Thai daughter giving me 30 yr house lease for free.

[DLang]

My biological Thai daughter born in Thailand with Thai and Western passports owns a house in Thailand that she wants to lease to me (EU National) for 30 years, a usufruct? for free obviously.

 

Is this possible?

 

A contract with a sum of money could of course be drawn up or whatever if it is not allowed to be free? Is there a minimum amount that has to be 'paid' to the owner? 

 

What is the process for doing so?

 

Thanks.

[Khun Jean]

A usufruct is better as those can be 'free'. A lease without a price is harder, best to just imagine a fair price and pay taxes over that.

 

[DLang]

1 hour ago, Khun Jean said:

A usufruct is better as those can be 'free'.

Thanks.

 

I presume there's no issue in getting a usufruct from your child on a property (house+land) that they own?

[Sheryl]

Not to my knowledge.

[oxo1947]

15 minutes ago, DLang said:

I presume there's no issue in getting a usufruct

There always seems to be problems with some land offices----(although there should not be) much like immigration you can point to different things written in the law---but they just seem to be a law unto themselves --- I had a friend who was refused one in Ban Nok......the guy just said ...oh no I don't like that idea---he had a lady lawyer with him who pointed out it was fully legal...but .he just kept saying....Oh I don't like that idea....no.

 

Some of these offices are like they are in the realms of fantasy-----. The lawyer said well we can take it to state office then  after that we take to BKK----to which my friend just said, cancel the sale.

[kimmy]

Lease for free = right of habitation, is similar to usufruct, but much better in this case, can be for 30 years, or for life, must also be registered with the land department, minimal costs. 

[Happy Grumpy]

I presume the child is 20 or over and the legal owner.

 

If the child is still a child the property can be in their name, but it will need to have a Thai 'guardian' usually the Thai parent, who will need to go to court for the property to be used for anything - collateral for a loan etc etc or to be sold/transferred.

 

I would guess that that would also be needed for a usufruct to be given on the property. 

 

That until the child is 20 and the full owner without guardianship you cannot get a usufruct, or any other sort of legal right of habitation for the property.

Edited April 20, 2017 by Happy Grumpy

[flexomike]

No problem, just did this last week do not know what the minimum amount can be for the lease, daughter was going to do it for ten baht, but wouldn't work in there system, think she ended up putting down 100 baht per year, in and out in less than two hours, this was done at our land office in Klaeng, Rayong, cost was less than 200 baht if I remember right, go for it

[khunPer]

2 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said:

I presume the child is 20 or over and the legal owner.

 

If the child is still a child the property can be in their name, but it will need to have a Thai 'guardian' usually the Thai parent, who will need to go to court for the property to be used for anything - collateral for a loan etc etc or to be sold/transferred.

 

I would guess that that would also be needed for a usufruct to be given on the property. 

 

That until the child is 20 and the full owner without guardianship you cannot get a usufruct, or any other sort of legal right of habitation for the property.

I was just going to ask same question / say the same to OP - a minor (under 20) cannot grant Usufruct, and not all Land Offices will accept a Lease (with a fee for taxation).

 

It sound like OP's daughter is already the owner, otherwise make the Usufruct or Lease and declare it, before transferring the property to the minor daughter's name...

Edited April 20, 2017 by khunPer

[Happy Grumpy]

40 minutes ago, flexomike said:

No problem, just did this last week do not know what the minimum amount can be for the lease, daughter was going to do it for ten baht, but wouldn't work in there system, think she ended up putting down 100 baht per year, in and out in less than two hours, this was done at our land office in Klaeng, Rayong, cost was less than 200 baht if I remember right, go for it

Interesting.

 

What did you get, a usufruct or 30 yr lease? 

[Happy Grumpy]

14 minutes ago, khunPer said:

It sound like OP's daughter is already the owner, otherwise make the Usufruct or Lease and declare it, before transferring the property to the minor daughter's name...

Would that involve:

 

1) buying it in the name of the Thai parent.

2) Getting a usufruct or 30 yr lease in your name.

3) With a usufruct/30 yr lease in your name you get the Thai parent to transfer it into the child's name with them (or another Thai) being the 'guardian'.

 

?

 

[Laza 45]

What is 'usufruct'....?

 

[Khun Jean]

Here you go: Usufruct

Edited April 20, 2017 by Khun Jean

[bazza73]

Why not just keep things on an informal basis? All the OP will be doing is feed lawyers.

[Khun Jean]

A usufruct will cost about 100 baht.

[khunPer]

3 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said:

Would that involve:

 

1) buying it in the name of the Thai parent.

2) Getting a usufruct or 30 yr lease in your name.

3) With a usufruct/30 yr lease in your name you get the Thai parent to transfer it into the child's name with them (or another Thai) being the 'guardian'.

 

?

 

If parents are married, contracts between them can be declared void...

 

Property protection is in case of the worst – if we can trust, we don't need it – so you have to include as much of thinkable possible about worst case. Probably better to have the Lease or Usufruct granted by third party, perhaps seller of property, but you need to check with an experienced property-lawyer, also knowing how the local Land Office handles it, to make it as legally correct as possible.

 

I.e., as I see it,

1) Having the 30-year Lease/Usufruct/Superficies granted and declared on the title deed as Servitude by the Land Office (tax shall be paid, if a Lease)

2) Buying the land from original seller

3) Transferring the land to the minor child direct from original seller

[flexomike]

11 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said:

Interesting.

 

What did you get, a usufruct or 30 yr lease? 

30 Year lease on the chanote

[juehoe]

As far as I know, you cannot transfer land to a minor.

 

You have also consider the taxes. You cannot give a lease «for free». The Land Office calculates/accepts a lease price and the lessor has to pay taxes on this income. The other option may be more or less expensive.

 

[Laza 45]

10 hours ago, Khun Jean said:

Here you go: Usufruct

Thank you Khun Jean...  this is interesting to me.. my wife although much younger than me wants me to take a lease on our house in case she should meet a premature end.. we have a good family and wouldn't expect any problems but she wants to make sure for my benefit.. 

[Happy Grumpy]

58 minutes ago, flexomike said:

30 Year lease on the chanote

Thanks.

 

So the original owner of the property is still the owner, you're just leasing it from them for 30 years?

 

That sounds very good for people that are maybe 50 yrs+ without children that they will want to leave the property to.

[Happy Grumpy]

38 minutes ago, juehoe said:

As far as I know, you cannot transfer land to a minor.

Yes you can, but it needs a Thai guardian until the minor is 20 yrs old. This means that the land/property is in the name of the minor, but it cannot be sold or used as collateral unless the adult guardian goes before a judge and it is found to be in the best interest of the minor. This is quite rare. Thai judges are surprisingly good at protecting minors when cases come before them. 

[Happy Grumpy]

9 hours ago, bazza73 said:

Why not just keep things on an informal basis?

It sounds like the OP's daughter wants to give him more security/peace of mind in Thailand. Nothing wrong with that. 

[Sheryl]

It sounds like the OP's daughter wants to give him more security/peace of mind in Thailand. Nothing wrong with that. 

In fact, very good idea. We never know what the future may hold. He might outlive his daughter and whomever then owns the house may be less trustworthy/sympathetic to him. His daughter might come under the influence of someone else who might pressure her. Etc etc.

[DLang]

Thanks, so it looks easily enough.

 

1) Try to get a usufruct, depending on the land office.

2) Failing that, get a 30 year lease.

 

 

It looks like for foreigners here that have a child and want as much security over a house could do the following:

 

Agree a purchase with the vendor.

Get a cashier's cheque in their name.

Go to the land office and get a usufruct, or failing that a 30 yr lease on the property.

Go again and have the property transferred into their child's name with the Thai parent as a guardian.

 

 

The child will be owner and they will have a usufruct or 30 year lease on it. Sounds about the safest one can get here. 

[DLang]

18 hours ago, kimmy said:

Lease for free = right of habitation, is similar to usufruct,

Is there a Thai name for this? 

 

Thanks. 

[kimmy]

2 hours ago, DLang said:

Is there a Thai name for this? 

 

Thanks. 

 

arsai อาศัย you can find it in the civil code 1402 - 1409

 

มาตรา 1402 บุคคลใดได้รับสิทธิอาศัยในโรงเรือน บุคคลนั้นย่อมมี สิทธิอยู่ในโรงเรือนนั้นโดยไม่ต้องเสียค่าเช่า

 

Section 1402. A person who has been granted a right of habitation in a building is entitled to occupy such building as a dwelling place without paying rent.

[flexomike]

4 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said:

Thanks.

 

So the original owner of the property is still the owner, you're just leasing it from them for 30 years?

 

That sounds very good for people that are maybe 50 yrs+ without children that they will want to leave the property to.

correct,  I am just on the lease as  renter, no claim for any property

[Khun Jean]

5 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said:

That sounds very good for people that are maybe 50 yrs+ without children that they will want to leave the property to.

It doesn't sound good to me.

What happens when you are 80!

Pack up your things and leave?

It is the reason why developers/agents/brokers/lawyers will always try to convince you that a 30+30 is perfectly fine. No one wants to be left without a home at 80+ years old.

The current problem though is that most people who signed a 30+30(+30) lease will find out exactly what the law means with 'maximum 30 years' at such a ripe old age.

They are kept in the dark and kept quiet by a false feeling of security. If those people knew that 30 years was the max they either not sign the lease, renegotiate the price or know that making preparations (savings, return to their own country) for when the leases ends is vital.

 

[DLang]

2 hours ago, kimmy said:

 

arsai อาศัย you can find it in the civil code 1402 - 1409

 

มาตรา 1402 บุคคลใดได้รับสิทธิอาศัยในโรงเรือน บุคคลนั้นย่อมมี สิทธิอยู่ในโรงเรือนนั้นโดยไม่ต้องเสียค่าเช่า

 

Section 1402. A person who has been granted a right of habitation in a building is entitled to occupy such building as a dwelling place without paying rent.

Very interesting, and informative, thanks.

 

So the owner of the property and you can sign an 'arsai', and they cannot sell, lease out, or use the property as collateral while you are there? Is there a 30 year arsai, or are they limited to a lower amount of time, or no time specified at all?

 

The main question is if the owner can sell, lease out, kick you out, or use the property for any legal or financial means while you are there?

 

Thanks.   

[kimmy]

5 hours ago, DLang said:

Very interesting, and informative, thanks.

 

So the owner of the property and you can sign an 'arsai', and they cannot sell, lease out, or use the property as collateral while you are there? Is there a 30 year arsai, or are they limited to a lower amount of time, or no time specified at all?

 

The main question is if the owner can sell, lease out, kick you out, or use the property for any legal or financial means while you are there?

 

Thanks.   

 

The same as with a lease or usufruct, it is not less secure as long as it is properly registered, and of course the owner can sell or mortgage the property but no one will buy or accept it as collateral as it will not be worth much with such rights registered as transfer of ownership does not terminate such rights. The term of a right of habitation is the same as for usufruct, life, up to 30 years. If you google you will find some info. Under a right of habitation your rights and responbsibilities towards the property would be I think more a match, just compare usufruct with habitation, one is just a strong as the other. You can find a translation of the civil code on various websites.