Can courts enforce loan shark debts?

[Global Guy]

I feel like a rookie for posting this but in my 15 years of living here on and off, I've had some interactions with the legal system but because of an accident. So this new scenario has me scratching my head so I thought I'd throw this out there for those who may have come across this.

 

Here goes.....

 

Someone told  me that a small group of Thais got together and they loaned money to people, basically, loan sharking as they call it. Apparently, one, then two, then a number of the borrowers decided not to pay off the loans and the group is going after the leader of the group to pay off the deadbeats debts. Okay, I guess that is how it works here.

 

Come to find out that one of the loan shark group members is some how bringing criminal charges against their leader because the leader didn't cover the other loan sharks investment losses.

 

My confusion (yes, I know anything can be bought in the legal system here) is how the hell can police/court pursue criminal charges to enforce a criminal act from one law breaker to another law breaker? It's like one criminal who wasn't caught just walking into a police station and pointing the finger at someone for doing the same thing, they implicate themselves in the process.

 

FYI, I am not being hustled for money to help anyone involved, that's not part of this equation.

[worgeordie]

As loan sharking is supposed be to against the law,I would say courts could not enforce payment,

but depending on the loan shark i am sure they will have other ways of getting their pound of flesh !

regards worgeordie

[cyberfarang]

1 hour ago, worgeordie said:

As loan sharking is supposed be to against the law,I would say courts could not enforce payment,

but depending on the loan shark i am sure they will have other ways of getting their pound of flesh !

regards worgeordie

Cannot agree with you on this one.

 

For example; if I lend you 50000 baht as a private individual not as a registered loan company, with a written agreement of the installments and payback period that involves 90% interest on the loan I lend you and you sign on the dotted line,  then that is a contract, legal and binding. And if you put something up as collateral, a property, vehicle or anything of value that covers the full loan I lend you and you default on the loan, I have a legal right to lay claim to it. In fact I could lay claim to anything you have of value if unable to pay back the loan in monies as par agreement.

 

Another example is; if I was a part of a money lending gang and preferred a fast track method of sending round the heavy mob to persuade you to pay up rather then go through the long drawn out legal system, then I would guess in most cases the debtors will be too afraid to report the matter in-case they may end up as part of a concrete pillar supporting a flyover somewhere. So people who use loan sharks to borrow money should know exactly what they are getting into. Is a little like selling the soul to the devil, reap the benefits now, and suffer the consequences later on.

[stevenl]

Cannot agree with you on this one.
 
For example; if I lend you 50000 baht as a private individual not as a registered loan company, with a written agreement of the installments and payback period that involves 90% interest on the loan I lend you and you sign on the dotted line,  then that is a contract, legal and binding. And if you put something up as collateral, a property, vehicle or anything of value that covers the full loan I lend you and you default on the loan, I have a legal right to lay claim to it. In fact I could lay claim to anything you have of value if unable to pay back the loan in monies as par agreement.
 
Another example is; if I was a part of a money lending gang and preferred a fast track method of sending round the heavy mob to persuade you to pay up rather then go through the long drawn out legal system, then I would guess in most cases the debtors will be too afraid to report the matter in-case they may end up as part of a concrete pillar supporting a flyover somewhere. So people who use loan sharks to borrow money should know exactly what they are getting into. Is a little like selling the soul to the devil, reap the benefits now, and suffer the consequences later on.

That contract would be against the law and therefore illegal.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[FritsSikkink]

7 hours ago, cyberfarang said:

Cannot agree with you on this one.

 

For example; if I lend you 50000 baht as a private individual not as a registered loan company, with a written agreement of the installments and payback period that involves 90% interest on the loan I lend you and you sign on the dotted line,  then that is a contract, legal and binding. And if you put something up as collateral, a property, vehicle or anything of value that covers the full loan I lend you and you default on the loan, I have a legal right to lay claim to it. In fact I could lay claim to anything you have of value if unable to pay back the loan in monies as par agreement.

 

Another example is; if I was a part of a money lending gang and preferred a fast track method of sending round the heavy mob to persuade you to pay up rather then go through the long drawn out legal system, then I would guess in most cases the debtors will be too afraid to report the matter in-case they may end up as part of a concrete pillar supporting a flyover somewhere. So people who use loan sharks to borrow money should know exactly what they are getting into. Is a little like selling the soul to the devil, reap the benefits now, and suffer the consequences later on.

your contract isn't legal as the interest rate is beyond the legal amount.

[Sharp]

If the loan Agreement is within the legal guidelines for breach or non payment and the interest rate in line with Thai financial lending criteria then its absolutely legal if not then the lending parties normally have their own way of collecting /enforcing they dept which most times include the the help of the police with 'assistance' payments!

Sent from my SM-N915G using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[offset]

Most of these loan shark contracts do not state the interest on it 

 

It can go to court and the court will only give the maximum interest allowed which I think is about 1.5% a month

 

It will have to be taken to the Civil Court

 

Yes I do know somebody that was taken to Civil Court for a loan non repayment and it was carried out by a private individual 

[prakhonchai nick]

A "private" loan with a contract is quite legal if the interest is within government guidelines. which I believe allow up to 18% per year .

I have heard of cases that have gone to court, where the contract states an interest rate which is higher than that permitted. In such cases (where the court hearing  has been in Isaan rather than Bangkok)  the Courts decision has either been that repayment must be made along with the maximum legally permitted interest, or in one case, the Court stated that no interest should be paid.

Edited January 10, 2017 by prakhonchai nick

[TheFishman1]

TIT

[Mousehound]

Most countries work on a dual system - that is criminal and civil.  Criminal is where the law of the land is involved, that is The State V XXX,  and Civil is between individuals, that is Mr X V Mr Y. The police should have no interest in a civil matter unless a criminal law has been breached.  If the monies are illegally obtained ie money laundering, then a contract is void, as a basic requirement of a contract is that it be deemed legal.  Also there may be (as mentioned) a legal maximum interest rate that can be applied to a loan. Of course if the borrower were to have known the monies were being laundered he could be a party to an illegal act that breaches the criminal code.  But best speak to a lawyer who is Thai. 

[GOLDBUGGY]

9 hours ago, cyberfarang said:

Cannot agree with you on this one.

 

For example; if I lend you 50000 baht as a private individual not as a registered loan company, with a written agreement of the installments and payback period that involves 90% interest on the loan I lend you and you sign on the dotted line,  then that is a contract, legal and binding. And if you put something up as collateral, a property, vehicle or anything of value that covers the full loan I lend you and you default on the loan, I have a legal right to lay claim to it. In fact I could lay claim to anything you have of value if unable to pay back the loan in monies as par agreement.

 

Another example is; if I was a part of a money lending gang and preferred a fast track method of sending round the heavy mob to persuade you to pay up rather then go through the long drawn out legal system, then I would guess in most cases the debtors will be too afraid to report the matter in-case they may end up as part of a concrete pillar supporting a flyover somewhere. So people who use loan sharks to borrow money should know exactly what they are getting into. Is a little like selling the soul to the devil, reap the benefits now, and suffer the consequences later on.

Well, actually this is not how it works. 

 

I gather you think you are protected as you would have a signed Contract which brings me to Contract Law. For a Contract to be legal and binding as you said, it must meet a certain criteria. This includes both private and public banks. Perhaps the first one is that this Contract cannot be written in such a way as to have any illegal activity involved.

 

So you can't have a Legal Contract in which the borrower agrees to pay you back from 10 stolen cars, or after he robs the bank. Since Thailand has a law which sets the maximum borrowing rate, and if your Contract exceeds that rate, then it becomes an invalid Contract under the terms of Loan Sharking. 

 

In other words, if you took someone to court over this Contract you would not have a leg to stand on as your Contract is not valid to begin with and thus null and void. You might be able to get the maximum interest rate, which I highly doubt, but you may get arrested for Loan Sharking.  

[AlQaholic]

As I understand the OP, there is a leader of the group who is actually the active loan shark, the rest of the group has invested money with him, to act in their interest and bring in profit to the group, like a fund manager if you like the analogy.

 

Now the leader is not bringing in any profit and the money invested is lost, as long as there is a written agreement (contract), or if there is compelling evidence that such an agreement exists (witnesses) it can be pursued in court, however in doing so the group becomes subject to criminal charges of loan sharking, which is up to the police to bring onto them in separate charges, if the police so chooses to. 

 

However I doubt that the court will side with the group, if it did, all fund managers in the world will be sweating.....After all investing is always a risk....

Edited January 10, 2017 by AlQaholic

[kaleevala]

"Someone told  me that a small group of Thais got together and they loaned money to people, basically, loan sharking as they call it. "

It is a common practice in Thailand for groups of people to get together and form what we might call a Credit Union. The members contribute money to a common fund and borrow against it, agreeing to re pay with interest. Farmers do it. Teachers do it. Other groups with a common bond do it. It is not regulated . My Thai wife , who is a teacher , is a member of such a group. Now she owes money that she can not repay. The groups generally do not resort to violence to enforce repayment, but rely on shame , guilt and harassment. It is a serious problem in Thailand that could be addressed with a revision of the Bankruptcy Code

[pennine]

What about gold shops charging 4% per month on money lent against gold deposited? Is that legal?

[Global Guy]

Thanks for the replies. But we are not talking about the people who borrowed the money. We are talking about one member of the lending group bringing charges against the leader of the same lending group.because the leader of the group did not pay the other lending members for losses incurred by borrowers who did not pay off the loans. I guess that's how it's supposed to work in these groups, the leader is responsible for covering any losses that the group as a whole incurres if borrowers don't pay. This is all off the books stuff.

 

Also, this is NOT some scum bag group of people. No goons, no pound of flesh, etc. It's a middle class group of people who tried to do something they had no business getting into, loaning money to people they don't know, for higher profits. I don't think there were contracts, just an online paper trail because the money was transferred online. 

 

I get that illegal contracts are unenforceable in a country where "rule of law" exists and I wouldn't need to post this if I was back home (where I've worked with contracts and also the legal system for decades), So that's why I'm  shaking my head on this one. But this is Thailand. Rule of law should be renamed to rule of baht. 

 

I just wonder how an illegal arrangement. from one criminal to another, can be pursued like this, here, in Thailand. I already assumed someone was paid off at the court to allow this to happen so they can harass the leader into paying some money to the other investors (loan sharks).  It may be just as simple as that. 

 

Thanks again.

 

 

Edited January 10, 2017 by Global Guy
update

[connda]

11 hours ago, cyberfarang said:

Cannot agree with you on this one.

 

For example; if I lend you 50000 baht as a private individual not as a registered loan company, with a written agreement of the installments and payback period that involves 90% interest on the loan I lend you and you sign on the dotted line,  then that is a contract, legal and binding. And if you put something up as collateral, a property, vehicle or anything of value that covers the full loan I lend you and you default on the loan, I have a legal right to lay claim to it. In fact I could lay claim to anything you have of value if unable to pay back the loan in monies as par agreement.

 

Another example is; if I was a part of a money lending gang and preferred a fast track method of sending round the heavy mob to persuade you to pay up rather then go through the long drawn out legal system, then I would guess in most cases the debtors will be too afraid to report the matter in-case they may end up as part of a concrete pillar supporting a flyover somewhere. So people who use loan sharks to borrow money should know exactly what they are getting into. Is a little like selling the soul to the devil, reap the benefits now, and suffer the consequences later on.

This is probably correct.  To the best of my knowledge Thailand doesn't have any usury laws that protect consumers from loan sharks.

[robblok]

12 minutes ago, Global Guy said:

Thanks for the replies. But we are not talking about the people who borrowed the money. We are talking about one member of the lending group bringing charges against the leader of the same lending group.because the leader of the group did not pay the other lending members for losses incurred by borrowers who did not pay off the loans. I guess that's how it's supposed to work in these groups, the leader is responsible for covering any losses that the group as a whole incurres if borrowers don't pay. This is all off the books stuff.

 

Also, this is NOT some scum bag group of people. No goons, no pound of flesh, etc. It's a middle class group of people who tried to do something they had no business getting into, loaning money to people they don't know, for higher profits. I don't think there were contracts, just an online paper trail because the money was transferred online. 

 

I get that illegal contracts are unenforceable in a country where "rule of law" exists and I wouldn't need to post this if I was back home (where I've worked with contracts and also the legal system for decades), So that's why I'm  shaking my head on this one. But this is Thailand. Rule of law should be renamed to rule of baht. 

 

I just wonder how an illegal arrangement. from one criminal to another, can be pursued like this, here, in Thailand. I already assumed someone was paid off at the court to allow this to happen so they can harass the leader into paying some money to the other investors (loan sharks).  It may be just as simple as that. 

 

Thanks again.

 

 

Sounds a lot like the game of share Thais play (and that is legal)

 

Say you got 12 people all putting in 1000 per month and then one of them can loan per month but they pay more then the 12.000. They bid against each other how much they want to pay to get the money that month. The one with the highest bid gets the money. That person has to pay back that money in 12 months. The ones who wait get the most of the interest.

 

Ans I think there might be some case against the leader of the share game but more so against the people defaulting to pay.

 

This is a real way loaning among friends unfortunately it often goes wrong. (i seen it go well between real friends)

[AlQaholic]

12 minutes ago, Global Guy said:

I get that illegal contracts are unenforceable in a country where rule of law exists and I wouldn't need to post this if I was back home, but this is Thailand. Rule of law should be renamed to rule of baht.

The person who is suing the leader could argue that he/she invested with the leader on the promise of profit, without knowing what kind of business was being conducted, now there is no profit and the invested funds are gone, so......legal civil action based on the evidence on hand.

[Global Guy]

1 minute ago, AlQaholic said:

The person who is suing the leader could argue that he/she invested with the leader on the promise of profit, without knowing what kind of business was being conducted, now there is no profit and the invested funds are gone, so......legal civil action based on the evidence on hand.

 

It is a criminal case and the members all knew exactly what they were doing.

[AlQaholic]

1 minute ago, Global Guy said:

 

It is a criminal case and the members all knew exactly what they were doing.

That puts the whole matter in a totally different ballpark than what I thought.....

[Global Guy]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

Sounds a lot like the game of share Thais play (and that is legal)

 

Say you got 12 people all putting in 1000 per month and then one of them can loan per month but they pay more then the 12.000. They bid against each other how much they want to pay to get the money that month. The one with the highest bid gets the money. That person has to pay back that money in 12 months. The ones who wait get the most of the interest.

 

Ans I think there might be some case against the leader of the share game but more so against the people defaulting to pay.

 

This is a real way loaning among friends unfortunately it often goes wrong. (i seen it go well between real friends)

 

Yes, this sounds like how they described this situation. I guess they tried sending the police after the borrowers who defaulted but the dead beats told the police they don't have money to repay and the police shrugged their shoulders and dropped it against all eight dead beats. That's why I told this leader, just do the same thing these dead beats did. They got away with it, use the same method.

 

The person bringing the charge is implicating themself by telling the police they loaned money illegally, so I can't see the angle the courts can use to hear an illegal case.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, Global Guy said:

 

Yes, this sounds like how they described this situation. I guess they tried sending the police after the borrowers who defaulted but the dead beats told the police they don't have money to repay and the police shrugged their shoulders and dropped it against all eight dead beats. That's why I told this leader, just do the same thing these dead beats did. They got away with it, use the same method.

 

The person bringing the charge is implicating themself by telling the police they loaned money illegally, so I can't see the angle the courts can use to hear an illegal case.

This is not illegal.. this is legal.. it all depends on the % of interests this has nothing to do with loansharking at all.

 

And yes the leader can plead poverty too.. not sure the cops would be interested in going after it. But its not the leaders responsibility ((unless he takes a big fee or something like that)

[AlQaholic]

9 minutes ago, robblok said:

This is a real way loaning among friends unfortunately it often goes wrong. (i seen it go well between real friends)

Yeah I've seen those share games in action too, The leader of those does it for one of two reasons, Either they need money themselves quickly, or they are looking to make a handsome profit waiting to the last month, In any case most I know who have done it says "never again!" after, because you become enemies with almost all your friends pestering them over payments, once somebody takes out their share, they are very passive regarding actually paying for the rest of the duration of the share. I can't imagine why anyone wants to go thru that hell......

[sinbin]

Here's my story. A few years ago we lent money  to someone who gave us her land paper as security. She  even signed a paper regarding the loan. She didn't repay the load. Okay we take the land. No. To get the land the land has to be signed over. She wouldn't do it. Okay we work the land. No. The land belongs to the person on the title.

After seeing a lawyer we were told to forget it. I then asked on TV about this and I was advised to obtain the services of a 'Reng Rak Nee' company. They are now illegal but can be found if you know where to look.

9 years later we still have her land paper. She's repaid zero Baht. She now cannot sell the land etc unless she gets the paper back. Okay you may say she can go get another paper saying her original is lost. To get that she needs to file a 'lost' complaint at the local cop shop. If found out it isn't lost  it's a jail-able offence.

[timewilltell]

5 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

your contract isn't legal as the interest rate is beyond the legal amount.

 

Sadly you are wrong.  You think you are right and you should be right but the contract is not illegal it is just the interest rate that is illegal so the loan sharkers will get judgement.  If the debtors are savvy enough to be able to prove the loan interest is illegal then they will be able to counterclaim for the interest to be reduced to the legal rate of 15% per annum.

 

But of course loan sharkers are savvy and will use a Sale with Right of Redemption agreement to cover themselves and then claim the excessive interest is not interest at all but a redemption amount not covered by the law and the judges here seem to side with the loan sharks even when it is obvious they know they are buying stolen property.  In my case my lease was cancelled by fraud and the money lender - loan shark - introduced by his agent (who was already involved in three other frauds with the same people) bought the property a few minutes after the lease was cancelled by using a forged document giving his agent the power to cancel my 30 year lease at the land office.  The loan shark watched the lease cancelled and even gave evidence he knew my name was registered as leaseholder and that the lease was being cancelled so he could buy it at 30% of market value.  His interest of 3% per month front loaded onto the redemption price and even then he cheated further by knocking the advance interest off the amount handed over to the fraudster at the same time as adding the interest onto the redemption amount thus getting it twice.  This is the way these scumbags work and it seems 'I didn't know the farang didn't want to cancel his lease', 'I didn't know it was fraud', 'I never went inside the house before I bought it' and 'I was charging 1.5% per month not 3%' despite the obvious paper trail is all sufficient for the courts to go along with it.  I think we all know why.

 

Anyway the courts are impotent to protect victims, since the money lender simply threatens kidnap of your children and / or violence of extreme kind on your person using a few bully boys - forcing you out of the province so any court action becomes completely unviable and to recover and prove the fraud you need to file in the province the crime occurred - i.e. where the money lenders are waiting for you.  If you go to the police they will do nothing without proof of the threats - and these scum do not write them down on paper or send them by text.  Even if using a third party to pass on the threats as in my case the court simply dismisses that evidence as unlikely.  You truly cannot win or secure a conviction when 'I don't know' is the only defence and the lawyers assist by co-ordinating stories between the players - it is as obvious as the lies are obvious in evidence. 

Edited January 10, 2017 by timewilltell

[timewilltell]

3 hours ago, GOLDBUGGY said:

Well, actually this is not how it works. 

 

I gather you think you are protected as you would have a signed Contract which brings me to Contract Law. For a Contract to be legal and binding as you said, it must meet a certain criteria. This includes both private and public banks. Perhaps the first one is that this Contract cannot be written in such a way as to have any illegal activity involved.

 

So you can't have a Legal Contract in which the borrower agrees to pay you back from 10 stolen cars, or after he robs the bank. Since Thailand has a law which sets the maximum borrowing rate, and if your Contract exceeds that rate, then it becomes an invalid Contract under the terms of Loan Sharking. 

 

In other words, if you took someone to court over this Contract you would not have a leg to stand on as your Contract is not valid to begin with and thus null and void. You might be able to get the maximum interest rate, which I highly doubt, but you may get arrested for Loan Sharking.  

 

Not if the guy says he did not know the cars were stolen which is the usual BS and the courts may well accept that as evidence - don't ask me why - just my experience

[FritsSikkink]

35 minutes ago, timewilltell said:

 

Sadly you are wrong.  You think you are right and you should be right but the contract is not illegal it is just the interest rate that is illegal so the loan sharkers will get judgement.  If the debtors are savvy enough to be able to prove the loan interest is illegal then they will be able to counterclaim for the interest to be reduced to the legal rate of 15% per annum.

 

But of course loan sharkers are savvy and will use a Sale with Right of Redemption agreement to cover themselves and then claim the excessive interest is not interest at all but a redemption amount not covered by the law and the judges here seem to side with the loan sharks even when it is obvious they know they are buying stolen property.  In my case my lease was cancelled by fraud and the money lender - loan shark - introduced by his agent (who was already involved in three other frauds with the same people) bought the property a few minutes after the lease was cancelled by using a forged document giving his agent the power to cancel my 30 year lease at the land office.  The loan shark watched the lease cancelled and even gave evidence he knew my name was registered as leaseholder and that the lease was being cancelled so he could buy it at 30% of market value.  His interest of 3% per month front loaded onto the redemption price and even then he cheated further by knocking the advance interest off the amount handed over to the fraudster at the same time as adding the interest onto the redemption amount thus getting it twice.  This is the way these scumbags work and it seems 'I didn't know the farang didn't want to cancel his lease', 'I didn't know it was fraud', 'I never went inside the house before I bought it' and 'I was charging 1.5% per month not 3%' despite the obvious paper trail is all sufficient for the courts to go along with it.  I think we all know why.

 

Anyway the courts are impotent to protect victims, since the money lender simply threatens kidnap of your children and / or violence of extreme kind on your person using a few bully boys - forcing you out of the province so any court action becomes completely unviable and to recover and prove the fraud you need to file in the province the crime occurred - i.e. where the money lenders are waiting for you.  If you go to the police they will do nothing without proof of the threats - and these scum do not write them down on paper or send them by text.  Even if using a third party to pass on the threats as in my case the court simply dismisses that evidence as unlikely.  You truly cannot win or secure a conviction when 'I don't know' is the only defence and the lawyers assist by co-ordinating stories between the players - it is as obvious as the lies are obvious in evidence. 

A loan shark gets 20% per month here not 3%.

Here something to read that proves it is illegal:

 

Edited January 10, 2017 by FritsSikkink

[Global Guy]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

This is not illegal.. this is legal.. it all depends on the % of interests this has nothing to do with loansharking at all.

 

And yes the leader can plead poverty too.. not sure the cops would be interested in going after it. But its not the leaders responsibility ((unless he takes a big fee or something like that)

 

p

50 minutes ago, timewilltell said:

 

Sadly you are wrong.  You think you are right and you should be right but the contract is not illegal it is just the interest rate that is illegal so the loan sharkers will get judgement.  If the debtors are savvy enough to be able to prove the loan interest is illegal then they will be able to counterclaim for the interest to be reduced to the legal rate of 15% per annum.

 

But of course loan sharkers are savvy and will use a Sale with Right of Redemption agreement to cover themselves and then claim the excessive interest is not interest at all but a redemption amount not covered by the law and the judges here seem to side with the loan sharks even when it is obvious they know they are buying stolen property.  In my case my lease was cancelled by fraud and the money lender - loan shark - introduced by his agent (who was already involved in three other frauds with the same people) bought the property a few minutes after the lease was cancelled by using a forged document giving his agent the power to cancel my 30 year lease at the land office.  The loan shark watched the lease cancelled and even gave evidence he knew my name was registered as leaseholder and that the lease was being cancelled so he could buy it at 30% of market value.  His interest of 3% per month front loaded onto the redemption price and even then he cheated further by knocking the advance interest off the amount handed over to the fraudster at the same time as adding the interest onto the redemption amount thus getting it twice.  This is the way these scumbags work and it seems 'I didn't know the farang didn't want to cancel his lease', 'I didn't know it was fraud', 'I never went inside the house before I bought it' and 'I was charging 1.5% per month not 3%' despite the obvious paper trail is all sufficient for the courts to go along with it.  I think we all know why.

 

Anyway the courts are impotent to protect victims, since the money lender simply threatens kidnap of your children and / or violence of extreme kind on your person using a few bully boys - forcing you out of the province so any court action becomes completely unviable and to recover and prove the fraud you need to file in the province the crime occurred - i.e. where the money lenders are waiting for you.  If you go to the police they will do nothing without proof of the threats - and these scum do not write them down on paper or send them by text.  Even if using a third party to pass on the threats as in my case the court simply dismisses that evidence as unlikely.  You truly cannot win or secure a conviction when 'I don't know' is the only defence and the lawyers assist by co-ordinating stories between the players - it is as obvious as the lies are obvious in evidence. 

 

My post is inquiring about one group member (lender) to another (group leader of the lenders), not about the borrowers.

 

These are NOT gooned up loan sharks. They are just some working class people who got in over their head on something they had no business getting into. They have full time jobs, sort of white collar folks, and started this little group that morphed into something bigger and spun out of control. No kidnappings, no goons, no violence or threats of it, or any other movie style depictions. Quite the opposite. No detailed contracts, no savvy loan sharks, none of that.

 

My whole issue is how can a criminal case be pursued by the courts to enforce an illegal action? As I wrote, I know this is Thailand, I have been around here for 15 years, but never came across this one. I've dealt  with the courts and police as a result of being struck by a taxi so I saw firsthand how useless the police, courts, and laws in general are here. I get all that. There is zero rule of law here (It's this exact reason I stopped my investment group from investing in Thailand). Even for Thailand this seems out there.

 

I think it just boils down to using the courts to intimidate the leader of the group to try and make a settlement. This person (leader) isn't used to hardball negotiating tactics and they are worried just by hearing the word "court." I told them to tell the other group member who initiated this case to go pound sand up their ass like the borrowers who kept their money did to them. This isn't in their nature to do this, like I would. They finally got a lawyer to help them.

 

Thanks for the replies. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2017 by Global Guy
update

[SOTIRIOS]

...sounds more like ' a collective' rather than 'an individual'....???

[khunPer]

13 hours ago, cyberfarang said:

Cannot agree with you on this one.

 

For example; if I lend you 50000 baht as a private individual not as a registered loan company, with a written agreement of the installments and payback period that involves 90% interest on the loan I lend you and you sign on the dotted line,  then that is a contract, legal and binding. And if you put something up as collateral, a property, vehicle or anything of value that covers the full loan I lend you and you default on the loan, I have a legal right to lay claim to it. In fact I could lay claim to anything you have of value if unable to pay back the loan in monies as par agreement.

 

Another example is; if I was a part of a money lending gang and preferred a fast track method of sending round the heavy mob to persuade you to pay up rather then go through the long drawn out legal system, then I would guess in most cases the debtors will be too afraid to report the matter in-case they may end up as part of a concrete pillar supporting a flyover somewhere. So people who use loan sharks to borrow money should know exactly what they are getting into. Is a little like selling the soul to the devil, reap the benefits now, and suffer the consequences later on.

It works in Thai Court if the annual interest don't exceed 15 percent, i.e. 1.25% a month. If the interest is higher, the Court may still take the case, but with a lower interest of 15 percent; i.e. the lawyer will adjust the claim before the bringing it to Court.