I Paid For Some Land Today

[bikerider21]

I have userfruct on my house and my hotel. It's registered at the land register office so anyone wanting to buy the land will know that even if he buys the land, then I have full use of it until I die.

I would suggest a lawyer to handle everything for you. A small price at around 10,000B.

As I know, the userfruct apply s to the land but that automatically means all the properties built on the land, like houses, hotels etc.

There is one thing. Because it's in your g/f's name, she's got to sign the userfruct papers. It's a good time to see now if she's agreeable.

Usufruct seems to be the easiest and cheapest way for a foreigner to get possession or right of use of some land here.

However, looked at in the extreme rare situations – the ones you read about in books and sometimes in the news section at Thai Visa – if everything works out the wrong way your life may be in danger, as the usufruct runs for lifetime. Maybe I’ve read too many Thai claimed-to-be-true horror stories? But it sticks in the back of my head that a farang shall always be worth more alive than dead.

Another downside I see with usufruct is, that it may be difficult to sell your investment and move on – you may have both paid for the land and the building(s) on it – as nothing belongs to you. A lease, even more expensive in long terms, gives more rights on the investment.

Anyway, I got nothing to fear; I’m lucky, because my lovely GF and her family are different…!

Yes, you are right. This business is not for everyone. No matter how much you are in love etc. the chances of breakup in Thailand are, I think, higher than most other places, mainly because many marriages involve grumpy old guys who've seen it all before and expectant young girls with big eyes and a Thai family and strong culture. It's really a slow burning fuse when you think about it.

I think that you have to approach this arrangement with your eyes open. Being hotly in love doesn't help. Don't go to Las Vegas unless you are prepared to loose.

Don't think that you will ever be in a position to pack up and move on. Therefore it's good for older guys with low ambitions. Never assume that you will stay married.

My property (well not mine actually) goes to my half Thai daughter when she's of age. A good lawyer will also make a WILL at the same time as the usufruct so what ever happens, how can I loose?

I would advise not putting all your eggs in one basket. Keep something in reserve for when you meet another girl of your dreams and want to start over. Just don't bank on getting anything back from the first go.

[leosuntime]

I always read the title of this post as 'I paid for a lady today' my subconscious is so naughty

[bikerider21]

Quite apt. However, I never knew any ladies that I never had to pay for; girl friends, wives, daughters...... but then I'm old fashioned English and I suppose that's me.

[simon43]

Something else that has not been mentioned here is control of the land. Whilst most people know that foreigners cannot legally own land in Thailand, (with very few exceptions), it is also law that foreigners cannot use legal 'loopholes' to control the land. This of course, is wholly open to interpretation by a Court.

For example, if a Thai company owns land and the non-Thai controls that company via share voting rights etc, then it follows that the non-Thai controls the land, which is illegal. If you lease land (as I do), for say 20 years, you can do whatever you like with that land during the lease period, but you do not control the land, because it can be sold under you and you have no control over that situation. Of course, the new owner has to honour the lease that you have and cannot throw you off the land.

Therefore, as a rule of thumb test, for whatever means or legal loophole you use for the piece of land in question, ask yourself if you (as a non-Thai), can control the land from being sold from under you. If you can control such a sale, then I suggest that you are at risk of having your 'control' challenged in a Court of Law, since control of land by a non-Thai is illegal.

Of course, whether someone would actually go as far as to challenge you is another matter....

Simon

Edited January 27, 2014 by simon43

[RigPig]

Something else that has not been mentioned here is control of the land. Whilst most people know that foreigners cannot legally own land in Thailand, (with very few exceptions), it is also law that foreigners cannot use legal 'loopholes' to control the land. This of course, is wholly open to interpretation by a Court.

For example, if a Thai company owns land and the non-Thai controls that company via share voting rights etc, then it follows that the non-Thai controls the land, which is illegal. If you lease land (as I do), for say 20 years, you can do whatever you like with that land during the lease period, but you do not control the land, because it can be sold under you and you have no control over that situation. Of course, the new owner has to honour the lease that you have and cannot throw you off the land.

Therefore, as a rule of thumb test, for whatever means or legal loophole you use for the piece of land in question, ask yourself if you (as a non-Thai), can control the land from being sold from under you. If you can control such a sale, then I suggest that you are at risk of having your 'control' challenged in a Court of Law, since control of land by a non-Thai is illegal.

Of course, whether someone would actually go as far as to challenge you is another matter....

Simon

However (as in another thread I started) it would seem that you can (could) control the "debt" the land owes you through a mortgage arrangement.

I guess it all depends on what your objectives are and what you are trying to achieve. I think that the nightmare stories of farangs buying some land and building a house and being thrown out shortly after could at least be "controlled". If the land had an existing house it would then become part of the mortgage arrangement. The land would just have to be sold to a Thai to recoup your money.

Safer than an Ursfruct I would think, monetarily anyway.

[khunPer]

Something else that has not been mentioned here is control of the land. Whilst most people know that foreigners cannot legally own land in Thailand, (with very few exceptions), it is also law that foreigners cannot use legal 'loopholes' to control the land. This of course, is wholly open to interpretation by a Court.

For example, if a Thai company owns land and the non-Thai controls that company via share voting rights etc, then it follows that the non-Thai controls the land, which is illegal. If you lease land (as I do), for say 20 years, you can do whatever you like with that land during the lease period, but you do not control the land, because it can be sold under you and you have no control over that situation. Of course, the new owner has to honour the lease that you have and cannot throw you off the land.

Therefore, as a rule of thumb test, for whatever means or legal loophole you use for the piece of land in question, ask yourself if you (as a non-Thai), can control the land from being sold from under you. If you can control such a sale, then I suggest that you are at risk of having your 'control' challenged in a Court of Law, since control of land by a non-Thai is illegal.

Of course, whether someone would actually go as far as to challenge you is another matter....

Simon

However (as in another thread I started) it would seem that you can (could) control the "debt" the land owes you through a mortgage arrangement.

I guess it all depends on what your objectives are and what you are trying to achieve. I think that the nightmare stories of farangs buying some land and building a house and being thrown out shortly after could at least be "controlled". If the land had an existing house it would then become part of the mortgage arrangement. The land would just have to be sold to a Thai to recoup your money.

Safer than an Ursfruct I would think, monetarily anyway.

From what I read, Thai Visa news for example, and hear from others like lawyers, the authorities do not care much about the more private set-ups where a farang controlled company owns a small plot of land, leased to a farang; whilst business set-ups for speculation with larger plots or projects are subjects to be scrutinized. However some Land Departments may today have reservations when transferring a plot to a farang controlled limited company.

For the smaller private set-ups there may be a problem if it’s an “old” limited company with nominees, who cannot prove their mean of funds for the investment. If controlling such a company it may be advisable to make some changes in the shareholders.

Using the loan-servitude/mortgage method combines with lease may be safer.

[RigPig]

Something else that has not been mentioned here is control of the land. Whilst most people know that foreigners cannot legally own land in Thailand, (with very few exceptions), it is also law that foreigners cannot use legal 'loopholes' to control the land. This of course, is wholly open to interpretation by a Court.

For example, if a Thai company owns land and the non-Thai controls that company via share voting rights etc, then it follows that the non-Thai controls the land, which is illegal. If you lease land (as I do), for say 20 years, you can do whatever you like with that land during the lease period, but you do not control the land, because it can be sold under you and you have no control over that situation. Of course, the new owner has to honour the lease that you have and cannot throw you off the land.

Therefore, as a rule of thumb test, for whatever means or legal loophole you use for the piece of land in question, ask yourself if you (as a non-Thai), can control the land from being sold from under you. If you can control such a sale, then I suggest that you are at risk of having your 'control' challenged in a Court of Law, since control of land by a non-Thai is illegal.

Of course, whether someone would actually go as far as to challenge you is another matter....

Simon

However (as in another thread I started) it would seem that you can (could) control the "debt" the land owes you through a mortgage arrangement.

I guess it all depends on what your objectives are and what you are trying to achieve. I think that the nightmare stories of farangs buying some land and building a house and being thrown out shortly after could at least be "controlled". If the land had an existing house it would then become part of the mortgage arrangement. The land would just have to be sold to a Thai to recoup your money.

Safer than an Ursfruct I would think, monetarily anyway.

From what I read, Thai Visa news for example, and hear from others like lawyers, the authorities do not care much about the more private set-ups where a farang controlled company owns a small plot of land, leased to a farang; whilst business set-ups for speculation with larger plots or projects are subjects to be scrutinized. However some Land Departments may today have reservations when transferring a plot to a farang controlled limited company.

For the smaller private set-ups there may be a problem if it’s an “old” limited company with nominees, who cannot prove their mean of funds for the investment. If controlling such a company it may be advisable to make some changes in the shareholders.

Using the loan-servitude/mortgage method combines with lease may be safer.

I agree, however you do not need to be a company to have a mortgage arrangement set up with your GF, one reason I feel it is "safer" this way.

You could even "gift" 50% or whatever to your GF. I don't see this as a proxy to circumvent the law YOU CAN NEVER OWN THE LAND. It is just a method of protecting the money you have invested in the property, a means of preventing yourself from being scammed. That is all.

A 30 year lease or ursfruct gives you nothing.

I believe that should you marry AFTER the purchase it will not affect the mortgage as you own everything before the marriage and the arrangement was made before the girl became your spouse.

You could think of it as a secure pre-nup.

However weather you could combine a mortgage with a lease or ursfruct I do not know, but I can see, as Simon states this may well be seen as CONTROL over the land and may be construed as being illegal and an attempt to circumvent the law.

Edited January 28, 2014 by RigPig

[khunPer]

Something else that has not been mentioned here is control of the land. Whilst most people know that foreigners cannot legally own land in Thailand, (with very few exceptions), it is also law that foreigners cannot use legal 'loopholes' to control the land. This of course, is wholly open to interpretation by a Court.

For example, if a Thai company owns land and the non-Thai controls that company via share voting rights etc, then it follows that the non-Thai controls the land, which is illegal. If you lease land (as I do), for say 20 years, you can do whatever you like with that land during the lease period, but you do not control the land, because it can be sold under you and you have no control over that situation. Of course, the new owner has to honour the lease that you have and cannot throw you off the land.

Therefore, as a rule of thumb test, for whatever means or legal loophole you use for the piece of land in question, ask yourself if you (as a non-Thai), can control the land from being sold from under you. If you can control such a sale, then I suggest that you are at risk of having your 'control' challenged in a Court of Law, since control of land by a non-Thai is illegal.

Of course, whether someone would actually go as far as to challenge you is another matter....

Simon

However (as in another thread I started) it would seem that you can (could) control the "debt" the land owes you through a mortgage arrangement.

I guess it all depends on what your objectives are and what you are trying to achieve. I think that the nightmare stories of farangs buying some land and building a house and being thrown out shortly after could at least be "controlled". If the land had an existing house it would then become part of the mortgage arrangement. The land would just have to be sold to a Thai to recoup your money.

Safer than an Ursfruct I would think, monetarily anyway.

From what I read, Thai Visa news for example, and hear from others like lawyers, the authorities do not care much about the more private set-ups where a farang controlled company owns a small plot of land, leased to a farang; whilst business set-ups for speculation with larger plots or projects are subjects to be scrutinized. However some Land Departments may today have reservations when transferring a plot to a farang controlled limited company.

For the smaller private set-ups there may be a problem if it’s an “old” limited company with nominees, who cannot prove their mean of funds for the investment. If controlling such a company it may be advisable to make some changes in the shareholders.

Using the loan-servitude/mortgage method combines with lease may be safer.

I agree, however you do not need to be a company to have a mortgage arrangement set up with your GF, one reason I feel it is "safer" this way.

You could even "gift" 50% or whatever to your GF. I don't see this as a proxy to circumvent the law YOU CAN NEVER OWN THE LAND. It is just a method of protecting the money you have invested in the property, a means of preventing yourself from being scammed. That is all.

A 30 year lease or ursfruct gives you nothing.

I believe that should you marry AFTER the purchase it will not affect the mortgage as you own everything before the marriage and the arrangement was made before the girl became your spouse.

You could think of it as a secure pre-nup.

However weather you could combine a mortgage with a lease or ursfruct I do not know, but I can see, as Simon states this may well be seen as CONTROL over the land and may be construed as being illegal and an attempt to circumvent the law.

You shall make a prenuptial agreement upon marriage; that is accepted by Thai law to state difference between personal property and common property, however a newer concept and not commonly used by Thais (Source: Thai Law for Foreigners, page 62).

[iancnx]

A 30 year lease or ursfruct gives you nothing.

As I mentioned I have a lifetime usefruct. Your statement above implies all expats are out to get a financial return on the relationship if it all goes pear shaped. That's not necessarily the case. If it all goes to rats shit in my case my investment is my son's inheritance and I am very comfortable with that concept. I have independent wealth secured prior to my marriage.

I do understand though if there are no children to inherit than scam Central can easily kick in as we have seen and heard so many times.

[RigPig]

A 30 year lease or ursfruct gives you nothing.

As I mentioned I have a lifetime usefruct. Your statement above implies all expats are out to get a financial return on the relationship if it all goes pear shaped. That's not necessarily the case. If it all goes to rats shit in my case my investment is my son's inheritance and I am very comfortable with that concept. I have independent wealth secured prior to my marriage.

I do understand though if there are no children to inherit than scam Central can easily kick in as we have seen and heard so many times.

I fully understand, and could possibly see myself going down the same path. Horses for courses......

To me it's just a method of protection, I believe a mortgage can be inherited by a relative, even if a foreigner (children from a previous relationship maybe).

Just out of curiosity, what happens to the land if something happens to before your son becomes of age? I didn't think minors could own or make decisions on land. Does the mother or a relative (if both of you died in a car accident) become the guardian? Could they possibly sell it before your son gained legal control over it?

[FiftyTwo]

Sometimes the OP says wife, sometimes the OP says the girlfriend.

Which one is it?

If it's a girlfriend, already too late.

If it's a wife, no problem contracts between husband and wife can be cancelled at any time.

Gifts are considered contractual between a husband and wife, so you can ask for them back at any time up to 1 year after divorce.

[FiftyTwo]

A 30 year lease or ursfruct gives you nothing.

As I mentioned I have a lifetime usefruct. Your statement above implies all expats are out to get a financial return on the relationship if it all goes pear shaped. That's not necessarily the case. If it all goes to rats shit in my case my investment is my son's inheritance and I am very comfortable with that concept. I have independent wealth secured prior to my marriage.

I do understand though if there are no children to inherit than scam Central can easily kick in as we have seen and heard so many times.

Why didn't you put it in your son's name?

Usually nothing left to inherit after mum goes gambling.

[iancnx]

A 30 year lease or ursfruct gives you nothing.

As I mentioned I have a lifetime usefruct. Your statement above implies all expats are out to get a financial return on the relationship if it all goes pear shaped. That's not necessarily the case. If it all goes to rats shit in my case my investment is my son's inheritance and I am very comfortable with that concept. I have independent wealth secured prior to my marriage.

I do understand though if there are no children to inherit than scam Central can easily kick in as we have seen and heard so many times.

I fully understand, and could possibly see myself going down the same path. Horses for courses......

To me it's just a method of protection, I believe a mortgage can be inherited by a relative, even if a foreigner (children from a previous relationship maybe).

Just out of curiosity, what happens to the land if something happens to before your son becomes of age? I didn't think minors could own or make decisions on land. Does the mother or a relative (if both of you died in a car accident) become the guardian? Could they possibly sell it before your son gained legal control over it?

All excellent questions which I have been wrestling with for a number of months. A Will of course is needed in this event. At the end of the day I suspect we would have to rely on the good heart of my wife's father and sister (mother deceased). Happy to say both are 100% good good people and absolutely adore our son. They even make a pretty good job out of putting up with me! And ATMs have not once been mentioned in what has been 4 yrs +. Added to this my son is already on the house book of one of the two dwellings built on my wife's land. My wife will also need a Will. I should pull my finger out. Thanks for the kick up the arse.

[FiftyTwo]

Added to this my son is already on the house book of one of the two dwellings built on my wife's land.

Means nothing with reference to ownership or inheritance rights.

If you wanted him to have it, you should have registered him as owner from day 1.

[RigPig]

Well in my OP (I think it may have been further down the track) I stated making the mortgage BEFORE marriage, hence the use of both terms.

Your son has no control over the land (i believe, please correct me if I'm wrong) so the legal guardian has control. It could probably be sold out BEFORE he come of age.

Sometimes the OP says wife, sometimes the OP says the girlfriend.
Which one is it?

If it's a girlfriend, already too late.
If it's a wife, no problem contracts between husband and wife can be cancelled at any time.
Gifts are considered contractual between a husband and wife, so you can ask for them back at any time up to 1 year after divorce.

A 30 year lease or ursfruct gives you nothing.

As I mentioned I have a lifetime usefruct. Your statement above implies all expats are out to get a financial return on the relationship if it all goes pear shaped. That's not necessarily the case. If it all goes to rats shit in my case my investment is my son's inheritance and I am very comfortable with that concept. I have independent wealth secured prior to my marriage.

I do understand though if there are no children to inherit than scam Central can easily kick in as we have seen and heard so many times.

Why didn't you put it in your son's name?
Usually nothing left to inherit after mum goes gambling.

[RigPig]

Added to this my son is already on the house book of one of the two dwellings built on my wife's land.

Means nothing with reference to ownership or inheritance rights.

If you wanted him to have it, you should have registered him as owner from day 1.

I am not sure if this would work either @FiftyTwo, I am pretty sure that I read somewhere that unless the child is of age they can not own or control land. That would then fall to the guardian of the child, with it's inherent dangers.........

[FiftyTwo]

Added to this my son is already on the house book of one of the two dwellings built on my wife's land.

Means nothing with reference to ownership or inheritance rights.

If you wanted him to have it, you should have registered him as owner from day 1.

I am not sure if this would work either @FiftyTwo, I am pretty sure that I read somewhere that unless the child is of age they can not own or control land. That would then fall to the guardian of the child, with it's inherent dangers.........

A Thai can own land from the day it's born.

It can't be sold without court permission, which is never given.

Either parent can be named as manager of the land (foreigner or Thai) with very limited management powers.

What the corrupt official at the land office says after Thai mum has bribed him, is an entirely different matter.

[iancnx]

Added to this my son is already on the house book of one of the two dwellings built on my wife's land.

Means nothing with reference to ownership or inheritance rights.

If you wanted him to have it, you should have registered him as owner from day 1.

I am not sure if this would work either @FiftyTwo, I am pretty sure that I read somewhere that unless the child is of age they can not own or control land. That would then fall to the guardian of the child, with it's inherent dangers.........

A Thai can own land from the day it's born.

It can't be sold without court permission, which is never given.

Either parent can be named as manager of the land (foreigner or Thai) with very limited management powers.

What the corrupt official at the land office says after Thai mum has bribed him, is an entirely different matter.

To all the latest posters. Just to clarify the land is my wife's land inherited from her deceased mother. So idiotic supposition and comment about gambling in this particular case is off beam don't you think!

[FiftyTwo]

Means nothing with reference to ownership or inheritance rights.

If you wanted him to have it, you should have registered him as owner from day 1.

I am not sure if this would work either @FiftyTwo, I am pretty sure that I read somewhere that unless the child is of age they can not own or control land. That would then fall to the guardian of the child, with it's inherent dangers.........

A Thai can own land from the day it's born.

It can't be sold without court permission, which is never given.

Either parent can be named as manager of the land (foreigner or Thai) with very limited management powers.

What the corrupt official at the land office says after Thai mum has bribed him, is an entirely different matter.

To all the latest posters. Just to clarify the land is my wife's land inherited from her deceased mother. So idiotic supposition and comment about gambling in this particular case is off beam don't you think!

She could have gone to the land office and given the land to her son, and still can.

Which will secure his inheritance rights.

She may well not gamble, but at the moment there are many ways she could lose the land.

Sign as guarantor on a bank loan for a car for a friend is a good one.

Borrow money from a loan shark to pay hospital bills for her sick parent is another.

Thais are completely daft where land ownership is concerned, in your son's name, it's as safe as houses.

Everyone pretends they really care for their children, but so few are prepared to do the work to ensure their future.

No excuses, it's just lazy.

Edited January 29, 2014 by FiftyTwo

[RigPig]

Added to this my son is already on the house book of one of the two dwellings built on my wife's land.

Means nothing with reference to ownership or inheritance rights.

If you wanted him to have it, you should have registered him as owner from day 1.

I am not sure if this would work either @FiftyTwo, I am pretty sure that I read somewhere that unless the child is of age they can not own or control land. That would then fall to the guardian of the child, with it's inherent dangers.........

A Thai can own land from the day it's born.

It can't be sold without court permission, which is never given.

Either parent can be named as manager of the land (foreigner or Thai) with very limited management powers.

What the corrupt official at the land office says after Thai mum has bribed him, is an entirely different matter.

Fair enough, that's interesting, but it does bring up a few other questions and yes I would think the biggest worry in that case would be the land office, but I wouldn't think there would be any corruption there would there.......

I think the land office has control over an ursfruct too, which is another reason for just owning the lien (debt) over the land as a separate binding document.

[FiftyTwo]

Fair enough, that's interesting, but it does bring up a few other questions and yes I would think the biggest worry in that case would be the land office, but I wouldn't think there would be any corruption there would there.......

The land office is so corrupt, you have to pay a bribe (about 2,000bht )to get a land transfer completed the same day.

[iancnx]

Fair enough, that's interesting, but it does bring up a few other questions and yes I would think the biggest worry in that case would be the land office, but I wouldn't think there would be any corruption there would there.......

The land office is so corrupt, you have to pay a bribe (about 2,000bht )to get a land transfer completed the same day.

Absolute rubbish! Clearly you are no expert, though you might mean well, and you might have to pay bribes in your Amphur. But my experience with our land office has been nothing other than professional and amenable.

[FiftyTwo]

Fair enough, that's interesting, but it does bring up a few other questions and yes I would think the biggest worry in that case would be the land office, but I wouldn't think there would be any corruption there would there.......

The land office is so corrupt, you have to pay a bribe (about 2,000bht )to get a land transfer completed the same day.

Absolute rubbish! Clearly you are no expert, though you might mean well, and you might have to pay bribes in your Amphur. But my experience with our land office has been nothing other than professional and amenable.

You just didn't notice, or waited until tomorrow for the transfer to complete.

I clearly saw my SCB bank representative hand a bribe over, and asked the Thai guy next to me what it was about.

"Bribe for same day service" was his answer, poor "people wait until tomorrow."

Then he went and did the same thing.

PS

I loved all the peeps handing over bags full of cash, takes them forever to count to 2M (or so).

Edited January 29, 2014 by FiftyTwo

[RigPig]

One other thing I just thought of, not all of can have children anymore either.......snip snip......

[khunPer]

Fair enough, that's interesting, but it does bring up a few other questions and yes I would think the biggest worry in that case would be the land office, but I wouldn't think there would be any corruption there would there.......

The land office is so corrupt, you have to pay a bribe (about 2,000bht )to get a land transfer completed the same day.

It's not briebe, it's a minor surcharge for First Class VIP-service; if it's bribe it will costs you a lot more than 2,000 only...!

[FiftyTwo]

Fair enough, that's interesting, but it does bring up a few other questions and yes I would think the biggest worry in that case would be the land office, but I wouldn't think there would be any corruption there would there.......

The land office is so corrupt, you have to pay a bribe (about 2,000bht )to get a land transfer completed the same day.

It's not briebe, it's a minor surcharge for First Class VIP-service; if it's bribe it will costs you a lot more than 2,000 only...!

Obviously,

So why did their hands with the cash go under the table, and why was no receipt issued for the VIP service.

Every other expense was itemized on the receipts, even 30bht for a stamp.

[Showbags]

Land offices....no corruption....

[khunPer]

Fair enough, that's interesting, but it does bring up a few other questions and yes I would think the biggest worry in that case would be the land office, but I wouldn't think there would be any corruption there would there.......

The land office is so corrupt, you have to pay a bribe (about 2,000bht )to get a land transfer completed the same day.

It's not briebe, it's a minor surcharge for First Class VIP-service; if it's bribe it will costs you a lot more than 2,000 only...!

Obviously,

So why did their hands with the cash go under the table, and why was no receipt issued for the VIP service.

Every other expense was itemized on the receipts, even 30bht for a stamp.

Good point…!

IMO bribe is when you for “money under the table” achieves something with are impossible or not likely.

Money talks everywhere in the World, so I compare it with flying on Business Class rather than Monkey Class; I get a better service, sits up front, is boarding the plane before those not paying extra and do not have to wait in line at check-in – even have my own short queue counter with a nice royal blue carpet to stand on – and sits in a special lounge instead of mingling with the monkeys; but I don’t need to flash for everybody that I can afford a business class ticket; or just have been upgraded because I’m a frequent flyer and gives the airline more money than my fellow monkeys.

At Land Department I will have my deed done anyway, just a question if I want to wait in the monkey-line a whole day – or come back the next – or pay the little extra for the short queue. Just think of what money can buy, if we poor “cheep Charlie” TV-forum members could afford the official Thai VIP Elite-card membership and being »recognized as a friend of the country« and »are also treated as such« (quotes from Thailand Elite home page).

I always remember the cute little Thai girl telling me: »Khun Per, there are so much about Thailand you don’t understand.« But I will like to understand, accept and follow “the Thai way of thinking” and “the Thai way of living” as much as I can when living here; even I have a Western luggage. So today I accept that “bribe” in some level is an integrated part of the Southeast Asia culture; that if I can afford it I can have the speedy service for a “small discrete extra fee” – I’ve been a number of times to Land Departs in two provinces and as I don’t want to waste my time I chose to pay the VIP-fee; and instead of waiting six to eight weeks for a building permission, which I would have anyway, I chose to pay for the short one-to-two-week cut. Bribe would IMO be if I paid for permission to build something which was not allowed – including the risk of later be forced to demolish the building when somebody else got in charge; of course I might be able to pay a bribe once again.

I know very well, that when coming from many Western countries we feel that all shall be equal and anything else is bribe – but in real life »some are more equal than others«.

[icare999]

everything here is in my thai wife or children's names if you have doubts don't do it if it goes wrong then just man up and let her have it all

worked for me for 30 years

[FiftyTwo]

everything here is in my thai wife or children's names if you have doubts don't do it if it goes wrong then just man up and let her have it all

worked for me for 30 years

Worked for me for 30 years too ....... then she took the lot and chucked me out.