Jump to content

some bad news for Farang house owners


cheekyboy

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply
No, thai law does not define nominee land ownership, what it does define is nominee company ownership and that is what this is about.

 

OK, where is defintion of "nominee company ownership"?

 

And if this is all about companies, why your long quote on Land Department's rules that apply when a Thai person - who is married to a foreigner - buys land? Those regulations are all about [individuals, and what the Land Department expects an individual Thai to do if she (usually it is a she) is married to a foreigner and, horror of horrors, buys land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See my earlier post on defining "nominees". You might want to check out the link in it.

 

You are just speculating that the land dept is going to ask for anything other then the current statement by the husband confirming the land is not part of the matrimonial property when a Thai wife buys land. The same thing I have signed several times when my wife bought property. At this time there is nothing other then what I still consider a bad translation of a statement by the Land Dept Director to think that has changed. Several lawyers involved in the property business have the same opinion.

 

TH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did check the link. The link lists the documents the Land Department requires, but that is not the point nor the question.

 

Let's be clear. You cannot provide a cite to a Thai law on land that defines the term "nominee". You cannot even provide a cite to a Thai law that uses this term. Not faulting you at all for this. The Land Department cannot do it either.

 

But this is extremely important. Why? Because the Land Department says it is permitted to refuse to register the deed of anyone whom it considers to be an illegal nominee. The Land Department also says it will revoke the land title of any Thai who is acting as a nominee of a foreigner.

 

If the Land Department is entitled to take such drastic action against "nominees", shouldn't the law at least tell us what a nominee is? This means an actual law rather than a list of paperwork thta is retroactively created. More fundamentally, doesn't there at least have to be a law that says that nominee holding is illegal?

 

I see what the Land Department says, but I don't see anyone pointing to any law that says anything about nominees. That is the point.

 

What is probably most disturbing about these sorts of measures is that they are retroactive. Pause for a moment and actually think about what is going on:

 

After property is purchased, the Land Department comes up with a list of requirements that must be satisified or title will be revoked. These requirements didn't exist before. There was and is no law that says anything about nominees. And yet now, the Land Department is saying it can revoke title because of retroactive rules it has unilaterlly imposed to enforce a legal requirement (no nominees) they cannot even identify?

 

This is not a problem???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

is going to ask for anything other then the current statement by the husband confirming the land is not part of the matrimonial property when a Thai wife buys land.

 

If the nominee issue is only about companies (that is exactly what you said), why are they asking married individuals for documents? You have been more than a bit inconsistent on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you keep going on and on about defining â??nomineesâ? I can only surmise you did not understand my post on that subject. Again, if a person cannot produce the documents when registering a company, then they will not allow it to be registered. They donâ??t have to define â??nomineeâ? all they have to do is define what you have to produce to not be able to register. When they say you cannot register a â??nomineeâ? company it is just using common contractual terms to describe it. There is no need to define â??nomineeâ? in the law itself. Like I said, this is just like â??bank robberâ? not being defined in any law, but everyone knows that is a person that breaks the law that says you cannot take money from a bank by force or coercion is a â??bank robberâ?Â. Just like everyone knows (except apparently you) that if you cannot prove you have the income or capital to register a company, you are most likely a â??nomineeâ? for someone that does.

 

Note that the order requiring income proof in my link was issued in 2006; there is nothing retroactive about this issue. The land dept has been trying to stop the practice of farangs using nominee companies to buy land for some time now (see my first post on this).

 

Your second post I donâ??t understand at all. You have sniped part of sentence and then asked why the land dept is asking married individuals for documents. They land dept has been asking for the husband to sign a statement saying the purchased property is not matrimonial property for something like 10 years now. My first experience with this was in 2001. To my knowledge they have not started asking for anything else, nor does there appear to be any intention to start doing so. This is confirmed by the answer the Phuket Land Dept official gave in his response to the question about a Thai wife registering a land purchase in her name.

 

Since I am now repeating stuff I have put in earlier posts, I donâ??t think I will continue this much longer. Iâ??ve never seen you to give up anyway. When the Thai government confiscates the first land title deed from a Thai individual (not a company) married to a farang, something they have never done, then you can then crow that you were right.

TH

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

On a slight side note, my wife and I went to look for a house today (considering maybe buying something towards the end of the year). My wife's salary is not enough to cover the downpayments, so we'd have to get a combined loan. And that is where things got a bit odd.

 

According to the girl since I am a foreigner we'd have to provide a larger deposit. Obviously I asked why. The answer was that if something happens to me, my wife would perhaps not be able to continue paying the installments.

 

Fair enough answer, but why would me being a farang have any impact on that? Wouldn't my wife still have the same problems if I were Thai and something happened?

 

Maybe I am reading too much in this, but I do wonder why it was explicitly mentioned that this was because I am a farang.

 

Sanuk!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In addition to the usual death and dismemberment that can cause you to not be able help to make the payments, there is the additional risk of you just leaving the country. Something even you have to admit, that from the perspective of the bank, has a somewhat higher risk then a Thai?

:dunno:

TH

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...