Have The Rules Changed ?

[pepsi666]

Have the rules changed on owning property in Thailand (and Pattaya) ?

I have been reading in several newspapers about owning property in Thailand, Pattaya in particular

They go on to say how easy it is to buy property and make investments in property in Pattaya (I dont know why Pattaya was singled out, but no other place in Thailand was mentioned)

They make no mention of visa's though

I thought the rules on property and investment were pretty much cast in stone

The Ad did show quite a few villas, detached homes, but no mention of Condo's or the 49/51% rule

There was a lot about the 'stunning' scenery, 'liveley' night life, 'fantastic' beach and 'great' water sports, 'great shopping expeiriences'

There were a couple of photos of places I have never seen in Pattaya (but I havent travelled all over Pattaya) so they maybe of Pattaya

Anyone know about this and any law/rule changes ?

[longball53098]

The real estate market is slow and they will say anything to get customers.

[DickWong]

No, the rules have NOT change (yet).

[pepsi666]

No, the rules have NOT change (yet).

What are the chances of that happening ?

What is likely to change ? (if anything)

I'd be very surprised if the 49/51 rule ever changed

[Humphrey Bear]

Nothing is likely to change in the near (or distant) future.

The land belongs to Thais, and will always do so.

You can buy a house through a registered company, but that will have 51% Thai shareholding. And theoretically the company must be operating and paying all it's taxes.

You can buy (and own) an apartment in a condominium where there is, as you say, a 49/51% foreign ownership arrangement.

You can rent whatever you like, work out a 30-year agreement, with a 30-year renewal option (twice) and thus have lifetime occupancy. And this would probably be the best way for most people, unless you wish to leave asets behind for your family when you die. (Thai family, of course - foreign families would have to sell and move on).

Don't ever believe Real Estate / Estate Agent blurb - it seldom tells the real truth. The better ones do not tell lies, but no one discloses the snags in buying a property.

[dsfbrit]

The real estate industry is pushing various 'cunning plans' to get around the fact farangs cannot own land. The latest seems to be some nonsense about 30+30 year leases etc... If you want to have a good discussion about all this it may be better to post in this TV forum.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Real-Estate-...land-o-f59.html

Enjoy!

[Humphrey Bear]

The real estate industry is pushing various 'cunning plans' to get around the fact farangs cannot own land. The latest seems to be some nonsense about 30+30 year leases etc... If you want to have a good discussion about all this it may be better to post in this TV forum.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Real-Estate-...land-o-f59.html

Enjoy!

The 30+30+30 year lease is not a stunt. It is standard practise.

It is the agreement I have with my wife with regard to our house. Registered at the Land Office at the same tiime as the house was bought (by my wife). Thus she has the security of owning the land and the house, I have the security of the lease.

Should she wish to sell the house, the new owner has to continue with the lease arrangement. All is legally correct.

This practice has been in place for many many years.

[NanLaew]

If the OP could give details of what papers he saw these statements and adverts in or provide a link. If it's from the local foreign-language 'press', then don't bother but if these articles are being published in overseas rags, I would like to see how a real scam looks in print.

[monty]

The 30+30+30 year lease is not a stunt. It is standard practise.

It is the agreement I have with my wife with regard to our house. Registered at the Land Office at the same tiime as the house was bought (by my wife). Thus she has the security of owning the land and the house, I have the security of the lease.

Should she wish to sell the house, the new owner has to continue with the lease arrangement. All is legally correct.

This practice has been in place for many many years.

It still is a sales stunt if coming from project developers. When leasing from your wife it's a private matter, it'll depend if she will still be alive in 30 years and how your relationship will be at that moment.

Look very good at your land title deed. Only the first 30 years are registered, as that is the maximum allowed under Thai law.

The two times +30 are an agreement made between you and your wife. This cannot be registered and as such is not cast in stone.

It is an agreement between 2 persons only. If somebody buys the land, they will have to honor the lease as registered on the land title deed, they however are in no way bound to comply with any agreements you made with your wife.

If your wife is still alive when the time of the 2nd 30 years comes up she will be legally bound to honor the written agreement she has with you IF she still owns the land. If she doesn't want to extend, she can just sell the land to her brother who is not bound in any contract with you.

Your only legal recourse at that time would be to sue her to recuperate the amount of rent you have paid to her (as per the lease contract you made with her, where you normally pre-pay the lease money for the 2nd and 3th lease term). Which could take ages and cost loads in legal fees, and you'll still be kicked out of the land...

[pepsi666]

I read it in the daily mail and the daily express, about a week or so ago, probably longer

I cant have any links for them, sorry

I dont know if it was posted by developers or who the estate agents were

There was no mention of needing a Thai wife or the 49/51 rule

I thought the 30 + 30 rule was finished

(I was considering this at one point, but couldnt get very much information about it, all the Brits I spoke to seemed rather 'wideboys' and rather brash,)

I dont have a Thai wife, and it seemed a way of living out there, even if it was for a year, didnt really fancy the retirement visa way

I had arranged to meet up with a poster in here on my last visit to Pattaya to chat about various aspects of renting, buying in Pattaya, but he never showed up or contacted me while I was there (he had business while I was there, apparently)

[bojo]

The real estate industry is pushing various 'cunning plans' to get around the fact farangs cannot own land. The latest seems to be some nonsense about 30+30 year leases etc... If you want to have a good discussion about all this it may be better to post in this TV forum.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Real-Estate-...land-o-f59.html

Enjoy!

The 30+30+30 year lease is not a stunt. It is standard practise.

It is the agreement I have with my wife with regard to our house. Registered at the Land Office at the same tiime as the house was bought (by my wife). Thus she has the security of owning the land and the house, I have the security of the lease.

Should she wish to sell the house, the new owner has to continue with the lease arrangement. All is legally correct.

This practice has been in place for many many years.

Yes, you are correct, 30+30+30 is standard practice, especially where a developer is trying to sell.

I'm sure your deal with your wife will be honoured.

However with regard to those who have contracts for 30 year renewals.... I believe that if the freeholder at the time of new renewal, if he so wants, will not have to honour any contract that he has signed/agreed to. The leases that have been agreed upon will become test cases in 15 years or so and I believe that a judge will order in favour of the freeholder if he doesn't want to honour any previosely made contract, simply because of the judges interpretation of the law, that repeat renewals are just a way to circumvent the law of a maximum lease term of 30 years. If however hefty premiums have been paid with future rental prices in mind for the next 30 year term, then maybe he might err in favour of the tenant.

However I doubt very much that anyone has paid those index linked premiums to safeguard their investments, it just wouldn't be worth it.

Regards Bojo

[pepsi666]

I dont have a Thai wife, so the 49/51 rule wouldnt apply for me

Would I still be able to get a place under this 30-30 ? (I doubt I would get the second 30 year anyway, unless I was buried there)

I know there is a lot to critisice about Pattaya, I like it though

[LennyW]

Read this topic, some have done 30+30.....

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/60-Years-Leasing-t267983.html

[PattayaParent]

No, the rules have NOT change (yet).

What are the chances of that happening ?

What is likely to change ? (if anything)

I'd be very surprised if the 49/51 rule ever changed

he rule has been changed once berfore. No reason why it can't be changed again.