Being Screwed By Samui Developer

[NevadaInThailand]

I bought a plot of land in Narayan Heights in 2005 in NorthEast Samui. The deal was (under the contract) that I would start the building of a villa within 3 years of Jan 01, 2006 (i.e. by Jan 01, 2009) and would complete the build within one year.

If I didn't comply with those conditions, Samui Estates (now called Thailand Estates) could at their option buy the land back from me at the price I paid for it.

The problem was in 2005 prices in Samui was going gangbusters. Then came the coup in 2006 and everything ground to a halt and has never really picked up other than very marginally lately. I didn't build during these 3 years and neither did 70% of the other 18 owners in Narayan Heights. It is a gated development with 19 plots.

I asked in 2009 about Samui Estates buying the land back from me at the price I paid for it. They said they weren't going to do that and that since everybody was in the same boat, nobody was being forced to build.

Now almost 4 years later, I just got a letter from Samui Estates (Thailand Estates) lawyers stating:

They want to exercise the clause and buy my land back at the price I paid for it minus 5% per year. I went back and checked the contract, there is a clause that says they can claim this 5% per year for a maximum of 3 years.

I paid about 6million baht, so they want pay me 6M - 5% * 3 or 5.1M baht.

I wonder if they can legally do this after so many years. They should have claimed it in 2009 after I violated the contract, not almost 4 years later.

Their lawyer's letter was dated Aug 21, 2012 and states I have to be at the Samui land office on Sept 3, 2012 to give them back the chanot documents and they will pay me the approx 5.1M baht (they don't say how they will do this). If I don't do this they will pursue further legal action against me.

I'm currently not even in Thailand and cannot travel across the world in 2 weeks even if I wanted to accept their tyrannical request, which I do not.

This is a developer in Samui that has been there for many years, blatantly screwing 70% of the people that bought into his development.

[croweater]

You got an ice lock in hells chance of justice. Muntipliedby a factor of 1000 since you Arnt here. Who owns the land, did you buy it useing the share holder deal? if so, your double sunk. tit.

[Soutpeel]

WOW...who are the clowns that state that when you invest property you can't go wrong...

I suppose the first thing to do is retain a lawyer in Thailand, you dont really have too many options other than the legal route...they have your money

[travelmann]

ignore the letter do not respond in any way

[MrRealDeal]

They get a 5 percent discount for wating at least 3 years ..... why wouldnt they wait ?

You failed to live up to your agreement and accuse them of screwing you ? Pretty weird way to look at it.

Yes thet have every right to wait to file if they want to. Another misconception people have ..... that when they break the law or an agreement the other person has to act on it in a way that suits them the best ..... it's the other way around.

In short .... You failed to live up to your agreement , you knowingly signed a contract saying exactly what could happen at the leisure of the other party , they are enforcing the contract you signed , ........ Sorry but you screwed yourself , I feel sorry for you but blaming it on them is simply nonsense and accusing them of some sort of fraud or "screwing" is not only wrong but embarrasing to yourself.

To the poster that says no justice can be had ...... Justice would be having his land taken per the agreement, not keeping it, and thats whats gona happen .....

If thier is a lesson here it is that verbal comments do NOT recind signed contracts. The other lesson is that just because a party allows you extra time on a contract doesnt mean THEY are breaking the contract , it means they are not enforcing the contract at that time, and have every right to enforce it later at their leisure. Obviously in this case after the 3 year 5 percent discount window closed for them.

PS ..... I would advise you to keep reading the contract because it probabbly also makes you liable for any and all costs incurred by the other party if required to enforce the contract , that would be pretty typical in a contract like yours

Edited August 29, 2012 by MrRealDeal

[samran]

do you even own the land? Or is it a company?

[Soutpeel]

do you even own the land? Or is it a company?

One assumes its a company

[norrona]

If I were you I would thank my lucky stars that you are going to get that back, from nearly 8 years ago to now Thailand has changed in so many ways with regards to owning property especially land in a development.

Now even if you do decide to build your dream home on this plot...do you really want to be on an island in a gated estate where the developer has a problem with you and the fact you haven't honoured your side of the deal.

Take the money and run.....you don't say where you're from but I am assuming U.S.A, forget your laws over there buddy....they don't apply to how it is run in Thailand and especially 'mafia' run Samui....

It is ashame you're not from the U.K and bought it as the FX differential from then to now is probably a money maker and would show a nice profit!

[smokie36]

Lots of people have lost more than 15% in the property development nightmare that is Samui.

Take your remaining cash and sanity and count yourself lucky.

[chuang]

.....

If thier is a lesson here it is that verbal comments do NOT recind signed contracts. The other lesson is that just because a party allows you extra time on a contract doesnt mean THEY are breaking the contract , it means they are not enforcing the contract at that time, and have every right to enforce it later at their leisure. Obviously in this case after the 3 year 5 percent discount window closed for them.

PS ..... I would advise you to keep reading the contract because it probabbly also makes you liable for any and all costs incurred by the other party if required to enforce the contract , that would be pretty typical in a contract like yours

You broke the contract..consider yourself lucky to get 5.1 mil back......many investors get nothing...

[siampreggers]

Get your money as quick as you can and never invest in Thailand again.

[MrRealDeal]

As a side explanation to the fact that people have every right to wait to enforce contracts here is an analogy: You owe for a car and the contract says afer 24 hours of non payment the other party can reposess the car and you are at a total loss ..... You call one day after 72 hours of being late on the monthly payment and tell the guy you are late but will pay tomorrow he says no prob. The next month after 25 hours the car is gone , you say hey last month you let me be late so now you have to wait 72 hours from now on because you allowed things to change ..... He says nope I just didnt enforce the contract, I didn't change it , now I am enforcing it, end of story.

Same story with the house , they decided to not enforce then changed their mind , not enforcing it doesn't mean they changed it , it means they havent gotten around to it yet is all.

[lovelomsak]

They get a 5 percent discount for wating at least 3 years ..... why wouldnt they wait ?

You failed to live up to your agreement and accuse them of screwing you ? Pretty weird way to look at it.

Yes thet have every right to wait to file if they want to. Another misconception people have ..... that when they break the law or an agreement the other person has to act on it in a way that suits them the best ..... it's the other way around.

In short .... You failed to live up to your agreement , you knowingly signed a contract saying exactly what could happen at the leisure of the other party , they are enforcing the contract you signed , ........ Sorry but you screwed yourself , I feel sorry for you but blaming it on them is simply nonsense and accusing them of some sort of fraud or "screwing" is not only wrong but embarrasing to yourself.

To the poster that says no justice can be had ...... Justice would be having his land taken per the agreement, not keeping it, and thats whats gona happen .....

If thier is a lesson here it is that verbal comments do NOT recind signed contracts. The other lesson is that just because a party allows you extra time on a contract doesnt mean THEY are breaking the contract , it means they are not enforcing the contract at that time, and have every right to enforce it later at their leisure. Obviously in this case after the 3 year 5 percent discount window closed for them.

PS ..... I would advise you to keep reading the contract because it probabbly also makes you liable for any and all costs incurred by the other party if required to enforce the contract , that would be pretty typical in a contract like yours

I came back to this thread to post exactly what you posted. Read a contract,sign a contract,live up to the contract. It isnot rocket science

[MrRealDeal]

.....

If thier is a lesson here it is that verbal comments do NOT recind signed contracts. The other lesson is that just because a party allows you extra time on a contract doesnt mean THEY are breaking the contract , it means they are not enforcing the contract at that time, and have every right to enforce it later at their leisure. Obviously in this case after the 3 year 5 percent discount window closed for them.

PS ..... I would advise you to keep reading the contract because it probabbly also makes you liable for any and all costs incurred by the other party if required to enforce the contract , that would be pretty typical in a contract like yours

You broke the contract..consider yourself lucky to get 5.1 mil back......many investors get nothing...

I wouldn't really say he "broke" it ...... I would say he chose to use the part of the contract that he thought would benefit him the most and found out later he was wrong and while he wanted to use the buyback clause to his advantage when it was , now crys foul because the other side is using it to their advantage. "Breaking" the contract would be not giving it back as the contract says and like I already pointed out you can be SURE their will be extra penaltys for doing that.

The contract is simple .... Build a house or lose the land ...... he chose option 2 didn't really break the contract. ......... Unless he DOES break it by not sending the paperwork in like they requested, THEN he has broken the contract.

PS .... It's not that they "can buy the land back" Legally what that means is they have the right to FORCE you to sell , it's not that they are buying it back from a legal point of view it's they are forcing him to sell , the reason for that seemingly small point is that when you are required to force a sale any costs can be given the other party for your trouble.

[NevadaInThailand]

As a side explanation to the fact that people have every right to wait to enforce contracts here is an analogy: You owe for a car and the contract says afer 24 hours of non payment the other party can reposess the car and you are at a total loss ..... You call one day after 72 hours of being late on the monthly payment and tell the guy you are late but will pay tomorrow he says no prob. The next month after 25 hours the car is gone , you say hey last month you let me be late so now you have to wait 72 hours from now on because you allowed things to change ..... He says nope I just didnt enforce the contract, I didn't change it , now I am enforcing it, end of story.

Same story with the house , they decided to not enforce then changed their mind , not enforcing it doesn't mean they changed it , it means they havent gotten around to it yet is all.

Thanks for your comments Real Deal.

Further to my situation. The contract is such that they could buy it back for a period of 3 years. Those 3 years expired almost 4 years ago. The way the contract is worded is very vague and open to interpretation.

I can post the specific verbiage shortly FYI.

There are also a number of issues Samui Estates did not adhere to in the contract as well. Again I can provide some details.

[MrRealDeal]

Well certianly all I can comment on is what you tell me ....... I am happy to give you advice with more information that may put things in your favor.

My guess is you are confused about the 3 years ....... It would be highly unlikely that a lawyer would allow you to simply wait 4 years or 10 years and then have their recourse expire , it may be vauge to you but not to a lawyer in fact the "spirit of the contract" would render the expiry thing moot without a clear explanation that that as the case ...... the vauge part is to their advantage because it's obvious enough what the intention is.

[Pseudolus]

Can't you dig out some foundations quickly and start building? After all, you have a letter from them saying they will not enforce the ruling on that.

[MrRealDeal]

Can't you dig out some foundations quickly and start building? After all, you have a letter from them saying they will not enforce the ruling on that.

That would probabbly make his situation worse not better , they have now informed him that they are excersing their option and changes to the property could be considered vandalism and he be required to change it back to the way it was before the notice. If he could magicly buid a house overnight and they didnt like it they could make him tear it down and remove it and restore the property to the way it was when he recieved the notice. Since thats the case even if they liked it they would pay 50 cents on the dollar because they would have him over the barell. Tear it down or give it away would be the result.

[Pseudolus]

Can't you dig out some foundations quickly and start building? After all, you have a letter from them saying they will not enforce the ruling on that.

That would probabbly make his situation worse not better , they have now informed him that they are excersing their option and changes to the property could be considered vandalism and he be required to change it back to the way it was before the notice. If he could magicly buid a house overnight and they didnt like it they could make him tear it down and remove it and restore the property to the way it was when he recieved the notice. Since thats the case even if they liked it they would pay 50 cents on the dollar because they would have him over the barell. Tear it down or give it away would be the result.

In that case, take the money and hand it over after the OP has made a bit of money offering a toxic chemical dumping service for a few weeks.

[travelmann]

Can't you dig out some foundations quickly and start building? After all, you have a letter from them saying they will not enforce the ruling on that.

That would probabbly make his situation worse not better , they have now informed him that they are excersing their option and changes to the property could be considered vandalism and he be required to change it back to the way it was before the notice. If he could magicly buid a house overnight and they didnt like it they could make him tear it down and remove it and restore the property to the way it was when he recieved the notice. Since thats the case even if they liked it they would pay 50 cents on the dollar because they would have him over the barell. Tear it down or give it away would be the result.

In that case, take the money and hand it over after the OP has made a bit of money offering a toxic chemical dumping service for a few weeks.

Dont be crazy everyone knows you can dump that toxic stuff anywhere in Thailand

[Scully]

I presume you paid by money from your own country. The exchange rate is definitely in your favour now, not a solution but a less bitter pill to swallow if you have to swallow it.

[payak]

you waited to build so long it never even happened, you broke an agreement doing so.

they waited, they broke no agreement.

how would you deal here in anyway leaving yourself open to anything, so foolish.

[transam]

Sounds like a good money earner for yourself. You will receive more than you paid for it in UK pounds. Moving the cash out might be a different matter.

[Soutpeel]

As a side explanation to the fact that people have every right to wait to enforce contracts here is an analogy: You owe for a car and the contract says afer 24 hours of non payment the other party can reposess the car and you are at a total loss ..... You call one day after 72 hours of being late on the monthly payment and tell the guy you are late but will pay tomorrow he says no prob. The next month after 25 hours the car is gone , you say hey last month you let me be late so now you have to wait 72 hours from now on because you allowed things to change ..... He says nope I just didnt enforce the contract, I didn't change it , now I am enforcing it, end of story.

Same story with the house , they decided to not enforce then changed their mind , not enforcing it doesn't mean they changed it , it means they havent gotten around to it yet is all.

Thanks for your comments Real Deal.

Further to my situation. The contract is such that they could buy it back for a period of 3 years. Those 3 years expired almost 4 years ago. The way the contract is worded is very vague and open to interpretation.

I can post the specific verbiage shortly FYI.

There are also a number of issues Samui Estates did not adhere to in the contract as well. Again I can provide some details.

As I stated earlier...you have two options, take the money on the table and run or retain a lawyer to fight the contract, you will not fight this on your own

[NevadaInThailand]

Well certianly all I can comment on is what you tell me ....... I am happy to give you advice with more information that may put things in your favor.

My guess is you are confused about the 3 years ....... It would be highly unlikely that a lawyer would allow you to simply wait 4 years or 10 years and then have their recourse expire , it may be vauge to you but not to a lawyer in fact the "spirit of the contract" would render the expiry thing moot without a clear explanation that that as the case ...... the vauge part is to their advantage because it's obvious enough what the intention is.

Here is the specific clause in question:

8.3 In the event that the Purchaser fails to comply with the time limitations set out in this clause, the Seller has the right to buy back the Land at the same value as well as the Seller is entitled to charge an interest rate of 5% per year per Land for a period of three (3) years.

So as per the above, the clause was in there and at the time, 2005 when Samui was booming there was no doubt in my mind that I would have built and so I did fail in that clause and therefore what they said would have been reasonable in 2009.

They told me and told other owners that they weren't going to inforce that because of the coup, the financial crisis etc. 70% of the owners are in the same boat. Given (sadly not in writing) they told us they weren't enforcing this clause and now almost 4 years later they are doing so seems potentially not in sync with the contract.

He says, the seller has the right to buy the land back for a period of 3 years. Any way you look at this, the 3 years have expired.

From a marketing perspective, does it make sense for a developer try to invoke a clause like this if he is going to continue (which he is) to be a developer on Samui? All somebody will have to do (in future) is google this guys name and the internet will show that he's just "by many people's perspective" operated in a manner that does not have his investor's interests at heart. Bad publicity.

[Pseudolus]

Seems like a naff contract to begin with and open to so much translation, get a Thai brief to check it out. Might be worth getting in touch with the other land owners and see if they feel the same or are happy to get out with a 5.5m baht shirt on their back.

[zziffle]

I'm no lawyer, but in the plain language reading of the contract snippet, there is no time restriction stated for the buy-back right. There is a limit placed on the number of years for which they can deduct interest. The developer appears to be operating in accordance with the terms of the contract, but it sounds like you don't want to do the same.

Two choices:

1) Swap the land papers for the cash in accordance with the agreement and the request.

2) Hire Thai lawyers to fight this Thai contract made with a Thai company in Thai courts. Try and direct this process to ensure it proceeds in accordance with your own interests from overseas, lose after two or three years of aggravation, frustration and unpleasantness, be liable for the other side's legal expenses in the contest, and then count how much of the original 5M comes into your bank account, if any.

Some forks in the road have a more obvious best choice than do others.

[DLock]

As I see it, you made a few mistakes:

1. The wording of that clause is vague and does not read that their rights expired after 3 years, only that they can deduct a maximum 3 years of interest (15%)

2. Regardless, you did not get in writing their intention NOT to buy back your land after 3 years

3. You signed such a contract to begin with

4. You did not start construction

The way I read the situation is that you have breached a contract and they have enforced to buy it back at 15% discount because they can.

Given that the exchange rates in 2005 ranged between 38 and 42, you paid between $142k - $158k *.

They are offering to buy back the land at 5.1million baht at todays exchange (31.4) is $162k.

They will take you to court, waste your time and legal costs and they are likely to win.

Time to move on.

Note - exchange rates are approximate.

[harrry]

You have two choices, Take the money or see a lawyer. If you do this be prepared to lose but if you do not be also be prepared to imediatley start and continue buildingon your property if the court lets you do this.

Edited August 29, 2012 by harrry

[loong]

The wording on the contract is ambiguous. I imagine that it has been translated from Thai to English and the Thai version will be the important one.

If you are committed to fight this, it may be worth checking with the others who have bought land and maybe pool resources and instruct one firm of lawyers. A sort of class action.

I don't see how they can charge interest on land, but something may have been lost in the translation. If anything, they owe you interest because they have had the use of your money for all those years