Legal Query Relating To Marriage.

[electrozebra]

If a woman in Thailand owes a lot of money to a Thai bank and she gets married to a Farang, is the husband liable for those previously incurred debts, either during the marriage or after a divorce?

This is purely about debts owing before marriage, not what happens whilst married.

It would be a legal marriage in Thailand.

Any knowledgeable folk out there who can answer this, please?

edit for clarity

[Soutpeel]

Legally..most likely not, but from a practical point of view the husband will end up paying the debt...most certainly if he is a farang, so get your wallet ready...

[zzaa09]

Another sticky wicket. This continuing mentality to put oneself in debt surely catches up with you and those around.

[mstribling]

Another sticky wicket. This continuing mentality to put oneself in debt surely catches up with you and those around.

"Another sticky wicket".

[Beetlejuice]

Yes, technically the hubby can be reasonable for his wife’s premarital debts.

Once legally married, under the law whatever assets each partner owns, belongs to both of them.

So for example, if you have money in Thai bank accounts, even only in one name, or a home and land, business, a vehicle, jewellery and so on, the debtee can take a civil action in order to claim any assets to the amount of the debt owed by the debtor, including any assets in the name of a legal partner and especially items such as real estate or businesses which are likely to be in the Thai wife’s name.

If you as yet are not married to this woman, I would advise that you do not invest any of your own monies into anything that will be in her name or joint names until her debts are fully paid off.

If you are already married then it would be wise to hide all your assets a.s.a.p.

If you now divorced, the same applies to anything still in her name or on any agreements you signed as a guarantor, including the debts, which is still retrievable by the debtees.

Lots of ifs, but sorry, no buts or maybes, as this is fact.

[powderpuff]

Walk away now.

[simon43]

Walk away now.

Really bad advice...

RUN!!!!!

[gregb]

Yes, technically the hubby can be reasonable for his wife’s premarital debts.

Once legally married, under the law whatever assets each partner owns, belongs to both of them.

So for example, if you have money in Thai bank accounts, even only in one name, or a home and land, business, a vehicle, jewellery and so on, the debtee can take a civil action in order to claim any assets to the amount of the debt owed by the debtor, including any assets in the name of a legal partner and especially items such as real estate or businesses which are likely to be in the Thai wife’s name.

I think you are confusing some issues. If a debt was incurred after you were married, then in most instances (*) yes, it is possible to attach sin suan tua assets of either party, or sin somros assets to service the debt. However, if the debt was incurred before the marriage, then it is non trivial to attach sin suan tua assets of the other partner to service the debt. However, all sin somros assets may be attached.

Thus, in your example, stocks, land, etc. that are sin suan tua of yourself would be difficult to seize if your wife incurred the debt before you were married. Your pension however, which is sin somros, could be seized in full.

I suggest you visit a lawyer and make certain to declare your sin suan assets fully so that there is no ambiguity before you proceed with registering your marriage.

--------------

(*) in most instances because technically it is limited to debts:

1) from management of household affairs and providing the necessities for the family, including maintenance, medical expenses, and proper education of the children.

2) incurred by either spouse for his/her own benefit but ratified by the other. The ratification need not be formal or in writing. The implied consent by either party, such as a wife accompanying the husband to a loan agreement signing, is considered due ratification.

I say technically because in practice, it really impossible to acquire a debt after you are married without the implied consent of the other party.

[Beetlejuice]

One more point to mention, if you are married to this woman, have little or no assets, but income from a pension, business, employment or savings, the court can impose an order to pay the debts owed by instalments from your earnings, taking into consideration both your incomes and cash value, even if the income comes from abroad.

If your wife has no income or savings of her own, which by making an educated guess is the case, then the burden falls on you to pay off the debts.

[krading]

Another reason to hold off on marriage til all the chickens have come home to roost.

[electrozebra]

First of all thanks for the informative replies. A lot of food for thought in there.

(To those who say walk away - not going to happen under present conditions because it is not often you find a woman like this one).

Any long term relationship here or back home that ends in marriage would seem to have the same financial implications regarding property acquired and debts incurred during the marriage and that is fair enough. There are one or two differences from what you say here, but in essence the same.

Seems like we would need to see a lawyer because there is more involved, such as her current land ownership and my own house ownership back in the U.K. But it is her current debt that I am concerned with. Questions would need to be answered, documents produced and papers to be signed.

As ever there is a need to be careful and not rush headlong into situations and that is why I ask questions. Yet the long term prospects look good as her family are not poor and she is liable to come into money at a later date if her mother passes away. In a mercenary light, I / we would be a lot better off in that instance if we are married and the mother dies.

As I said, food for thought. Thanks for the input, it does help.