Questions About Thai Inheritance (Land & House) And Wills

[rhino533]

Does anyone know what would happen in this situation:

I'm (Canadian) happily married (8 years) to a Thai and we have a 5 month old baby. We own a house with land that's worth about 10,000,000B. Everything is in my wife’s name. Say something happens (car accident etc.) to my wife (passes away) and I decide to move back to my home country with my son. Say we want to sell the house and land. If I understand correctly everything she had in her name will be given to my 5 month old son. Can we sell the property that's now in his name? I'm just not clear on the Thai laws regarding this. Would a will make anything easier in this situation.

Thanks god my wife’s fine and I'm not in this situation. I have no plans to leave Thailand for now. We haven't set up any wills as of yet and we both are thinking about doing it. Any advice regarding a will setup for a farang married to a Thai in Thailand?

Edited February 8, 2013 by rhino533

[besth]

Get a will made.

I'm sure one of the mods will give you more detailed advice (and probably move your question to another forum for more information), but you don't have a lot to worry about.

It is legal for you to inherit property, although then you would have to sell it.

As the father of a minor, you would also be able to control the property ownership, but it would be a bigger headache, just because of the usual red tape.

Making a will is cheap and hopefully you will never need it.

[MrRealDeal]

You don't understand correctly ..... get a lawyer to explain it

[Semper]

If the land and house were bought after the marriage, I believe you are entitled to 50% of the value.

[LburtonL]

You don't understand correctly ..... get a lawyer to explain it

THIS

[Beetlejuice]

Firstly, you say; we own a house and land worth 10 million baht. In fact under Thai law, your wife owns the land and house worth 10 million baht and can you produce documents that the real estate was purchased with your wife’s money? As that’s the law.

Second, if you place the real estate in the name of your child, providing of course that your child holds Thai citizenship, than the real estate cannot be sold in the child’s name until the child reaches the age of 21 years. That is also the law.

He is the procedure:

If the land and property is placed in the child’s name prior to the age of 21, than your wife can still sell the property because she is regarded under the law as the Thai guardian of the child and has jurisdiction over the child’s affairs. If in the event that your wife dies prior to the child reaching 21, and you wish to sell the real estate before the child reaches 21, than you can register yourself as the manager of the property and take the matter via the civil court in order to obtain permission from the judge to dispense with the property.

If the property remains in your wife’s name and she dies, than this may make matters a lot more complicated. You would still need to go via the civil courts and maybe have to do battle with your wife’s family, even if under the law, the property belongs 50/50 to each partner, especially if they allege that the real estate was purchased illegally with the farang`s money, it could create all sorts of problems for you. It really does boil down to the discretion of the judge.

My advice is: it is best to place the real estate in the name of your child, the same as I have done, but to be on the safe side, rather than sorry, because there is millions of bahts involved here, I also recommend seeking the advice of a reputable property lawyer Plenty here advertised on good old Thai visa.

Here`s a good one:

http://www.siam-legal.com/?gclid=CMuO_o3WprUCFQh66wodF3IAIQ

Siam Legal.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Beetlejuice

[MrRealDeal]

You REALLY need to consult a lawyer ...... you think that anyplace in the world has a legal system that would automaticly give a 5 month old baby a 10M property instead of the surviving husband or wife ?

You would get the property ..... however you are required to sell it in 1 year and since everyone knows that you will get next to nothing for it locally.

The posts about 50\50 are simply not correct by any measure , you are entitled to a 50 50 slpit in a divorce of monies made after the wedding , the house may or may not have been made before or after , upon death the 50\50 idea is just made up and has no basis in law whatsoever.

You inherit your wife or husbands assets without a will anyplace on earth , the other people have to make a claim against the estate and show that they are the rightfull heir to some asset and a judge has to agree , but the default position is the wife or husband inherits everything , and all other claimants have to petition the court and prove they are the rightfull heir with some kind of proof , the wife or husband needs no proof except to show they were married.

Ps ...... if you did buy the house for your wife it is technically correct to say that was illegal , however if the reletives pressed the issue in court that wouldn't mean that they would recieve the house , it would go to the government not them, as they have no claim on your asset... illegal or otherwise. They can't say they are the rightfull owners of your property just because you bought it illegally , all they could do is mention it to a court and the court would decide if they wanted to confiscate it and give it to the government or not.

Edited February 8, 2013 by MrRealDeal

[Semper]

You REALLY need to consult a lawyer ...... you think that anyplace in the world has a legal system that would automaticly give a 5 month old baby a 10M property instead of the surviving husband or wife ?

You would get the property ..... however you are required to sell it in 1 year and since everyone knows that you will get next to nothing for it locally.

The posts about 50\50 are simply not correct by any measure , you are entitled to a 50 50 slpit in a divorce of monies made after the wedding , the house may or may not have been made before or after , upon death the 50\50 idea is just made up and has no basis in law whatsoever.

You inherit your wife or husbands assets without a will anyplace on earth , the other people have to make a claim against the estate and show that they are the rightfull heir to some asset and a judge has to agree , but the default position is the wife or husband inherits everything , and all other claimants have to petition the court and prove they are the rightfull heir with some kind of proof , the wife or husband needs no proof except to show they were married.

Ps ...... if you did buy the house for your wife it is technically correct to say that was illegal , however if the reletives pressed the issue in court that wouldn't mean that they would recieve the house , it would go to the government not them, as they have no claim on your asset... illegal or otherwise. They can't say they are the rightfull owners of your property just because you bought it illegally , all they could do is mention it to a court and the court would decide if they wanted to confiscate it and give it to the government or not.

A lot of contradictions in your reply.

"You would get the property"

"The posts about 50\50 are simply not correct by any measure"

" you are entitled to a 50 50 slpit in a divorce"

Can you make up your mind?

[MrRealDeal]

There are no contradictions ..... the post is about death and the 50\50 does not apply and is not correct by any meashure , the comment stemed from you saying that you would be entitled to 50 percent after mariage and that is only correct if the monies to buy the house made were made after the marriage and in a divorce case , a marriage itself would not entitle someone to 50 percent.. A mariage entitles a person to inherit 100 percent not 50. We are talking about death so it's irelevant in the first place(divorce) ...... Yes the husband or wife would inherit the assets ...... 50\50 is not correct in this situation by any meashure

Ps...... if your going to put things in quotes please use the whole sentence or at lease the part between the commas , : "you are entitled to a 50 50 slpit in a divorce of monies made after the wedding"

Edited February 8, 2013 by MrRealDeal

[fletchsmile]

A will would make a massive difference. If written correctly that could specify who the estate goes to.

Otherwise Thai Law for dying without a will, leaves things messy for you. You will be sharing with someone as all the relatives of your wife stand in line in a pecking order:

http://www.thailandlaw.org/intestate-succession-in-thailand/

http://www.isaanlawyers.com/Wills%20and%20Estate%20Planning.pdf

Then you have the added complication of land ownership. You can inherit as a foreigner, but creates a lot of hassles, which deserves a separate subject in itself....

Cheers

Fletch

[MrRealDeal]

Having a Will is always better obviously but as a point of fact :

Under Thai law, a statutory heir may be a non-Thai as well as a Thai citizen. The Thailand law makes no distinction as to the nationality of the heir’s right. There are special regulations, however, regarding inheritance of real estate by foreigners.

"A statutory heir" is a wife or husband , ....... so your situatiuon as a farang is no different under the law than a Thai person who dies intestate (without a will). Their are 6 classes with the wife or husband being on top in the "decendent" catagory, with children, and the other 5 decending in order . This is what happens in some stautory situations intestate.

1. Children

2. Parents

3. Brothers and sisters

4. Half-brothers and sisters

5. Grandparents

6. Uncles and aunts

* If the deceased leaves a spouse and children, then the spouse takes 50 percent and the children take 50 percent in equal shares.

* If the deceased dies leaving a spouse and parents, then the spouse takes 50 percent and parents take 50 percent in equal shares.

* If the deceased dies leaving a spouse and siblings of the whole blood, then the spouse takes 50 percent and the siblings take 50 percent in equal shares.

* If the deceased dies leaving a spouse and heirs in classes, 4,5 or 6 above, then the spouse takes two thirds of the estate and the statutory heirs in the class entitled take one third in equal shares.

* If there are no statutory heirs in existence, the surviving spouse takes the whole estate.

Where there is no surviving spouse:

Where a person dies leaving no surviving spouse, then the class of statutory heirs entitled takes the whole of the estate in equal shares. For example, if a person dies leaving no spouse but children, then the children take the whole estate in equal shares. If a person dies leaving no spouse or children but leaving parents, the parents take the whole estate in equal shares

Making a Legal will is pretty easy in Thailand you just need to make it and have 2 people witness and sign it.

.

The idea that a farang is at some disadvantage in this situation is a myth not supported by Law or Fact.

The "special regulations" that refer to Real Estate in a nutshell means that you must sell or give away any property you can't legally own within one year .... if you inherited a condo that you would be allowed to own because the building had the proper farang ownership space you could keep it , if not or like land you would need to sell it or distribute it to someone who could legally own it in 1 year.

A will only makes a difference if you want to give things to people who would not otherwise get them anyhow , such as some friend or charity , it really only helps the people who are not statutory heirs get what you want them to get , the people like your husband or wife and children are already protected under the Law. Contrairy to popular belief you are no more likely to win a lawsuit from someone without a will than from some will you were excluded from , in fact the opposite, a case is made sometimes that someone was forgotten in a will by accident and Lawyers reccomend leaving your hated brother or sister 1 dollar to point out you didn't foget them at all , but the intestate rules are stautory and give Judges very little discrection.

Edited February 8, 2013 by MrRealDeal

[MrRealDeal]

You REALLY need to consult a lawyer ...... you think that anyplace in the world has a legal system that would automaticly give a 5 month old baby a 10M property instead of the surviving husband or wife ?

You would get the property ..... however you are required to sell it in 1 year and since everyone knows that you will get next to nothing for it locally.

The posts about 50\50 are simply not correct by any measure , you are entitled to a 50 50 slpit in a divorce of monies made after the wedding , the house may or may not have been made before or after , upon death the 50\50 idea is just made up and has no basis in law whatsoever.

You inherit your wife or husbands assets without a will anyplace on earth , the other people have to make a claim against the estate and show that they are the rightfull heir to some asset and a judge has to agree , but the default position is the wife or husband inherits everything , and all other claimants have to petition the court and prove they are the rightfull heir with some kind of proof , the wife or husband needs no proof except to show they were married.

Ps ...... if you did buy the house for your wife it is technically correct to say that was illegal , however if the reletives pressed the issue in court that wouldn't mean that they would recieve the house , it would go to the government not them, as they have no claim on your asset... illegal or otherwise. They can't say they are the rightfull owners of your property just because you bought it illegally , all they could do is mention it to a court and the court would decide if they wanted to confiscate it and give it to the government or not.

A lot of contradictions in your reply.

"You would get the property"

"The posts about 50\50 are simply not correct by any measure"

" you are entitled to a 50 50 slpit in a divorce"

Can you make up your mind?

I am sorry I was wrong as the above indicates , their is a lot more 50\50 splitting going on than I realised in Thailand !

[Semper]

There are no contradictions ..... the post is about death and the 50\50 does not apply and is not correct by any meashure , the comment stemed from you saying that you would be entitled to 50 percent after mariage and that is only correct if the monies to buy the house made were made after the marriage and in a divorce case , a marriage itself would not entitle someone to 50 percent.. A mariage entitles a person to inherit 100 percent not 50. We are talking about death so it's irelevant in the first place(divorce) ...... Yes the husband or wife would inherit the assets ...... 50\50 is not correct in this situation by any meashure

Ps...... if your going to put things in quotes please use the whole sentence or at lease the part between the commas , : "you are entitled to a 50 50 slpit in a divorce of monies made after the wedding"

Read post #4

[BEVUP]

Thinking along the same lines (house in kids name )

But as mentioned the mother as a Guardian has the right to sell the property ( is that why we are together & in the event of i passing away )

( i also read in another thread she would need a court order for the best interest of the child ) Possibly easy to get (like the passport thread )

& also why wouldnt the father hold the same rights as a Guardian , because as mentioned he becomes Manager

[Arkady]

You REALLY need to consult a lawyer ...... you think that anyplace in the world has a legal system that would automaticly give a 5 month old baby a 10M property instead of the surviving husband or wife ?

You would get the property ..... however you are required to sell it in 1 year and since everyone knows that you will get next to nothing for it locally.

The posts about 50\50 are simply not correct by any measure , you are entitled to a 50 50 slpit in a divorce of monies made after the wedding , the house may or may not have been made before or after , upon death the 50\50 idea is just made up and has no basis in law whatsoever.

You inherit your wife or husbands assets without a will anyplace on earth , the other people have to make a claim against the estate and show that they are the rightfull heir to some asset and a judge has to agree , but the default position is the wife or husband inherits everything , and all other claimants have to petition the court and prove they are the rightfull heir with some kind of proof , the wife or husband needs no proof except to show they were married.

Ps ...... if you did buy the house for your wife it is technically correct to say that was illegal , however if the reletives pressed the issue in court that wouldn't mean that they would recieve the house , it would go to the government not them, as they have no claim on your asset... illegal or otherwise. They can't say they are the rightfull owners of your property just because you bought it illegally , all they could do is mention it to a court and the court would decide if they wanted to confiscate it and give it to the government or not.

Even if it were found by a court that you had illegally purchased land, the Land Code prescribes that you have 180 days to dispose of it and, failing that the Legal Executions Dept will do it for you. Either way you get the proceeds, not the state. However, you may be prosecuted and sentenced to prison and/or a fine. If you signed the standard declaration for foreign spouses or unmarried partners in the Land Office, you couldn't be prosecuted and prosecution is very rare anyway.

The Civil and Commercial Code does provide a structure for inheritances following French law from which it was borrowed. This gives legators more limited freedom to will property (willing 100% to Battersea Dogs Home is unlawful, if there are any surviving blood relations) and there is a complicated pecking order to divide up the estate amongst family. You and/or your son will get prior rights over all other family, and, even more so, if she willed the entire estate to you. If the land is willed to you, the minister could technically give permission for you to own the land as a foreigner but he is not going to do this. So you would have to sell the property and get the proceeds.

Probably transferring the land to your son is a practical solution which puts the rights of your wife's family at one remove, in the event that anything happened to your son. There is no downside to ownership by a minor child, except that they cannot apply for any planning permission and that selling would be made more complicated. Of course, it is a growing problem in the West that children boot out their parents after the house has been gifted to them to avoid inheritance tax. Alternatively you could leave it in your wife's name and get a usufruct agreement giving you lifetime use of the land at nil consideration - maybe not watertight but it makes the land an unattractive proposition to another buyer and the usufruct right continues, even if the land has been inherited by someone else.

[prakhonchai nick]

You REALLY need to consult a lawyer ...... you think that anyplace in the world has a legal system that would automaticly give a 5 month old baby a 10M property instead of the surviving husband or wife ?

You would get the property ..... however you are required to sell it in 1 year and since everyone knows that you will get next to nothing for it locally.

The posts about 50\50 are simply not correct by any measure , you are entitled to a 50 50 slpit in a divorce of monies made after the wedding , the house may or may not have been made before or after , upon death the 50\50 idea is just made up and has no basis in law whatsoever.

You inherit your wife or husbands assets without a will anyplace on earth , the other people have to make a claim against the estate and show that they are the rightfull heir to some asset and a judge has to agree , but the default position is the wife or husband inherits everything , and all other claimants have to petition the court and prove they are the rightfull heir with some kind of proof , the wife or husband needs no proof except to show they were married.

Ps ...... if you did buy the house for your wife it is technically correct to say that was illegal , however if the reletives pressed the issue in court that wouldn't mean that they would recieve the house , it would go to the government not them, as they have no claim on your asset... illegal or otherwise. They can't say they are the rightfull owners of your property just because you bought it illegally , all they could do is mention it to a court and the court would decide if they wanted to confiscate it and give it to the government or not.

Even if it were found by a court that you had illegally purchased land, the Land Code prescribes that you have 180 days to dispose of it and, failing that the Legal Executions Dept will do it for you. Either way you get the proceeds, not the state. However, you may be prosecuted and sentenced to prison and/or a fine. If you signed the standard declaration for foreign spouses or unmarried partners in the Land Office, you couldn't be prosecuted and prosecution is very rare anyway.

The Civil and Commercial Code does provide a structure for inheritances following French law from which it was borrowed. This gives legators more limited freedom to will property (willing 100% to Battersea Dogs Home is unlawful, if there are any surviving blood relations) and there is a complicated pecking order to divide up the estate amongst family. You and/or your son will get prior rights over all other family, and, even more so, if she willed the entire estate to you. If the land is willed to you, the minister could technically give permission for you to own the land as a foreigner but he is not going to do this. So you would have to sell the property and get the proceeds.

Probably transferring the land to your son is a practical solution which puts the rights of your wife's family at one remove, in the event that anything happened to your son. There is no downside to ownership by a minor child, except that they cannot apply for any planning permission and that selling would be made more complicated. Of course, it is a growing problem in the West that children boot out their parents after the house has been gifted to them to avoid inheritance tax. Alternatively you could leave it in your wife's name and get a usufruct agreement giving you lifetime use of the land at nil consideration - maybe not watertight but it makes the land an unattractive proposition to another buyer and the usufruct right continues, even if the land has been inherited by someone else.

Following on from your last paragraph/sentence...Alternatively you could leave it in your wife's name and get a usufruct agreement giving you lifetime use of the land at nil consideration -

maybe not watertight but it makes the land an unattractive proposition to another buyer and the usufruct right continues, even if the land has been inherited by someone else.........is it permissable to include in a Thai will, where the wife leaves the property to her child/children upon death, provision for the husband to remain in the property until either his death or such time as he vacates the property? If so this would avoid the necessity for a usufruct.

[Jaybonnaza]

I can't understand why you did not set up a company? Confused as hell then you own a percent so does she - either way the child gets?

But sorts half of the problems surely

[AnotherOneAmerican]

If married to foreigner, Thai woman only has one child and no will.

Foreigner husband gets 50%, child gets 50%, the property may not be sold until the child is 20, foreigner husband has control to manage but not sell/dispose.