Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next You cannot reply to this topic Go to first unread post 29 replies to this topic

[dzocor55]

hi im looking to have house built in hua hin looked at development,lovely spec,was going on advice from developer to go ltd company route,now having second thoughts,not heard of usufruct before,,been coming to thailand 4 or 5 times a year for last 18 years and want to spend a lot of my retirement there, i have a partner ( not thai ) and 2 kids 11 and 8,a big concern is that a house is a big asset and i would like my familly to have use of it after i die,is there any way of getting my 11 year old daughter written in to a lease or usufruct so she gets use of it after i die?? my oldest son has been married to a thai girl for 5 years and lives in u.k i could use her as the owner of the land,,need advice 10 days to go before my first payment,,also does anyone know a good land/prop lawyer who could sort this,,prefer not from hua hin as that is where the place is and not sure wich lawyer developer uses,,thanks

[stgrhe]

Start by reading these two threads

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Land-Usufruc...nt-t326630.html

http://www.thaivisa....nd-t329952.html

A usufruct for life using both your name and your daughter's name may be the best route for you but it may also be a combination of usufruct and a land lease. Stay away from the company route as it is illegal.

I am retired, live in Hua Hin and, although I am not a lawyer, I have been working with contracts and agreements for the past 30 years and can give you some advice if you are interested. If you like to get in contact with me send me a PM and we can arrange to meet somewhere here in Hua Hin.

[oracle]

Stay away from usufruct, it’s like a life estate and is only interesting if you have Thai relatives and you don’t mind them inheriting the property. Go for ownership over the house and the 30 year land lease with 2 renewal options prepaid to the developer, put a right of purchase transfer to freehold upon full payment in the deal. Sure you do not get a 90 year lease but you can sue someone and in the end and you may well end up as the lawful (unlawful) owner of the land if it set up as it should in court case under this structure.

Another option is to put the land including the lease in a company, but this includes doing you accounting and paying yearly for this as long as you own it, and you ever know what the government will do as it’s a controversial land ownership, and not so much illegal, unless you do it to circumvent the Foreign Business Act.

The difference between a usufruct and a lease is that if you die the usufruct ends, the lease not necessarily.

[stgrhe]

oracle, on 2010-01-19 14:23:23, said:

The difference between a usufruct and a lease is that if you die the usufruct ends, the lease not necessarily.

Not true! A usufruct can be registered for life or for a time that shall not exceed 30 years, i.e. the same as for a 30 years lease. A usufruct can also be registered with more than one name, e.g. a retired person may also add his/hers grandchild for life. Furthermore, there is no need to pay rent (the lease cost) with the usufruct route.

[oracle]

stgrhe, on 2010-01-19 14:38:51, said:

oracle, on 2010-01-19 14:23:23, said:

The difference between a usufruct and a lease is that if you die the usufruct ends, the lease not necessarily.

Not true! A usufruct can be registered for life or for a time that shall not exceed 30 years, i.e. the same as for a 30 years lease. A usufruct can also be registered with more than one name, e.g. a retired person may also add his/hers grandchild for life. Furthermore, there is no need to pay rent (the lease cost) with the usufruct route.

'you' can refer to more than 1 person, you should not use the usufruct option unless you have Thai relatives and you don’t mind them inheriting the property.

[oracle]

stgrhe, on 2010-01-19 14:38:51, said:

oracle, on 2010-01-19 14:23:23, said:

The difference between a usufruct and a lease is that if you die the usufruct ends, the lease not necessarily.

Not true! A usufruct can be registered for life or for a time that shall not exceed 30 years, i.e. the same as for a 30 years lease. A usufruct can also be registered with more than one name, e.g. a retired person may also add his/hers grandchild for life. Furthermore, there is no need to pay rent (the lease cost) with the usufruct route.

By the way, if you have a 30 year usufruct and you DIE the next day it's terminated again

Edited by oracle, 2010-01-19 14:53:42.

[mickba]

There are many experts on this (not me) and usually differing opinions on which way to go.

All 3 have their caveats and all 3 are ways of circumventing the intention that we should not own land.

On balance, many still prefer to take their chances with the "illegal" Company route.
I would think a Lawyer today would probably steer you towards the Usufruct using your 11yo daughter as joint Usufructee.
Remember that with either the Usufruct or the Lease you still need a Thai owner, to whom the property will revert in due course. You have an advantage there if you feel confident about using your Thai daughter-in-law. Either way, I would not use the Development Company and/or an unknown Thai for this. They are ultimately your Landlord and their circumstances may change. A hostile Landlord can probably affect your occupation of the property.
In using your daughter-in-law you should be aware of the rules in using Nominees. They may be interpreted such that it is illegal even to use a Thai wife if the money has come from her husband. Your daughter-in-law living outside Thailand can claim that it was her money, so again there may be an advantage there.
There are tax issues with all of the above.

Sebastian at Isaan Lawyers will give advice and provide a draft bespoke Usufruct Ageement to be enacted by yourself or someone local.

Also watch out for who owns the house if the Development Company made the Planning Application. It can sometimes turn out to be the Developer's wife.

That's as I see it.
Good Luck.

[oracle]

mickba, on 2010-01-19 15:42:57, said:

There are many experts on this (not me) and usually differing opinions on which way to go.

All 3 have their caveats and all 3 are ways of circumventing the intention that we should not own land.

On balance, many still prefer to take their chances with the "illegal" Company route.
I would think a Lawyer today would probably steer you towards the Usufruct using your 11yo daughter as joint Usufructee.
Remember that with either the Usufruct or the Lease you still need a Thai owner, to whom the property will revert in due course. You have an advantage there if you feel confident about using your Thai daughter-in-law. Either way, I would not use the Development Company and/or an unknown Thai for this. They are ultimately your Landlord and their circumstances may change. A hostile Landlord can probably affect your occupation of the property.
In using your daughter-in-law you should be aware of the rules in using Nominees. They may be interpreted such that it is illegal even to use a Thai wife if the money has come from her husband. Your daughter-in-law living outside Thailand can claim that it was her money, so again there may be an advantage there.
There are tax issues with all of the above.

Sebastian at Isaan Lawyers will give advice and provide a draft bespoke Usufruct Ageement to be enacted by yourself or someone local.

Also watch out for who owns the house if the Development Company made the Planning Application. It can sometimes turn out to be the Developer's wife.

That's as I see it.
Good Luck.

Yeh yeh, and the mostly the foreign lawyer who steers towards usufruct says that when you have the usufruct you can lease it out again to your children under a 30 year lease Anyone? The usufruct is really over-promoted on this forum. If you pay the freehold price for a property go the pre-paid 90 year land lease with all options and ownership over the house, or the company route, or be happy with 30 years lease , or be happy that the Thai gets the property (usufruct) when you die, or don't buy. I'm not buying here but if I would buy I would do the company.

Edited by oracle, 2010-01-19 16:02:59.

[mickba]

stgrhe, on 2010-01-19 08:38:51, said:

..................................Furthermore, there is no need to pay rent (the lease cost) with the usufruct route.

Correct, no rent, but I believe that the Land Office will expect to see remuneration (theoretically at least) passing to the Owner commensurate with the value of the benefit given and income tax will be due from the Owner on that income (I think) as well as the nominal (1.1%?) on the value of the registered Lease/Usufruct.
That value will have to be within their assessment, as with rent (pattaya has a figure of about 3-4k/month for 1.5 Rai I think) so there may not be much difference in the end.

[dzocor55]

thanks for the advice,,as you can see,so many different opinions, please keep the advice coming i think i will have to go with majority opinion dave

[Khun Jean]

oracle, on 2010-01-19 17:01:31, said:

mickba, on 2010-01-19 15:42:57, said:

There are many experts on this (not me) and usually differing opinions on which way to go.

All 3 have their caveats and all 3 are ways of circumventing the intention that we should not own land.

On balance, many still prefer to take their chances with the "illegal" Company route.
I would think a Lawyer today would probably steer you towards the Usufruct using your 11yo daughter as joint Usufructee.
Remember that with either the Usufruct or the Lease you still need a Thai owner, to whom the property will revert in due course. You have an advantage there if you feel confident about using your Thai daughter-in-law. Either way, I would not use the Development Company and/or an unknown Thai for this. They are ultimately your Landlord and their circumstances may change. A hostile Landlord can probably affect your occupation of the property.
In using your daughter-in-law you should be aware of the rules in using Nominees. They may be interpreted such that it is illegal even to use a Thai wife if the money has come from her husband. Your daughter-in-law living outside Thailand can claim that it was her money, so again there may be an advantage there.
There are tax issues with all of the above.

Sebastian at Isaan Lawyers will give advice and provide a draft bespoke Usufruct Ageement to be enacted by yourself or someone local.

Also watch out for who owns the house if the Development Company made the Planning Application. It can sometimes turn out to be the Developer's wife.

That's as I see it.
Good Luck.

Yeh yeh, and the mostly the foreign lawyer who steers towards usufruct says that when you have the usufruct you can lease it out again to your children under a 30 year lease Anyone? The usufruct is really over-promoted on this forum. If you pay the freehold price for a property go the pre-paid 90 year land lease with all options and ownership over the house, or the company route, or be happy with 30 years lease , or be happy that the Thai gets the property (usufruct) when you die, or don't buy. I'm not buying here but if I would buy I would do the company.

Oracle, you should shut up because it is clear you know nothing. Please refrain from parroting what you have heard from a few lawyers and developers who have vested interests. (Are you one of those?)

There is no such thing as a prepaid 90 year lease. Period!
The usufruct is the only way when you are not doing business to protect your right to stay for longer than 30 years. As such it is better than a lease. Also you don't have to pay rent which is convenient because then the owner not have to pay taxes. And yes even lease it to your children or someone else for that matter.
It will never ever be your property, the best you can get is the right to use it.

[dzocor55]

mickba, on 2010-01-19 15:42:57, said:

There are many experts on this (not me) and usually differing opinions on which way to go.

All 3 have their caveats and all 3 are ways of circumventing the intention that we should not own land.

On balance, many still prefer to take their chances with the "illegal" Company route.
I would think a Lawyer today would probably steer you towards the Usufruct using your 11yo daughter as joint Usufructee.
Remember that with either the Usufruct or the Lease you still need a Thai owner, to whom the property will revert in due course. You have an advantage there if you feel confident about using your Thai daughter-in-law. Either way, I would not use the Development Company and/or an unknown Thai for this. They are ultimately your Landlord and their circumstances may change. A hostile Landlord can probably affect your occupation of the property.
In using your daughter-in-law you should be aware of the rules in using Nominees. They may be interpreted such that it is illegal even to use a Thai wife if the money has come from her husband. Your daughter-in-law living outside Thailand can claim that it was her money, so again there may be an advantage there.
There are tax issues with all of the above.

Sebastian at Isaan Lawyers will give advice and provide a draft bespoke Usufruct Ageement to be enacted by yourself or someone local.

Also watch out for who owns the house if the Development Company made the Planning Application. It can sometimes turn out to be the Developer's wife.

That's as I see it.
Good Luck.

isaan lawyers say i wouldnt be able to put my 11 year old on usufruct dave

[Khun Jean]

Use your oldest son as a 'third party' on the usufruct. Then when your daughter reaches 18 you can give her a lease for 30 years.

[oracle]

Khun Jean, on 2010-01-20 02:30:00, said:

Oracle, you should shut up because it is clear you know nothing. Please refrain from parroting what you have heard from a few lawyers and developers who have vested interests. (Are you one of those?)

There is no such thing as a prepaid 90 year lease. Period!
The usufruct is the only way when you are not doing business to protect your right to stay for longer than 30 years. As such it is better than a lease. Also you don't have to pay rent which is convenient because then the owner not have to pay taxes. And yes even lease it to your children or someone else for that matter.
It will never ever be your property, the best you can get is the right to use it.

You are the extreme other side of an unscrupulous real estate seller KJ and the funny thing is you may even do them a favor! More and more you see 90 year lease offered by developers excluding all liabilities in case it’s not renewed after 30 years, while a correctly set up 90 year lease, of course it does not offer a 90 year lease, but does offer quite some additional right that you don’t have in a 30 year lease and the 90 year lease could give you a pretty good case in court for renewal or right to freehold after 30 years. Now a lot of developers are assured of a good bonus after 30 years because of your negative talk about the companies and 90 year leases. On behalf of many developers great thanks KJ for making it more profitable for us

[oracle]

oracle, on 2010-01-20 07:46:26, said:

Khun Jean, on 2010-01-20 02:30:00, said:

Oracle, you should shut up because it is clear you know nothing. Please refrain from parroting what you have heard from a few lawyers and developers who have vested interests. (Are you one of those?)

There is no such thing as a prepaid 90 year lease. Period!
The usufruct is the only way when you are not doing business to protect your right to stay for longer than 30 years. As such it is better than a lease. Also you don't have to pay rent which is convenient because then the owner not have to pay taxes. And yes even lease it to your children or someone else for that matter.
It will never ever be your property, the best you can get is the right to use it.

You are the extreme other side of an unscrupulous real estate seller KJ and the funny thing is you may even do them a favor! More and more you see 90 year lease offered by developers excluding all liabilities in case it’s not renewed after 30 years, while a correctly set up 90 year lease, of course it does not offer a 90 year lease, but does offer quite some additional right that you don’t have in a 30 year lease and the 90 year lease could give you a pretty good case in court for renewal or right to freehold after 30 years. Now a lot of developers are assured of a good bonus after 30 years because of your negative talk about the companies and 90 year leases. On behalf of many developers great thanks KJ for making it more profitable for us

I forgot to answer your question, no I'm not one of those, but I'm a liar too. What about you KJ, I'm wondering about you. Do you have a personal interest in dumping the 90 year lease structure and company ownership route for foreigner? Is your wife selling properties to foreigners under usufructs so your children are assured of a whealthy future when these stupid usufruct farangs die sooner or later

[Khun Jean]

My goodness, you fell for it hook line and sinker.
Good luck to you and your 90 year lease.

[dzocor55]

stgrhe, on 2010-01-19 08:36:42, said:

Start by reading these two threads

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Land-Usufruc...nt-t326630.html

http://www.thaivisa....nd-t329952.html

A usufruct for life using both your name and your daughter's name may be the best route for you but it may also be a combination of usufruct and a land lease. Stay away from the company route as it is illegal.

I am retired, live in Hua Hin and, although I am not a lawyer, I have been working with contracts and agreements for the past 30 years and can give you some advice if you are interested. If you like to get in contact with me send me a PM and we can arrange to meet somewhere here in Hua Hin.

has to be 20 yrs as thats majority in thailand

[thaiozy]

Well here`s my story
I got my Usufrut through Issaan Lawyers ( not Sebastian himself because he doesn`t handle that side),
Wasn`t married & on tourist visa
Everything done - Signed stamped & sealed in 2 hrs & in triplicate (1 held by Amphur & the others for us) COST - 15,000 bht (may have changed by now)
But in my case I only have my wife & son
AND yes i was told by all parties that i DO NOT own the land EVEN THOUGH i am on the titles (due to the Usufrut ) inwhich i was advised it is there for 30 years for my protection (still valid after marriage ) in having complete control over the property as to wether or not your wife still owns it ( ie she sells it )
A Usufrut also implies that since you control the land you can improve that peice of land but not degrade it ( ie build house - so house yours not land )

[thaiwanderer]

If just between you and your wife can it not therefore be cancelled within a year of (if) marriage ending - like any agreement concluded between husband and wife?

[manarak]

in this case, get the usufruct from the seller, and have the wife buy the land after the usufruct has been granted. problem solved.

and do not listen to oracle, he wrote a lot of bullshit in this thread.

[oracle]

manarak, on 2010-01-23 05:46:29, said:

in this case, get the usufruct from the seller, and have the wife buy the land after the usufruct has been granted. problem solved.

and do not listen to oracle, he wrote a lot of bullshit in this thread.

Don’t you get it? It’s in some people’s interest to promote usufructs. It is very lucrative to sell your property under a usufruct. This is the best deal possible for the seller. The guy who buys the property does not get the title to the property, he can’t sell the property, and by law he has the obligation to maintain the property and is liable for destruction and loss in value under the civil code. As the seller (developer) you have a 100% guarantee you get the property back on the day the buyer dies, and best of all in a good condition as this is the obligation of usufruct holder, he must take care of the property as a person of ordinary prudence would take of his own property. As the owner you can claim damages from the buyer for loss in value and destruction of the property and if he does not take care of the property you are allowed to take the property back and terminate the usufruct.

By the way the OP is not married to a Thai, so his wife can't buy and taking a usufruct from your son's GF, not a good idea.

[Chaimai]

I am not too sure I would listen to advice from a developer when wishing to buy a house.

Would a lawyer not be a better option ??

There are several who are sponsors on TV and I can only speak positively for Isaan Lawyers.

[caf]

Khun Jean, on 2010-01-20 02:30:00, said:

oracle, on 2010-01-19 17:01:31, said:

mickba, on 2010-01-19 15:42:57, said:

There are many experts on this (not me) and usually differing opinions on which way to go.

All 3 have their caveats and all 3 are ways of circumventing the intention that we should not own land.

On balance, many still prefer to take their chances with the "illegal" Company route.
I would think a Lawyer today would probably steer you towards the Usufruct using your 11yo daughter as joint Usufructee.
Remember that with either the Usufruct or the Lease you still need a Thai owner, to whom the property will revert in due course. You have an advantage there if you feel confident about using your Thai daughter-in-law. Either way, I would not use the Development Company and/or an unknown Thai for this. They are ultimately your Landlord and their circumstances may change. A hostile Landlord can probably affect your occupation of the property.
In using your daughter-in-law you should be aware of the rules in using Nominees. They may be interpreted such that it is illegal even to use a Thai wife if the money has come from her husband. Your daughter-in-law living outside Thailand can claim that it was her money, so again there may be an advantage there.
There are tax issues with all of the above.

Sebastian at Isaan Lawyers will give advice and provide a draft bespoke Usufruct Ageement to be enacted by yourself or someone local.

Also watch out for who owns the house if the Development Company made the Planning Application. It can sometimes turn out to be the Developer's wife.

That's as I see it.
Good Luck.

Yeh yeh, and the mostly the foreign lawyer who steers towards usufruct says that when you have the usufruct you can lease it out again to your children under a 30 year lease Anyone? The usufruct is really over-promoted on this forum. If you pay the freehold price for a property go the pre-paid 90 year land lease with all options and ownership over the house, or the company route, or be happy with 30 years lease , or be happy that the Thai gets the property (usufruct) when you die, or don't buy. I'm not buying here but if I would buy I would do the company.

Oracle, you should shut up because it is clear you know nothing. Please refrain from parroting what you have heard from a few lawyers and developers who have vested interests. (Are you one of those?)

There is no such thing as a prepaid 90 year lease. Period!
The usufruct is the only way when you are not doing business to protect your right to stay for longer than 30 years. As such it is better than a lease. Also you don't have to pay rent which is convenient because then the owner not have to pay taxes. And yes even lease it to your children or someone else for that matter.
It will never ever be your property, the best you can get is the right to use it.

Absolutely, there is no such thing as a 90 year renewable or prepaid lease.

You can pay for 90 years if you want to but it means nothing. But money in the seller's bank. If you believe every lawyer here you have a problem


No one has mentioned a superficie. That can allow the use of the land and house ownership to be transferable and inheritable

Note: use of land not ownership of land.

See also my thread on usufruct habitation and superficie.

caf

[caf]

oracle, on 2010-01-20 07:46:26, said:

Khun Jean, on 2010-01-20 02:30:00, said:

Oracle, you should shut up because it is clear you know nothing. Please refrain from parroting what you have heard from a few lawyers and developers who have vested interests. (Are you one of those?)

There is no such thing as a prepaid 90 year lease. Period!
The usufruct is the only way when you are not doing business to protect your right to stay for longer than 30 years. As such it is better than a lease. Also you don't have to pay rent which is convenient because then the owner not have to pay taxes. And yes even lease it to your children or someone else for that matter.
It will never ever be your property, the best you can get is the right to use it.

You are the extreme other side of an unscrupulous real estate seller KJ and the funny thing is you may even do them a favor! More and more you see 90 year lease offered by developers excluding all liabilities in case it's not renewed after 30 years, while a correctly set up 90 year lease, of course it does not offer a 90 year lease, but does offer quite some additional right that you don't have in a 30 year lease and the 90 year lease could give you a pretty good case in court for renewal or right to freehold after 30 years. Now a lot of developers are assured of a good bonus after 30 years because of your negative talk about the companies and 90 year leases. On behalf of many developers great thanks KJ for making it more profitable for us

Ah so you are a developer? Vested interested so advice clearl;y biased.

for making it more profitable for us

caf

[caf]

Khun Jean, on 2010-01-20 05:49:22, said:

Use your oldest son as a 'third party' on the usufruct. Then when your daughter reaches 18 you can give her a lease for 30 years.

Have you thought this through?

Is the usufruct for life or 30 years? Either way the land remains in the ownership of the owner and reverts on death of the usufructory or at the expiration of the term.

caf