Usufruct

[bgs]

Good day,

the alternative may be usufruct, but ...

How to do it ?

Whom you need for doing ?

How much one pay ?

Your experience, please ...

Thanks,

bgs

[Sunbelt Asia]

Good day,

the alternative may be usufruct, but ...

How to do it ?

Whom you need for doing ?

How much one pay ?

Your experience, please ...

Thanks,

bgs

This is a right granted by an owner of land in favour of a usufructuary whereby the usufructuary has the right to possess, use and enjoy the benefits of the property. The usefructuary can also have the right of management of the property.

A usufruct may be created for your natural life. You also can lease the land to a third party which would not end if you died. Example: If you died, you can lease out the property to a third party before your demise as per the Supreme Court ruling 2297/1998; 'the lessor does not have to be the owner of the property. Therefore the usefructuary can rent out the land. Although in the event of death of the usefructuary within the lease term, only the usufruct will be terminated but not also the lease'.

This way, a thirty year lease ( third party…only can be granted a maximum of thirty years) This could be passed on to your children or other relative even though you have died. (As long as the lease was done before you died)

With the usufruct, you are registered on the title deed. The land can never be sold or transferred by the owner of the land until the servitude is terminated. You can also get a yellow book which is a House Registration Certificate ( Thor. Ror 13)

The usufruct would be registered with a 1.5% tax of the value of the benefit( If you are not married to a Thai wife, if you are, the tax is less than 100 Baht). Our firm charges 9,500 for the drafting of the agreement, 8,500 for registration of the usufruct, House Registration Certificate( yellow book Thor Ror 13) professional registration fees are 8,800 Baht.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

[Nadia 2]

Good day,

the alternative may be usufruct, but ...

How to do it ?

Whom you need for doing ?

How much one pay ?

Your experience, please ...

Thanks,

bgs

This is a right granted by an owner of land in favour of a usufructuary whereby the usufructuary has the right to possess, use and enjoy the benefits of the property. The usefructuary can also have the right of management of the property.

A usufruct may be created for your natural life. You also can lease the land to a third party which would not end if you died. Example: If you died, you can lease out the property to a third party before your demise as per the Supreme Court ruling 2297/1998; 'the lessor does not have to be the owner of the property. Therefore the usefructuary can rent out the land. Although in the event of death of the usefructuary within the lease term, only the usufruct will be terminated but not also the lease'.

This way, a thirty year lease ( third party…only can be granted a maximum of thirty years) This could be passed on to your children or other relative even though you have died. (As long as the lease was done before you died)

With the usufruct, you are registered on the title deed. The land can never be sold or transferred by the owner of the land until the servitude is terminated. You can also get a yellow book which is a House Registration Certificate ( Thor. Ror 13)

The usufruct would be registered with a 1.5% tax of the value of the benefit( If you are not married to a Thai wife, if you are, the tax is less than 100 Baht). Our firm charges 9,500 for the drafting of the agreement, 8,500 for registration of the usufruct, House Registration Certificate( yellow book Thor Ror 13) professional registration fees are 8,800 Baht.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

I agree the usufructuary can rent out the property. However any lease exceeding 3 years has to be registered at the local Land Office, therefore you still need the owner of the land to sign.... I think the Supreme court judgemnet does not mean a usufructuary is allowed to register a 30 year lease.

[monty]

Would the owner of the land being a 100% Thai owned company Ltd. be a problem to draw up a usufruct, with the usufuctuary being a foreigner?

Or are usufructs only allowed if the owner is a single Thai owner...

[Sunbelt Asia]

I agree the usufructuary can rent out the property. However any lease exceeding 3 years has to be registered at the local Land Office, therefore you still need the owner of the land to sign.... I think the Supreme court judgemnet does not mean a usufructuary is allowed to register a 30 year lease.

All three parties would need to sign at the Land Dept. for a lease longer than three years.

Would the owner of the land being a 100% Thai owned company Ltd. be a problem to draw up a usufruct, with the usufuctuary being a foreigner?

Or are usufructs only allowed if the owner is a single Thai owner...

A Thai company can issue a usufruct.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

[birdbirdbat]

Can this be done with ALL Land titles or is it only for Chanote and/or Nor sor sam? Thanks!

[Dragonman]

I have waxed lyrical about the pitfalls of "servitudes", such as usufructs, before, so I will not bore people with the history. Just make sure you get advice from more than 1 lawyer on the practicality. See it through the eyes of the Judge. The foreigner has stated the money to acquire the land is his wife's. The wife then generously, without any pressure, says that hubby can live in the property until he dies and may even pass on a 30 year lease. All this by way of the husband giving no payment for the usufruct/habitation/superficies. She does all this WILLINGLY knowing that on divorce she will likely never get to live in her own house. Of course her husband's lawyer will say she is such a generous, kind, warm hearted woman, Yeah and there goes another of those pigs flying by. Me, I'd rather represent the wife.

[Khun Jean]

Exactly. You will never have protection against the wife (family, friends) when things turn bad. You might end up with a little compensation but living in the property will probably be made impossible. When things go sour, you should be able to walk away and still be financial secure, just in case. When you get older and older your financial situation is becoming more and more dependent on the fact that you own the house. (Does not apply to multi millionares (baht)) If that part is taken away it can be a very difficult situation. Owning a house in old age and not having enough money for a fallback plan, leaves you vulnerable. Something to avoid. If you are young the possibility to rebuild your financial status is possible, but it still we be a very bad thing and it might be impossible depending on qualifications and (job) market. In the west you are able to end a relatioship with 50% of the finances still yours, don't count on that here.

[bdenner]

This may help with your decision.

Earlier Thread

[Gary A]

I think a lot of people spend money to try to protect themselves and forget to ask themselves if they would WANT to live there in the event of a divorce or death of their mate. I DO know that if something were to happen to my relationship I would be heading back to the farang ghettos. The very best advice is STILL not to spend more than you can comfortably walk away from.

[Sunbelt Asia]

Me, I'd rather represent the wife.

Me. I'd rather represent the husband. She signed the agreement. She has a tough road to get the agreement thrown out.

Up to now, it has not happen that the wife has gotten an agreement thrown out on this basis.

By the way if the husband paid a benefit to the wife to give this right of servitude, would you still like to take the side of the wife? (That benefit of course is community property, so in reality does not make much sense, why he would be paying a benefit in the first place)

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

[Dragonman]

Me, I'd rather represent the wife.

Me. I'd rather represent the husband. She signed the agreement. She has a tough road to get the agreement thrown out.

Up to now, it has not happen that the wife has gotten an agreement thrown out on this basis.

By the way if the husband paid a benefit to the wife to give this right of servitude, would you still like to take the side of the wife? (That benefit of course is community property, so in reality does not make much sense, why he would be paying a benefit in the first place)

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

From experience I do not agree. But that is of course why there are usually 2 lawyers in a Court Case. I do not see why any Judge would not consider duress, and hence the usufruct is void, even in a Civil Code Society. Depending on the circumstances however there is no more financial duress than in the normal rather one sided farang/thai marriage. If you know of any cases which have yet come to Court I will be happy to update my records.

[Sunbelt Asia]

From experience I do not agree. But that is of course why there are usually 2 lawyers in a Court Case. I do not see why any Judge would not consider duress, and hence the usufruct is void, even in a Civil Code Society. Depending on the circumstances however there is no more financial duress than in the normal rather one sided farang/thai marriage. If you know of any cases which have yet come to Court I will be happy to update my records.

The only duress she had at that time, was making sure her loving husband had a place to live and not in the streets.

No duress cases involving usufruct have come to Court yet that we know of as well. I feel it’s because most Thai lawyers put a lot of meaning into the written word and if it is registered at the Land Dept, just would not feel they have much of a case. By the way, the Land Dept does a good job explaining to the wife, what a servitude is before they register it as well.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

[Khun Jean]

Can a usefruct be made for more people, for the same piece of land?

As an example. For a husband of a Thai wife AND for his friend or (brother, son, etc..)

[fxm88]

What effect, if any, does prehumous cryonic suspension ("suspended animation") have on a usufruct in Thailand?

[Khun Jean]

I think when you do it before you are clinically dead it would also be suspended.

Care to try?

[Dragonman]

From experience I do not agree. But that is of course why there are usually 2 lawyers in a Court Case. I do not see why any Judge would not consider duress, and hence the usufruct is void, even in a Civil Code Society. Depending on the circumstances however there is no more financial duress than in the normal rather one sided farang/thai marriage. If you know of any cases which have yet come to Court I will be happy to update my records.

The only duress she had at that time, was making sure her loving husband had a place to live and not in the streets.

No duress cases involving usufruct have come to Court yet that we know of as well. I feel it’s because most Thai lawyers put a lot of meaning into the written word and if it is registered at the Land Dept, just would not feel they have much of a case. By the way, the Land Dept does a good job explaining to the wife, what a servitude is before they register it as well.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

But I thought it was the farang husbands who were the caring ones. You mean to say that all the guys on here wouldn't care if the ex wife was on the streets due to his insistence that he lived in HER house until he died. You are encouraging an even earlier demise for farang husbands.

I feel it's because thai lawyers training does not encourage them to think of possibilities. A failing of the Civil Code Structure and why even the Government has said that with regard to Contract Law, do not depend on Government Departments, as strictly speaking "they ain't got a clue".

The Land Offices should not have the job of explaining, as some don't even know. The wife should have a lawyer who documents all the scenarios and gets her to sign saying she understands the possible consequences. Better presented in Court than " Somchai at the Land Office told her all about the complexities of servitudes"

I forgot to mention from your previous post regarding payment of benefit. Since the husband has signed to say that the property is not communal property, why should income derived from such be communal property. Hence income is all hers!