I would like to buy a house in my half thais sons name he is still an infant

,a well known law firm in hua hin that i was going to use contacted the land office and was told it is not possible

i then quoted this, section 1577 of the civil and commercial code it states "a person may transfer by gift or legacy a property to a minor' to them and there answer was it is different rules province to province is this right?

no.

thanks khun jean , using your advice i'm trying to avoid the leasehold option so do i ask the law firm to approach the land office again or find another lawyer

The real estate law is the same in each province/across the country....provinces don't make laws....the national parliament makes the laws. However, it's just like the posts we always see about how immigration offices in different provinces differ in how they enforce the immigration laws due to not fully understanding the law, vagueness in the law, bias by some officials towards farangs, selective enforcement of laws....etc...etc...etc. And just maybe the reluctance of a province office to call HQ probably in Bangkok to ask for clarification/guidance---that could cause loss of face.

thanks for clarification,now i need a lawyer who isn't scared to stand up to the local land office

thanks for clarification,now i need a lawyer who isn't scared to stand up to the local land office

You would be better off with a lawyer that has a cooperative relationship with the local land office; honey gets you a lot more than vinegar in Thailand

The law isnt different but you will find that land offices will quote different ages. Some will suggest that you buy the land in the Thai parents name and on the same day the parent will gift the land to the child.....hence it isnt classified as a purchase. Little bit more paperwork, the child needs to present and a notional transfer fee. You and the Thai parent can ask at the land office without the need to involve a lawyer.

"a person may transfer by gift or legacy a property to a minor'',

Very true, but that "person" must be entitled to own the property first, perhaps your lawyer was being too literal and asked the Land Office if the "falang" could buy a property and gift it to his son, instead of asking if the property could be gifted by the rightful owner?