Legal Issue - Family Land Used As Security

[Douggie Style]

Sorry don't have time to read the whole thread, so this might have been answered before..

The older brother was holding the land in trust, as a trustee, not as an owner.

So he never had title and couldn't loan against it. A trustee can't use trust property personally.

I am not sure how Thai law goes on equity but feel this will be the case and the courts will rectify this.

I feel the chanote issues probably follow this point not precede it.

But first you may need to get a court to declare there was a trust (via your lawyer), then if so the rest of the problems will probably fall away. If it goes that way you would want to request new trustees (all the family or a third party) and get the chanote issue sorted. You would also ask for all contracts, based on the breach of ubermai fidei to be voided.

Of course TIT but a lot of their commercial law is similar to west...

Thailand does not have trusts....they are ilegal

Wow thanks Harry...just had a read and googled it...seems you are right..also explains a lot..lol....appreciate the correction...a useful thing to know as well...cheers

[mrbojangles]

@ mrbojangles

The family has decided to repay. I mentioned that above.

Then I don't understand why the lender is trying to do a quick sale. Surely if they have agreed to repay, this is the easiest option for all.

Sorry, maybe the sequence of events is not clear:

The family learned about the loan at a stage where the lender had given up on retrieving the loan from their brother. The family was told that the paper work had gone to the lawyer who was now dealing with it and that they could expect to get evicted in a month's time.

However, through talking to the lender the family was offered a chance to repay including interest over 8 months. The current suggestion internally in the family is that the four parties (remaining brothers and sisters) split payments between them. I think this is a recipe for disaster though as they're incapable of agreeing what to do if one of them fails to make payment. But that's another story.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Gary A]

The lender can take the land only if his name is on the back of the chanote showing that he is holding a mortgage on that land. If the chanote does not show a legal mortgage that was recorded by the land office, I think the lender is out of luck.

[dksharron]

The lender was greedy and careless.

A bit harsh. We don't know the lenders side of the story in all this. For all we know, the family could have known all about this loan from the start and are now trying to wriggle out of paying. Not much goes on in a village without everyone knowing. Did the brother turn up with a new Motorcy one day? What did he buy with the money? Someone must have noticed something new.

I'm not accusing the family of any of this, I'm just making a point that we don't know the full story.

OK, and I need to make a response based on the information provided by the OP.

I do wonder why the lender waited for five years, this is a very unusual behavior. The OP never mentioned any interest being paid for these five years. That does not add up. Thai lenders do not wait five years to collect interest on loans.

And, I would still say it is careless as the borrower was not the name on the back of the chinote.

[Khun Jean]

Not all lenders are looking for a quick profit.

Maybe this was more in the form of help.

Most lenders that lend out money to help someone are not doing the things to protect themselves.

If that is the case, the moral obligation is there to pay back.

If it is a business like deal, securities and risks are taken by both parties and as such no moral obligation exists.

[mrbojangles]

Not all lenders are looking for a quick profit.

Maybe this was more in the form of help.

Most lenders that lend out money to help someone are not doing the things to protect themselves.

If that is the case, the moral obligation is there to pay back.

If it is a business like deal, securities and risks are taken by both parties and as such no moral obligation exists.

Yep. That is where I was coming from. I have fallen foul of letting my heart rule my head in the past and lent money to a friend cos he was so desperate. I didn't do it to make a profit and I certainly hadn't covered all my bases. Getting the money back wasn't easy (but I got it) and in the end I lost what I thought at the time of the loan, was a good friend.