beaufoy

It is quite a good reply only problem is I have taken said steps and the admin office have ignored my e mails, We lose some information because I do not speak thai and my thai wife does not follow my instructions, and when she receives important information from the office or other residents she fails to pass on said info to me this morning she informed me that that someone on the floor above us had the same problem and gave up waiting for the repairs hence paid for the repairs to be done himself

Well I will help you in that I suggest you should look for the identity of a regulator.......There has to be some kind of regulation.....As it stands management companies are putting some of the money which is paid for repairs into their own pockets ....if there was no regulation the management companies would put all of the repair money into their pockets

if you read the original post you should notice I did not mention the name of the condo ....I have had enough experience to know that calling a person a thief can get me in more trouble than the person will suffer by way of being a thief

If you read the original post you should notice I did not mention the name of the condo ....I have had enough experience to know that calling a person a thief can get me in more trouble than the person will suffer by way of being a thief

AHH the only person who has given a logical answer although I have answered your points in my original posting I will re-iterate. We Live in a corner apt so we have 2 or our four walls open to the elements. The wall that is the only one which comes into play in corner apts has dampness stains which would be worse if we did not use dampness catchers. Last year during the wet season we reported the matter to the CONDO admin office. They admitted liability and said the outside wall which was seeping in the dampness would be repaired as soon as the dry season arrived. The dry season did arrive and nobody came to repair the outside of our apt . We went to an annual meeting and re=iterated our complaint and was told someone would deal with the matter. We returned to the Admin office and was told " we will not repair the wall you should wait until it gets very bad and then claim on your insurance" This answers shows incredible corruption and/or incompetence....ie it has been admitted that it is an outside wall causing the problem so the structural insurance should pay and the structural insurance is paid for by the money paid to the management company. Also it is not storm damage it is damage caused by lack of investment during building and/or lack of regular maintenance We have not gone past the admin office with our complaints...That is why I wrote the original post ie to ascertain who should be contacted if the admin refuse to fix the problem

I have had experience with management companies in England, Ireland , and now in Thailand and I can assure you that a person asking other owners if they have problems with the management will get said person in more trouble than just a dampness/mould problem

give me an alternative obvious reason then we can look objectively at each reason put forward to ascertain which one has the most visibility.....now I do know that the management company lie frequently, but if you read the post that i wrote you will find some evidence which make the word obvious a good word

We own a condo near airport plaza chiangmai and last year stains started ( late in rainy season)to appear on the wallpaper at the point where the condo faces the outside wall of the condo. It is obvious that the stains are cause by lack of insulation from dampness caused by rain. We pay a large amount of money to the condo management in order to keep the condo in good condition hence we showed the dampness problems to said management. At first they admitted it was caused by rain hitting the outside wall and seeping through to our bedroom wall. They suggested we should wait until the dry season and promised they would make the required repairs. It is now at the end of the dry season and nothing has been done so we contacted them again, and this time they told us to wait until it gets worse and then make a claim on our insurance. Of course it is not storm damage problem it is lack of maintenance problem and therefore the repair should be paid for by way of the fees we pay the condo management If the condo management company refuses to repair the outside wall is there a regulator we can report them to?????

I am sure ducks are farmed here I want to know the addresses of the farms

I have duck feather pillows which are several years old and due to age and washing they have gone flat hence i want to increase the feathers in each pillow

are there duck farmers in chiangmai where i can buy duck feathers

I have problems with a thailand health insurance company. I want to start a case in the small claims court. In England the court requires the plaintiff to name a dept and/or a member of staff when lodging the case with the court. I have asked the health insurance company for details of lawyers/members of their staff who deal with legal matters, but they have ignored said requests. Therefore the only name i have is that of the sales rep who ignored my complaint letters sent to the health insurance offices in bangkok. Is it OK to name a sales rep as the recipitant of the court papers

Now coming from england and having worked as a claims negotiator I am fully aware that regulators in england would not allow a health insurance company get away with what this health insurance company has done to me in Thailand.: I applied for health insurance and the company said i would need to take a medical The medical found blood in the stool but it was examined for amount/colour/consistency and other readings which concluded the blood came from hemorrhoid's . The Doctor told me there was no need for a colonoscopy or a re-examination...so everyone was happy The insurance company then told me that they had been informed by the hospital that further investigation was required and therefore they wanted me to have a colonoscopy I told the insurance company to send me the report from the hospital which told them further investigation was required. The insurance company seemed to admit they had lied and therefore could not send papers/reports they claimed to have received I went to the hospital and received a report which stated the blood was not a problem, and there should not be a colonoscopy unless my symptoms get worse...and even if my symptoms get worse a colonoscopy should only be done if a specialist has re-examined a new stool sample and done other examinations and then decided a colonoscopy is advisable I sent said report to the insurance company who did not apologise for lying. There stance was as follows: They said that the hospital's opinion was that a colonoscopy was not required, but the hospital did not reject completely that a colonoscopy might be required in the future They also said they did not bother getting a full report because they always ask for a colonoscopy if blood is found in the stool, and said policy is independent of what the hospital advises The insurance company gave me 3 choices 1) Have a colonoscopy 2) Continue with cover but all bowel illnesses will not be covered 3) cancel the policy please give me your thoughts on the above

I have been employed in the insurance sector in England, although I was employed in motor claims, I believe the health insurance sector was able to amend the extent of cover after the joining medical examination found the insured was suffering from a condition ie the english insurance company could and did and should of added an exclusion. However, a situation then exists which falls into 3 sections 1) The insured wants to keep full cover 2) The insurance company wants to take advantage of the "found by doctor's condition' to reduce the cover as much as possible ie Hemmerrroid blood is found so all bowel problems excluded 3) The Hospital Doctors believe an adjustment in cover based on the findings of the doctor is correct Now to your second paragraph in which you say I was insured without endorsement during the first two years, in fact there was an endorsement, but the insurance company failed to inform me of said endorsement. This is the point where I have to explain the uk/usa rule " The insurance company must bring to the attention of the insured any changes which might effect the insured" In fact I will quote another rule " If evidence in each direction is equal then the court should decide in favor of the insured" Of course rules/laws are written in a way to benefit the consumers, but the law courts usually work in the opposite direction, and there is another hurdle Thai Law usually follows UK/USA law, but it might not in my case. My case is that for most of the two years I was not receiving what i had paid for ie full cover, and I was not informed that I was not receiving full cover. Hence the insurance company was in breach of contract and is obligated to refund the payments received for said period of time.......Yippee I won Now comes the problem in that the insurance company did post notification of endorsement and it was sent recorded delivery, but the receptionist signed for the letter and then lost the letter..... Now obviously the insurance company did not fullfill their obligation to bring my attention to the notice of endorsement, but i suspect they will tell the judge that they made every reasonable attempt to do so.....Then it will be up to the judge to decide and he will decide it is a 50/50 case so by way of my second rule he should find in my favor