Userfructs in udon thani

[JR]

I am aware of that. But a usufruct is a right, a law and if an office refuses to acknowledge it , they are acting contradictive to it, thus illegal.

[Marcosteffano]

As far as I can gather.usufruct is a IHL international humanity law in other words if Thailand wishes to waive international humanitarian laws they might have to let the rest of the world know they are opting out.something is going on though,maybe new boss needing his palms greased to get some back from the big brown envelope he's just had to pass on for his position.

[sometimewoodworker]

I am aware of that. But a usufruct is a right, a law and if an office refuses to acknowledge it , they are acting contradictive to it, thus illegal.

You are welcome to try that position, I don't think it will do much good.

An understanding of the ways that Thailand has developed historically and how the power structures have produced the society, and laws, of today compared with the different ways that European, and European origin societies have developed will give insights into the different view of the law in Thailand and how interpretation, enforcement and implementation is often local.

Just as an example take the case of the police officer who did not give tickets to kids riding motorcycles without helmets but made them do exercises instead. Was he acting within the law, no. Will his actions be of more benefit in getting the kids to wear helmets than giving fines to the kids parents, probably yes.

Many people of western societies want certainty in laws (that sometimes they then break) in Asia laws are often somewhat flexible and location can play a part in them.

I know I find it easier to understand the western approach. I think the Asian attitude much more difficult for someone brought in a western society to fit into but it is the the way things work here.

[JR]

I am aware of that too. Your example of a police officer decides not give a ticket is not the same as a land officer refusing to follow the rules. A police officer has the power to decide to give a ticket or not. It is up to his judgement of the situation.
That is not the case at the land office.
I was not talking about the way the country has developed in comparison with Europe or other countries. I was talking about what the usufruct is and how it should be applied.

[sometimewoodworker]

I am aware of that too. Your example of a police officer decides not give a ticket is not the same as a land officer refusing to follow the rules. A police officer has the power to decide to give a ticket or not. It is up to his judgement of the situation.
That is not the case at the land office.
I was not talking about the way the country has developed in comparison with Europe or other countries. I was talking about what the usufruct is and how it should be applied.

Sorry the cases are analogous.
The police officer decides not to follow the law, or make it up himself.
The land office has the same power.
They both come from the same roots of "law" being more guide than rule.

If you want another example just look at the different requirements that individual immigration offices impose.

That Thailand is changing to become more western and law following rather than its original law interpretation just makes it more confusing

[Bob22]

Are you talking about NEW usafructs not being available or existing ones being invalid?

[BobHelm]

I believe that people are discussing obtaining a new usufruct.

I don't think that, once granted, anybody has had an usufruct then canceled.
However, as to its' particular place in the law, if challenged, then I think it is best to read maaka's post earlier in this thread.

As in most countries, the actual application of the rules of law can only ever be really discovered once a test case comes before the courts & pursued by both parties to its' highest level - an expensive process..

Don't forget that, for many years, the 30/30/30 lease agreements were being touted as a legal instrument. It was not until someone actually took it to court that they were declared illegal.

So, as long as no one takes an usufruct agreement to court for a ruling then they would appear to be a legal way for a foreigner to have the use of land during his lifetime,

[jai yen yen]

The people running Thailand now can and will do whatever they want and they make and change the laws to suit them and with nobody to answer to it will not change.I did have a house in Thailand one time awhile ago with a 30 year lease on the land, I would never do it again the way things are going now. I would only rent and keep my cash out of Thailand.

[FrazeeDK]

no different in my mind than the "at the discretion of the Immigration officer" lede which I've seen work for and against people. The laws on Usufructs exist but the interpretation and application of those laws depend on who is doing it.. I'd wager for the local Immigration office boss to say "no usufructs" is within his purview as the "boss".. Unless a person desiring an Usufruct has connections/influence or as mentioned earlier "lubrication" the policy won't change.

[semperfiguy]

It makes one wonder what his main motivation is for denying the Usufructs in the first place. It really doesn't make much sense unless he's just another farang hater, or this is his way of creating an obstacle which presents his office with an opportunity to get grease money under the table, part of which eventually flows into his hands. I'd love to be a fly on the wall and get a firsthand look at just how elaborate the scheme is and how the money travels up the food chain!

[Marcosteffano]

Maybe having a good lawyer present when dealing with the person behind the desk could help.its so easy for a pen pusher to just say no to a Thai.these people who work for the government think they are all high and mighty and normal Thai folk are beneath them.im having a real night mare with obtaining a yellow book as the woman is deffo a farang hater.i had no problem getting the usufruct when I had a lawyer present.

[sometimewoodworker]

It makes one wonder what his main motivation is for denying the Usufructs in the first place. It really doesn't make much sense unless he's just another farang hater, or this is his way of creating an obstacle which presents his office with an opportunity to get grease money under the table, part of which eventually flows into his hands. I'd love to be a fly on the wall and get a firsthand look at just how elaborate the scheme is and how the money travels up the food chain!

Don't forget that an Usufruct is used by both Thai and farang and if you could get statistics that farang usage of them is probably only a small percentage of the total number, so it's unlikely to be that he is a farang hater.