cangetman Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Hello everyone this topic might sound a bit deep so i wont bore everyone to death, short story I was with thai girlfriend for 4 years i bought a 10 million baht house and put both the house and land under her name by the way we were not married and there are no kids involved , phew you still with me i then took out a 30 year lease between me and her any way I understand i have broken the law under thailands penal code which makes it illegal to use a Nominee to purchase a property and buy land. We have now split up and I want to sell the house the princess is not playing ball . as stated earlier I have been reading up on thai law . I can prove 100% that the money used to purchase the property was mine and was sent from the UK to the developers bank account the proof is called the Foreign Exchange transaction Form. Any one fallen asleep yet :jap: My Lawyer has advised me like all good lawyers in thailand that I will be summoned to court to give an account of what has happend the I will be given 12 months to sell the property the land office will retain 5% of the value of the sale and basically she will get nothing. Apparantly there are literally hundreds of cases like mine going through the courts now in Phuket alone this does not surprise me as many stupid people like me have put land and house under a thai princesses name . The negative side also is that the Alien myself could also go to Prison according to thai law ( i have been told this will not happen practically impossible not good for thailands image ha ha 2 questions Does anyone know any farang who has been in the same situation as me gone to court been able to sell the house and give the land office 5% and the princess has ended up with nothing. 2nd question does anyone know of any farang who has been imprisoned for using a thai to purchase land and property ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackdawson Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 i thought we had decided dudes weren't going to buy their t-raks houses anymore . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trogers Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 As I have mentioned before, such a method to acquire landed properties is a means to an end, but not an end to the means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cangetman Posted May 7, 2011 Author Share Posted May 7, 2011 i thought we had decided dudes weren't going to buy their t-raks houses anymore . hey jackdawson could not agree with you more , this stupid dude was thinking with the little head 3 years ago not the big ahead , anyway what is done is done i need to move forward some advice on my questions would be appreciated i suppose the most important one is what are the realistic chances of me going to prison as a farang for using her as a nominee to purchase land and property , thai law seems to be on my side everyone i speak to agrees and believe me jack i have read everyhting possible about the situation i am in. I am not being naive thailand is very grey not black and white i spent 10 years there so i made lots of stupid mistakes as well as having a great time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrry Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 Your lease still stands. However the house belongs to her. If you have3 the lease it continues but when it ends reverts to her. If you break the lease...she gets the lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kathukid Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 I don't believe that people have not got the message as of yet. I offer this. Smartly invest the value of the house and edarn enough money to rent a nice place. You have the money... unlike the op of this thread....... I have made two big gifts.. Motor Bikes... I Fino and one Vespa (pang) The Fino booked out in about a month and I'm still trying to get rid of the Vespa girl! Buy the panties and nasty bras..... that's all you need! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaiwanderer Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 Cangetman, You are both potentially liable for a fine and or imprisonment under both the land code and penal code. Whether that will happen (to you, to her or to you both) has nothing to do with any concern over Thailand's image or at least not in the way you appear to think. I wouldn't rely on what people claim has happened in other cases. The problem with an enforced sale is retaining value. You might want to consider having your lawyer explain what he/she thinks will happen to your ex and offering her a small percentage to avoid the need to go to all that trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boater Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 be this a warning NOT TO BUY IN YOUR GF name, why did you not just buy in your own name ??? , who was the developer? , Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 Maybe I misread the OP. If the property is in the name of the ex-GF and she is Thai then its legally her property (maybe not ethically, but that's another story)and she is not a nominee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaiwanderer Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 (edited) Maybe I misread the OP. If the property is in the name of the ex-GF and she is Thai then its legally her property (maybe not ethically, but that's another story)and she is not a nominee. Well she is no longer a nominee since she wishes to make her own decisions about the property that's in her name. He needs to get her to bend to his will or satisfy the court that she was a nominee and get the order he wishes. This of course involves establishing his own illegal activity. Edited May 7, 2011 by thaiwanderer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrry Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 Maybe I misread the OP. If the property is in the name of the ex-GF and she is Thai then its legally her property (maybe not ethically, but that's another story)and she is not a nominee. Well she is no longer a nominee since she wishes to make her own decisions about the property that's in her name. He needs to get her to bend to his will or satisfy the court that she was a nominee and get the order he wishes. This of course involves establishing his own illegal activity. No he does not. It is her house and that is npot an issue. She has leased it to him for 30 years and if that is on the chanote that is not an issue either. What he can do is offer to forgo the lease and if the compensaion forthis is for half the value of the house paid by her to him so be it. That is a commercial transaction for value...not a nominee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 Typically nominees are used for land purchases by a company controlled by a falang. If the house and land are in her actual name one assumes it is not company ownership. She is Thai, ergo she can own land and house in her own name which appears to be the case. Seems to me the classic mistake has been made and IMO he is hooped if its all in her name and not a company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedObserver Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 I fail to see how the girlfriend is a nominee. She holds the land title deed (Chanote?) in her name and has legal ownership of the house and land. The OP has a 30 year lease contract to occupy the premises in consideration therefore. Now the OP wants to sell what is not legally his to sell, is crying foul, and wants to back out of the deal. Cheeky gentleman is he. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaiwanderer Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 It's up to the OP to persuade the court that she was a nominee, apparently on the basis that he can prove direct payment for the sale but there was no payment for the lease. A nominee doesn't require a thai company structure. Persuading the court this is what happened and it wasn't a gift is one thing, getting them to sympathise is another - since he's essentially appealing to the law only because she's now not acting illegally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiangmaibruce Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 (edited) The sale would seem to be binding, as with the lease (assuming that was registered). The fact that you can prove you provided the money has been used in a divorce situation whereby the judges apparently sometimes give precedence to the divorce laws (separation of assets) over the land ownership laws. But that's irrelevant in this situation - she was only a g/friend. And I thought the 5% penalty only applied if you didn't dispose of the property within the 12 month timeframe ... and I've only heard of this in the case of property willed to a foreigner ... so again possibly irrelevant ... unless maybe this is the bent lawyer's cut. A negotiated settlement would appear to be your best strategy if you don't want to live in it ... I wonder ... did you get a clause written into the lease that allows you to sub-lease without getting the owner's consent? And who has possession now? Edited May 8, 2011 by chiangmaibruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cangetman Posted May 8, 2011 Author Share Posted May 8, 2011 Cangetman, You are both potentially liable for a fine and or imprisonment under both the land code and penal code. Whether that will happen (to you, to her or to you both) has nothing to do with any concern over Thailand's image or at least not in the way you appear to think. I wouldn't rely on what people claim has happened in other cases. The problem with an enforced sale is retaining value. You might want to consider having your lawyer explain what he/she thinks will happen to your ex and offering her a small percentage to avoid the need to go to all that trouble. thanks thaiwanderer i offered the princess 20% of the value of the property but she wanted 80% i told her to go jump in to the andaman sea and not come back up again, the lease i have on the property is water tight the problem is she wont get out of the house. This is why i am going down the legal road . Thaiwanderer you are clearly somone who has read up on the penal code good to know . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cangetman Posted May 8, 2011 Author Share Posted May 8, 2011 be this a warning NOT TO BUY IN YOUR GF name, why did you not just buy in your own name ??? , who was the developer? , because i was stupid plain and simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cangetman Posted May 8, 2011 Author Share Posted May 8, 2011 I fail to see how the girlfriend is a nominee. She holds the land title deed (Chanote?) in her name and has legal ownership of the house and land. The OP has a 30 year lease contract to occupy the premises in consideration therefore. Now the OP wants to sell what is not legally his to sell, is crying foul, and wants to back out of the deal. Cheeky gentleman is he. Cheeky gentleman actually has the chanot dont think actually means much reading up on thai law she can be classed as the nominee as technically speaking i used her as a thai national to buy land and property which ever way we want to dress it up she is a nominee. i am not looking for any sympathy just tried to get out of a tight hole some positive advice would be appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langsuan Man Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 2 questions Does anyone know any farang who has been in the same situation as me gone to court been able to sell the house and give the land office 5% and the princess has ended up with nothing. It has never been reported here at TV as happening. The closest has been responses from members who were married and ended up with 50% because of the Thai community property laws, nothing to do with the nominee situation. I question this 5% to the land office, why would they in any way be entitled to anything other than the fees they charge for land transactions 2nd question does anyone know of any farang who has been imprisoned for using a thai to purchase land and property ? Once again has never been reported here and I personally think that the threat of imprisonment is hyperbole from your lawyer. This is a civil matter and the only time the "police" would be involved is if it were a massive fraud perpetrated on many innocent investors You wanted positive advice and IMHO your lease trumps all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfchandler Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 I'm no expert in this, but what Johnnyk is saying seems to apply here... The GF is the legal owner of the house.... based on what the OP has done. I don't think there's any Thai law against a farang guy being, forgive me for saying so, so stupid as to hand over 10 million baht to buy a house as a gift for his GF. He's talking about having a 30 year lease. But I didn't think farang could have a legal, enforceable lease any longer than 4 years or so under Thai codes, not clear on all the details... But that limiting factor I'm thinking of is supposedly what keeps everyone from doing what the OP has done....because you supposedly can't guarantee a long-term house/property lease as a farang.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 He's talking about having a 30 year lease. But I didn't think farang could have a legal, enforceable lease any longer than 4 years or so under Thai codes... wrong thinking. a 30y lease is a 30y lease provided it is entered on the chanote and the appropriate tax has been paid to the land office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyIdea Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 The OP has not used a nominee to buy the house and the Thai girl friend is not a nominee. The Thai girl friend is the legal owner of the land and the house The OP has a 30 year lease and he has the right to occupy the house for the reminder of the time in the lease. If the Thai girl friend is in the house and refuse to leave, then it will take him one to a few years to get her out the legal way The OP cannot sell what is legally not his, this is absolutely correct and it should not be any other way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedObserver Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 (edited) Ah, the facts come out. The OP has retained possession of the Chanote title deed to the disadvantage of the ex-girlfriend who therefore cannot exercise her ownership rights over the property. By doing so the OP is signifying his intention to retain effective control of the property instead of his nominee ex-girlfriend. It would have been much easier if the OP stated so in post #1. Edited May 9, 2011 by InterestedObserver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyIdea Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Doesn't change the fact that the Thai girl friend is the owner of the house A Thai court would simply uphold both ownership and lease Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfchandler Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 (edited) Is the important factor who possesses the physical chanote deed, or in whose name the property is held on the chanote? The OP is saying he has the chanote, but I'm assuming it's in the ex-GF's name....For a house and land, the Land Dept. wouldn't allow otherwise. Edited May 9, 2011 by jfchandler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedObserver Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Doesn't change the fact that the Thai girl friend is the owner of the house A Thai court would simply uphold both ownership and lease If the nominee relationship is affirmed by the court, the Land Department will compel sale of the property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyIdea Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 (edited) Doesn't change the fact that the Thai girl friend is the owner of the house A Thai court would simply uphold both ownership and lease If the nominee relationship is affirmed by the court, the Land Department will compel sale of the property. You are right, but I simply cannot believe that a court would ever order it All the Thai girl friend have to say is that - Yes, he told me he wanted to put it in my name but keep control but I never accepted it. I decided to keep control even before it was signed over to me, the farang can think and say what he wants and the Thai girl friend has never been a nominee Edited May 9, 2011 by MikeyIdea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaiwanderer Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Doesn't change the fact that the Thai girl friend is the owner of the house A Thai court would simply uphold both ownership and lease If the nominee relationship is affirmed by the court, the Land Department will compel sale of the property. You are right, but I simply cannot believe that a court would ever order it All the Thai girl friend have to say is that - Yes, he told me he wanted to put it in my name but keep control but I never accepted it. I decided to keep control even before it was signed over to me, the farang can think and say what he wants and the Thai girl friend has never been a nominee The courts have ordered this. Whether that will be the case for the OP is another matter. (In defending it the Thai ex would be better claiming it was always a gift). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacificperson Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 But he told me that he was buying me a house. All I had to do was sign a lease for him. Now, I have no money and no place to live. I need to stay here a little longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cangetman Posted May 9, 2011 Author Share Posted May 9, 2011 Doesn't change the fact that the Thai girl friend is the owner of the house A Thai court would simply uphold both ownership and lease If the nominee relationship is affirmed by the court, the Land Department will compel sale of the property. You are right, but I simply cannot believe that a court would ever order it All the Thai girl friend have to say is that - Yes, he told me he wanted to put it in my name but keep control but I never accepted it. I decided to keep control even before it was signed over to me, the farang can think and say what he wants and the Thai girl friend has never been a nominee The courts have ordered this. Whether that will be the case for the OP is another matter. (In defending it the Thai ex would be better claiming it was always a gift). legal process has started so hear goes nothing :jap: , clearly for legal reasons i cant publish names etc but if the thai visa forum gods will allow i will publish a few details as things move on. the best scenario the land office under the penal code are convinced she is a nominee and give me authority to dispose of the house within 12 months a long shot i know . the second scenario is that i finally manage to evict her from the property which will at least allow me to rent the property out for the remaining 27 years if the courts enforce the lease. at least by going legal it will stop the princess from applying for another chanot as i have all the originals . looks like i may be making 2 court appeareances throughout this case . I dont believe she has the funds to defend herself not sure if this makes a difference in thailand from what i can gather no such thing as legal aid in thailand. also if she does not turn up to court do i automatically win!!!! does anyone know the answer to this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now