromide that “everything purchased during the marriage automatically has to be split 50/50” is a complete misunderstanding of how the law works.

This misunderstanding which, by the way, is shared by many , many Thai lawyers stems from the fact that there are two definitions: what is marital property and what is individual property. If you read just the definition of marital property which uses the highly imprecise wording that everything you “get” or “obtain” during the marriage is marital property and don’t bother to read the second definition of what constitutes individually owned property, you will fail to understand that property you owned before the marriage which is used to purchase other property during the marriage doesn’t magically become co-owned by the spouse.

If anyone is rolling their eyes and thinks this explanation is all wet consider the following hypothetical example. Suppose Taksin remarried and the day after remarrying he purchased a $500 million telecom company. Do you think that half of that newly purchased company would automatically becomes half owned by the new spouse the day after Taksin purchased it just because the purchase was completed after the wedding? The answer is: of course not.

34 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

It isn’t correct, legally speaking, that everything purchased during the marriage automatically gets split 50/50.

Thai law says that everything that is acquired during the marriage is marital property and should be split 50/50, but there are huge caveats to this which are spelled out in the definition of what constitutes individually owned property.

The verb used in the definition of marital property in the Thai law is ได้ which from a legal standpoint is extremely imprecise as it translates to “gets” or “obtains”. But there is a second definition in the law that defines what non marital or individually owned property is. That definition states that all property one party owned prior to the marriage is owned by that party AND if that property is used to purchase other property during the marriage, then that newly purchased property remains individual property and does not suddenly become marital property and have to be split 50/50!!!

For example if a spouse, let’s say a retired foreign man, uses savings he accrued before marriage to purchase property during the marriage then that newly purchased property, according to Thai marital property law remains individual property of the foreign man NOT marital property.

I am well aware that Thai land law which prohibits ownership of land by foreigners can complicate a foreigner’s attempt in the event of divorce to recover these funds on the grounds that it is his personal property in the event of divorce. My only point in taking the time to explain this is that the so often-repeated bromide that “everything purchased during the marriage automatically has to be split 50/50” is a complete misunderstanding of how the law works.

This misunderstanding which, by the way, is shared by many , many Thai lawyers stems from the fact that there are two definitions: what is marital property and what is individual property. If you read just the definition of marital property which uses the highly imprecise wording that everything you “get” or “obtain” during the marriage is marital property and don’t bother to read the second definition of what constitutes individually owned property, you will fail to understand that property you owned before the marriage which is used to purchase other property during the marriage doesn’t magically become co-owned by the spouse.

If anyone is rolling their eyes and thinks this explanation is all wet consider the following hypothetical example. Suppose Taksin remarried and the day after remarrying he purchased a $500 million telecom company. Do you think that half of that newly purchased company would automatically becomes half owned by the new spouse the day after Taksin purchased it just because the purchase was completed after the wedding? The answer is: of course not.

Interesting, thank you.

If I follow you correctly, in the case of a foreigner who sells his house back home to buy a house in Thailand with his Thai wife: as the money used to buy the Thai home comes from the sale proceeds of pre-owned property, then this should also enter this category of individual property?

It would probably take a competent and knowledgeable lawyer on the matter to preemptively lay it all out in rock solid legal terms in order for this Individual Property clause to be actionable in case of a divorce… but it's definitely good to know.

19 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

Interesting, thank you.

If I follow you correctly, in the case of a foreigner who sells his house back home to buy a house in Thailand with his Thai wife: as the money used to buy the Thai home comes from the sale proceeds of pre-owned property, then this should also enter this category of individual property?

It would probably take a competent and knowledgeable lawyer on the matter to preemptively lay it all out in rock solid legal terms in order for this Individual Property clause to be actionable in case of a divorce… but it's definitely good to know.

The example you give above would be an example of individually owned property. The law states that there is a presumption that all property acquired during the marriage is marital property, so the burden of proof that the property is individually owned and not marital property rests with whoever is making the claim. Presumably, not that difficult to prove with banking records.

On 4/21/2026 at 11:39 PM, scubascuba3 said:

❌Incorrect. My lawyer friend uses AI all the time, easiest way to check laws and cases

Fire your lawer immediately, or your "friend"- AI in Thailand is under-deveopped" at this time. Lingustically and otherwise.

Save cost: Use the same Ai as your "lawer" does.😃

Let us know how everything turned out-