Thread: Road show on rights of foreigners

so the farang can take a lease on a piece of land ,,say for 30 years .
and if he builds a house on the land, does that give him any rights over someone who has (a thai) 51% of the house ?
farangs can only have 49%.
is the farang within his rights to dismantle the house if he wishes, if the lease is in his name.
is that what you're saying Isee ?

Originally Posted by billy the kid

farangs can only have 49%.

As far as I know Farangs can't own any part of a house, only condos. They can lease 100% of a house for thirty years if they choose.

They can own 100% of the house.

Originally Posted by billy the kid

so the farang can take a lease on a piece of land ,,say for 30 years .

Yes

and if he builds a house on the land,

Yes - but you would want to evidence what was on the land at the time of commencement of the lease through written clause and photos etc.

does that give him any rights over someone who has (a thai) 51% of the house ? farangs can only have 49%.

I don't understand what you are trying to say/ask here. I think you are referring to companies here - ownership of land through a thai company and is thus a totally different scenario.

is the farang within his rights to dismantle the house if he wishes, if the lease is in his name.

Pretty much the answer is yes. But the reality of it is that you are unlikely to move the house if you do the traditional brick and mortar. A teak house etc you could do. I was more thinking that if things went sour, you couldn't be charged for destruction of your own property, or gutting the house etc - so long as it occurs within the lease terms.

is that what you're saying Isee ?

What I'm saying is that if you start with a blank piece of land, you can expressly agree that any improvements made by you (and you would do that by a deeming provision) remain your property unless abandoned by you. I'm not about to write out complete wording to sections you would use. You simply start by thinking what the worse can happen. So in this case, you build a 10 million mansion and having a hard time walking away from it with them laughing and pointing at the stupid falang. From then, you start to consider what happens in the event of a breach by the lessor and that will then branch out to possible sceneries you would want to address such as a time period commencing from time of uninterrupted access is given - and so on and so on. With a bit of clever drafting of the lease terms you could ensure that if things are sour, the "landlord" doesn't receive that "windfall" that was mentioned and you aren't paying to have rubble removed - if you want to take it that far.

Obviously using "standard form" leases are unlikely to properly cover your specific interests . For example, you wouldn't want to have a clause in there requiring the lessor to maintain the improvements (house, fence, olympic size swimming pool in the adjoining rice paddy etc) - because that could be interpreted as creating an interest which is exactly what you are not wanting.

The only qualification I'll make is that I'm not a thai lawyer - so take the above for what value you want, but it really is just basic contract drafting skills at the end of the day. The real kicker is the exorbitant prices same lawyers in thailand want for their services to draft up basic stuff as well as finding someone competent enough to even do that.

Originally Posted by pickel

Originally Posted by billy the kid

farangs can only have 49%.

As far as I know Farangs can't own any part of a house, only condos. They can lease 100% of a house for thirty years if they choose.

You need to acknowledge distinctions such as real property, fixtures, chattels, ownership vs possession etc. You don't really lease "houses" you lease the land that the house is attached (fixed) to. What you really lease is up to what is stated in the lease document.

^ Where are you getting this 51/49% split from? Your post is confusing because it says "The farang doesn't have a leg to stand on..." and then you say on the other hand he's entitled to "49%".

The only way I can think of, is if the guy is prudent enough to put all receipts, building contract, bank statements etc in his name to evidence the source of $$. In a Common Law country we would possibly raise issues such as unjust enrichment etc and I believe that Thailand recognises the concept but maybe in a different form. So if/when the GF/wife kicks him out he can spend some more dosh to go to court and apparently get an order in his favour to get some money from the sale. I've read about people doing that and saying they had some success with their particular circumstances, but I'm 99.9% sure there isn't a pre-defined split of 51/49 in such cases.

Also having a lease is limited to the terms that is contained therein. In a nutshell, its basic function is one of a higher right to possession (lessee) over ownership (lessor) and anything more needs to be specifically included (as I discussed above).

Originally Posted by billy the kid

know you're not a lawyer Isee but it would be interesting to know what rights if any, the farang has when leasing land.

Yes, I'm not a thai lawyer. You edited your post from when I was writing my reply.

The benefit of having a lease on a property where you paid for the house to be built is that you have a right to occupy the property during the lease period to the determinate of the property owner (ie: you "could" make a complaint of trespass against them). Without it and the relationship goes tits up, your partner could get the police to come around and have you removed and hit you with a trespass complaint.

How do you protect yourself? Some people will say never invest in Thailand, some will say only invest in what you are prepared to walk away from, get a lease, get an agreement, put it in a thai company name etc etc. At the end of the day, you are fighting against a legal system that doesn't want you to have a direct interest in land and therefore trying to "protect" your interests in such will always be a compromise.

i've never bothered with property in thailand cause i never intended to stay,,
always thought that to build you needed a thai..they would have 51% while the farang holds 49%.
and somehow ( maybe they are just idiots ) when it goes tits-up the farang walks away empty handed.
the lil dream lying in ruins. or gone into her bank account.
was told in khon kaen that an englishman had lost 16 million baht in a nearby town. not the only one either.
you wonder with a simple transaction how the fok it can get so fokked up.
yes,, to your last paragraph. always rent. a lot cheaper and without hassle.
cheers.

There is a good lawyer in Isaan that can help set things up properly.....just be careful......could be daggers from both ends.

Originally Posted by billy the kid

always thought that to build you needed a thai..they would have 51% while the farang holds 49%.

Yes, whatever "option" you want to use, you will always require the involvement of a thai entity when talking about land for your average joe. Even though I've asked a couple of times you still haven't responded as to where you are getting your 51/49 split that you are still making reference to and I can only think of two sources:

1. Thai Company - purchased through a thai company with a shareholder split of 51% of thai nationals and 49% foreigner. The company "owns" the property and your rights as a "shareholder" will be contained in constitution/share classes etc. There is no explicit right for occupation of the property in question. However, "stacking up" the rights/benefits to favour the foreigner will come under scrutiny if you believe the reported "crack downs" etc.

2. Purchasing a Condominium - you can purchase a condo as a foreigner outright up to a 49% allocation of available condos in the building.

The above is nothing new but I only set it out to show the sources that I'm aware of where there is a stated split of 51/49 when dealing with real property.

Source 1 - doesn't relate to the circumstances we were discussing where the house is built of land owned by a thai person.

Source 2 - once again not related/applicable to our discussion.

There is of course a split as ordered by the Court where sufficient evidence and circumstances convince the judge to make such an order - but as I said its not a pre-determined split of 51/49 that I'm aware of and of course, to suggest that there is would create unfair orders. As I read your posts, you imply that there is a third source for a stated 51/49 split and I'm merely asking you to show/explain so I might better understand where you are coming from and possibly learn something new.

Originally Posted by Nawty

.....just be careful......could be daggers from both ends.

What do you mean?

Originally Posted by billy the kid

ye complicated. it seems i think, that most farangs buy the land to build a house on, with the help of their thai partner and in this way the partner takes all if a problem arises in the relationship

if you are married you can force a sale and take half. As long as you are legaly married you have rights, infact you are better off married here than probably your own country

^ how do you force a sale and take half on real property when you have a law stating that foreigners cannot own an interest in thai land? Its not so straight forward as you make it out to be.

Originally Posted by Isee

Originally Posted by Nawty

.....just be careful......could be daggers from both ends.

What do you mean?

The lawyer has a nice dagger collection apparently and if it is divorce related....the missus might have some also.

^ OK thanks, clear as mud now

ask DD....he started it

^ Do you think I'll get a straight answer?

he is avoiding it right now....same same you mentioned in the other thread....quite as a church mouse

Originally Posted by Isee

^ how do you force a sale and take half on real property when you have a law stating that foreigners cannot own an interest in thai land? Its not so straight forward as you make it out to be.

Yes not straight forward but possible and was just done by a friend, he was just a normal person that couldnt afford to just walk away and won also his wifes family are Hi up police and even that didnt help them in the end.
Mind you he did get a 10,000baht fine for doing a U turn
But go on beleiving that you half no rights and just walk away and leave the lot as I am sure it will make your better half happy.
Which is what most do anyway so carry on

Originally Posted by Rigger

Originally Posted by Isee

^ how do you force a sale and take half on real property when you have a law stating that foreigners cannot own an interest in thai land? Its not so straight forward as you make it out to be.

Yes not straight forward but possible and was just done by a friend, he was just a normal person that couldnt afford to just walk away and won also his wifes family are Hi up police and even that didnt help them in the end.
Mind you he did get a 10,000baht fine for doing a U turn

Without any specific reference to what the circumstances are regarding your friend's situation, its hard to see how your statement benefits anyone reading this thread. End results don't benefit anyone in understanding how things are being treated by the Courts without knowing how they came to the decision.

But go on beleiving that you half no rights and just walk away and leave the lot as I am sure it will make your better half happy.
Which is what most do anyway so carry on

Who said you have no half(sic) rights which I can assure you I'm not half(sic) happy about. The problem with your post is that you don't have any idea what legal issues were in play and merely quoting an outcome as told to you by your friend. In fact, it seems you didn't even bother reading any of my posts as I did say that you can go to Court seeking recourse - but like ANY court proceeding, you walk in prepared. The whole discussion was about a stated split of specifically 51/49% - but don't let that stop you from replying incoherently to my question. I would actually fire off some specific questions about how you explain X and Y - but I think I'd be wasting my time and effort.

Isee most of what i learnt or didn't learn was picked up from your average farang with no business interest in thailand.
boy meets girl scenario, fall in luv ,,get married and decide to build a nest . seems that some marriages are more legal than others ,,again word of mouth ,
and i kept hearing the figures,, she has 51% because she's thai and he has the other 49% because he's a farang.
but when it goes tits up she ,takes all.
all very simple,, but somehow the farang has nothing at the end, even though he paid out all the money to get the land and build the house.
in a nut-shell he got conned or he allowed it to happen .
the figures never came from any legal body,, only hers .
dahleen i luv you,,let's make a nest,, it very cheap ,,you pay. bla bla.
anyway, there are no clear answers and also, it's very confusing and dangerous.

^ ahhh ok thanks for clearing it up. It certainly is a confusing area which you have thai officials allegedly making statements that no one else has heard about before.

Originally Posted by Isee

Originally Posted by Rigger

Originally Posted by Isee

^ how do you force a sale and take half on real property when you have a law stating that foreigners cannot own an interest in thai land? Its not so straight forward as you make it out to be.

Yes not straight forward but possible and was just done by a friend, he was just a normal person that couldnt afford to just walk away and won also his wifes family are Hi up police and even that didnt help them in the end.
Mind you he did get a 10,000baht fine for doing a U turn

Without any specific reference to what the circumstances are regarding your friend's situation, its hard to see how your statement benefits anyone reading this thread. End results don't benefit anyone in understanding how things are being treated by the Courts without knowing how they came to the decision.

But go on beleiving that you half no rights and just walk away and leave the lot as I am sure it will make your better half happy.
Which is what most do anyway so carry on

Who said you have no half(sic) rights which I can assure you I'm not half(sic) happy about. The problem with your post is that you don't have any idea what legal issues were in play and merely quoting an outcome as told to you by your friend. In fact, it seems you didn't even bother reading any of my posts as I did say that you can go to Court seeking recourse - but like ANY court proceeding, you walk in prepared. The whole discussion was about a stated split of specifically 51/49% - but don't let that stop you from replying incoherently to my question. I would actually fire off some specific questions about how you explain X and Y - but I think I'd be wasting my time and effort.

Gee you are wound a little tight you foken tosser.
I will get some more details in about 10 days when he gets here.
The thread is about Road show on rights of foreigners dickhead.

Originally Posted by Rigger

Gee you are wound a little tight you foken tosser.

You really do struggle to articulate yourself don't you. I'd pity you if you weren't such a wanker about it.

I will get some more details in about 10 days when he gets here.

That might be a good idea - don't forget to write notes.

The thread is about Road show on rights of foreigners dickhead.

OK, I can only guess that you are trying to make some sort of point here. Can I buy a vowel or something?