Jump to content

Common law husband and wife must split assets 50:50 on death or divorce, online lawyer


webfact

Recommended Posts

On 10/15/2019 at 3:02 PM, marko kok prong said:

My ex wife tried to take my houses off me yet she had signed a legal document put together by my lawyer,that stated i had paid for the land,buildings,and contents,she reluctantly agreed to a divorce foe a 2 million baht settlement plus the new car 1 .7 mil,,but look i kept the 2 houses,worth a total of about 7.5 million.The other reason i did this was to avoid court,as we all know "Thai lak Thai",also so i did not have to sneak around with my new girlfriend,who after 2 month's decicded she was going to see her English boyfriend for 3 months in Phuket,but whatever i still got the houses and nice they are too,out in the country,nice and quiet and a beautiful pool. The quietness is worth a lot and the setting is great,almost jungle on one side and rice paddies and trees on the other,5/10 mins to town.Girlfriend of course wants to come back,but after 6 weeks now starting to forget her,we have no real contact,anyway fairly happy here on my own. These papers are not hard to draw up,one is called 'right to habitation instead" no idea if it would stand up in court,but when the cops read it,when i turfed the cheating ex out,they shrugged and told her " ban falang" so they worked then.

sounds like you might have a usufruct in place, which would grant you the right to live in the house and use the land as long as you live.  after that, it reverts to the actual owner (your ex?).  if that's the case, you'll want to avoid pissing off your ex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 10/15/2019 at 4:29 PM, Krataiboy said:

I'm no expert, but when I married I was advised that in a divorce under Thai law, a couple are entitled to keep any personal possessions (gifts, for example) and/or any assets acquired before marriage.

 

Items acquired after marriage are considered as jointly owned and therefore should be divided equally.

 

This applies to a house, condo or other property acquired as a married couple, irrespective of who paid for the purchase or in who is registered as the owner. Post-divorce, each partner would be entitled to half the sale proceeds.

Yes, but like in many areas of law there are lots of nuances here.  Thailand follows a "community property" approach to dividing assets upon divorce as you outline above.  The Thai law calls personal property brought into the marriage "Sin Suan Tua" and property to be shared by both parties "Sin Somros", or community property.  Where it gets complicated (and people get screwed over) is when they treat personal property as community property.  Say you own a home before marriage, but during your marriage you decide to sell the home and buy a larger one with the proceeds, then this new home would still be considered part of your personal property. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2019 at 6:06 PM, Skallywag said:

Here is a scenario.  You rent a house/apartment, gf gets the owner to put her name on the water bill.

"when" the break-up occurs, she has proof she is living there (water bill), thus gets 50% of what you have. 

Politics and the Law, stay away from getting involved with either if possible

 

sounds like she would also get stuck with 50% of the rent in your scenario.  my guess is she'd keep nice and quiet on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2019 at 10:01 PM, wisperone said:

So lets say I get married... I have 10mm in my bank account. I then buy a house and car after we get married with the savings in my bank account. Next year we get divorced. Do we split the house and car 50 50 because it was purchased after we married....but it was with my saved money from before we got married. Did not work during marriage.

No, it would not be split 50/50.  You would be entitled to the vast majority of the house and car.

 

The bank account is your personal property brought into the marriage and remains your personal property even if you buy a home and car (in your name) during the marriage.  The reason I say you would get the vast majority is because of any interest on the bank account that accrued while you were married.  This would not be much, but that interest becomes community property (subject to the 50/50 split), and if that interest was used to purchase the house and car, then she would be entitled to a tiny fraction of the house and car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Angry Dragon said:

sounds like you might have a usufruct in place, which would grant you the right to live in the house and use the land as long as you live.  after that, it reverts to the actual owner (your ex?).  if that's the case, you'll want to avoid pissing off your ex.

You could be right,yet if i am dead i don't think i will be worrying on it,but she is happy she got a <deleted> load off me so i don't forsee a problem,she signed all the docs,and all were witnessed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2019 at 2:50 PM, Destiny1990 said:

What will happen with ur estate after ur death? Can ur ex claim the land then?

No changed chanote to my nieghbour,who is like a sister to me,i know she would never cheat me me,anyway we have the same exact agreement as with my ex.All confirmed by lawyer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In CA separate property remains separate if it is treated as such and not commingled. But we are talking about Thailand. To the best of my knowledge, and I've read a lot, common law marriage does not exist in Thailand (as it somewhat does in CA, with "palimony"). Also, what if we just leave the country? How would a "common law" wife follow you if she cannot get a visa? I don't HAVE to live here. All very interesting. That lawyer, though, is a troll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Angry Dragon said:

Silly statement.  Every lawyer offering services online is a bad lawyer.  In many (if not most) cases, probably yes.  To say 100% are bad is simply narrow-minded.

Think as you like.

 

I disagree.

 

I also see a difference between lawyers using the net to advertise their services and those who dispense them on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

 

I also see a difference between lawyers using the net to advertise their services and those who dispense them on it.

the best ones do both.  in fact the ones that dispense advice as well as advertise their services are the tops in the world.  i invite you to visit the websites of the UK's magic circle firms as well as the top firms in NYC as examples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Angry Dragon said:

the best ones do both.  in fact the ones that dispense advice as well as advertise their services are the tops in the world.  i invite you to visit the websites of the UK's magic circle firms as well as the top firms in NYC as examples.

I politely decline your offer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Angry Dragon said:

of course, far more simple to dig in them heels than to consider whether or not you're wrong.  that thinking fits in well in our current political climate.

No, I just know what suits me best.

 

And am able to politely express it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...