land lease question

malaica2000 wrote:

This works for both residential and commercial land?

I know it works with residential or a small commercial land.  Not sure about large commercial properties. 

The property I mentioned was part commercial and part residential.  It was a large residential property on which 50+ fruit trees have yielded more than the previous owners and staff could consume each season. Not to waste resource, the owners acquired a commercial license to sell part of each harvest to local markets.  Upon purchasing, my niece chose not to renew the license and turned the property back to its original residential status and a gentlewoman's farm.

If I were you, I would heed Colin's warning and be very careful.  If I ever wish to buy a property here, I would only involve someone with whom I've spent a lifetime and trust implicitly.

Budman1 wrote:

As I have posted more than a few time. If it needs a key and you can't put the ownership in your name exclusively don't buy it.

My sentiment exactly.

colinoscapee wrote:

She has been to court numerous times for people who have had the Red Book copied several times and sold the land to different people.

Aside from the typical scam using multiple notarised copies of a real red book, there were also fake red books made from real template, then used to sell non-existent land.  An officer from the Office of Natural Resources and Environment (Phòng Tài Nguyên và Môi Trường) in Phúc Yên had a good business doing that a few years back.

Similarly, a staff from the office in huyện Gia Lâm stole 20 blank red books, then with a team of cohorts, printed into them scanned signatures of real officials, then used them as collaterals to borrow from banks and businesses.

In addition, the 500 missing red books in Sơn Tây have not recovered still, so a whole lot more victims will eventually emerge.

It's used to be easy to verify a redbook: a person only needs to compare its number with the one recorded at the local TN&MT.  However, if the particular redbook is one of those created by inside jobs, then all bets are off.

BTW, most buyers don't know that a notarised copy (performed by a notary office) is not the same as a certified copy (authenticated by a state agency from the original paper).  One is easier to duplicate than the other.

colinoscapee wrote:

In relation to your post that you deleted about notaries, where do you think the copies of the Red Book comes from.

Thanks colinoscapee:  i didn't mean to delete. Just dealing with a website error.

The deleted post was:

Fake papers... the notary has no way to figure it out ? ..or is it common practice for a notary to be the partner in crime ?

malaica2000 wrote:

Fake papers... the notary has no way to figure it out ? ..or is it common practice for a notary to be the partner in crime ?

colinoscapee wrote:

You just have to read the local papers here to see how many officials are caught for corruption.

Aside from corrupted officials, some of the fake red books are very sophisticated they even fooled the banks and the local government offices.

Some are real with faked signatures or unauthorised scan of real signatures.  And, as Colin stated, some are 100% real red books for a property that have been sold to multiple buyers simultaneously, or property that the seller doesn't actually own.

malaica2000 wrote:

The deleted post was:

Fake papers... the notary has no way to figure it out ? ..or is it common practice for a notary to be the partner in crime ?

In the West, a notary does not verify the veracity of the contents of a document.  He/she verifies the identity of the individual who signs the document.  That is why they ask you to sign in their presence.

If the notary verified a false signature that was not made in his presence, then he could be considered complicit.

colinoscapee wrote:

The point is that some notaries are criminals here. They work in with the person who has forged the documents.

That's what I said.  I was responding to the question of how could the notary not figure it out.

THIGV wrote:

If the notary verified a false signature that was not made in his presence, then he could be considered complicit.

THIGV wrote:

In the West, a notary does not verify the veracity of the contents of a document.  He/she verifies the identity of the individual who signs the document.  That is why they ask you to sign in their presence.

malaica2000 wrote:

My notary in Italy did a mistake one time. And he took full responsibility.  In case something goes really wrong they have an insurance.

A notaio in Italy is also a lawyer who is appointed by the State and holds a public office.  A notary public in the US is sort of appointed but only required 6-hour of study for the job and nothing of the law in general.  Most notaries public in the US have to hold a full time job and use the notary duty only for extra income.

An Italian notaio registers deeds and agreements. An American notary public only witnesses the signature of the persons on the documents and nothing else.

An Italian notaio certifies documents as true copies of the originals. The stamp from a notaio is recognised by all Italian authorities as the proof that the documents were authenticated.   American notaries public have no need to see the original document because it has nothing to do with their duty.

When I bought and sold my house in Italy, a notaio was presented through several hours of signing and exchanging money.  He read the contract aloud and made sure that all parties understood every clause, then took the documents with him to register at the comune.  Every time we bought and sold our houses in the States, a person in the staff of the escrow companies would step in to witness the signatures and stamp the documents.  The process usually took 5 minutes.  That was the beginning and end of her duty.

Same title in different countries equals different descriptions, responsibilities, and power.

Vietnamese notary (công chứng viên) is more similar in descriptions and requirements to Italian notaio than American notary, but I doubt that they have insurance to cover for their mistakes, nor do they take responsibility for any wrongdoing.

gobot wrote:

Along with money that has 5 zeros for buying lunch. 

I've never thought of that!  Thank you for the chuckle.   

malaica2000 wrote:

Going back to the original question:

Is it legal or illegal  for a foreigner to lease the land for 50 + years from a local person ?

You've moved the goal post a bit from your first question but maybe this might give you a better insight anyway:

http://www.vietnam-briefing.com/news/le … tnam.html/

gobot wrote:

In the west (the US anyway) there is: An actual legal system, enforceable contracts, escrow accounts for deposits, public records of trust deeds (property transfers) at the local courthouse, pre-sale title searches and title insurance in case of another claim.
Plus a culture where citizens expect to be treated fairly in dealings.
And a free press for exposing crooks.

Red books are another embarrassment for a country seeking international respect. Along with money that has 5 zeros for buying lunch. 

Yep....it does make you wonder.
I would suggest anyone thinking of doing business here to refer to ,,& memorise the above post before committing to ANYTHING.

And if your still not sure......read it again.

malaica2000 wrote:

Can i have a local person to buy freehold land, then lease it to me for 50 years ?

That is a big 'it depends' question.  Caveat Emptor.