You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

August 21, 2015

Thailand’s New Debt Collection Law Provides a Measure of Protection

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

Debt collection has long been associated with deceptive and unscrupulous practices. In Thailand, it is not uncommon to hear stories of collectors tricking debtors into paying by giving false information or even resorting to abusive language, violence, and blackmail.

In an effort to stamp out these practices, the National Legislative Assembly has passed the Debt Collection Act. The new law, which will take effect on September 2, seeks to establish fair and standardized collection rules. It applies to all debt collectors, from institutional lenders such as banks to individual creditors. Importantly, however, while it applies to individual debtors, debtor companies are not protected by the law.

Under the law, the way creditors collect debts will be more tightly regulated. Debtors will also have increased protection and rights.

The law defines “debt collector” as a creditor who makes a loan to a debtor. The debt can be legal or illegal. In other words, even loan sharks are subject to the Act.

Further, a creditor’s authorized representative (such as an attorney), a debt collection agency, and its authorized representative are all categorized as “debt collectors.” A “debt collection business” means any business hired to collect a debt, directly or indirectly. Lawyers who collect debts for clients are not considered a “debt collection business.”

A “debtor” means any natural person obligated to pay a debt. This includes an individual debt guarantor.

Under the law, debt collectors can only communicate with the debtor or another person authorized by the debtor (such as a lawyer). A collector can only contact third parties to acquire information or learn the debtor’s location. The collector is also limited to identifying himself or herself and inquiring about the debtor’s whereabouts to a third party. The collector cannot tell the third party that the debtor owes a debt unless the third party is a spouse, parent, or child of the debtor.

The collector is also required to communicate confidentially with the third party. He or she cannot use any language, symbol, mark, or business name of the debt collector on any correspondence that may indicate the communication is related to debt collection.

The collector can contact the debtor only between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday to Friday and between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. on holidays. The collector can also only contact the debtor at a place indicated by the debtor.

Attorneys for debt collectors must state their names, agency, creditors’ names, and the debt amount. If the collector seeks to collect the debt in person or demands performance, he or she must show his or her power of attorney to the debtor. If the debtor pays the debt, the collector must give the debtor evidence of payment such as a receipt.

When collectors try to collect a debt, they cannot do the following:

  • Threaten to use violence against the debtor or any action that injures the body, property, or reputation of the debtor;
  • Notify and disclose any debt of the debtor to third parties who are not related to the collection;
  • Use profane or other language that insults the hearer or reader;
  • Use false information to deceive a debtor—for example, by falsely claiming to have a court order or be a state official or lawyer, or by falsely threatening to seize the debtor’s assets or salary.

In addition, and much like when contacting third parties, collectors cannot disclose that the nature of their communication is to collect a debt. They cannot contact debtors by postcard, open letter, fax, or any other “non-discreet” method that shows the communication is related to collection.

Moreover, even if the communication is discreet, the collector can only indicate the collector’s business name—as long as it does not indicate the business is a debt collector.

The collector cannot collect any fees or expenses over an official limit set by the Committee Governing Debt Collection, appointed under the Act. Also, the collector cannot convince a debtor to pay by check if the collector knows the debtor cannot afford the debt.

Failure to comply with the law is a criminal offense. Anyone who is aware of a violation can report it to a district office or police station. A collector who threatens or causes injury to a debtor’s person, property, or reputation can be fined up to THB 500,000 and/or jailed for up to five years.

Individual directors, managers, and representatives of corporate debt collectors can also be criminally liable. If a juristic person violates the law, and the offense falls within the scope of duty of the director, manager, or representative, these individuals can be punished for the same offense as that committed by that juristic person.

While the best way for debtors to minimize the risk of dealing with unscrupulous collectors is to borrow from reputable lenders, the Debt Collection Act provides a measure of protection for those who do not have this option. Prudent lenders should understand the law.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 23, 2025
In cross-border disputes, a recurring concern for claimants is whether they can protect respondents’ assets located in jurisdictions other than the seat of arbitration. This article explores whether Thai courts can issue interim measures, such as freezing orders, under Section 16 of the Thai Arbitration Act (2002) to support an arbitration seated outside of Thailand. Requesting Interim Measures Section 16 provides that a party to an arbitration agreement may request that the court impose interim measures, either before or during arbitral proceedings. If the court determines that it would have been able to impose such measures had the proceedings been conducted in court, it may proceed as requested. Notably, Section 16 does not limit its application to arbitrations seated in Thailand. It simply refers to “a party to an arbitration agreement,” which arguably includes both domestic and international arbitrations. Further, it allows for applications even before arbitration is commenced, provided that the arbitration is initiated within thirty days from the issuance of the order (or other period the court prescribes). A Hypothetical Scenario Consider the following scenario: Company A, incorporated in the Netherlands, and Company B, incorporated in the Cayman Islands, have entered into a contract containing a clause requiring arbitration at the Singapore International Arbitration Center (SIAC). A dispute arises, and Company A commences arbitration at SIAC. Company B holds significant assets in Thailand, such as bank accounts or real estate. Concerned that Company B might dispose of its assets before an award is rendered, Company A applies to the Thai court seeking a freezing order over those assets. Can the Thai court issue such an interim measure? The answer is not straightforward. Thai law is silent regarding whether Section 16 applies to arbitrations seated outside Thailand, leaving the door open for argument. Some academic sources suggest that
Read More
June 25, 2025
In Thailand, in-court business rehabilitation is a legal proceeding that enhances a debtor’s chance to restructure business operations for corporate debtors who are unable to repay their debts. The purpose of this proceeding is to allow the debtor to continue operating the business and generate income to repay creditors. The amounts that creditors receive in the rehabilitation proceeding are greater than the amounts creditors would receive if the debtor went bankrupt. The law is not designed to allow debtors or creditors to use the business rehabilitation process in bad faith for their benefit or to defraud another party. Accordingly, the Business Rehabilitation Law, which is included in the Thai Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483 (1940), provides criminal liability for actions taken before or during the process. This article addresses the key points regarding criminal liability for safeguarding debtors and creditors in business rehabilitation proceedings from any parties who act in bad faith. Criminal Liability in Business Rehabilitation The following provisions establish the framework for criminal liability in business rehabilitation cases, ensuring that all parties act with integrity throughout the process. The Bankruptcy Act of Thailand B.E. 2483 (1940) provides the relevant provisions regarding the business rehabilitation process. Additionally, if a company debtor or its authorized directors are found to have committed fraud or malfeasance under the Bankruptcy Act, they can also be held criminally liable under the Penal Code or related criminal statutes. The rehabilitation process aims to help a business recover financially under the supervision of the court. When the court approves the rehabilitation plan, the court appoints a business rehabilitation plan administrator to manage and implement the process. However, if it is discovered that the debtor, its executives, or even the plan administrator engaged in illegal activities prior to or during the rehabilitation process—such as tax evasion, embezzlement,
Read More
June 13, 2025
In today’s digital age, cyberattacks have become a real threat to organizations worldwide. These attacks can range from phishing and malware to ransomware and distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks. As the frequency and sophistication of these attacks increase, so does the importance of cybersecurity compliance. In the corporate world, compliance refers to the process of ensuring that a company and its employees adhere to all relevant laws, regulations, standards, and ethical practices—but it should not stop there. Compliance should also encompass asset recovery and disciplinary measures, which can both help organizations address incidents effectively and promote good governance. Cyberattacks are malicious attempts to access or damage a computer system or network, often carried out for financial gain, for political activism, or simply to cause disruption. For instance, a successful attack might involve an attacker creating an email address that closely resembles a legitimate one, perhaps by changing only one or two characters. That email address is then inserted into an existing conversation thread, making it appear as if the user with this email address was already part of the discussion. This tactic can easily deceive a recipient into believing the email was sent from a trusted source, thereby leading them to click on malicious links, provide sensitive information, or even make payments in accordance with the attacker’s request or instructions. Phishing attacks like these are particularly dangerous and can have a serious impact on the ongoing business of a corporation because they exploit the trust and familiarity established in the original email chain. Effective Mitigation Approaches Mechanisms for addressing the aftermath of a crisis provide important recourse to affected organizations, but effective compliance mechanisms can minimize the risk of such crises ever occurring. Companies should therefore prioritize preventative measures and implementation of effective crisis management schemes. Various legal
Read More
June 11, 2025
Thailand’s tax dispute resolution framework has undergone a significant transformation with the enactment of the Act Establishing the Tax Court and the Procedure for Tax Cases (No. 3) B.E. 2568. Published in the Government Gazette on May 27, 2025, the amended act will come into force on November 24, 2025, which is 180 days after its publication. The amended act marks a pivotal shift in the jurisdiction and procedures of the Tax Court, most notably by empowering it to adjudicate certain criminal tax cases for the first time. Background and Rationale The Tax Court was originally established in 1985 as a specialized forum to handle complex tax disputes, including those related to revenue, customs, and excise taxes. The creation of the Tax Court recognized the need for judicial expertise in tax law, given its technical and specialized nature. The latest amendment is designed to address procedural inefficiencies, modernize court processes, and align Thailand’s tax litigation system with international standards. The reform demonstrates Thailand’s commitment to enhancing the efficiency, transparency, and fairness of its tax dispute resolution mechanisms. Key Amendments and Provisions Six of the key changes in the amendment are highlighted below. Expansion of jurisdiction to criminal tax cases. The most significant change is the extension of the Tax Court’s jurisdiction to include criminal offenses under the Revenue Code, customs law, excise tax law, and other tax-related laws that may be specified by royal decree. New sections in the act explicitly grant the Tax Court authority to hear and decide criminal tax cases, so individuals and entities accused of criminal tax evasion or other tax-related crimes will now have their cases heard by judges with specialized tax expertise. The law also clarifies the Tax Court’s jurisdiction when a single act constitutes multiple offenses (some tax-related, some not) or when
Read More