Valentine Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Don't worry. It's just another step to Thai Happiness I don't think so. Some might be happy to get their land back with a nice home already built on it but any developer trying to sell now has even less chance considering this & the fact the Russians are basically out of the market. I went to a development this morning built by Thai owner. Construction standard was not good & I could not believe the asking price of 12 million for a 2 bedroom pool villa that was on not more than 250m2 of land with living area about 120m2. Unless they were laundering money it would be sheer lunacy to buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentine Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I read it as the worse case is any 90 year lease that starts with the 30 year lease, the entire contract could be voided and even the initial 30 year lease could be void. This sounds possibly like the beginnings of a "nationalization" of Thai properties. See Venezuala and recent company and company asset siezures. That's the way I read it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirtless Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Just reciprocate this treatment to Thai people in western countries and see them lose their houses , its about time western governments protected westerners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
englansi Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 And why is this 'news'? Only the seriously stupid fell for this. There must be a lot of seriously stupid people then. God loves stupid people. That's why he made so many of them. David Stupid people invented god to represent them faithfully. They did a good job. 55 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stgrhe Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 And why is this 'news'? Only the seriously stupid fell for this. Not necessarily stupid, but extremely naive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicken George Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 The point is the loop hole people have been using to buy via the company route is not safe. It was never intended for people to buy a residential property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trogers Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Foreigners cannot own land and landed properties. Period! All the smokes and mirrors created by developers and their legal and property 'experts' are just out to make money from you. Period! How careful you are with your money is the outcome of the struggle between greed and wisdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 No one should be surprised at this ruling. The "90 year leases" pedaled by estate agent and developer spivs were an obvious scam from the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I read it as the worse case is any 90 year lease that starts with the 30 year lease, the entire contract could be voided and even the initial 30 year lease could be void. This sounds possibly like the beginnings of a "nationalization" of Thai properties. See Venezuala and recent company and company asset siezures. That's the way I read it too. It is not. The court was asked to rule on the issue and it did based on the provisions of the Land Code. The Land Code clearly states that fictitious agreements designed to make the transaction look other than it really was will be voided. There is no problem for people who bought 30 year leases which is the maximum term permitted by the Land Code. Better to check the law first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzexpat Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 <script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script> No one should be surprised at this ruling. The "90 year leases" pedaled by estate agent and developer spivs were an obvious scam from the start. A friend is caught up with this! He was warned about the doubtful nature of the "90 lease" but chose to believe the seller. He also used the sellers lawyer to complete the "deal" ! Some are , sadly, victims of their own stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbymack Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 It depends on the contract because often a contract will have a clause that if one clause is found to be void then it does not invalidate the whole contract and other clauses. If this was in then maybe the buyers have a chance of restitution at appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKResort Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I will like to believe that this rule is to avoid the use of those 90 years leases by foreigners for speculation, some times leaving farming land without any use. Makes sense for overpopulated agricultural countries like Thailand and others in Asia.The problem is that will affect also many foreigners that just built residences in small areas. Thailand need a big reform in real estate laws. No doubts that buy real estate here is risky, and not just for this rule, and not just for foreigners. It is very common for Thai people buy, farm, and build in land without proper documentation, some in public areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToddinChonburi Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 So are they saying that anyone that signed a 30 year lease, built a house on there girl friends land is now totally screwed. looks like that to me . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spectrumisgreen Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Well I've said it before ... You'd have to be a complete and utter moron to buy property in Thailand. Who in their right mind would think about handing over 51% of their assets to what is little more than a nation of thieves? It's a shame the UK, US and EU countries don't apply the same rules to Thais but of course we understand the importance of foreign investment and we also know that they can't dig it up and take it with them. The other issue has for many years been pricing; in most cases the property market especially in areas such as Phuket, are so over the top it beggars belief anyone would think they are buying a home / villa or apartment of good investment value. I honestly cannot understand how anyone could be stupid enough to buy property in Thailand ... there again the Nigerian 419 Scam continues to catch the very stupid and greedy and I can only conclude that the expats who brought property in Thailand fall into both categories. 'A nation of thieves'? and yet obviously YOU stay/ live here.. another ex-pat spouting negative crap about everyone who is a native here.. I mean, really, how rosy exactly is everything 'back home' (where really you should go and stay if its so bad, here!)?.. I always believe that there a good and bad everywhere, in all things, all places, and that we should remain fully aware of the pitfalls and dangers wherever we go and whatever we do, but still I really don't get this self-righteous bullshit spouted by people who seem so convinced of how morally superior and righteous WE, and the places and laws and rules and people WE ALL left behind, usually long ago, are!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeyrobot Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 And why is this 'news'? Only the seriously stupid fell for this. There must be a lot of seriously stupid people then. Yes you are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlwilliamsjr18 Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 About time... Let's see if Hua Hin is next, the stand alone homes that Euro. buy via a Thai broker is not legal, yet, they keep getting built. My guess, Hua Hin does the same practice. As I said once before, you got a Russian selling land in Hua Hin area...go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlyouThai Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 hi guys , not sure i get that right. Farang bought a lease of appartment. They sold him the 3*30 years stuff wich means. He registered a lease of 30 years and he signed an other contract stating that the developer will renew for free 2*30 years more. Is that correct ? In this case this other " contract " is illegal and means nothing because its not allowed by laws to give 90 years. Now the farang go to court for some reasons , and he shows this piece of paper. Court rules that this is illegal and then cancel the first one ? How can they cancel a 30 years " official " lease based on a paper who is basically toilet paper because it does not have any legal power. Am i missing something here ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeverSure Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 why buy in thailand ,go to place where you buy and get what you pay for lot places in the world got beaches/sun/girls/beer without all the problems Ecuador tops the list I believe. Yes, it is time. After so many years Thailand is finally finished. This part is off topic but Ecuador is no longer the haven. Unlike Thailand it hasn't had a building boom and there's a shortage of housing, even for the natives. On topic, I suspect there will be a lot of formerly smug and even wealthy expats who fell into a variation of this trap and are screwed. Sometimes people are just determined to outsmart themselves. In Thailand if people would just rent, there would be no houses lost to bar girls and bar girls wouldn't latch onto a green pea who would buy her a house. Relationships would have to be based on something different. There are many expats who have already lost homes without this new crackdown, and now there will be more and many of the homes will be very expensive losses. Sad, but not my fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 So are they saying that anyone that signed a 30 year lease, built a house on there girl friends land is now totally screwed. looks like that to me . I don't think so, since this ruling is about 90 years leases, not the 30 years ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 hi guys , not sure i get that right. Farang bought a lease of appartment. They sold him the 3*30 years stuff wich means. He registered a lease of 30 years and he signed an other contract stating that the developer will renew for free 2*30 years more. Is that correct ? In this case this other " contract " is illegal and means nothing because its not allowed by laws to give 90 years. Now the farang go to court for some reasons , and he shows this piece of paper. Court rules that this is illegal and then cancel the first one ? How can they cancel a 30 years " official " lease based on a paper who is basically toilet paper because it does not have any legal power. Am i missing something here ? He did not sign another contract, he signed just one contract, for 3 x 30 years. And that is legally not possible, therefor apparently invalid and void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlwilliamsjr18 Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 The simple solution here is to find a nice place, owned by a Thai, negotiate a decent rent, and sign a 2 year lease. It works. Why is it we need to own something forever. Last time I checked, we all have expirations dates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToddinChonburi Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 It says that this would make 30 year lease void also. crazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iphototjes Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Live in Thailand, invest in ANY other country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlyouThai Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 hi guys , not sure i get that right. Farang bought a lease of appartment. They sold him the 3*30 years stuff wich means. He registered a lease of 30 years and he signed an other contract stating that the developer will renew for free 2*30 years more. Is that correct ? In this case this other " contract " is illegal and means nothing because its not allowed by laws to give 90 years. Now the farang go to court for some reasons , and he shows this piece of paper. Court rules that this is illegal and then cancel the first one ? How can they cancel a 30 years " official " lease based on a paper who is basically toilet paper because it does not have any legal power. Am i missing something here ? He did not sign another contract, he signed just one contract, for 3 x 30 years. And that is legally not possible, therefor apparently invalid and void. Well he had to sign an other contract no ? by that i mean he signed a lease at the land office for 30 years. There is no way he could sign a lease of 30*3 at the land office ? By an other contrat i mean , he goes to sign a 30 years lease at land office , which is legal , and he have an other contract stating that the developer will renew it 2 times ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToddinChonburi Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 The more I keep rereading this the more it is confusing. run for cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomacht8 Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 How i understand this:To lease for 30 years maximum time is legal.A lease with 30 Years + 30 Years + 30 years in one contract is illegal and voit at all.How would it be if:i lease legal 30 years from 2015 to 2045and my daughter lease after from 2045 to 2075both contracts signed in 2015 for the same pice of land.Would this be possible aka legal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadKiter Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 bottomline - Thailand is not a place to invest, especially as long as the government is a military dictatorship and the courts are a corrupt, politicized farce. Just rent. It's cheap and you won't lose a bunch of $. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiestyFarang Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Let me see if I get this straight. If the Supreme Court rules like the other two then the properties and money paid will all go to Thais. There could be literally 1000's of cases as the previous owners will want to invalidate the lease and kick the people out!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiestyFarang Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Let me see if I get this straight. If the Supreme Court rules like the other two then the properties and money paid will all go to Thais. There could be literally 1000's of cases as the previous owners will want to invalidate the lease and kick the people out!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon43 Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 It says that this would make 30 year lease void also. crazy If you leased for up to 30 years, then that contract is legally-binding If you signed a 30+30 or 30+30+30 lease contract, then that contract is void, which includes your original 30 year term. Bottom line: Stick to the written law and don't try to circumvent what is clearly stated in Thai Law ==> 30 years maximum lease term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.