Tammi

Well... finally stopvt7 got wise and decided to stop posting here, as he states on his blog.

The real reason will be he knows his chances of winning the case are gone, the reason he gives is that he is being censored on this site.

I think that the moderators here have been very patient with both sides of the VT7-posters,

and like to believe stopvt7 is running with his tail between his legs.

Don't be silly. VT7 has been advised many times by sensible people to stop posting here.

My advice is that you should stay well clear of all so called financial advisors. Last one I had lost over 50,000 pounds for me. Learn to look after your own money, that's what I did and haven't lost a penny since. But if you do go with a financial advisor do notgive him discretionary powers - you look at his suggestions every which way before giving the go ahead.

A little while ago I was in contact with someone I had met as a young lad many years ago. Due to various circumstances he had not been able to finish his education so - you've guessed it - he became a financial advisor!

Thanks for the positive reply Lazy. Some good points there. I will offer some of these ideas to the committee and hopefully something constructive will come of it. I am offshore working at the minute but have had some info regarding the situation. The condo management seem to have pin pointed the problem to the rubbish shafts and are taking steps to clean these up and seal them off. Mobile bins are being placed outside. Its not too much of a problem for me as I live on the first floor, but I have to feel for the poor folk on the higher floors. If it eradicates the rats im sure there wont be too many complaints.

In response to Pushits comments. I am in complete agreement, condo committees are a pain. Hopefully before the end of the year I will have my own house and no one breathing down my neck saying I cant do this and I cant do that. I want to kill my own rats.

Off topic a little but is there anyone else in agreement that the cost for condo maintenance per year is way above the average in Europe, I am currently forking out 38,000 Baht, this has got to be bad for your health (back on topic)

Anyway many thanks for all the responses

Re Maintenance: In Europe I am paying eqivalent to 33,000 for 54 sq metres. In Thailand I am paying 48,000 for a lot more space and swimming pools and tennis courts, etc, etc.

Re Rats: Had the same problem where I stay. I inspected every nook and cranny of building and grounds and found garbage everywhere. It took one year to get it removed. We have garbage chutes down to garbage room. Room was absolutely filthy with brokenand unlidded bins. I complained but nothing was done so I cleaned it myself. Of course Manager and Management were angry (I don't know why!) and told me I wasn't allowed in garbage room. I said I would continue to clean it. But didn't need to as Management did start doing its work and saw that staff cleaned it. Condo 'engineers' also put down that sticky stuff and caught many rats. Also drains are now regularly inspected. Also it was useful to get a group of farangs together who were also willing to sign joint complaints and suggestions and take to Manager and Committee.

Best of luck!

Still flogging the same old dead horse I see StopVT7. Don't know how many times we have to remind people, but I'll go as many as you keep posting and highlighting things out of context, but you missed that word "IF" after therefore. You have no Supreme Court support, and I would think that even your supporters should have jumped ship by now. But we'll wait and see.

Yes, it really is quite horrendous how you have handled this campaign, but fortunately we see through it all. How many times now have our side caught you out on the whole tampering with the evidence thing?

Maybe that is why you cannot find any real support from the courts, and are only finding support from those who are fundamentally against the idea of beachside development and/or the VT empire anyhow?

Exactly. We will wait and see.

StopVT7 and supporters there is no need to reply to the above by jpm76. Thre is nothing he and other pro VT7 people would like better than that this topic be closed down.

]There have been many rumors swirling around the Pattya-Jomtien property market. Among them:

A developer has recently sold a choice piece of land near Dong Tarn Beach on which he was going to build a condo.

Another developer has run out of funds and a very large condo tower is not going to be built.

Can anyone comment?

I heard both these rumors about 3 weeks ago and my gut feeling is that they probably have substance.

MSL and CCL cannot be at the same place.

Lets use a bit of logic.

If mean sea level is half way between the high water mark and the low water mark, this distance is going to differ all along the beach, as it depends on the slope of the beach. The shallower the slope, the greater the difference between high and low water, so, the MSL moves seawards.

MSL could be very different 50 metres along the beach. Why would anybody in their right mind use the MSL as CCL. The MSL will meander right along the length of the beach.

I think the principle of measurement is very important.

As you allude to, depending on whether you measure perpendicular to the building, parallel to the sea, or along the ground , you get different results.

Your second point would be correct if you measured along the ground.

However you have overlooked that if MSL meandered like this, then the ghost CCL would also meander like this, as it would always be 100m out to sea from it per Thaibobs map!!

Thats why the measurement technique is important to right minds.

Also practically, you can get at MSL, but not to the ghost CCL, to do the issue 9 stated measuring.

Today, I consulted with a nautical expert and it is his opinion that the measurement should be from the mean high water spring tides. If any of you would like me to explain this further please let me know. But you can 'google' it.

Also, new additions such as the Rabbit Resort, the Avalon Resort and VT5. (By the way Deborah and her husband (Rabbit Resort owners) told me could have built a high-rise condo on their land but obviously did not choose to do so.)

My understanding of my conversation with Deborah and Paisin was that they would have built hi-rise at 200 metres back from sea on same line as Jomthien Condotel but could not get access from Tappraya Road and therefore had to go for the very attractive low-rise resort they have now and use buggies to transport customers along Dongtan Beach pathway. (Later on they bought property inside Jomthien Condotel compound and knocked down part of the wall between the Condotel and Rabbit and now use Jomthien Condotel road for access and parking)

StopVT7 is a guest in Thailand and should act like one.

And how do you think a 'guest' in Thailand should act?

Stop VT7 is, I think, protected by Thai Law just as Thais are protected by UK/American/Canadian/French/etc/etc laws when they are in those countries.

Why don't VT7 investors go get themselves a lawyer who can inform them and keep them informed - will give us all a rest from unnecessary posts by both VT7 investors and StopVT7.

Just picked this up on a related thread on condo act amendments. There is to be a seminar on the repercussions and meanings of the new amendments. Should be useful as, amongst other experts, reps from Tillek & Gibbons law firm will be there to speak.

Venue: Novotel Hotel (Siam), Bangkok

Date: Aug. 20

Time: 09:00 - 17:00

Also, ZZZ, the owners were NOT informed they were funding the case until an announcement at a gen. mtg. that maintenance funds were being used for this purpose. They were not asked until this year's AGM, where a second call meeting carried the vote. At that time, whoever was present or had proxied was able to pass the funding. Not the majority of co-owners. If it hadn't been done that way, there would be no resistance to VT7 at all, so there are some who think it was a good thing. But not kosher.

2nd called AGMs have never been kosher. But now we have a new condo act which specifically says that quorum is not required at 2nd called meeting. So one person can attend and speak to himself and pass resolutions - not that co-owner resolutions are allowed by many committees and if co-owners do manage to pass a resolution the committee will just ignore it if it doesn't suit them.

So, stopvt7, when can we expect the final decision? Is there any planning beyond the numerous copy/paste-art in this thread?

It seems to me that there is no progress at all (except of course by the VT7-workers) and you fill your time with re-re-repeating

all your re-re-repeats.

Are you able to bring some news or will it be the old song for the next few months?

There must be some kind of schedule, right?

There will be re-re-re-repeating until anti-stopVT7 stop posting. Why do you bother? The case is with the Courts and they will make decision.

<br />

To dismantle VT7 would not be very expensive, two weeks with a wrecking crew and any trace of the construction would be gone.

<br />Really? Two weeks?<br /><br />A wrecking ball is fine for knocking down houses, but, not a multi-storey building. Would you like to operate the wrecking-ball with the danger of being buried in rubble?<br /><br />How many truck loads of rubble? Then it's got to be taken somewhere. Lots of man-power lots of machines.<br />It will not be cheap and it will be a lengthy process.<br /><br />But, why would VT7 do it? I've already explained that it makes financial sense for VT7 to appeal, if they can't, they'll duck and dive, just like the owners of the 101 businesses on Walking street.<br />Better yet, declare bancruptcy and walk away.<br /><br />Keep wearing the rosy-tinted glasses, you're going to need them if stopVT7 win (which they won't).<br />

<br /><br /><br />

I have seen wrecking balls operate in Thailand -- to knock down multi-story buildings. I have never seen a wrecking ball take down a house. As far as I know, only a few people have been buried in the rubble.

I would think that the number of truck loads of rubble would roughly equal the number of truckloads of cement they used to build up the structure.

Perhaps the rubble can be taken to the Thai-Cambodian border where it can be used for fortification.

There is no appeal from the Supreme Administrative Court. That is why it is called Supreme.

As I said previously, declaring bankruptcy is an option only if View Talay wants to fold its cereal boxes and never again build another ugly white tower. Even rosy-tinted-glasses-wearing farangs such as you would think twice about throwing hard-earned cash at a developer who declares bankruptcy. Think of all the VT7 investors who would be marching on City Hall (Just like good old Stop VT7) to protest. It would be great copy for the Bangkok papers, and, maybe, the international media.

Probably very many fewer people have been buried in wreacking ball rubble than have fallen off hi-rises under construction that have not followed safety rules.

Rubble usually gets buried in areas designed for gardens. Small projects just remove it and dump at roadsides.

BTW, have heard that land at Jomthien Condotel on which Regatta was to be built has been sold to another developer. Rumor or fact??

As I've said before, if stopVT7 wins the case, VT7 will promptly announce banckruptcy, then sue Pattaya City for wrongfully issuing a building permit. VT7 hasn't done anything wrong, the case is about Pattaya City issuing a building permit illegally.

Pattaya City doesn't have the money to pay for dismantling and hauling away VT7, or, reimbursing VT7 for the construction costs. The court case will be strung out for years and years as VT7 slowly rots away.

--The Nation 2007-03-27

Haines alleged View Talay 7 was illegal because it is more than 14 metres in height and within 200 metres of the sea. Buildings of this height are prohibited within 200 metres of the shore by planning law, he said. Pattaya Mayor Niran Wattana-sartsathorn said the city correctly issued building permission. "I'm not worried that some foreigners are suing the city in the Administrative Court because we are just an agent to mediate this problem. "If the foreigners succeed it will be a precedent for others and maybe developers will think before getting into problems like this,"

Its okay I dont see that as being rude. The main thing that I have learned here on TV is that there is never any reasoning to be had with hardcore cynics.

I'll just say that in the real world these committees are comprised of your fellow co-owners who must stand for election every year. If you own a condo there you can stand for election too.

As a co-owner at an AGM you would also be welcome to scrutinize the audited accounts of the condominium. If they are collecting surplus CAM fees, (surplus meaning after all expenses and sinking fund contributions), question them, challenge them, propose a resolution to reduce CAM fees at the AGM.

The goal of these Juristics should be run to the building at the highest possible standards at the lowest possible expense. If they don't, and you never challenge them, then you are partly to blame.

I think the new Act says that the monthly accounting has to be posted on the bulletin board within 15 days of month end and must remain on the board for 15 days. Any and all co-owners have the right to inspect the accounting records.

At this condo the accounting was posted but after the 15 days and consists of a few generalised lines. Not good enough!!! And there is no information on where OUR money is and what interest it is earning.

I advise that if co-owners believe that condo is not being well managed that they should get in touch with all the rest of co-owners asking if they would like to form an Interest Group. I have heard that Grand Condo did this, held meetings, and made written reports to Management. It wasn't liked by management but results were got and I now hear that GC is much better looked after.

Yes it is included. Nonpayment is never the best recourse for dispute resolution, as you will not be permitted to vote at AGM / EGM's, you can also be prohibited from using common areas and facilities.

The goal of these Juristics should be run to the building at the highest possible standards at the lowest possible expense. If they don't, and you never challenge them, then you are partly to blame.

Thanks for info. Which version of the condo act did you see that has the no-voting statement?

The first response above does not include it and I still don't understand why it is not in ALL of the English translations I have seen.

Is it possible that there are two thai versions of the law? One with it and one without it.

What you say makes sense but sorry that you are not aware of reality.

Many developers run condominiums as they want and for their own benefit.

And it is extremely difficult to do anything about it.

Hence many complaints eventually generate changes in the regulations.

The changes are good but how do you get them implemented if the manager is not interested? The fines are nowhere near enough to bother unscrupulous managers / developers who could well be taking six figure sums each year.

Who is going to decide and charge the fines? The land office reps? H..mm. TIT.

How can you do anything about the committee if you cannot have a vote?

How can you judge the accounts when information needed is not provided?

To put you in the picture at our condo

The manager is the wife of the original developer and the committee has been their selected persons for a very long time. The manager does as she wants with disregard for the co-owners rights and the law.

In the last few years our condo has gone from 30% foreign ownership to the maximum 49% so we have gained enough strength to try to improve things. But this takes a hel_l of a lot of effort.

We know a lot of thai owners have not paid dues. Despite our requests the manager has still not yet provided a list of overdue accounts, since first requesting almost two years ago. AND the request was through the committee (we managed to get one farang on the committee then).

Yet the manager produces her own list to bar people from voting recently. Many farang???? Could it be a case of when and who she wants? We don't know and cant find out. The developer is not included and still has his votes yet we don't know if he is paying anything for his units. She barred a large unit area holder who has a very well documented dispute.

Very good isn't it that the manager can do and sign off anything she wants to, such as clearance of outstanding dues without any accountability.

Excellent that nobody can check!

We had no AGM last year despite repeated requests the manager hold it, and no accounts.

We submitted the 25% request for a EGM early this year and the manager told us it would be held then cancelled it. She did not comply with it.

Because she has persistently and deliberately refused to comply with the law many co-owners don't believe they should pay the money to her until she does comply with legal obligations, has the vote for the new committee and we resolve the issue over who are not paying. Other courses of action all have no effect.

Why should we all pay if many people do not and nothing is done about it?

Also, DO YOU give money to people who donot want to account for it??

She held an agm a few months ago and refused to have a vote for new committee, despite co-owners in the majority demanding it!!

She arranged for another meeting then cancelled it.

Finally after several months of us trying to get a vote for a new committee she recently held the meeting with this on the agenda. But the meeting had to be closed because there were too many disputes over her application of the new law.

Since when is a new law retrospective?? Is that how things work here in Thailand?

Should the six months not be from the date of the new law??

Are there any legal eagles out there who can clarify please.

Also I still have to try and establish without doubt that the non-voting statement is in 18/1.

We have a second meeting to vote again shortly so we would welcome any further comments.

Regards

Jojothai

Why don't you take to court? Jomthien Condotel did and won - got rid of of the management committee.

First you might want to read the new Condo Act and take all the infringements you can find to the Competent Officer at the Land Office as advised in the new Condo Act. If he can't/won't help then go to court.

I believe the new condo Act says that co-owners can be on committee for 2 years and may only be re-elected if nobody else wants to stand. It doesn't matter how many votes the incumbent may get - if he has done 2 years he is out if somebody else wants the position.

And remember that committee members are no longer allowed to hold proxy votes.

Lalana, it is not possible to stop some people from disagreeing with StopVT7 group and writing screeds on this topic to which StopVT7 and supporters feel they have to respond.

The anti-StopVT7 people are upset that they may lose out on investments they have made on VT7 and very much want to read the Law differently. They don't seem to realize that however many posts they make it is now up to the Supreme Admin Court to decide what the intent of the Law is and maybe that will happen soon or it may happen years from now when VT7 is occupied and the residents are wishing they hadn't bought into another cereal box (modified) in an increasingly built-up area - I walk the beach from time to time and see only very grumpy looking farangs and Thais and no beauty.

And, of course, there are all the problems of condo living in Thailand that, in spite of best efforts by a few people to get condo owners interested in Condo Law and Regulations, will continue until the building(s) get into a state that even the most disinterested cannot ignore. It could be that many VT investors will rent out their units and that brings me to another thought which is how much tax does the Thai government levy on income from rental properties?

Another worry to VT7 investors is the fall in property prices in the past few months. According to HSBC, last month UK house prices fell by 1.7%, more than double June's 0.8%, resulting in an annual decline of 8.1%, the largest since records began in 1991.

--The Nation 2007-03-27

Haines alleged View Talay 7 was illegal because it is more than 14 metres in height and within 200 metres of the sea. Buildings of this height are prohibited within 200 metres of the shore by planning law, he said. Pattaya Mayor Niran Wattana-sartsathorn said the city correctly issued building permission. "I'm not worried that some foreigners are suing the city in the Administrative Court because we are just an agent to mediate this problem. "If the foreigners succeed it will be a precedent for others and maybe developers will think before getting into problems like this,"

I advocate that interested parties take VT5 to court now. And the ex-mayor's comments above seem to suggest that VT7 (and VT5) are outside the Law.

Both Tammi and stopVT7 don't seem to understand the word "If"

You, FredKroket, are unable to analyse the ex-mayor's statement. He stated that maybe developers will think before asking for permits to build hi-rises within the 200 metre zone; that developers who do not read and understand the Law will have the problem of being taken to court; that we await the decision of the court to see IF the StopVT7 group will prevail or VT7.

Hopefully, this clears things up for you?

As I've said before but will say again: There's really no need for you all, including StopVT7, to keep writing up your opinions. We have heard it all and it is with the Court and the lawyers. Justice will prevail. Relax.

You don't seem to "get it", ThaiBob. AsiaLawWorks, the attorney for the Stop VT7 group, submitted a brief to the Rayong court that agreed with the so-called "expert" witness hired by the defendants -- that is, City Hall and the View Talay developer. This was contrary to what they told their clients they would do.

Now, what would motivate a lawyer to betray the interests of his client? Let's see. . .

Perhaps Amnat and Markus deeply and sincerely believed that the "expert" witness was correct. Could that be it?

Or maybe Amnat and Markus want to see a beautiful building like View Talay 7 grace Dongtarn beach, their clients be damned. Could that be it?

Another possible conclusion is that they were "persuaded" -- either by carrot or stick -- to deceive their clients and throw the case to their opponents. This is only a possiblity, I grant, but, here in Thailand, it is, at the very least, conceivable. Khun Amnat's later election to the City Council is certainly an interesting coincidence, don't you agree?

Now . . . the Supreme Administrative Court was founded by the Monarch to counter corruption. That would include bribery, intimidation, and a host of other tactics used to get around the law. If, by some outside chance, it were to become obvious to the judges that some of those tactics were used to secure the building permit for VT7, then it would be incumbant upon the court to abrogate the permit and force the developer to obey the legal limits stated in Issue 9.

In case you missed it, ThaiBob, what I am saying is that the very argument you use, that AsiaLawWorks agreed with City Hall, is a sign that something is rotten. Let us hope that the stench makes its way to Bangkok.

I think that Markus didn't know what was going on.

Wiresok,

I tried to answer your questions or "flaws" using arguments from stopVT7's own lawyers but you are unconvinced. That's Ok because nobody has to convince you but more importantly the stopVT7 arguments did not convince the Courts either. I see nothing in the stopVt7 case to overturn Issue 9 and the way it has been interpreted for about the last 30 years.

In an earlier post (#1226) you said you were a VT5 owner. Frankly, your position on VT7 seems a little "strange" considering there are some posters (Tammi) that advocate demolishing VT5 if stopVT7 wins his case. I personally feel the Avalon Resort and VT5 were nice additions to Dongtarn Beach and would not refer to your unit as you do as a "low cost rental".

--The Nation 2007-03-27

Haines alleged View Talay 7 was illegal because it is more than 14 metres in height and within 200 metres of the sea. Buildings of this height are prohibited within 200 metres of the shore by planning law, he said. Pattaya Mayor Niran Wattana-sartsathorn said the city correctly issued building permission. "I'm not worried that some foreigners are suing the city in the Administrative Court because we are just an agent to mediate this problem. "If the foreigners succeed it will be a precedent for others and maybe developers will think before getting into problems like this,"

I advocate that interested parties take VT5 to court now. And the ex-mayor's comments above seem to suggest that VT7 (and VT5) are outside the Law.

From the archives:

--The Nation 2007-03-27

Haines alleged View Talay 7 was illegal because it is more than 14 metres in height and within 200 metres of the sea. Buildings of this height are prohibited within 200 metres of the shore by planning law, he said. Pattaya Mayor Niran Wattana-sartsathorn said the city correctly issued building permission. "I'm not worried that some foreigners are suing the city in the Administrative Court because we are just an agent to mediate this problem. "If the foreigners succeed it will be a precedent for others and maybe developers will think before getting into problems like this," Niran added. The court will hold a preliminary hearing tomorrow.

I agree with Thaiman, Pattaya is what it is,if you dontlike it leave, the Thais have always been good at creating zones, look at Bangkok a few areas where everything was on view and accepted,a few Police to run it and benefit from it, but close it down earlier closing times,less sex and what happens it creeps into every back street. Pattaya is where all the shit collects in one place

You obviously don't know Pattaya. I personally know many super kind and wonderful people both Thai and foreign and I am sure there are probably hundreds of thousands more.

I don't understand why people are still writing so much about this topic - for the most part far too long diatribes that probably very few bother to read.

The case is with the Court and it and the Laws of Thailand will decide who is right and who is wrong.

But I do appreciate StopVT7 bringing to our attention anything new and germane to the topic.

VT7 may well be built well before any solution is found, and the solution will take into account that VT7 is already built.

Apparently there is a Law that buildings can be taken down within 5 years of being built. That information came from a lawyer. So those people interested in getting their rights under Thai Law (Be it enacted by the King, by and with the advice and consent of the National Legislative Body in the capacity of the National Assembly, as follows:" ) just have to keep on going for it.

OhdLover, please don't be ridiculous. Obviously StopVT7 is not a native English speaker. If I jumped on all the spelling mistakes by native English speakers on this forum I would do nothing else all day. So please can it. The main thing is that the sense is there in what StopVT7 writes.

Tammi, I believe stopVT7 is a retired American from Southern California. I am from California too, but the school I went to taught English grammar and spelling. There are many tools on the Internet and simple software applications (MS Word) to help people with grammar and spelling. Obviously, stopVT7 just doesn't care. Personally I think it is a reflection on him and his case.

You are being ridiculous again. StopTV7 may be a retired American and you say should be able to construct sentences and spell. We all know that everyone's circumstances are different and that there are good schools and bad schools. And often it doesn't matter how rich some people are and how good the school is some people just cannot get to grips with the written English language. I am sure that if I had the time to do the research I would find many influential and educated people in that category. George Bush?

Maybe stopVT7 cares, maybe he doesn't. He is to be admired for not letting his 'failing' stop him from communicating with us. Personally I like his determination.

Perhaps you could ask ThaiVisa to include a spell and sentence construction tool since the failing seems to exasperate you so much.