House and divorce - do you really get 50%?

[falang07]

Hello,

My question relates to the often mentioned "fact" (even the thaivisa lawyers have recently replied in this sense) that a foreign husband gets half of the house just he has to sell it within one year. But how could this be possible when at the time the house is bought at the land office he has to sign a paper stating that the house is not bought using his own money, otherwise the wife could not buy in her name either? I really doubt he would be entitled to 50% when divorced since this paper basically means that he is officially confirming (I would call it an officially endorsed lie, possible in Thailand only?) that it is not his property and is bought exclusively using his wife's money. Please advise if I am wrong.

[Soutpeel]

Yes your wrong

yes you can get 50%...but your not getting 50% of the house, your getting 50% of the assets acquired during the relationship, ie the owner of the property would have to sell the property to give you the 50% your entitled to under community of property in the marriage.

that a foreign husband gets half of the house just he has to sell it within one year....this one I assume refers to a foreigner national inheriting a property on the death of the Thai spouse, this answer is mixed up, it doesn't refer to divorce

[falang07]

Thank you for the answer. But would not the house be excluded from 50% of the assets acquired during the relationship since you explicitly signed the paper that the house was bought using the wife's money only?

[Soutpeel]

Thank you for the answer. But would not the house be excluded from 50% of the assets acquired during the relationship since you explicitly signed the paper that the house was bought using the wife's money only?

no because unless specifically specified, you are married under community of property, ergo...50% of the assets you acquired during the marriage are hers, and 50% are yours...if there was a prenup in place or the property was bought before the marriage it may work differently. But if married COP..whats yours is her's and whats her's is yours..

[ezzra]

What ever you get, 40, 50, or 60%, at the end you get 100% of the shaft....

[prakhonchai nick]

Technically you are entitled to 50% of property acquired during a marriage. But in practice it does not usually work that way.

The house will be in the wife's name, and she would need to sell it so that you can have your 50%. But there is nothing to prevent the wife asking an outrageous price for the property, to ensure it is never sold and it remains hers to live in.

I had that problem 8/9 years ago. However eventually the ex wife was so broke that she wanted to sell the house for a realistic price. I then dug my heels in and agreed to a sale "on my terms", which left her with somewhat less than 50%

I should add that she could not sell without my permission, because I had a mortgage on the property in my name!

Edited June 4, 2014 by prakhonchai nick

[falang07]

Then why does the Land Office require signing this paper?

[AnotherOneAmerican]

Thai marriage law trumps all other laws.

If signing a piece of paper at the land office was evidence of ownership, every Thai guy would force his wife to do it.

Land office doesn't get to make up contract law, court won't enforce it or consider it evidence.

In divorce court, woman says It's mine, look at this bit of paper, court says, where did the money come from, show us the pay slips?

[stgrhe]

The signing of the document at the land office that the OP refers to, shall be seen more like a deed or an agreement, whereas splitting the value of the house's assits is defined in a law. A law has always precedence over any other type of agreement.

[larsjohnsson]

I don't know anybody in real life that got 50% of everything when divorced here.

[prakhonchai nick]

I don't know anybody in real life that got 50% of everything when divorced here.

I DID! As I said above I received in excess of 50% the house sale money, and took what furniture etc from the house that I wanted for my new home. The car was in my name, and whilst technically the ex could have demanded 50% of it's value, she was not aware of that fact! Apart from the house, the ex wife owned nothing!

Having paid everything for the house, and with her clearing off 8 years before the house was sold, leaving me to care for our daughter (11 at the time). I begrudged her every baht that she received. I even made her "donate" 100,000baht to our daughter as part of the house sale conditions.

[Charlie1]

Would it make any difference if you're married in Europe for example? Could a Thai Court divorce a marriage that has been closed in Europe? Would the assets then be divided according to Thai law or the law of that European country?

[no deal]

I don't know anybody in real life that got 50% of everything when divorced here.

well i get 50% of everything including the house it was hard to sale the house because the wife dont want sale, but i give her hard time and finally she give up, we both have a layer but we dont go to court,that my story!

[falang07]

So if I get it right, if the wife does not want to sell, it can be pretty difficult to get anything.

[GOLDBUGGY]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Yes your wrong

yes you can get 50%...but your not getting 50% of the house, your getting 50% of the assets acquired during the relationship, ie the owner of the property would have to sell the property to give you the 50% your entitled to under community of property in the marriage.

that a foreign husband gets half of the house just he has to sell it within one year....this one I assume refers to a foreigner national inheriting a property on the death of the Thai spouse, this answer is mixed up, it doesn't refer to divorce

Good Answer and Good Post. But I think the point the Op tried to bring up is this.

You mentioned that 50% of the assets acquired during the relationship must be divided equally. I don't doubt this is true. But the big question remains that what happens to property brought into marriage that was not acquired during the relationship. For example this Thai Woman inherited land from her Father before she met this man and married him?

Your answer would probably be she gets to keeps this and I believe your answer would be right. What I understand in Thai Divorce that what ever you bring into a marriage you are allowed to keep after the divorce. All sound well and good and so simple. But is it?

The Op mentioned that in order to get this house you must sign papers and declare that none of this house was financed by you. That it is all your wife's money which bought this house. So what you are saying in essences is that this money belongs to your wife and thus what she brought into the marriage. Perhaps sp;d her farm land to do it.

So since Divorce Proceedings say she is allowed to keep what she brought in the marriage, then in fact does this woman not get to keep this house and separate to other assets? Looking from the Outside-In I would say she does get to keep it free and clear! I am sure many will say it does not happen this way, and it is good to hear from them. But I wonder how many silent ones out there that learnt the hard way?

For what other reason would anyone make you declare that before you can buy a house in Thailand you must swear that you are not doing so with any of your own money, even when you are married and it is your wife? In any other situation it does not seem to apply here. Wife gets debt, you are expected to pay.etc.

[Tbone999]

Follow the link to this site, which will explain the confusion. As I understand it, the agreement you sign at the Land office is one which states that the cash used to buy the LAND is solely from the Thai spouse, since foreigners (apart from Permanent Resident Holders, who can own a maximum of 1rai I believe) cannot own land. If you want to protect yourself, please read the link, I would also recommend to enter a Supercities or Usufruct agreement (although, I've read somewhere that the Supercifies is better. In the event of divorce, the house can be regarded as marital assets, but not the land on which it sits.

http://www.samuiforsale.com/family-law/protection-and-ownership-thai-spouse.html

[prakhonchai nick]

Follow the link to this site, which will explain the confusion. As I understand it, the agreement you sign at the Land office is one which states that the cash used to buy the LAND is solely from the Thai spouse, since foreigners (apart from Permanent Resident Holders, who can own a maximum of 1rai I believe) cannot own land. If you want to protect yourself, please read the link, I would also recommend to enter a Supercities or Usufruct agreement (although, I've read somewhere that the Supercifies is better. In the event of divorce, the house can be regarded as marital assets, but not the land on which it sits.

http://www.samuiforsale.com/family-law/protection-and-ownership-thai-spouse.html

As a PR holder, I am not aware that I am any more entitled to own land than any other foreigner.

So far as I am concerned the only benefits I have from PR is not having to do visa runs, or show 400/800,000baht in a bank to obtain a visa extension.or do 90 day reporting.

Even trying to enter National parks etc at the Thai price can be rather iffy, and generally much easier just showing a Thai driving licence.

[332]

If the foreigner owns the house, as a separate legal entity to the land in which it is (or was) on. What happens then?

For example 1).

Foreigner owns the house 100%. The land on which is sits is leased in his/her name for 30 years.

What happens then?

Example 2)

Foreigner owns the house 100%. It is a pre-fab or knock down house made from nice wood, that either can or has been moved to a new plot of land that he has leased for 30 years.

What happens then?

[332]

So if I get it right, if the wife does not want to sell, it can be pretty difficult to get anything.

In such a case it might be easy to get in a serious accident or suicide.

[dotpoom]

Thank you for the answer. But would not the house be excluded from 50% of the assets acquired during the relationship since you explicitly signed the paper that the house was bought using the wife's money only?

I imagine it makes no difference who's money bought the house. The fact is....upon divorce you are entitled to 50% of the assets.

Same as at home, If the man pays for the house his wife is entitled to half upon divorce (but usually ends up staying in it while he goes flat hunting).

In my own case she brought a man in to live with her and I would have to knock on MY door to visit my children and it was he who sometimes opened it and let me enter......(it's not only Thailand that this type of thing happens). Sometimes I think posters on here forget that when complaining about being done out of a house by a Thai lady. Farang ladies know a thing or two about this too....maybe could teach the Thais a lesson or two.

Edited June 4, 2014 by dotpoom

[falang07]

What I do not like the most about all this matter is that the official Thai authorities (which are fully aware that the wife could not afford to buy the house) are forcing us to lie on oath and sign this fraud paper. This is the most ridiculous thing of all the ridiculous things I have encountered so far in Thailand.

[falang07]

Thank you for the answer. But would not the house be excluded from 50% of the assets acquired during the relationship since you explicitly signed the paper that the house was bought using the wife's money only?

I imagine it makes no difference who's money bought the house. The fact is....Upon divorce you are entitled to 50% of the assets.

well, if it really makes no difference, then I wonder why they insist on signing it...

[AnotherOneAmerican]

+++++++++++++++++++++The Op mentioned that in order to get this house you must sign papers and declare that none of this house was financed by you. That it is all your wife's money which bought this house. So what you are saying in essences is that this money belongs to your wife and thus what she brought into the marriage. Perhaps sp;d her farm land to do it.

The court would require evidence of the inheritance or farm sale.

Saying that is what happened with no supporting paper trail would result in a 50/50 split.

Do you understand, without compelling evidence and a money paper trail, the court splits 50/50.

[steelepulse]

Thank you for the answer. But would not the house be excluded from 50% of the assets acquired during the relationship since you explicitly signed the paper that the house was bought using the wife's money only?

I imagine it makes no difference who's money bought the house. The fact is....Upon divorce you are entitled to 50% of the assets.

well, if it really makes no difference, then I wonder why they insist on signing it...

As stated above, it's the law that a foreigner can't legally own land, so this is the work around in regards to land purchase. House sitting on the land can be a completely separate issue.

[In Search of Space]

Technically you are entitled to 50% of property acquired during a marriage. But in practice it does not usually work that way.

The house will be in the wife's name, and she would need to sell it so that you can have your 50%. But there is nothing to prevent the wife asking an outrageous price for the property, to ensure it is never sold and it remains hers to live in.

I had that problem 8/9 years ago. However eventually the ex wife was so broke that she wanted to sell the house for a realistic price. I then dug my heels in and agreed to a sale "on my terms", which left her with somewhat less than 50%

I should add that she could not sell without my permission, because I had a mortgage on the property in my name!

Don't you love it. We're not permitted to own a property, however when I took out a mortgage on a house in my wife's name, the only concern the bank had was ensure that I was able to pay the mortgage and would live long enough to pay off the mortgage. Even though I had signed "The Paper".

[slipperylobster]

I don't know anybody in real life that got 50% of everything when divorced here.

perhaps fifty percent of nothing....

[slipperylobster]

It's a fool's game..buying a house.

If you really have to buy one, to impress or keep your wife...put the minimum down payment .

She is not going to sell it....she is going to get a 2nd mortgage, and hide/spend it....or worse yet...the china moneylender is going to be holding her title for a loan where the principle is never paid.

Bye house.

Edited June 4, 2014 by slipperylobster

[larsjohnsson]

I don't know anybody in real life that got 50% of everything when divorced here.

I DID! As I said above I received in excess of 50% the house sale money, and took what furniture etc from the house that I wanted for my new home. The car was in my name, and whilst technically the ex could have demanded 50% of it's value, she was not aware of that fact! Apart from the house, the ex wife owned nothing!

Having paid everything for the house, and with her clearing off 8 years before the house was sold, leaving me to care for our daughter (11 at the time). I begrudged her every baht that she received. I even made her "donate" 100,000baht to our daughter as part of the house sale conditions.

Like I wrote I don't know anyone in real life that got 50%. Do we know each other ???

[prakhonchai nick]

Like I wrote I don't know anyone in real life that got 50%. Do we know each other ???

Unlikely as you appear to be a Bangkok resident.

[Arkady]

Thai marriage law trumps all other laws.

If signing a piece of paper at the land office was evidence of ownership, every Thai guy would force his wife to do it.

Land office doesn't get to make up contract law, court won't enforce it or consider it evidence.

In divorce court, woman says It's mine, look at this bit of paper, court says, where did the money come from, show us the pay slips?

I think you are probably right but it is not Thai marriage law. It is the Civil and Commercial Code. There was a case that went to the Supreme Court where the court awarded the divorced foreign husband half the value of the house but that was before the "declaration' was introduced in 1999. Even so I don't think that you can declare away your CCC rights based on a declaration that has its basis only in letter issued by the Interior Ministry. (The declaration was introduced in response to the 1999 Land Act that restored the right to acquire land to Thai women married to or cohabiting with foreign men to save the work of Land officials in checking whether the Thai women were using their own funds to purchase land. It gives the impression of having been introduced without thorough study and just left there as a compromise that avoids complaints from Thai women with foreign husbands who might otherwise have their rights impinged on. Anyway it seems to work.)

Similarly a pre-nup agreement can be disregarded by a Thai court, if it is out of line with the CCC. Generally when wealthy Thais marry their pre-nups only serve to set out exactly what assets were owned by each party prior to marriage that will not become part of the conjugal property to be divided upon divorce. Of course you may designate your property that was acquired before marriage to be conjugal property but you cannot dictate that property acquired after marriage will remain your sole property because that would be regarded as an attempt to reduce your partner's rights under the CCC. Thai law firms serving expats often offer a pre-nup service that may be of dubious validity, i.e. not valid in Thailand, if inconsistent with the CCC, not valid in foreign jurisdictions that have similar laws, e.g. the UK, and maybe not drafted and executed properly to be valid in countries that do allow pre-nups like the US. However, if the Thai wives are convinced they have signed away their rights, the pre-nups are worthwhile.