Legal Complication

[coconutmonkey]

Hello

I cannot give specific information, but can elaborate enough to get some answers.

My friend has put money into a real estate investment. The owner of the investment plan drew a contract saying that if there was no profit in some time, then he would give the money back to my friend. The time period is not yet up, but the other investors involved in the project have all withdrawn; leaving no project, just the investment plan owner and the contract.

Therefore, is it valid for my freind to get the money back?

another explanation:

1) friend put in money to investment and signed contract: stating he would recieve profit from the project

2) He signed the contract AFTER the other investors; the project existing because the other investors held a majority in the investment and that his money would be paid back after a time period if no profit was made

3) all other investors pulled out of the project, leaving no effective project

4) the time period is not yet complete, another year to go before money can come back according to the contract

Does anyone know what would happen with the money my friend paid? Nothing in the contract states anything about if the investment went bad cause all the other investors pulled out......

[midas]

Hello

I cannot give specific information, but can elaborate enough to get some answers.

My friend has put money into a real estate investment. The owner of the investment plan drew a contract saying that if there was no profit in some time, then he would give the money back to my friend. The time period is not yet up, but the other investors involved in the project have all withdrawn; leaving no project, just the investment plan owner and the contract.

Therefore, is it valid for my freind to get the money back?

another explanation:

1) friend put in money to investment and signed contract: stating he would recieve profit from the project

2) He signed the contract AFTER the other investors; the project existing because the other investors held a majority in the investment and that his money would be paid back after a time period if no profit was made

3) all other investors pulled out of the project, leaving no effective project

4) the time period is not yet complete, another year to go before money can come back according to the contract

Does anyone know what would happen with the money my friend paid? Nothing in the contract states anything about if the investment went bad cause all the other investors pulled out......

How much reliance would you place on any advice you receive on TV to this matter when the members

don't even have any access to the documentation you are referring to? Your friend should go straight to one of the best

legal firmsin Bangkok for a meaningful response

[prefabs]

Better be a good lawyer. Some friends of mine invested in real estate near Pattaya some time back. One guy still has nothing(house or money) 2 years later, even with a stipulated completion date. Other guy even had a clause in his contract saying "if not happy, you will get your money back on **/**/07 date". Over 18 months ago, in fact. He also has nothing.

Lawyers are unable to help him, seems that contracts drawn up here are not enforceable as they are in the West. Both foreign and Thai developers are able to hide behind this loophole.

Mind you, there are some straight developers out there, just have to look around. Best advice I heard over here was from a Thai lawyer who said, "if you can't see it, can't feel it, can't walk into it, then don't buy it".

[coconutmonkey]

Better be a good lawyer. Some friends of mine invested in real estate near Pattaya some time back. One guy still has nothing(house or money) 2 years later, even with a stipulated completion date. Other guy even had a clause in his contract saying "if not happy, you will get your money back on **/**/07 date". Over 18 months ago, in fact. He also has nothing.

Lawyers are unable to help him, seems that contracts drawn up here are not enforceable as they are in the West. Both foreign and Thai developers are able to hide behind this loophole.

Mind you, there are some straight developers out there, just have to look around. Best advice I heard over here was from a Thai lawyer who said, "if you can't see it, can't feel it, can't walk into it, then don't buy it".

Cheers goys, great to get some feedback on this. He's a bit worried about it. However, the developer has been continuously emailing stating "we're ready to sign in some more investors..... the new project is coming and you'll get your money....." ... So, if nothing else, It acts a testimony for him that the developer has assured his commitement to the contract... could this be used as a type of evidence?

[midas]

Better be a good lawyer. Some friends of mine invested in real estate near Pattaya some time back. One guy still has nothing(house or money) 2 years later, even with a stipulated completion date. Other guy even had a clause in his contract saying "if not happy, you will get your money back on **/**/07 date". Over 18 months ago, in fact. He also has nothing.

Lawyers are unable to help him, seems that contracts drawn up here are not enforceable as they are in the West. Both foreign and Thai developers are able to hide behind this loophole.

Mind you, there are some straight developers out there, just have to look around. Best advice I heard over here was from a Thai lawyer who said, "if you can't see it, can't feel it, can't walk into it, then don't buy it".

Hey prefabs ! Actually you are quite right.

But I'm really intrigued by your comment because it sounds identical to my friends

situation except for my friends case it has been going on for 4-5 years

and still hasn't been resolved. And he's been to court and I have accompanied him

and I have to tell you I have no faith whatsoever in the Thai judiciary ( I'm talking about

the judges themselves !! ) They have made some very strange comments and decisions so far. They are definitely not aboveboard !

This is starting to sound like a trend for farangs

[prefabs]

One strange thing was that one of the guys got a lawyer who took him to the police station to file a criminal complaint. The police wouldn't act on it as it was only one person against another. Was advised to get additional sufferers, which he did. Now the police are taking action. Seems that one crime doesn't count, two or three might start the ball rolling.

Glad it doesn't count for murders etc.

[midas]

Wait until your friend gets involved with the court system in Thailand!

Because I accompanied my friend to court ( he was the plaintiff ) I had a very unique experience

that I'm sure not many farangs here would have witnessed.

On one of our visits, the judge let us into a private room- just my friend, the lawyers

for both sides and the judge. The defendant was not present at any of the hearings.

And then incredible as it sounds the judge said to my friend the defendant ( a developer in Pattaya )

was known to be a dangerous person if he was crossed and it would have been

in my friends best interest to settle the matter there and then.

Obviously he found himself suing a member of the Pattaya mafia !

Incredible !

He's obstinate so he will not do that but now I have absolutely zero confidence

in the integrity or impartiality of the Thai judicial system in particular when it comes to

farang vs. Thai.

Edited November 11, 2008 by midas

[monty]

Too many loopholes in Thai law.

In most cases where Thai persons owe money to Foreigners (or other Thais for that matter) they will remove everything they own onto other people (family, maids, drivers) and simply plead poverty. They might still be driven around in a Benz, but on paper it is not theirs.

Anybody recalls how rich Thaksin's maid was

In the West this would generate a big inquiry in how his family/maid ended up being so rich, and how the bloke manages to drive a Benz while being poor. Mainly by the tax people looking for missed revenue! Not so in Thailand, where these people have the lower level tax people and coppers in their pockets!

So basically these judges aren't doing much wrong, they are just following the laws, and in Thailand you simply can't make a person without money to give you back much. They will probably propose something like a monthly payback of 25% of the bloke's salary, which will amount to something like 2000 Baht. Big help on a multi million Baht debt!

[Gary A]

I don't want to elaborate too much because it's embarrassing to have been a sucker. To make a very long story short, a former Thai partner of mine and I made a contract in English. Both of us signed it with witnesses. It was left at the Thai law firm to be translated into Thai and legalized. Contracts written in English are not valid. I should add that my former Thai partner is very well connected. Several weeks went by and the contracts were not returned. When I finally became irritated and went to that Thai law firm, they denied making any contract and went so far as to say they didn't even know me. Of course the money had already changed hands. I was then threatened and I can assure the threats were real. I walked away much poorer but smarter.

[popshirt]

<snip>

Best advice I heard over here was from a Thai lawyer who said, "if you can't see it, can't feel it, can't walk into it, then don't buy it".

This is the BEST advice for purchasing a house or condo in Thailand. I bought "off plan" once and was lucky as the project was completed as promised, but I know MANY westerners who have been left holding the bag (and the bag is empty). Lawyers will take the case, but there is really no way to get the money back as all funds are hidden away or spent. The lawyers will charge enormous fees however.

[coconutmonkey]

Too many loopholes in Thai law.

In most cases where Thai persons owe money to Foreigners (or other Thais for that matter) they will remove everything they own onto other people (family, maids, drivers) and simply plead poverty. They might still be driven around in a Benz, but on paper it is not theirs.

Anybody recalls how rich Thaksin's maid was

In the West this would generate a big inquiry in how his family/maid ended up being so rich, and how the bloke manages to drive a Benz while being poor. Mainly by the tax people looking for missed revenue! Not so in Thailand, where these people have the lower level tax people and coppers in their pockets!

So basically these judges aren't doing much wrong, they are just following the laws, and in Thailand you simply can't make a person without money to give you back much. They will probably propose something like a monthly payback of 25% of the bloke's salary, which will amount to something like 2000 Baht. Big help on a multi million Baht debt!

Thanks guys, especially Monty and Gary A.... good advice and insights.

If English contracts are not valid, then how can Thai investments be taken seriously? More importantly, are English contracts valid if the developer and the investor were both of Foriegn descent, neither being Thai, but the deal was witnessed and signed by two Thais?

Would that one have a fair chance of legal support at getting money back?

[sunlife2000]

i think doing business with any thais apart from a trusting wife is just too risky full stop

[chiangmaibruce]

Contracts written in English are not valid.

Gary A. I have read your previous posts with interest but need to confirm the basis of your statement above. Was this told to you by the bent lawyers (ie. perhaps part of the scam) or have you heard this from another source? If so, where?

The reason I ask is that I have just signed a contract with a Thai company - in English only. It was not to buy or invest in anything but I would like to get your feedback on this point - and perhaps some input from others.

-CB

[midas]

Contracts written in English are not valid.

Gary A. I have read your previous posts with interest but need to confirm the basis of your statement above. Was this told to you by the bent lawyers (ie. perhaps part of the scam) or have you heard this from another source? If so, where?

The reason I ask is that I have just signed a contract with a Thai company - in English only. It was not to buy or invest in anything but I would like to get your feedback on this point - and perhaps some input from others.

-CB

Let's wait for Gary's response by my immediate reaction is

if there is a breach of the contract and the parties need to refer to the courts,

they are unlikely to go to the trouble of translating the documents into Thai just for their purposes

and anyway things can get misinterpreted or lost during translation.

I have seen two judges now and neither had a good command of English so

documents would need to be in Thai if there was a court case.

So it wouldn't surprise me if Gary is correct

[Gary A]

I was told that by the crooked lawyers and also by another lawyer I talked with about filing suit against the crooks. I had the original proposals with signatures from my former partner. The second lawyer said they were useless because they were written in English. As of now, I wouldn't believe anything ANY Thai lawyer tells me.

[lannarebirth]

I don't want to elaborate too much because it's embarrassing to have been a sucker. To make a very long story short, a former Thai partner of mine and I made a contract in English. Both of us signed it with witnesses. It was left at the Thai law firm to be translated into Thai and legalized. Contracts written in English are not valid. I should add that my former Thai partner is very well connected. Several weeks went by and the contracts were not returned. When I finally became irritated and went to that Thai law firm, they denied making any contract and went so far as to say they didn't even know me. Of course the money had already changed hands. I was then threatened and I can assure the threats were real. I walked away much poorer but smarter.

If it's any consolation Gary, there aren't any of us that haven't lost money at something. The first loss is the best loss, as it's saved you countless possible losses since.

[midas]

I was told that by the crooked lawyers and also by another lawyer I talked with about filing suit against the crooks. I had the original proposals with signatures from my former partner. The second lawyer said they were useless because they were written in English. As of now, I wouldn't believe anything ANY Thai lawyer tells me.

I think from memory 2 parties to a contract are allowed to have the documents in English

for their benefit if they are unable to read Thai on the understanding that the English copies

are only ancillary to the principal contracts which have to be in Thai and it's the Thai

contracts that will be relied on in court. I'm almost positive this is how it works in this country.

Edited November 13, 2008 by midas

[quiksilva]

I was told that by the crooked lawyers and also by another lawyer I talked with about filing suit against the crooks. I had the original proposals with signatures from my former partner. The second lawyer said they were useless because they were written in English. As of now, I wouldn't believe anything ANY Thai lawyer tells me.

Three year leases for commercial property are almost exclusively written in English, I have personally negotiated leases for prominent multinational legal firms, who are well established in Thailand, who have used English as the principal language in their own agreements, sometimes a translated copy in Thai is provided as a courtesy, sometimes not, and sometimes it can be the other way around.

It depends on what was agreed.

Edited November 13, 2008 by quiksilva

[midas]

I was told that by the crooked lawyers and also by another lawyer I talked with about filing suit against the crooks. I had the original proposals with signatures from my former partner. The second lawyer said they were useless because they were written in English. As of now, I wouldn't believe anything ANY Thai lawyer tells me.

Three year leases for commercial property are almost exclusively written in English, I have personally negotiated leases for prominent multinational legal firms, who are well established in Thailand, who have used English as the principal language in their own agreements, sometimes a translated copy in Thai is provided as a courtesy, sometimes not, and sometimes it can be the other way around.

It depends on what was agreed.

But a commercial lease is only likely to contain generally accepted terms and conditions ?

In other words its not likely to be a hugely complicated document because there are only

two parties to the contract?

Maybe when it comes to a complicated contract involving several parties and is

considered to be a one off document to reflect

what could be a very complex commercial arrangement including god knows what, then

maybe it is the other way around in terms of the importance of it being in Thai

verus English ?

[quiksilva]

Certainly some documents do have to be in Thai, such as those that are registered at the land department.

A sales and purchase agreement for instance can be in English (the land department does not have to see it for transfer), but a long lease (more than 3 years) has to be shown to the local officials at the land department and must be in Thai for the registration process, but other official translations are accepted on the understanding that it is the Thai contract which is binding.

Some three year commercial leases can in fact be quite complex (depending on the situation, lawyers and the parties involved) I have had some contracts take over a year to negotiate, yet they were in English and entirely valid. So its not based on level or degree of complexity, rather its whether they must be registered at a government office or not.

Many contracts could be in any language at all and could still be valid under the Thai law, although obviously the preference is for the official documents to be in Thai, but not all of them have to be.

Edited November 13, 2008 by quiksilva

[midas]

Certainly some documents do have to be in Thai, such as those that are registered at the land department.

A sales and purchase agreement for instance can be in English (the land department does not have to see it for transfer), but a long lease (more than 3 years) has to be shown to the local officials at the land department and must be in Thai for the registration process, but other official translations are accepted on the understanding that it is the Thai contract which is binding.

Some three year commercial leases can in fact be quite complex (depending on the situation, lawyers and the parties involved) I have had some contracts take over a year to negotiate, yet they were in English and entirely valid. So its not based on level or degree of complexity, rather its whether they must be registered at a government office or not.

Many contracts could be in any language at all and could still be valid under the Thai law, although obviously the preference is for the official documents to be in Thai, but not all of them have to be.

This is what I must have picked up - and it interpreted as applying for all contracts.

Sales of land contracts in that case would definitely have to be in Thai surely?

[midas]

Certainly some documents do have to be in Thai, such as those that are registered at the land department.

A sales and purchase agreement for instance can be in English (the land department does not have to see it for transfer), but a long lease (more than 3 years) has to be shown to the local officials at the land department and must be in Thai for the registration process, but other official translations are accepted on the understanding that it is the Thai contract which is binding.

Some three year commercial leases can in fact be quite complex (depending on the situation, lawyers and the parties involved) I have had some contracts take over a year to negotiate, yet they were in English and entirely valid. So its not based on level or degree of complexity, rather its whether they must be registered at a government office or not.

Many contracts could be in any language at all and could still be valid under the Thai law, although obviously the preference is for the official documents to be in Thai, but not all of them have to be.

quiksilva this is on the website for http://www.lawyerthai.com and contradicts your statement ?

If you have decided to buy a house in Thailand, you must be aware that Thai laws are difficult to

understand and differ a lot from Western laws. Thai laws often change on a short notice, and not

always in favor of the foreigner. All official documents involved in a real estate transaction are

in Thai language and have no legal power when translated/presented in any foreign Language.

Therefore you need a Thai lawyer who is fully aware of local laws and stays informed at all times.

LHSTC works closely with a Thai lawyer who fulfills all requirements of our clients. LHSTC can

provide you with information on buying a house and/or land in Thailand but we will also direct you

to the lawyer who can always give you the latest accurate information on Thai laws

[teacup]

This is what I think

The contract wouldn’t be valid until it’s notarized ?

So I would assume even if the contract’s written in English, it’s still should be fully enforceable according to all the details in the said contract, ONLY if it got notarized “at the time of all parties signing”, by the “whoever” that the thai judicial system recognized as the legitimate governing body to notarized.

I’m just speaking from certain “common sense” here

What do you think?....Am I making some valid points here?...huh

Edited November 13, 2008 by teacup

[thaihome]

This is what I think

The contract wouldn’t be valid until it’s notarized ?

So I would assume even if the contract’s written in English, it’s still should be fully enforceable according to all the details in the said contract, ONLY if it got notarized “at the time of all parties signing”, by the “whoever” that the thai judicial system recognized as the legitimate governing body to notarized.

I’m just speaking from certain “common sense” here

What do you think?....Am I making some valid points here?...huh

Thailand does not have notary system.

TH

[chiangmaibruce]

OK, well I raised this point with a legal person and got directed to a very good online discussion on this topic. It is (ahem) in a certain other thai expat forum (<URL Automatically Removed>) so I hope it is ok to post these details.

Simply go that web site and search for this thread "If it is written in English, it's not binding" and you will find legal references and helpful discussion.

The bottom-line is that generally an english language contract is fine and IS BINDING

[Farma]

From the pinned link on the Job forum. http://bia.serverbox.net/030.html

CIVIL LITIGATION

Evidence Oral evidence may be given by any person who has directly and personally seen or heard, or has knowledge of the facts relevant to the adjudication of the case. All court proceedings are required to be conducted in the Thai language, except in some special courts, such as the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court, where the court may permit the trial to be conducted in English. Documents made in a foreign language must be translated into Thai. Only original documents are admissible in evidence, except where:

1. all parties concerned agree that a copy of the document is correct;

2. the original cannot be produced through no wilful default by either party (here, a copy or oral evidence of the contents may be admitted);

3. the original document is in the possession of or under the control of a Thai government official and may be produced only with the prior permission from such official (here, it may be sufficient to produce a copy of or extract from the document certified by the appropriate official).

[teacup]

This is what I think

The contract wouldn’t be valid until it’s notarized ?

So I would assume even if the contract’s written in English, it’s still should be fully enforceable according to all the details in the said contract, ONLY if it got notarized “at the time of all parties signing”, by the “whoever” that the thai judicial system recognized as the legitimate governing body to notarized.

I’m just speaking from certain “common sense” here

What do you think?....Am I making some valid points here?...huh

Thailand does not have notary system.

TH

How about if it's certified by the appropriate official? ---err....whoever they may be that being recognized by the thai judicial system

May be by certain government department, or some licensed thai attorney...?

[quiksilva]

Certainly some documents do have to be in Thai, such as those that are registered at the land department.

A sales and purchase agreement for instance can be in English (the land department does not have to see it for transfer), but a long lease (more than 3 years) has to be shown to the local officials at the land department and must be in Thai for the registration process, but other official translations are accepted on the understanding that it is the Thai contract which is binding.

Some three year commercial leases can in fact be quite complex (depending on the situation, lawyers and the parties involved) I have had some contracts take over a year to negotiate, yet they were in English and entirely valid. So its not based on level or degree of complexity, rather its whether they must be registered at a government office or not.

Many contracts could be in any language at all and could still be valid under the Thai law, although obviously the preference is for the official documents to be in Thai, but not all of them have to be.

quiksilva this is on the website for http://www.lawyerthai.com and contradicts your statement ?

If you have decided to buy a house in Thailand, you must be aware that Thai laws are difficult to

understand and differ a lot from Western laws. Thai laws often change on a short notice, and not

always in favor of the foreigner. All official documents involved in a real estate transaction are

in Thai language and have no legal power when translated/presented in any foreign Language.

Therefore you need a Thai lawyer who is fully aware of local laws and stays informed at all times.

LHSTC works closely with a Thai lawyer who fulfills all requirements of our clients. LHSTC can

provide you with information on buying a house and/or land in Thailand but we will also direct you

to the lawyer who can always give you the latest accurate information on Thai laws

Is it credible for a Thai lawyer website that seems to be aimed at foreigners, promoting to help foreigners buy land and houses?

My team is regularly engaged in sales transactions (mostly development sites, commercial buildings and factories on industrial estates) and have had no problems using English sales and purchase contracts for over 11 years. Supporting official documentation (eg company registration etc must be in Thai).

As Farma mentioned official translations can be produced in Thai but the overriding language can still be in English.

Edited November 13, 2008 by quiksilva

[Nadia 2]

I was told that by the crooked lawyers and also by another lawyer I talked with about filing suit against the crooks. I had the original proposals with signatures from my former partner. The second lawyer said they were useless because they were written in English. As of now, I wouldn't believe anything ANY Thai lawyer tells me.

I think from memory 2 parties to a contract are allowed to have the documents in English

for their benefit if they are unable to read Thai on the understanding that the English copies

are only ancillary to the principal contracts which have to be in Thai and it's the Thai

contracts that will be relied on in court. I'm almost positive this is how it works in this country.

Section 19 Civil and Commercial Code: Whenever a document is executed in two versions, one in the Thai language , the other in another language, and there are discrepancies between the two versions, and it cannot be ascertained which version was intended to govern, the document executed in the Thai language shall govern.

[ChampagneSuper]

Our 30 year lease is in duplicate, English and Thai. As we knew the Thai language would take precedence and because we were concerned the Thai translation could well be wrong in parts, we (lessor and lessee) agreed for the lawyer to add a clause saying that if any legal dispute arose the English version would take precedence.

Anyone know if that would stand up or would Section 19 that nadia2 quoted overrule our clause ?

Cheers,

Edited November 13, 2008 by ChampagneSuper