No wonder why some end up with financial problems!

[Jose T]

Foreigner can't buy a house in Thailand.

There's no legal issue with a foreigner buying and owning a house in Thailand.

Which bar will you be proping up tonight?

[FiftyTwo]

I actually see the sharing ownership of a house, as a protection for both parties. Lets say we go the the bank and put down a small prepayment and make an arrangement to pay of the house in e.g. 20 years. Something happens and suddenly, she is alone with the payments. The house is then taken over by the bank and sold at a low price, meaning she is left alone with the original and remaining debt.

Protection is for me a TWO-way thing and it has nothing to do with distrust or not loving someone. Actually, I believe that if you really love someone, then you also try to make sure that the person you love, can avoid getting into trouble. This is how people think in most other parts of the world. Why should it be different in Thailand?

The banks in Thailand don't sell repossessed houses at bargain prices.

The chances of you getting a loan are ZERO.

She gets the loan on her income, she also has to pay compulsory life insurance on the loan (about 7% of loan up front).

You buy yourself a life insurance (BKB will give a 600k live insurance for 2,500bht which includes 30k accident insurance).

The problem is, you don't seem to know any facts at all on house purchase in Thailand.

Edited November 10, 2013 by FiftyTwo

[khunpa]

If you can't walk away from a house that you paid cash for and not have it destroy you finanicially, then you have no business buying a house. But if you have the money and you have sincere trust in your lady - what's the harm in building a nice house. Especially, if you have kids together.

I believe most of the nay-sayers are in the low income bracket and are unable to plop down 2-3 million baht comfortably.

But, if you sell everything in your home land, find a lady, she kicks you out and you're finanically strapped and forever hateful then Sum num na.

cheers

For anyone who is not a multi $ millionaire then dropping 2-3 million baht is not something that should be taken as a joke. In my home country that would equate to around £40-60k. Why does it have to destroy someone financially for it to be issue? Why does it have to be taken to that extreme? Can it not just be considered an unwise and risky investment to build a house on land you do not own?

Well, it seems that it is ONLY in Thailand, that it is considered to be not risky to purchase a home in your partners name only. In most other parts of the "normal" world, any sane person would consider this as unwise and risky.

However, I just asked a Thai-friend about this and he said that he of course never would buy a house in only his girlfriends/wifes name. My girlfriend also would never do that and also see that as unwise and risky.

But maybe it is only valid in most Farang/Thai relationships and my relationship/partner is strange. I have no idea... but at least good to see that not all Thai-people think I am stupid in wanting to find a shared solution.

[Jose T]

But maybe it is only valid in most Farang/Thai relationships and my relationship/partner is strange.

No, it's that many are desparate, and are in the land of illusions for the easily self tricked.

[khunpa]

I actually see the sharing ownership of a house, as a protection for both parties. Lets say we go the the bank and put down a small prepayment and make an arrangement to pay of the house in e.g. 20 years. Something happens and suddenly, she is alone with the payments. The house is then taken over by the bank and sold at a low price, meaning she is left alone with the original and remaining debt.

Protection is for me a TWO-way thing and it has nothing to do with distrust or not loving someone. Actually, I believe that if you really love someone, then you also try to make sure that the person you love, can avoid getting into trouble. This is how people think in most other parts of the world. Why should it be different in Thailand?

The banks in Thailand don't sell repossessed houses at bargain prices.

The chances of you getting a loan are ZERO.

She gets the loan on her income, she also has to pay compulsory life insurance on the loan (about 7% of loan up front).

You buy yourself a life insurance (BKB will give a 600k live insurance for 2,500bht which includes 30k accident insurance).

The problem is, you don't seem to know any facts at all on house purchase in Thailand.

Well, have you considered that could be the reason why my girlfriend and I consulted the bank-woman? We simply wanted to get some advice and instead it turned out as a joke. But thanks for the info... although it seems very hard from all the different posts here... who is right and who is wrong.

All I want to do, is do it the best way for both of us - if we decide to at some point buy a house. And that was why I asked the bank-woman...

[Issangeorge]

At various times during my mother's & father's marriage the house was in my mother's name depending on what the tax situation was at the time. If two people love and trust each other it shouldn't matter whose name the house is in. If one is worried about it, there are ways to protect yourself.

Sent from my i-mobile IQ X using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[FiftyTwo]

Well, have you considered that could be the reason why my girlfriend and I consulted the bank-woman? We simply wanted to get some advice and instead it turned out as a joke. But thanks for the info... although it seems very hard from all the different posts here... who is right and who is wrong.

All I want to do, is do it the best way for both of us - if we decide to at some point buy a house. And that was why I asked the bank-woman...

My wife bought a house this year, very hard to deal with bank staff, they are very ignorant about Thai law AND their products. Their only interest is selling you a life insurance policy over the entire loan period, paid for entirely up front (deducted from the loan amount), which works out at about 7% of the loan.

BKB are awkward as when a foreigner is on the scene they only want to offer a 65% loan.

SCB are in cahoots with many of the big developers and will offer up to 90%.

You are getting different sets of advice because, last year a company could get a loan for a house purchase with a foreigner share holder, this year the rules have been tightened and the land office will just refuse to register the house.

Lease and Usafunct are safeguards for cash purchases from a foreign man not married to the prospective land owner.

(As no contracts between a man and wife in Thailand are legally enforceable)

But not an entirely brilliant idea, if the land owner wants the foreigner out they will just have the foreigner killed.

There was an interesting thread about a foreigner turkey farmer who did all the company stuff ........

His wife just forged his signature and sold/borrowed it all, he lost the lot, nobody cared what happened to a foreigner trying to bypass Thai laws on property ownership.

Edited November 10, 2013 by FiftyTwo

[khunpa]

At various times during my mother's & father's marriage the house was in my mother's name depending on what the tax situation was at the time. If two people love and trust each other it shouldn't matter whose name the house is in. If one is worried about it, there are ways to protect yourself.

Sent from my i-mobile IQ X using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Agree, love and trust brings you a long way.

However, real life can also play some tricks on you and I have seen many horrible divorces. I am sure both partners in these divorces once loved and trusted each other very much, but although it turned out bad. I have even seen close family members fight over money and destroy their relationship because of money. Very close relationships that you thought would never turn out bad... but did anyway.

Neither my girlfriend or I see nothing wrong in taking precautions and securing both of us as good as we possible can. And I can not see, what is wrong with that.

[Loptr]

Were you in the movie Dumb and Dumber? These laws of ownership have been in place forever. Buy your wife Thai wife the house and quit complaining. She most likely has children from you...

Candidate for the most asinine post of the day award.

[thehelmsman]

If you can't walk away from a house that you paid cash for and not have it destroy you finanicially, then you have no business buying a house. But if you have the money and you have sincere trust in your lady - what's the harm in building a nice house. Especially, if you have kids together.

I believe most of the nay-sayers are in the low income bracket and are unable to plop down 2-3 million baht comfortably.

But, if you sell everything in your home land, find a lady, she kicks you out and you're finanically strapped and forever hateful then Sum num na.

cheers

For anyone who is not a multi $ millionaire then dropping 2-3 million baht is not something that should be taken as a joke. In my home country that would equate to around £40-60k. Why does it have to destroy someone financially for it to be issue? Why does it have to be taken to that extreme? Can it not just be considered an unwise and risky investment to build a house on land you do not own?

Well, it seems that it is ONLY in Thailand, that it is considered to be not risky to purchase a home in your partners name only. In most other parts of the "normal" world, any sane person would consider this as unwise and risky.

However, I just asked a Thai-friend about this and he said that he of course never would buy a house in only his girlfriends/wifes name. My girlfriend also would never do that and also see that as unwise and risky.

But maybe it is only valid in most Farang/Thai relationships and my relationship/partner is strange. I have no idea... but at least good to see that not all Thai-people think I am stupid in wanting to find a shared solution.

Let's go over the options a foreigner has in regards to being a homeowner. I've only rented twice in the states and only for a short time. I've always owned. So a foreigner has the option to -

1. Share a rented house with lady.

2. Buy an overpriced condo with limited space for kids in foreigner's name.

3. Buy land and build a house in lady's name or buy a cookie cutter house in a sub. in lady's name.

In the states this wouldn't be an issue because of their lax laws regarding home ownership and I would never think of buying a house in only lady's name. Here in Thailand during the course of 6 yrs I've bought land, built a nice house ( all cash) and started a family. Should the whole thing go south some day it will only be an emotional issue. My investments in the states will continue to provide me with an acceptable lifestyle.

Don't overthink shit too much. I will say the new truck I just bought (cash) is in my name. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's done as I've done. I don't have any foreigner friends here to ask questions so I just stumble along here doing what I think works. So far - So good.

[AYJAYDEE]

If you can't walk away from a house that you paid cash for and not have it destroy you finanicially, then you have no business buying a house. But if you have the money and you have sincere trust in your lady - what's the harm in building a nice house. Especially, if you have kids together.

I believe most of the nay-sayers are in the low income bracket and are unable to plop down 2-3 million baht comfortably.

But, if you sell everything in your home land, find a lady, she kicks you out and you're finanically strapped and forever hateful then Sum num na.

cheers

For anyone who is not a multi $ millionaire then dropping 2-3 million baht is not something that should be taken as a joke. In my home country that would equate to around £40-60k. Why does it have to destroy someone financially for it to be issue? Why does it have to be taken to that extreme? Can it not just be considered an unwise and risky investment to build a house on land you do not own?

Well, it seems that it is ONLY in Thailand, that it is considered to be not risky to purchase a home in your partners name only. In most other parts of the "normal" world, any sane person would consider this as unwise and risky.

However, I just asked a Thai-friend about this and he said that he of course never would buy a house in only his girlfriends/wifes name. My girlfriend also would never do that and also see that as unwise and risky.

But maybe it is only valid in most Farang/Thai relationships and my relationship/partner is strange. I have no idea... but at least good to see that not all Thai-people think I am stupid in wanting to find a shared solution.

Let's go over the options a foreigner has in regards to being a homeowner. I've only rented twice in the states and only for a short time. I've always owned. So a foreigner has the option to -

1. Share a rented house with lady.

2. Buy an overpriced condo with limited space for kids in foreigner's name.

3. Buy land and build a house in lady's name or buy a cookie cutter house in a sub. in lady's name.

In the states this wouldn't be an issue because of their lax laws regarding home ownership and I would never think of buying a house in only lady's name. Here in Thailand during the course of 6 yrs I've bought land, built a nice house ( all cash) and started a family. Should the whole thing go south some day it will only be an emotional issue. My investments in the states will continue to provide me with an acceptable lifestyle.

Don't overthink shit too much. I will say the new truck I just bought (cash) is in my name. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's done as I've done. I don't have any foreigner friends here to ask questions so I just stumble along here doing what I think works. So far - So good.

4. have the house financed by a bank loan in the lady's name

[falkan]

it's because falangs here usually picking up poor uneducated girls so grab a girl with some cash next time and not local cleaning lady..

[Khun Jean]

Contracts between husband and wife are not legally binding in Thailand.

Surprised your US lawyers didn't mention that.

Looks like they aren't that good after all.

Protect your rights in a real estate owned by a Thai spouse

You may not be familiar with the right of usufruct in Thailand as it is a typical Civil Law property right and you may also not be aware what your rights and obligations under a right of usufruct are.

The usufruct of an immovable property is primarily the right to use and manage another person's real estate property and receive the benefits ('fruits') from it. Management in this matter means to the extent permissible for foreigners under Thailand land laws. This means you can live in the house and you can for example rent it out and keep the rent but as a foreigner you cannot register a rental exceeding 3 years with the Land Department.

Just another type of contract, not legally binding between a husband and wife in Thailand.

What is the matter with you people, why can't you listen!

Because I don't think you are correct. I can make a marriage contract in Thailand. I can make a rental contract in Thailand. I can make a loan contract in Thailand. I can make a pre nup in Thailand. All with my wife. You mean all those lawyers are wrong and you are right? Are you a Thai Lawyer or have any documentation of what you are saying? A simple link to a site that says you can't make a legal contract with a Thai wife would be great. For example I submit the following from http://www.siam-legal.com/realestate/thailand-property-faq.php

If your spouse is Thai, and you are planning to build a house on his/her land, you are recommended to sign a lease agreement with your spouse indicating that you are a tenant. This way, you shall have a joint ownership over such construction, not a land, together with your spouse.

I have some news for you. You are wrong.

The only worth a usufruct with your wife had is that when she dies you can still occupy the land (and house). Without it you wul dneed to sell within a year, that is if she willed it to you otherwise the family members will inherit it and depending on the relationship you have with your family in law you either get kicked out the same day or are allowed to stay until they change their minds.

The lawyer who told you that you were protected against that told you a bold faced lie. He knows it, but he also knows you don't know.

So he has the advantage. Because if he told you the truth you would not need his services.

Simple isn't it. It is just about money. Keep that in mind when in Thailand because most things are and it can be very useful to find out if someones is telling you the truth or not.

For your and maybe others education and reading pleasure: http://www.samuiforsale.com/family-law/thai-marriage-and-contracts-between-husband-and-wife.html

The first sentence says it all doesn't it?

I really love Thai Law, they are so abundantly clear. No legalese at all. Only a lawyer can screw it up and make you believe otherwise. And they even get paid for doing it. Amazing......

They even mention in the law for your convenience what can be done about it to protect you more. You just need to include a third party.

Wow, how simple. Now why did that lawyer forget to tell you that? Easy, because he is not 100% sure you know somebody that you trust enough to be that third party. So he plays it save and keeps that information from you and insists that a contrct between husband and wife are good and enforceable.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Khun Jean

[sdanielmcev]

This is why you need to learn the language.

[thailiketoo]

Just another type of contract, not legally binding between a husband and wife in Thailand.

What is the matter with you people, why can't you listen!

Because I don't think you are correct. I can make a marriage contract in Thailand. I can make a rental contract in Thailand. I can make a loan contract in Thailand. I can make a pre nup in Thailand. All with my wife. You mean all those lawyers are wrong and you are right? Are you a Thai Lawyer or have any documentation of what you are saying? A simple link to a site that says you can't make a legal contract with a Thai wife would be great. For example I submit the following from http://www.siam-legal.com/realestate/thailand-property-faq.php

If your spouse is Thai, and you are planning to build a house on his/her land, you are recommended to sign a lease agreement with your spouse indicating that you are a tenant. This way, you shall have a joint ownership over such construction, not a land, together with your spouse.

I have some news for you. You are wrong.

The only worth a usufruct with your wife had is that when she dies you can still occupy the land (and house). Without it you wul dneed to sell within a year, that is if she willed it to you otherwise the family members will inherit it and depending on the relationship you have with your family in law you either get kicked out the same day or are allowed to stay until they change their minds.

The lawyer who told you that you were protected against that told you a bold faced lie. He knows it, but he also knows you don't know.

So he has the advantage. Because if he told you the truth you would not need his services.

Simple isn't it. It is just about money. Keep that in mind when in Thailand because most things are and it can be very useful to find out if someones is telling you the truth or not.

For your and maybe others education and reading pleasure: http://www.samuiforsale.com/family-law/thai-marriage-and-contracts-between-husband-and-wife.html

The first sentence says it all doesn't it?

I really love Thai Law, they are so abundantly clear. No legalese at all. Only a lawyer can screw it up and make you believe otherwise. And they even get paid for doing it. Amazing......

They even mention in the law for your convenience what can be done about it to protect you more. You just need to include a third party.

Wow, how simple. Now why did that lawyer forget to tell you that? Easy, because he is not 100% sure you know somebody that you trust enough to be that third party. So he plays it save and keeps that information from you and insists that a contrct between husband and wife are good and enforceable.

I have some news for you too. You are wrong.

A registered right of usufruct is not a contract that can be terminated by your wife. Usufruct is a real right and as a real property right governed by book IV PROPERTY in civil and commercial Code and not by book III CONTRACTS. This means that once the right of usufruct is registered by the land office it is guaranteed and your wife would need 1 your consent or 2 a court order to have it removed from the title deed.

Simple isn't it. It is just about money. Keep that in mind when in Thailand because most things are and it can be very useful to find out if someones is telling you the truth or not. I really love Thai Law, they are so abundantly clear.

Edited November 11, 2013 by thailiketoo

[Khun Jean]

Nope she doesn't.

Continue on your own peril.

How do i know. Because i have tried it. Just to see what happens. I am like that. Leaving as little to change as possible is my way of handling things.

She had no problem whatsoever.

Send you wife to the Land office and let her revoke the usufruct.

If you did that please report back.

Simple isn't it?

Just to clarify, if i say something with certainty it is because i experienced it. Not some theory.

If i am not sure i will tell that too. I will try to find out as much as possible and will ask others, even lawyers.

Edited November 11, 2013 by Khun Jean

[Berkshire]

Was it embarrasing for your gf to explain to the bank clerk that you want to buy a home in a company name because you don't trust her? Was that a loss of face for her?

Good questions. Too bad we can't get the answer directly from her.

[thailiketoo]

Nope she doesn't.

Continue on your own peril.

How do i know. Because i have tried it. Just to see what happens. I am like that. Leaving as little to change as possible is my way of handling things.

She had no problem whatsoever.

Send you wife to the Land office and let her revoke the usufruct.

If you did that please report back.

Simple isn't it?

Just to clarify, if i say something with certainty it is because i experienced it. Not some theory.

If i am not sure i will tell that too. I will try to find out as much as possible and will ask others, even lawyers.

Sorry I thought we were discussing the law. You wrote, "I really love Thai Law, they are so abundantly clear. No legalese at all."

Now you bring up how your wife circumvented the law.

That is a different kettle of fish.

The law says, "A registered right of usufruct is not a contract that can be terminated by your wife. Usufruct is a real right and as a real property right governed by book IV PROPERTY in civil and commercial Code and not by book III CONTRACTS. "

Also I was discussing a house not a house and land.

Can you name instances where the law was not followed? I'm sure you can.

[Khun Jean]

I believe you when you show me the passage in the CCC.

I also know what 'real rights' are, and that a contract with your wife will be looked upon as if it was made with someone not being your wife. Paying nothing for the usufruct for instance would be impossible with someone else. Hence it is considered a 'marriage' deal. If you paid the full price for it, and registered it as such and payed taxes then you might have a very small change that a judge would consider that you are the one who is disadvantaged in case of a divorce. In all other cases it will be handled as if the Thai wife has been coerced to sign a usufruct with her husband.

The situation where your wife goes to the land office tomorrow and revokes your usufruct does not need a court case or a judge to make a decision. Her decision alone (or yours because you can also do it) is enough.

My own thought before was that because the land is 100% owned by a Thai wife, and is part of her Sin Suan Tuan, that a contract like a usufruct would also be considered as she would act in the interest of her Sin Suan Tuan and as such is not a contract between husband and wife. But unfortunately the practical experience proofed otherwise. After rereading the CCC i saw my error as a contract can not be made in another capacity then that of she being your wife. So the law still is clear, every, and the word every really means every, contract between husband and wife can be revoked by either one at any time, and yes any time really means any time, or in the case of divorce within one year, without questions asked. Only proof needed is a marriage certificate and an id card. This was tested in the Land Office in Bang Saphan, about 2 years ago, usufruct was in place for about 2 years. Since then nothing has been changed in the CCC.

You might have interpreted it wrong, or did someone else interpret it for you, happens a lot, that is why i ask.

And when my wife is allowed to revoke a usufruct without any problems, it is only you who says she circumvented the law.

And did you really mean a house that floats in the air? Because every where i look houses seem to be build on land.

A house when build when married is Sin Somros (shared property).

If you buy a house it is part of the title and can not be separated from the land. So only when vacant land is bought and a house build upon it later is it possible to have shared ownership.

The land, never.

Edited November 11, 2013 by Khun Jean

[thailiketoo]

I believe you when you show me the passage in the CCC.

I also know what 'real rights' are, and that a contract with your wife will be looked upon as if it was made with someone not being your wife. Paying nothing for the usufruct for instance would be impossible with someone else. Hence it is considered a 'marriage' deal. If you paid the full price for it, and registered it as such and payed taxes then you might have a very small change that a judge would consider that you are the one who is disadvantaged in case of a divorce. In all other cases it will be handled as if the Thai wife has been coerced to sign a usufruct with her husband.

The situation where your wife goes to the land office tomorrow and revokes your usufruct does not need a court case or a judge to make a decision. Her decision alone (or yours because you can also do it) is enough.

My own thought before was that because the land is 100% owned by a Thai wife, and is part of her Sin Suan Tuan, that a contract like a usufruct would also be considered as she would act in the interest of her Sin Suan Tuan and as such is not a contract between husband and wife. But unfortunately the practical experience proofed otherwise. After rereading the CCC i saw my error as a contract can not be made in another capacity then that of she being your wife. So the law still is clear, every, and the word every really means every, contract between husband and wife can be revoked by either one at any time, and yes any time really means any time, or in the case of divorce within one year, without questions asked. Only proof needed is a marriage certificate and an id card. This was tested in the Land Office in Bang Saphan, about 2 years ago, usufruct was in place for about 2 years. Since then nothing has been changed in the CCC.

You might have interpreted it wrong, or did someone else interpret it for you, happens a lot, that is why i ask.

And when my wife is allowed to revoke a usufruct without any problems, it is only you who says she circumvented the law.

And did you really mean a house that floats in the air? Because every where i look houses seem to be build on land.

A house when build when married is Sin Somros (shared property).

If you buy a house it is part of the title and can not be separated from the land. So only when vacant land is bought and a house build upon it later is it possible to have shared ownership.

The land, never.

I never said anything about owning land. You are arguing with yourself. I don't know any instance where a spouse was expelled from a home and land or forced to sell after the wife's death if they had a will. But maybe you do. OK.

I didn't mention that at all. I'll repeat it for you. The law is, "The law says, "A registered right of usufruct is not a contract that can be terminated by your wife. Usufruct is a real right and as a real property right governed by book IV PROPERTY in civil and commercial Code and not by book III CONTRACTS. "

No mention of land. No mention of a divorce. You are talking about different issues. You said you tested the issue at a land office, ya right. Sure you did. Paid a lawyer to do a Usefruct on your house and then had your wife go the the land office and terminate it? Do you really expect anyone to believe that? How much did you pay the lawyer to file the Usefruct on your house that you threw away? Answer a simple question. Did you have a Usefruct on your house alone? Because if you did not we are writing about different things. I am not writing about land or a divorce at all because those are completely different issues.

[FiftyTwo]

You said you tested the issue at a land office, ya right. Sure you did. Paid a lawyer to do a Usefruct on your house and then had your wife go the the land office and terminate it? Do you really expect anyone to believe that? How much did you pay the lawyer to file the Usefruct on your house that you threw away? Answer a simple question. Did you have a Usefruct on your house alone? Because if you did not we are writing about different things. I am not writing about land or a divorce at all because those are completely different issues.

Costs about 30bht to register a Usefruct at the land office, they have the form for you to fill in.

Very few people in Thailand use lawyers for land deals, too many crooks, too many incompetents, too much unnecessary cost.

I just gave my wife money for the deposit for a house, we went to the land office to buy, bank people were there, housing development people were there, wife and I were there. No lawyers, plenty of form filling, bribe from the bank to the land office so we didn't need to queue. All done in an hour. Best way to buy a house, use a bank loan, nobody will try and cheat the bank, all very easy.

Interesting to hear you paid a small fortune to a crook to provide you with protection that your wife can cancel at any time. One born every day, eh? How much did you pay your lawyer? (just for laughs)

[thailiketoo]

You said you tested the issue at a land office, ya right. Sure you did. Paid a lawyer to do a Usefruct on your house and then had your wife go the the land office and terminate it? Do you really expect anyone to believe that? How much did you pay the lawyer to file the Usefruct on your house that you threw away? Answer a simple question. Did you have a Usefruct on your house alone? Because if you did not we are writing about different things. I am not writing about land or a divorce at all because those are completely different issues.

Costs about 30bht to register a Usefruct at the land office, they have the form for you to fill in.

Very few people in Thailand use lawyers for land deals, too many crooks, too many incompetents, too much unnecessary cost.

I just gave my wife money for the deposit for a house, we went to the land office to buy, bank people were there, housing development people were there, wife and I were there. No lawyers, plenty of form filling, bribe from the bank to the land office so we didn't need to queue. All done in an hour. Best way to buy a house, use a bank loan, nobody will try and cheat the bank, all very easy.

Interesting to hear you paid a small fortune to a crook to provide you with protection that your wife can cancel at any time. One born every day, eh? How much did you pay your lawyer? (just for laughs)

Where did I say I paid a lawyer to provide anything for me? I didn't. I was asking the other poster a question maybe you thought I meant I paid to file a Usefruct. We bought a house at the bank. Went to the land office first and then with the builder/owner went to the bank to arrange the loan. I didn't pay any money, why would I care about a Usefruct. My wife bought the house. I was only there for security.

[northernjohn]

TiT....explains everything.

Sent from my GT-I9200 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

TIT is a fact. It is not a derogatory statement.

People who can not understand that and keep insisting on changing the Thai logic to match there own are not really playing with a full deck. To be here long enough to get a girlfriend and consider buying a house with her is long enough to learn that.

The proper response was say thank you and go to another bank. My western mind is saying if you don't trust her for sure don't marry her. If you do trust her Marry her and show her you do. Also if you marry her you might find a side of her you were unaware of.

[aveabeeror2]

Sorry RS can't use quote on your post, as you screwed around with the "quote" function.

So

Foreigner can no longer buy house in company name.

A small and easy search of the company records will find any foreigner shareholdings, and a prompt refusal to register the property in that company name will be forthcoming. (and that's 'too challenging' not 'to challenging')

Only if the express purpose of the company is to circumvents the restrictions and solely own property.

A functioning real company can own property.

A "functioning real company " is not a person, farang.

[Khun Jean]

I never said anything about owning land. You are arguing with yourself. I don't know any instance where a spouse was expelled from a home and land or forced to sell after the wife's death if they had a will. But maybe you do. OK.

I didn't mention that at all. I'll repeat it for you. The law is, "The law says, "A registered right of usufruct is not a contract that can be terminated by your wife. Usufruct is a real right and as a real property right governed by book IV PROPERTY in civil and commercial Code and not by book III CONTRACTS. "

No mention of land. No mention of a divorce. You are talking about different issues. You said you tested the issue at a land office, ya right. Sure you did. Paid a lawyer to do a Usefruct on your house and then had your wife go the the land office and terminate it? Do you really expect anyone to believe that? How much did you pay the lawyer to file the Usefruct on your house that you threw away? Answer a simple question. Did you have a Usefruct on your house alone? Because if you did not we are writing about different things. I am not writing about land or a divorce at all because those are completely different issues.

So you choose to not show me where it is said in the CCC. Again!

Btw, a usufruct is just a formality, took about 20 minutes. Small form (1 page) to be filled in at the land office.

You talk about a usufruct on a house, i talk about a usufruct on land. It does not make any difference in the subject we are discussing. It is a contract between husband and wife and can be revoke by either at any moment. I thought that was what you not agreed with. It is also true for a lease. Or ANY other contract. ANY meaning every kind.

I test many things, if you choose to not believe that it is not really my problem. I choose to not believe a lawyer. I also not just believe everything i read on internet. Being skeptical is a good thing. But also be skeptical with so call experts. Most of the time it is just some bloke with a fancy business card.

For me, my strategy worked out good so far, i get better all the time at detecting utter bullshit.

The text your write "The law says,.....etc" is your text or that of a lawyer. It is not stated like that in any section in the CCC.

If you do not want to copy/paste the section you refer to, then at least tell the numbers. The books are not precise enough.

You can also not choose to comply with one piece of the CCC and ignore another piece. You have to comply with all that is written in it.

In a following post you tell you're wife bought a house and you did not have a usufruct on it. Or did you forget to mention that?

So you not even know how a usufruct looks like, or how much it costs?

You were only there as security. You mean like a bodyguard? Did you have your dark sunglasses on and put some foam under your shirt? Or is the foam reserved for another place?

Are you William. H. ?. The one who first put a comment on samuiforsale website and then quote yourself?

Or did you decide that quoting a comment would be better then quoting from the article itself?

http://www.samuiforsale.com/family-law/usufruct-in-a-thai-marriage.html

In that same comment "This includes usufruct and superficies but it is difficult to void and deregister such rights. "

My wife proved that it was rather simple. There goes that theory.

I find it rather funny that you choose to believe that comment and not mine.

Maybe you should check it out for yourself, rely on your own knowledge. Be independent, take care of yourself, etc...

Ah well, one born every microsecond.

Edited November 11, 2013 by Khun Jean

[thailiketoo]

TITLE VII

USUFRUCT

Section 1417. An immovable property may be subjected to a usufruct by virtue of which the usufructuary is entitled to the possession, use and enjoyment of the property. He has the right of management of the property.

You can look it up. I'm not getting paid to work for you.

I live in Thailand full time. I did not buy my wife a house. My wife bought us a house. I don't have any claim to it. It is her house. She will live much longer than I.

In dealing with the Thai government concerning money I use a lawyer. It is not that I don't trust my wife; I would do the same thing in the West. I don't have a Usefruct on a house in Thialand. I never bought a house in Thailand. I would not buy anyone a house. I did that in the West, I found a person I disliked and bought them a house. It's called a divorce.

Edited November 11, 2013 by thailiketoo

[Khun Jean]

Sure section 1417 is just what it says it is.

And you don't have to work for me, i know the CCC very well. I just want you to point out where it says that it can not be voided by your spouse.

Because it also says this:

Section 1469. Any agreement (post-nuptial) concluded between husband and wife during marriage may be avoided by either of them at any time during marriage or within one year from the day of dissolution of marriage; provided that the right of third persons acting in good faith are not affected thereby.

Section 1470. Properties of husband and wife except in so far as they are set aside as Sin Suan Tua, are Sin Somros.

It is very clearly stated. ANY agreement. Or can this part be ignored when talking about a usufruct. A usufruct being a form of agreement.

If that is what you think, explain it then. Or point out something in the CCC that contradicts this.

[thailiketoo]

If you are NOT married to the owner granting you the usufruct, I believe it is not possible to cancel a usufruct.

If you are married to the person granting the usefruct and want me to explain what to do you will have to pay me.

Alternatively you could document where it says in Thai law that a wife may cancel a usefruct on a house (and not part of a divorce settlement).

I hope this discussion has motivated interested parties to consult a lawyer when making financial transactions in any country, Thailand included.

Edited November 11, 2013 by thailiketoo

[Khun Jean]

If you are NOT married to the owner granting you the usufruct, I believe it is not possible to cancel a usufruct.

If you are married to the person granting the usefruct and want me to explain what to do you will have to pay me.

Alternatively you could document where it says in Thai law that a wife may cancel a usefruct on a house (and not part of a divorce settlement).

I hope this discussion has motivated interested parties to consult a lawyer when making financial transactions in any country, Thailand included.

Pay you. That would be a big mistake as you have proved to be wrong so many times.

Now you have got me thinking...... you are a lawyer?

Where it says in Thai law??? Are you serious? Do i have to make it bold and in all caps?

How about you read the post above you, section 1469.

[thailiketoo]

If you are NOT married to the owner granting you the usufruct, I believe it is not possible to cancel a usufruct.

If you are married to the person granting the usefruct and want me to explain what to do you will have to pay me.

Alternatively you could document where it says in Thai law that a wife may cancel a usefruct on a house (and not part of a divorce settlement).

I hope this discussion has motivated interested parties to consult a lawyer when making financial transactions in any country, Thailand included.

Pay you. That would be a big mistake as you have proved to be wrong so many times.

Now you have got me thinking...... you are a lawyer?

Where it says in Thai law??? Are you serious? Do i have to make it bold and in all caps?

How about you read the post above you, section 1469.

1469 does not say usefruct. If you want a better answer consult a lawyer. Me wrong? Maybe but not in this thread. I would be interested to hear a real legal opinion on the issue. No free lawyers on Thaivisa?

Edited November 11, 2013 by thailiketoo