Revocation Of Janot Land Title

[RaiBerg]

I (Farang) bought a plot of land in my Thai children's name.

The land has a "special janot document" (the once who state: cannot be sold for a certain period of time – in our case: cannot be sold for 10 years).

The seller is the grandfather!! (wife's father)

(my wife died 5 years ago)

We made a contract. Seller signed, his wife signed.

Our lawyer signed.

I signed (as the legal guardian of the children)

We paid with check.

Deal done.

We build a couple of bungalows on this plot.

Relationship of grand-parents and my children went sour.

3 month ago grandfather died.

The widow (his wife) wants now the land back.

(to get even with us)

She claims (correctly!??) the contract was illegal.

She is prepared to go to court.

She is prepared to pay back the original land price (including interest).

She is NOT prepared to pay compensation for the bungalows.

(take them away – she suggests..)

As this plot of land borders with our living area – and we do not want her as a neighbor (!!)

we are not willing to give the land back.

My children do not want to give the land back.

Does any body knows precedence cases?

What can I expect from this legal wrangle???

Edited March 7, 2010 by RaiBerg

[Loz]

Best case scenario is you have 10 years to woo her into letting you keep the land.

Realistically, time to personally start bringing her a morning cup of tea, and Maybe cooking for her more often...

[anotherpeter]

Precedence isn't usually used in Thailand. (that's what I have been told)

As you have said, the contract is illegal ... you don't really have a leg to stand on.

Get your money. Get your interest. Move on.

[RaiBerg]

Precedence isn't usually used in Thailand. (that's what I have been told)

As you have said, the contract is illegal ... you don't really have a leg to stand on.

Get your money. Get your interest. Move on.

Well - what about the bungalows? (cost 1.5 Million Baht)...

[RaiBerg]

Best case scenario is you have 10 years to woo her into letting you keep the land.

Realistically, time to personally start bringing her a morning cup of tea, and Maybe cooking for her more often...

......she would not give us 10 years.. she wants the land NOW....

she is an old dragon.... but you are right... I will visit her more often.. SMILE.... and do the Thai blues....

[Benjie]

Hawk it out through the courts, that will probably take up to 10 years or so, how old is she?

[RaiBerg]

Hawk it out through the courts, that will probably take up to 10 years or so, how old is she?

She is 67 or so.... (but top fit)

[anotherpeter]

Precedence isn't usually used in Thailand. (that's what I have been told)

As you have said, the contract is illegal ... you don't really have a leg to stand on.

Get your money. Get your interest. Move on.

Well - what about the bungalows? (cost 1.5 Million Baht)...

Move them somewhere else (yeah I know, not real easy!). Sell them as scrap to someone. Just make sure she doesn't get them.

Why don't you sell the property on? Or sue your lawyer? Lots of accidents happen to old ladies.

[RaiBerg]

[Well - what about the bungalows? (cost 1.5 Million Baht)...

Would the court demand her to pay for the bungalows???

[LivinLOS]

What kind of chanote has a 10 year sale restriction on it ??

[anotherpeter]

Well - what about the bungalows? (cost 1.5 Million Baht)...

Would the court demand her to pay for the bungalows???

Well, it is ... possible ... that the courts will tell her that she shouldn't have sold the property, and therefore pay for the improvements that you have made.

But I wouldn't hold my breath.

[RaiBerg]

What kind of chanote has a 10 year sale restriction on it ??

Some chanots have a RED STAMP on the back saying: cannot be sold for x years of time.

(in our case total 10 years.... only 2 years left..)

[dave111223]

I would suggest this be moved to the real estate section, as you'd probably get more info on there.

This sounds like one hel_l of a coldhearted b*tch; trying to steal the land back off her semi-orphaned grandchildren...<deleted>.

Does she really have the money and conviction to see this thing all the way through the courts? If not call her bluff and hire a lawyer.

[RaiBerg]

I would suggest this be moved to the real estate section, as you'd probably get more info on there.

This sounds like one hel_l of a coldhearted b*tch; trying to steal the land back off her semi-orphaned grandchildren...<deleted>.

Does she really have the money and conviction to see this thing all the way through the courts? If not call her bluff and hire a lawyer.

How can I move to the real-estate section??

Well - after my wife died the old lady and the grandfather jumped on us - they wanted to seperate me from my (underaged four children) in order to get hold of the land.

Actually this specific plot belonged to my wife - but in grandfather's name.

First he agreed to give the land to the kids - but grandmother made him change his mind.

We had to buy the plot. We did. (I was so devastated by the death of my wife that I could not properly think....) Anyway - we have a social project started (my wife and I) and the kids and I want to continue this projects.... that's why we bought the land....

It's an ugly blues.... real life.... by the way: all Thais (!!) exept family were very helpful!!!!!!!!!

[CobraSnakeNecktie]

How deep is this womans pockets and how well connected is she?

go find the most blood thirsty ruthless influence peddling lawyer you can find and institute a 100% scorched earth policy. Lawyers live for this kind of thing.

With the right lawyer the sky is the limit.

[Carib]

Shame her in the village, always someone there to lend a helping hand.

Let a lawyer tell her that she will need to pay for the build-ons. ( I mean they can say anything, if they can sign anything.. )

[RaiBerg]

How deep is this womans pockets and how well connected is she?

With the right lawyer the sky is the limit.

we live upcountry... village scene... the land has not much value (Bt 300'000.-) the bungalows total Bt 1.5 Mio to Bt 2 Mio..... I want to limit costs for lawyers.... (maybe the youth-department would help???? Land is in kid's names) - - but .... could somebody recommend a suitable lawyer (Chiangmai?? Sukhothai? Pitsanoluk??)

[getgoin]

So complicated. Usually when the type of paper is changed, from one paper to chanote, they stamp the back that it can not be sold until ten years. You should have had the land assigned to your children from the grand parents rather than the sale from them to your kids. The sale is illegal. Four Children? And they are ripping you off?

That being said, are you and have you been living there? Stand up to her and her other siblings. It's not hard. Think of your kids. I agree with cobrasnakenecktie but the real issue here is that the stronger person will prevail.

Are you the stronger person? If so, think of your kids, think of your wife. Most of these Thai people become desperate money hungry grubbing scavengers when they see the opportunity.

Stand up to them and they will shrink. The other option is pay them some money every month. Not alot but more than they will be able to earn by themselves each month, about 10,000 Bht.

Where are you living? I would like to have a foreigner support group that regularly goes around and supports those that are being ripped off. There is always strength in numbers.

[Maizefarmer]

The Red Stamp regards change of Titleship time-frame restriction has little/nothing to do with this dispute as I see it: the relivant questions at this stage are:

1) why is the contract illegal, or why is she claiming the contract is/was illegal.

2) exactly what is mean't by referal to a/the contract - what contract - is this reference to the Red Stamp and time-frame regards change of Titleship/ownership, or the original sale its self, or some or other aspect related to the the property been in the kids name c/o of legal gaurdian - or is she claiming something else is illegal, and if so, just what is it grandma is alleging??

If her argument in any way revolves around the fact that you are a foreigner and as such cannot own land, I can tell you now that a) I don;t see it as you owning land, and yes - the precedent has been set: i.e. foreigners are allowed to hold land as security, or on behalf of their children - I have held land as security for a debt owed to me by a Thai national in the past, and I currently have "control" (not ownership) of land that ultimately belongs to my children, one of whom is still a minor.

So - just what is grandma claiming Raiberg?

[RaiBerg]

The Red Stamp regards change of Titleship time-frame restriction has little/nothing to do with this dispute as I see it: the relivant questions at this stage are:

1) why is the contract illegal, or why is she claiming the contract is/was illegal.

2) exactly what is mean't by referal to a/the contract - what contract - is this reference to the Red Stamp and time-frame regards change of Titleship/ownership, or the original sale its self, or some or other aspect related to the the property been in the kids name c/o of legal gaurdian - or is she claiming something else is illegal, and if so, just what is it grandma is alleging??

If her argument in any way revolves around the fact that you are a foreigner and as such cannot own land, I can tell you now that a) I don;t see it as you owning land, and yes - the precedent has been set: i.e. foreigners are allowed to hold land as security, or on behalf of their children - I have held land as security for a debt owed to me by a Thai national in the past, and I currently have "control" (not ownership) of land that ultimately belongs to my children, one of whom is still a minor.

So - just what is grandma claiming Raiberg?

Grandma says: because the land document was stamped with titleship time-frame restriction (cannot be sold for 10 years) the deal is illegal....

[Carib]

Doesn't that mean that YOU ( or your children) cannot sell it for 10 years?? They sold it and the land office accepted, so ???

Sorry, just saw the landoffice was not involved

Edited March 7, 2010 by Carib

[zzdocxx]

Can you explain exactly why the contract was illegal? (Must have gone over my head.)

[Carib]

Seller was the now deceased grandfather. Was grandma officially married to him, if not what say does she have in this ?? She cosigned, but couldn't that have been for witness reasons??

Just trying...

[RaiBerg]

Can you explain exactly why the contract was illegal? (Must have gone over my head.)

Because the Chanot was stamped "cannot be sold" - but we bought it....

She admits that the court will ask her to repay the money....(and she is willing - just to get us out of here)

My kids and I want to keep the land...

I am looking for a similar case... I would like to know how courts decided in the past....

[Carib]

Can you explain exactly why the contract was illegal? (Must have gone over my head.)

Because the Chanot was stamped "cannot be sold" - but we bought it....

She admits that the court will ask her to repay the money....(and she is willing - just to get us out of here)

My kids and I want to keep the land...

I am looking for a similar case... I would like to know how courts decided in the past....

She was part of the illegal deal she is now contesting, what does that make her....

You will get the money for the land back, but not the value of the build-ons.

Are the build-ons insured? I will leave it to your imagination..

Sorry no similar case known to me.

[tooninthai]

How deep is this womans pockets and how well connected is she?

With the right lawyer the sky is the limit.

we live upcountry... village scene... the land has not much value (Bt 300'000.-) the bungalows total Bt 1.5 Mio to Bt 2 Mio..... I want to limit costs for lawyers.... (maybe the youth-department would help???? Land is in kid's names) - - but .... could somebody recommend a suitable lawyer (Chiangmai?? Sukhothai? Pitsanoluk??)

If you still want the advice of a good lawyer and you can speak Thai or have a friend that does, PM me. This guy and his wife are red hot with legal matters but they only speak Thai. He does love juicy court fights. Also he will tell you straight if you do not stand a cat in hells chance.

edit - typo

Edited March 7, 2010 by tooninthai

[loong]

I was a bit confused with you original post. I assumed that the 10 year clause was something that you had inserted into the Chanot.

I'm also confused about your statement that the land belonged to your Wife - but in her Father's name.

So the Chanot is still in the name of your Wife's Father? If so, why would she need to take you to court? I would think that she could just apply to have the land re-assigned to her as heir.

I would think that this would not go down well with the Thais because there are so many similar land deals made, often just with the signature of the village headman. If she won a court case that would effectively end this method of land transfer as nobody will want to buy land if they know that the original owner could simply claim it back at a later date!

Obviously you need advice from a good lawyer, including the possibility of claiming damages from the original lawyer.

Are you able to claim any sort of Squatters' rights?

Was this land that was not bought, but claimed by the Grandfather? If this land was claimed but never occupied or used by the Grandfather, maybe there is something illegal here. I don't know for a fact, but I would have thought that people can only claim land if they actually utilise it. Maybe worth looking into. If the Grandfather did something illegal to claim the land, the Grandmother could possibly have to compensate you and then run the risk of losing the land herself.

[noise]

I was a bit confused with you original post.

I, too, am confused, but mainly because of lack of specifics.

You said:

1. I (Farang) bought a plot of land in my Thai children's name.
   
2. The land has a "special janot document" (the once who state: cannot be sold for a certain period of time – in our case: cannot be sold for 10 years).
   
3. The seller is the grandfather!! (wife's father)
   
4. (my wife died 5 years ago)
   
5. We made a contract. Seller signed, his wife signed.
   
6. Our lawyer signed.
   
7. I signed (as the legal guardian of the children)
   
8. We paid with check.
   

My comments/questions to the above list (based on being involved in a land dispute and listening to lawyers):

1. You/Thai citizen children bought land.... that should mean the title was tranferred to/registered in your children's names at the land office. If this was done, then title seems to be legally clear.

2. But, you said a janot/chanot exists that says land can not be sold for 10 years, 2 years remaining. My limited knowledge of chanots has them defining the use of the land by a non-owner. And any sale that takes place can not abrogate that usage. I can't imagine a case where the owner of a piece of land would simply, for no outside imposed reason just up and issue a chanot upon himself saying "I can not sell for XX years." So what is the exact wording of the chanot; what was it purpose? When was it executed and by whom? There have to be some other parties involved, some rationale for creating it.

5. You made a contract .....for what? This implies the sale was not registered; the title was not transferred. The father made a written contract to transfer the title to the land to you at the expiration of the "chanot"? If this is the case, #1 did not take place. But you have the contact for an action to take place at the proper time.

8. Can you today produce a paper trail showing you paid for the land at the time the #5 contract was executed?

Given 5 is correct, here is what I suggest.....

1. Review the chanot; get a copy in English and insure you understand exactly what it says. Assuming it predates your contract and that there is nothing in it that abrogates your contract..

2. Go to court and file for protection of the land IAW the contract and showing the paper trail for having already paid. This can be done; a friend has done so on a home that is being contested.

3. If the MIL wants to fight that, my understanding is she would have to file suit and put into escrow the full value of the land and probably the improvements. Plus pay court fees of 100,000 plus and attorney fees. Most likely this will not happen.

4. If she does not do that, then you have no legal battle pending, most likely, and you just execute the contract at the end of 2 more years. By virtue of being granted the protection, the court is saying the contract is legal and binding, monies have been paid, and transfer of the title can take place upon the expiration of the chanot.

I sure hope you post the chanot wording here. It would be most education for me, if not all your avid readers.

[noise]

RaiBerg

Further thoughts:

I will suggest that on the surface, assuming the chanot is what you said it is, that the contract does not violate the chanot's limitation on the sale of the property. Technically, the sale has not taken place until the title is transferred at the land office. The contract should have words to the effect that the transfer of the title from grandpa to you will take place 10 years plus 1 day from the effective date of the chanot.

You said a lawyer was involved in the creating and executing the contract. He should have advised you if such a contact was not valid and not taken your fees. Did he say whether or not such a contract had to be registered at the land office as it is a lien on the land? You might ask him as I understand liens must be registered. If that is true, was it registered? If it was, that is prima facie evidence that it is legal and binding. Lack of registration may not mean that it is not valid; I do not know.

And as Loong suggested, if the grandfather was granted the land from the govt and had to occupy/use it for 10 years before selling, then that may explain the "chanot". Until the 10 years is up, the title upon the death of the grandfather should pass to his heir specified in a will. And if your lawyer did his job correctlly 8 years ago (?), he should seen the age of the old gentleman and have drawn up a will leaving the land to his daughter (your late wife).

Even if that did not happen and the title legally transferred to another heir (wife or other child or all children), the contract was executed. Assuming (one more time) your lawyer did his job , the wife should have no legal basis to claim the contract is invalid. From what you say, it sounds like a bluff to me by someone who sees a chance to profit greatly by taking this tact. And the court most likely would recognize that attempt for what it is since she signed the contract years ago and did not make any such claim until the grandfather died and she, apparently, had a chance at gaining title.

zzdocxx asked you why the contract was invalid and you replied because of the chanot. But you have stated words to the effect that the title was not transferred. Therefore, the chanot's sale criteria/time period limitation was not violated. The contract was for a future action even though the funds transferred prior to the expiration of the chanot. So what, the letter of the law was not violated?

It is not in my mind any different that if he had taken a loan out on the land (a bank can loan on land with a chanot if they think there is no risk, that it is to their advantage).

So protect your self from the possibility that the wife, if she was the heir and now has her name on the title at the land office, might just be waiting at the land office on day 10 years+1 day with a new buyer and sells it out from under you. Go to court now to get protection/ establish the validity of the contract. That will be the precedent to go to court again in 2 years to force her to surrender the title to you/your kids on that day 10 years+1 day.

What does your old lawyer say about all this?

[OZEMADE]

Hawk it out through the courts, that will probably take up to 10 years or so, how old is she?

She is 67 or so.... (but top fit)

Well you said she is TOP FIT and there is only you and the kids! Move in with her.

Problem solved.