New Draconian Property Law To Deport Foreigners Who "Owns" Land Illegally

[simple1]

Are Land Offices still registering usufructs? - not if at the time of application you are married to a Thai, not enforceable under Thai law.

I don't think there has been any directive to Land offices not to register usufructs. Usufruct is enshrined in the law and would require an act of parliament to phase it out, something that is certainly not a legislative priority of the current government. What has been happening for years is that some local Land Dept staff either don't like usufructs or, more likely, don't like usufructs in favour of foreigners. So they just refuse to register them and, this being Thailand, they act like little Hitlers with the power to make up whatever laws please them. Technically you may file a complaint about their refusal to abide by Thai law with the Administrative Court but I can't say how far this would get you, particularly if there is any element of nomineeship in the ownership of the land in question.

What the Land Office's don't like are Usufructs presented to them that have been severely modified by lawyers, some of them have so much clauses and alterations they just confuse!!, never known of anyone having a problem registering an Usufruct using the standard paperwork provided by the Land Office.

In my experience the Land Office in Bkk didn't look at the agreements between the parties to the usufruct drawn up by lawyers. They were only interested in their standard form, although they did interview my wife and ask her somewhat half heartedly if she really wanted to assign a life time usufruct for nil consideration. It is possible that some offices might ask to see the agreements but they will not register them as part of the usufruct. If the lawyer's agreement creates a problem, it might be easiest to tell the Land Office that there isn't a separate agreement - just the standard form. The legal agreements don't effect the registration or enforcement of the usufruct by the Land Office which is to done according to law and ministerial regulations. Any breech of the legal agreement has to be addressed in a civil court. I think the problem is more likely to be the interview of the usufructor revealing the essence of the lawyers' agreement and the officer's personal conclusions that the deal is unfair to the Thai usufructor. At any rate any agreement between man and wife can be held by a court to be null and void under the Civil and Commercial Code, if the court rules that one spouse took unfair advantage of the other.

So in essence, a Usufruct between a foreigner and their Thai wife will be accepted and registered by a provincial Land Office. This is opposite to what I have been told by a Thai lawyer, but never mind. You are saying the Usufruct is subject to a Court ruling for enforcement should the parties, at the time of separation, not agree on access rights to the property. Therefore the Usufruct instrument does not provide the foreigner, married with a Thai, any certainty whatsoever.

[mozzieslapper]

I read on here that but I can not find it that in a couple of years, in ASIAN, foreign companies can own land in Thailand, it is part of ASIAN agreement.

I have meet people planing to use a Singapore company to own their home.

Anyone know the proposed ASIAN agreement?

[Cheops]

@Cheops (Thai Friends)....AHHAAHAAAHAAAAA AHAHHAAAAAAHAAA STOP IT ! ( Thai friends) ahahhhahaaaaahhahaaaaaa

There is no such thing as a Thai friend.....a few good Thai wives but even they will look at you sometime and say...Yes! it have to be that way...this is Thailand.. Your a F'n idiot if you think you have a real Thai friend. (Thailand IS my homecountry) ahaaahaaaaahaaaahaaaa What will you do for an encore. You either have no possesions and live from hand to mouth or your a complete fool to believe they are your friends. First time you have a serious Thai on falang problem away from your home you will find out just how kind Thailand. is.

Well, your post says probably more about you than about me To use your unnecessary words: you are a F'n idiot to write such a post about people you don't even know.

And I gladly keep it this way! Probably you don't have friends in your homecountry as well.

There are cerntainly a lot of good people here. Of course there are also a lot of bad people here, but this is the same in your homecountry.

I know that I have quite some good Thai friends. Real friends. For example one of them co-signed a 1 million car-finance (and if you really know Thai people you will know that they are hesitate to do this even for family, but as said these friends really know me very well), since it's difficult to get some trust from banks in the beginning. Probably that has to do with all the bad foreigners here who don't have friends (neither here or in their homecountry) and behave like they are the best (nicely said!). There are more examples why I know my friends are real friends, but I will not bother you with this and I will not try to explain to you about the homecountry thing, since your mindset will not believe it anyway.

What do still here in Thailand anyway? Since you can't make any friends here, don't trust the people here and you don't see this as your homecountry? I bet you are one of those people who just come here to enjoy and misuse the Thai females (reading in your post that you only have some good Thai wives).

You REALLY can't see past the end of your nose can you! He only co-signed your loan for the car hoping you would default and he could pick it up after you had made 1/2 the payments.

GET THIS STRAIGHT.....YOU WILL NEVER BE THAI.....YOU WILL ALWAYS BE LOOKED DOWN UPON!!!

WAKE UP dreamer, you are caught up in fantasy land worse than the idiots that frequent the bars looking for a good wife. Oh and by the way, misuse their females, who the dickens do you think sends them to work in the bars in the first place to be "misused" as you put it? THEIR PARENTS who don't want to work and only had them in the first place so they could live off them. Thai culture from good wholesome Thai families no doubt friends of yours.

i agree this guy is sucker, he will get cheated sooner or later that is exactly how falang is loosing all his fortune and end up under the bridge

And I need to take advice from someone who can't even write the word I correct?

I see you are looking for a condo in Pattaya. You advice me about getting cheated while you are going to live in cheat-city? I know enough.

Edited July 2, 2012 by Cheops

[davidstipek]

Over the past decade, there have been so many statements from various government officials that they are about to clamp down on foreigners owning land through illegal nominees, and that new, draconian laws will be introduced.

But apart from a few ‘scaremongering’ actions and statements from regional land offices that they are going after these land-owning ‘criminals’, little has been done to disturb the peace and tranquillity of those farangs who ‘own a property through the company/nominee system. To my knowledge, not a single farang, who lives in his own home, has ever been brought to book, and had his home seized or been forced to sell and deported from Thailand.

Therefor it is not unreasonable to assume that these new proposed laws will also die a similar death over the coming weeks and months.

Changing the land laws here is a very lengthy and complicated business, and just because one guy says he is drafting new laws, there is absolutely no reason to assume that anything is going to change any time soon – if ever.

There are so many obstacles to overcome, including partisan ‘fights to the death’ by opposing political parties on anything that smacks of controversial legislation that in all probability, it will die a death like all previous land reform proposals.

If the government wanted to clamp down on foreign land ownership, it would make far more sense to go after the ‘nominee shams’ than try to bring in new laws. They already have the necessary laws if they really want to do something.

In any event, for a vast majority of farangs who only want their dream home in paradise to eke out their remaining years, then the proposal to lengthen the lease period from 30 to 50 or 90 years would satisfy a vast majority of farang residents. The maximum 30 year lease rule has always been the major bone of contention as they would live in fear of being thrown out of their homes in their dotage, with little money and nowhere to go.

As for those who predict dire consequences for the tourist industry if such laws are passed, well quite frankly that is just laughable. The number of tourists coming to Thailand has increased year on year for decades, regardless of coups, murders and rapes of foreigners, scams, and any amount of negative publicity.

The punters will never stop coming here – no matter what the government does to the land laws or anything else, for that matter. It is fact that for every tourist who says they are not coming back, there are at least ten new ones to take their place. Get used to it, and stop making foolish, unsubstantiated, dire predictions on tourist numbers dramatically dropping.

99% of the tourists couldn’t give a hoot what Thailand does with its land laws.

But maybe these new proposals have nothing to do with the farangs who own land and homes through dubious legal devices.

It is actually highly possible that it has much more to do with the activities of an alarming trend in governments and corporations of rich countries to buy up farmland on a large scale in more than 60 developing countries to produce basic foods for export.

According to the farmers’ rights group, GRAIN, on worldwide farmland grabs, the massive rush was triggered by the food crisis in 2007 and 2008.

To protect themselves, the food-importing countries, led by the Gulf States, started to use "farming abroad" to secure direct food supplies.

According to the World Bank, about 50 million hectares of land were sold or under long-term lease to foreign governments and investors in 2008 and 2009 alone and according to Land Matrix, an online public database of large-scale land deals, 227 million hectares were involved in this global farmland grab.

That is more than 1,400 million rai of farmland, or half the land area of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

As a result of this global land grabbing, millions of poor farmers are being thrown off their land, local water sources are siphoned to feed giant agro-industries, and ecosystems are severely damaged by large-scale chemical-intensive plantations.

Among the main countries seeking farmland abroad are the Gulf States, China, South Korea and Japan. Closer to home are Singapore and Malaysia. For example, Kuwait is reportedly investing US$20 million to irrigate 4,500 hectares in Laos to produce rice for export to Kuwait.

While the buying up of paddy fields in Thailand has yet to be exposed, many scenic areas in resort towns are now in the hands of foreign real estate businesses.

For years, mountains in the North have been turned into chemical-intensive orange plantations by Chinese money and corn plantations by contract farm giants.

Meanwhile, forest dwellers are kicked off their ancestral land for forest officials' carbon credit money. Old communities are also evicted from the forests to make way for timber and oil palm plantations.

So concerns about massive land grabbing really have nothing to do with xenophobia.

They stem from a desire to hold the government accountable when the drive to make Thailand the so-called ‘Kitchen of the World’ ends up destroying local ecological systems, small farmers' livelihoods, and the country’s own food security.

Why don’t we just wait and see what this proposed legislation is really all about before we start to throw our toys out of our prams and indulge in unnecessary and unjustified name calling at our Thai hosts?

Wait.... Right!

Law gets past and they (Thailand or some local Policeman) decide to enforce it. They can! Example:

Mr XXX and Mrs XXX live in Chiang Mai. She is Thai and he is a Farang... They have been married for 20 years. So local policeman desides that Land must be in his name, because that is (he Thinks) the custom in Farangs Country. So he proceeds to have land taken, Farang jailed... because they must.. be breaking law somewere....

End result Land is Thai has been in family for 100 years, has been past down to "The Children..." His Wife... Now we have Thai Policeman who must "Save Face" and They change nothing... they take land... Deport Husband... Jail Wife as she must have been Land brokering for him, surely she had broken law.... SOMEWHERE....

Finally Thai Children are at a loss... they lose their Inheritance... Their Given right that was purchased by Great Grand Parents!

Even if you say this will never.... Happen! Will you put money in escrow to award Plantifs when it is? Just because "Loss of Face" to policeman of Goverment Official should not... or will never happen! Screw our Thai Children... Is this really what Thailand is saying??

[samsiam]

Over the past decade, there have been so many statements from various government officials that they are about to clamp down on foreigners owning land through illegal nominees, and that new, draconian laws will be introduced.

But apart from a few ‘scaremongering’ actions and statements from regional land offices that they are going after these land-owning ‘criminals’, little has been done to disturb the peace and tranquillity of those farangs who ‘own a property through the company/nominee system. To my knowledge, not a single farang, who lives in his own home, has ever been brought to book, and had his home seized or been forced to sell and deported from Thailand.

Therefor it is not unreasonable to assume that these new proposed laws will also die a similar death over the coming weeks and months.

Changing the land laws here is a very lengthy and complicated business, and just because one guy says he is drafting new laws, there is absolutely no reason to assume that anything is going to change any time soon – if ever.

There are so many obstacles to overcome, including partisan ‘fights to the death’ by opposing political parties on anything that smacks of controversial legislation that in all probability, it will die a death like all previous land reform proposals.

If the government wanted to clamp down on foreign land ownership, it would make far more sense to go after the ‘nominee shams’ than try to bring in new laws. They already have the necessary laws if they really want to do something.

In any event, for a vast majority of farangs who only want their dream home in paradise to eke out their remaining years, then the proposal to lengthen the lease period from 30 to 50 or 90 years would satisfy a vast majority of farang residents. The maximum 30 year lease rule has always been the major bone of contention as they would live in fear of being thrown out of their homes in their dotage, with little money and nowhere to go.

As for those who predict dire consequences for the tourist industry if such laws are passed, well quite frankly that is just laughable. The number of tourists coming to Thailand has increased year on year for decades, regardless of coups, murders and rapes of foreigners, scams, and any amount of negative publicity.

The punters will never stop coming here – no matter what the government does to the land laws or anything else, for that matter. It is fact that for every tourist who says they are not coming back, there are at least ten new ones to take their place. Get used to it, and stop making foolish, unsubstantiated, dire predictions on tourist numbers dramatically dropping.

99% of the tourists couldn’t give a hoot what Thailand does with its land laws.

But maybe these new proposals have nothing to do with the farangs who own land and homes through dubious legal devices.

It is actually highly possible that it has much more to do with the activities of an alarming trend in governments and corporations of rich countries to buy up farmland on a large scale in more than 60 developing countries to produce basic foods for export.

According to the farmers’ rights group, GRAIN, on worldwide farmland grabs, the massive rush was triggered by the food crisis in 2007 and 2008.

To protect themselves, the food-importing countries, led by the Gulf States, started to use "farming abroad" to secure direct food supplies.

According to the World Bank, about 50 million hectares of land were sold or under long-term lease to foreign governments and investors in 2008 and 2009 alone and according to Land Matrix, an online public database of large-scale land deals, 227 million hectares were involved in this global farmland grab.

That is more than 1,400 million rai of farmland, or half the land area of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

As a result of this global land grabbing, millions of poor farmers are being thrown off their land, local water sources are siphoned to feed giant agro-industries, and ecosystems are severely damaged by large-scale chemical-intensive plantations.

Among the main countries seeking farmland abroad are the Gulf States, China, South Korea and Japan. Closer to home are Singapore and Malaysia. For example, Kuwait is reportedly investing US$20 million to irrigate 4,500 hectares in Laos to produce rice for export to Kuwait.

While the buying up of paddy fields in Thailand has yet to be exposed, many scenic areas in resort towns are now in the hands of foreign real estate businesses.

For years, mountains in the North have been turned into chemical-intensive orange plantations by Chinese money and corn plantations by contract farm giants.

Meanwhile, forest dwellers are kicked off their ancestral land for forest officials' carbon credit money. Old communities are also evicted from the forests to make way for timber and oil palm plantations.

So concerns about massive land grabbing really have nothing to do with xenophobia.

They stem from a desire to hold the government accountable when the drive to make Thailand the so-called ‘Kitchen of the World’ ends up destroying local ecological systems, small farmers' livelihoods, and the country’s own food security.

Why don’t we just wait and see what this proposed legislation is really all about before we start to throw our toys out of our prams and indulge in unnecessary and unjustified name calling at our Thai hosts?

Wait.... Right!

Law gets past and they (Thailand or some local Policeman) decide to enforce it. They can! Example:

Mr XXX and Mrs XXX live in Chiang Mai. She is Thai and he is a Farang... They have been married for 20 years. So local policeman desides that Land must be in his name, because that is (he Thinks) the custom in Farangs Country. So he proceeds to have land taken, Farang jailed... because they must.. be breaking law somewere....

End result Land is Thai has been in family for 100 years, has been past down to "The Children..." His Wife... Now we have Thai Policeman who must "Save Face" and They change nothing... they take land... Deport Husband... Jail Wife as she must have been Land brokering for him, surely she had broken law.... SOMEWHERE....

Finally Thai Children are at a loss... they lose their Inheritance... Their Given right that was purchased by Great Grand Parents!

Even if you say this will never.... Happen! Will you put money in escrow to award Plantifs when it is? Just because "Loss of Face" to policeman of Goverment Official should not... or will never happen! Screw our Thai Children... Is this really what Thailand is saying??

you have a vivid imagination david.

[davidstipek]

Over the past decade, there have been so many statements from various government officials that they are about to clamp down on foreigners owning land through illegal nominees, and that new, draconian laws will be introduced.

But apart from a few ‘scaremongering’ actions and statements from regional land offices that they are going after these land-owning ‘criminals’, little has been done to disturb the peace and tranquillity of those farangs who ‘own a property through the company/nominee system. To my knowledge, not a single farang, who lives in his own home, has ever been brought to book, and had his home seized or been forced to sell and deported from Thailand.

Therefor it is not unreasonable to assume that these new proposed laws will also die a similar death over the coming weeks and months.

Changing the land laws here is a very lengthy and complicated business, and just because one guy says he is drafting new laws, there is absolutely no reason to assume that anything is going to change any time soon – if ever.

There are so many obstacles to overcome, including partisan ‘fights to the death’ by opposing political parties on anything that smacks of controversial legislation that in all probability, it will die a death like all previous land reform proposals.

If the government wanted to clamp down on foreign land ownership, it would make far more sense to go after the ‘nominee shams’ than try to bring in new laws. They already have the necessary laws if they really want to do something.

In any event, for a vast majority of farangs who only want their dream home in paradise to eke out their remaining years, then the proposal to lengthen the lease period from 30 to 50 or 90 years would satisfy a vast majority of farang residents. The maximum 30 year lease rule has always been the major bone of contention as they would live in fear of being thrown out of their homes in their dotage, with little money and nowhere to go.

As for those who predict dire consequences for the tourist industry if such laws are passed, well quite frankly that is just laughable. The number of tourists coming to Thailand has increased year on year for decades, regardless of coups, murders and rapes of foreigners, scams, and any amount of negative publicity.

The punters will never stop coming here – no matter what the government does to the land laws or anything else, for that matter. It is fact that for every tourist who says they are not coming back, there are at least ten new ones to take their place. Get used to it, and stop making foolish, unsubstantiated, dire predictions on tourist numbers dramatically dropping.

99% of the tourists couldn’t give a hoot what Thailand does with its land laws.

But maybe these new proposals have nothing to do with the farangs who own land and homes through dubious legal devices.

It is actually highly possible that it has much more to do with the activities of an alarming trend in governments and corporations of rich countries to buy up farmland on a large scale in more than 60 developing countries to produce basic foods for export.

According to the farmers’ rights group, GRAIN, on worldwide farmland grabs, the massive rush was triggered by the food crisis in 2007 and 2008.

To protect themselves, the food-importing countries, led by the Gulf States, started to use "farming abroad" to secure direct food supplies.

According to the World Bank, about 50 million hectares of land were sold or under long-term lease to foreign governments and investors in 2008 and 2009 alone and according to Land Matrix, an online public database of large-scale land deals, 227 million hectares were involved in this global farmland grab.

That is more than 1,400 million rai of farmland, or half the land area of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

As a result of this global land grabbing, millions of poor farmers are being thrown off their land, local water sources are siphoned to feed giant agro-industries, and ecosystems are severely damaged by large-scale chemical-intensive plantations.

Among the main countries seeking farmland abroad are the Gulf States, China, South Korea and Japan. Closer to home are Singapore and Malaysia. For example, Kuwait is reportedly investing US$20 million to irrigate 4,500 hectares in Laos to produce rice for export to Kuwait.

While the buying up of paddy fields in Thailand has yet to be exposed, many scenic areas in resort towns are now in the hands of foreign real estate businesses.

For years, mountains in the North have been turned into chemical-intensive orange plantations by Chinese money and corn plantations by contract farm giants.

Meanwhile, forest dwellers are kicked off their ancestral land for forest officials' carbon credit money. Old communities are also evicted from the forests to make way for timber and oil palm plantations.

So concerns about massive land grabbing really have nothing to do with xenophobia.

They stem from a desire to hold the government accountable when the drive to make Thailand the so-called ‘Kitchen of the World’ ends up destroying local ecological systems, small farmers' livelihoods, and the country’s own food security.

Why don’t we just wait and see what this proposed legislation is really all about before we start to throw our toys out of our prams and indulge in unnecessary and unjustified name calling at our Thai hosts?

Wait.... Right!

Law gets past and they (Thailand or some local Policeman) decide to enforce it. They can! Example:

Mr XXX and Mrs XXX live in Chiang Mai. She is Thai and he is a Farang... They have been married for 20 years. So local policeman desides that Land must be in his name, because that is (he Thinks) the custom in Farangs Country. So he proceeds to have land taken, Farang jailed... because they must.. be breaking law somewere....

End result Land is Thai has been in family for 100 years, has been past down to "The Children..." His Wife... Now we have Thai Policeman who must "Save Face" and They change nothing... they take land... Deport Husband... Jail Wife as she must have been Land brokering for him, surely she had broken law.... SOMEWHERE....

Finally Thai Children are at a loss... they lose their Inheritance... Their Given right that was purchased by Great Grand Parents!

Even if you say this will never.... Happen! Will you put money in escrow to award Plantifs when it is? Just because "Loss of Face" to policeman of Goverment Official should not... or will never happen! Screw our Thai Children... Is this really what Thailand is saying??

you have a vivid imagination david.

Okay... Maybe I do! BUT.

.

Can you honestly say after reading the many different posts on TV including the Homoside of two Canadian Sisters... That "Saving Thai Face" is not the first thing that is brought up in any confrontation???

Regardless who is at fault, who is wronged... Thai Police or Goverment is always....... Right. agree??

Are you willing to sit and wait, then say "Wow" this can't be happening... Wake up it is a Daily Thing, regardless of what Officials say. It happens... Just like "Tea Money"

Thailand has set their sights on increasing Tourisim to a "Unreachable Level" why? Because they have or will open the gates first with Law changes such as this. Maybe it is not the intended meaning... But I would be willing to place a substaniable Bet in Los Vegas on it happening! Then take my winnings to Burma, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia and Invest... Can you smell the concrete... Skyscrapers... High Rises...?

Edited July 2, 2012 by davidstipek

[Jawnie]

"Ombudsman Siracha Charoenpanij said the new law would comprise punishment for companies offering advice to foreigners on how to hold Thai property by disguising their legal transaction. This would include law firms and consultants."

Question: how will the Thai authorities find and prosecute lawyers and real estate agents when they can't even stop the cops from shaking down motorcycle taxi drivers?

[TommoPhysicist]

And I need to take advice from someone who can't even write the word I correct?

I see you are looking for a condo in Pattaya. You advice me about getting cheated while you are going to live in cheat-city? I know enough.

If one wants to act as the spelling and grammar police, one should first learn when to use 'advise' and when not to use 'advice'.

[robinhill]

With the world still in economic crisis, foreign currencies such as the US dollar and Euro under pressure as a result and at low levels in respect of the Thai baht, exports from Thailand to these countries down on previous levels, foreign investment is far more scarce than before. Other countries are adapting to this global economic situation and becoming more competitive for whatever foreign investment they can attract, because the knock on effect to their economy is worth more than the equivalent that they can generate domestically. For any politician or official in Thailand to suggest taking steps which might further constrict foreign investment in this country is just plain stupid, and obviously has an ulterior motive, when good economic sense would be to do the opposite. But, suggest to the Thais that they can make 20% of every foreigner's property which is "legally" appropriated from them and the policy will be a sure fire vote winner, which is after all quite obviously far more important to this official than implementing a policy which will be of far more benefit to the economy and the Thai people overall.

[Cheops]

And I need to take advice from someone who can't even write the word I correct?

I see you are looking for a condo in Pattaya. You advice me about getting cheated while you are going to live in cheat-city? I know enough.

If one wants to act as the spelling and grammar police, one should first learn when to use 'advise' and when not to use 'advice'.

Very sharp, but thanks TommoPhysicist!

I'm not native English, so I make my mistakes as well. I checked on how to use the words advice and advise, which is clear to me now. Thanks for your advice

[johnnyk]

Making a speech and drafting a bill are not the same as an actual change in law. A proposed bill is a very very long way from legislation so people should not jump to paranoid conclusions. He is one politician among hundreds and they all like attention.

[notime]

The most senseless comment yet - unless you are joking of course.

Can you please explain to me why a Thai can buy land in the UK, but UK citizens can't buy land here?

This should not be illegal in the first place. Allow foreigners to buy land in Thailand, but put a limit on how muuch they can buy. Then everybody's happy.

This is the one instance that I wish I had some kind of influence over David Cameron. I would love to see the look on Hi-so Thais' faces if the a UK law came in to stop Thais buying ouur land, unless they change their laws. Som-num-naa!!

"Will there be any land left for our Thai children?"

Definitely not if the foreigners are allowed to take the land back to their countries. More laws are badly needed and rewards should be as big as half of the land being taken away!

Of course I was joking. I believe a joke should not require a smily at the end to let everybody know it's a joke, but if you like it here it comes :-)

[PoodMaiDai]

If they really cared about the children, perhaps they should get their sex trade, child sex trade, teen drug problem, poor education, and human trafficking problems in order. Then move on to the land issues.

Because with the poorly educated kids they are pumping out of their fail factories, they are not going to be worth much to anyone exact for farming and low wage factory work. So they are not going to be land owners anyway, unless their farming parents leave it to them when they die, which in most cases the child will sell it for money as soon as he can.

Lets also evict all Thai land owners from every country in the world. Reciprocity is a bitch. But we should do it for the kids, of course.

Edited July 4, 2012 by PoodMaiDai

[RogueLeader]

Lets also evict all Thai land owners from every country in the world. Reciprocity is a bitch. But we should do it for the kids, of course.

What will that achieve? It's not their fault that the government is acting vindictively. Why should Western governments react with more counterproductive spite?

[johnnyk]

If they really cared about the children, perhaps they should get their sex trade, child sex trade, teen drug problem, poor education, and human trafficking problems in order. Then move on to the land issues.

Because with the poorly educated kids they are pumping out of their fail factories, they are not going to be worth much to anyone exact for farming and low wage factory work. So they are not going to be land owners anyway, unless their farming parents leave it to them when they die, which in most cases the child will sell it for money as soon as he can.

Lets also evict all Thai land owners from every country in the world. Reciprocity is a bitch. But we should do it for the kids, of course.

Yes, and you could organize all those countries to evict Thais. Excellent idea from Fantasy Island. So go ahead, the rest of us may not have the time for this.

[cockerdoodledo]

This was bound to happen eventually,jailing theguilty then kick 'em out

[LennyW]

This was bound to happen eventually,jailing theguilty then kick 'em out

Nothing has actually happened, the law has not even been written or passed, it was only a suggestion from an ombudsman who is in no such position to do anything about it - hot air!!

[kanderson]

Foreign ownership should be of some concern to Thai's. Look at what happened to the Hawaiians.

Very hard for Hawaiians to even live near the beach now. Mostly low paying jobs etc.. Culture decimated in many ways. Some are quite angry and want their Nation back.

I'm sure there are many other examples as well.

Buy a condo in Thailand - in foreign name ownership or rent something. Seems reasonable to me.

[yoshiwara]

Whether a proposal from this 'ombudsman' is enacted or not, a part of the price of owning a property through a nominee company is the continual uncertainty and element of risk attached to such a purchase. It might be discarded but it cannot be disregarded.

[w11guy]

Time to move. I hear Cambodia is nice.

Goodbye.

[w11guy]

Foreigners are permitted to buy land in industrial estates because they generate income and employment.

We're nothing but walking ATMs to these people.

Same in most countries. Even in USA if you have enough money to invest you'll be allowed to live there. No money to invest, then goodbye. But nothing at all wrong with that. All countries need investment and so it needs to be encouraged. It's not good for poor countries to sell all their assets (land) to richer foreigners. That just leads to the company becoming poorer, as any profits are usually spend outside the country. Nothing at all to do with walking ATMs. I certainly don't get treated like that by any Thai people, and neither do most people I know. You obviously hang out with the wrong type of people.

[w11guy]

If they really cared about the children, perhaps they should get their sex trade, child sex trade, teen drug problem, poor education, and human trafficking problems in order. Then move on to the land issues.

Because with the poorly educated kids they are pumping out of their fail factories, they are not going to be worth much to anyone exact for farming and low wage factory work. So they are not going to be land owners anyway, unless their farming parents leave it to them when they die, which in most cases the child will sell it for money as soon as he can.

Lets also evict all Thai land owners from every country in the world. Reciprocity is a bitch. But we should do it for the kids, of course.

Stupid argument. There's a big difference between richer people buying up land in poor counties to an open policy like the UK has.

[thaibeachlovers]

There is really no excuse.

Those that decide to live long term in Thailand should be aware of the policies regarding property rights of foreigners. What’s the point of investing here, hoping that the laws will not be enforced, then complaining afterwards when things don`t go to plan?

For those wanting to Immigrate from their own countries should first do some research and perhaps go somewhere where the system is more ex-pat friendly and would be better suited to they’re lifestyles.

Many come here believing all the exaggerated tales that Thailand is some sort of paradise utopia. Sorry to burst the bubble, but it`s not. Thais only see Westerners as walking cash dispensers, sort of pay as you go guests, where they are completely under the authority of the Thais and strictly controlled.

Invested wealth is power and this is one thing the Thais are afraid of, that farangs will gain a foothold here and there are those who rule that will ensure this never happens.

For those who don’t mind living as third-rate residents with no statutory rights, with the risks of being thrown out the kingdom at a moments notice and where even the poorest Burmese immigrates have more clout in Thailand than the average ex-pat, than Thailand is for you, but there is no point in whinging if you have blown a fortune on a lame duck after you land here, because by that time, it`s too late.

I too do not feel sorry for the Farang "land developers". I know some who have made big money at it and they were the ones that knew it was illegal. building condo blocks and then selling them using this method to sell the other 51% to farangs. Their solicitors helped instigate it. However I can't help feel sorry for the ones that were conned by lines of "that's how it is done", or "everyone does it" and were literally duped into it believing it was all above board. It is likely thy will be the ones who pay the price. The small fry, the others already have someone in their back pocket. The people who really need prosecuting are the ones doing the selling using this method. I almost fell for it but fortunately listened to the "little voice in my head" and waited, and consequently discovered otherwise. It is not just Thais that are unscrupulous, but a lot of them learned too and truly did know what was going on but the material gains outweighed anything else.

Caveat Emptor springs to mind. Still valid after 2,000 years.

[thaibeachlovers]

Whether a proposal from this 'ombudsman' is enacted or not, a part of the price of owning a property through a nominee company is the continual uncertainty and element of risk attached to such a purchase. It might be discarded but it cannot be disregarded.

After many, many years of visiting, and now living in Thailand, nothing would ever make me buy property here.

I fail to understand why ANY farang would do so, unless it's the beer goggles, or lust for a woman that demands it.

[samsiam]

Whether a proposal from this 'ombudsman' is enacted or not, a part of the price of owning a property through a nominee company is the continual uncertainty and element of risk attached to such a purchase. It might be discarded but it cannot be disregarded.

After many, many years of visiting, and now living in Thailand, nothing would ever make me buy property here.

I fail to understand why ANY farang would do so, unless it's the beer goggles, or lust for a woman that demands it.

How about a home....or a quid ??

[bangkokrick]

Whether a proposal from this 'ombudsman' is enacted or not, a part of the price of owning a property through a nominee company is the continual uncertainty and element of risk attached to such a purchase. It might be discarded but it cannot be disregarded.

After many, many years of visiting, and now living in Thailand, nothing would ever make me buy property here.

I fail to understand why ANY farang would do so, unless it's the beer goggles, or lust for a woman that demands it.

I lived in a 50 square metre condo in Bangkok for 9 years it cost me 30000 Baht a month. I decided to buy a house in my wife's name at a cost of 50000 GBP the house is 250 square metres and has a garden. If I stay there for 10 years it costs me 5000GBP a year. Cheap living in big surroundings. So why not buy a house in Thailand.

[thaibeachlovers]

Whether a proposal from this 'ombudsman' is enacted or not, a part of the price of owning a property through a nominee company is the continual uncertainty and element of risk attached to such a purchase. It might be discarded but it cannot be disregarded.

After many, many years of visiting, and now living in Thailand, nothing would ever make me buy property here.

I fail to understand why ANY farang would do so, unless it's the beer goggles, or lust for a woman that demands it.

I lived in a 50 square metre condo in Bangkok for 9 years it cost me 30000 Baht a month. I decided to buy a house in my wife's name at a cost of 50000 GBP the house is 250 square metres and has a garden. If I stay there for 10 years it costs me 5000GBP a year. Cheap living in big surroundings. So why not buy a house in Thailand.

Well for all the obvious reasons when another person owns your house ( NOT saying that will happen to you ).

However, what will you do if an all night karaoke sets up next door, or a businessman decides to open a rock grinding business across the road. It's Thailand- you have no rights or redress.

If renting, at least you can move on.

[thaibeachlovers]

Whether a proposal from this 'ombudsman' is enacted or not, a part of the price of owning a property through a nominee company is the continual uncertainty and element of risk attached to such a purchase. It might be discarded but it cannot be disregarded.

After many, many years of visiting, and now living in Thailand, nothing would ever make me buy property here.

I fail to understand why ANY farang would do so, unless it's the beer goggles, or lust for a woman that demands it.

How about a home....or a quid ??

Is it less of a home if it's rented?

Not all places cost a lot. I stayed in a nice enough place for 5,000 a month till last year, when we moved to the village, and that was definitely cheap living.

[samsiam]

Whether a proposal from this 'ombudsman' is enacted or not, a part of the price of owning a property through a nominee company is the continual uncertainty and element of risk attached to such a purchase. It might be discarded but it cannot be disregarded.

After many, many years of visiting, and now living in Thailand, nothing would ever make me buy property here.

I fail to understand why ANY farang would do so, unless it's the beer goggles, or lust for a woman that demands it.

How about a home....or a quid ??

Is it less of a home if it's rented?

Not all places cost a lot. I stayed in a nice enough place for 5,000 a month till last year, when we moved to the village, and that was definitely cheap living.

yes but there is something nice about doing your own thing to your own home...especially if have kids...additions, etc and decorating inside etc.....also the ongoing peaceful feel of your own home and you can be there until you wish to move or sell...rather than at someone elses orders....and then there is the issue with fixing shit etc.

I have rented most of my life....because I found it convenient and a roaming soul....but owning is also good for different reasons.

[bangkokrick]

Whether a proposal from this 'ombudsman' is enacted or not, a part of the price of owning a property through a nominee company is the continual uncertainty and element of risk attached to such a purchase. It might be discarded but it cannot be disregarded.

After many, many years of visiting, and now living in Thailand, nothing would ever make me buy property here.

I fail to understand why ANY farang would do so, unless it's the beer goggles, or lust for a woman that demands it.

I lived in a 50 square metre condo in Bangkok for 9 years it cost me 30000 Baht a month. I decided to buy a house in my wife's name at a cost of 50000 GBP the house is 250 square metres and has a garden. If I stay there for 10 years it costs me 5000GBP a year. Cheap living in big surroundings. So why not buy a house in Thailand.

Well for all the obvious reasons when another person owns your house ( NOT saying that will happen to you ).

However, what will you do if an all night karaoke sets up next door, or a businessman decides to open a rock grinding business across the road. It's Thailand- you have no rights or redress.

If renting, at least you can move on.

I live in Moo Baan so no chance whatsoever of a Karaoke bar opening up and the houses are already built and sold to Farang Thai couples. It is residential and will remain that way. I am fully aware that I don't own the house and never will, but having lived with my wife for the past 12 years she deserves it for putting up with me for so long.