
CRUNCHER
-
Posts
992 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by CRUNCHER
-
-
Golden Tulip was being developed by the same people that messed up Waterfront.
The new developers are the same people behind Nova Group, so the is a good likelihood it will be finished to a good standard.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, newnative said:I don't have any ties to the developer and I am not a Waterfront buyer. The case, however, has interested me; hence my asking if anybody had any updates. Plus, I have to look at the unfinished hulk every day. I think it's important to remember that construction was originally halted not due to any compliance issues but, instead, and only, because of very vocal demonstrations and online condemnation regarding the view-blocking height of the project. The bad publicity, and only the bad publicity, forced City Hall to stop construction. From the Pattaya Mail, August 20, 2014:
'Pattaya officials have halted construction of a 53-story condominium and hotel project at Bali Hai Pier that sparked an Internet firestorm after photos showing the tower obstructing a classic Pattaya viewpoint went viral online. Mayor Itthiphol Kunplome stated that the project – first launched in 2004 – has continually followed correct and fully transparent legal processes and he urged anyone alleging that shortcuts were taken to investigate the various hearings and reports themselves.'
So, at the time construction was halted, the project was deemed to be fully compliant and had followed all procedures correctly. It had EIA approval and, according to City Hall, was not being built too close to the water or too tall. (Although City Hall did say that it had initially opposed the height of the building but was overruled.) Which begs the question as to how it could be shut down if City Hall thought it was doing everything properly and legally.
Having shut it down, City Hall now had to come up with a reason for the construction halt--and this after very publically saying that everything was hunky-dory with the project. And, thus, we get a shifting list of non-compliance issues.
From the news stories of the time, first, it was something to do with the elevators being in the wrong spot and then it was something to do with the emergency staircases. The latest I saw on the Magna Carta website seems to involve a problem with a corner of the low-rise building encroaching on public land and the number of car parking spaces. Several massive, new projects come to mind that seem to have quietly flown under the radar with no parking garages and a very inadequate number of surface parking spaces, resulting in many of the cars having to park out on the street. (But, no noisy protests.)
At the time of the construction halt, one official noted, according to the Pattaya Mail, that if public agencies had approved the project, even knowing that it blocked scenery, then the public agencies should be at fault rather than the developer. This radical idea that some public agencies might bear some responsibility seems to have fallen by the wayside. (And, never mind that, apparently, no public agencies checked on such a prominent project from time to time while it was being built to see if the building specs. were being followed.)
Had the developer been a large, publically-traded, Bangkok construction company such as Lumpini or Sansiri, a solution likely would have been ironed out years ago. Instead, we have an unfinished, unsightly skeleton standing abandoned year after year--with that forlorn, never-moving crane at the top.
There appears to be plenty of fault to go around on all sides. Was Pattaya gung-ho for the project (until the bad publicity) as part of its Bali Hai redevelopment? Seems so. Did EIA approve the project on that site, with substantially that design and height? Seems so. Was the project built 'substantially different' than specified? By how most people would define substantial, seems not. Was the developer non-compliant on some of the construction specs? Seems so.
This being Thailand, I suspect there are few projects that have completely complied with all aspects of their EIA approved designs. As yet another day goes by my only wish is that someone in power has the cojones to either order it finished, with compliance changes, or order it torn down.
A very interesting post with some highly relevant points raised. I agree with just about everything you say.
On the question of buildings flying under the radar and car parks, there is a mall on the beachfront that has an underground car park. This, I am reliably informed, is unlawful for beach front properties because of the liability to flooding. This building has not only been allowed to be finished, but is operational. How did that happen? Further, it has an unlicensed beer bar on its frontage which caused annoyance to nearby residence which authorities refuse to deal with.
Ah what it is to have connections!!!!
And if rumors are true it is "connections" that are preventing City Hall from giving the go ahead to continue construction and why City Hall are being so obdurate. Allegedly there are influential people who want the project stopped and City Hall are piggy in the middle. I was told that City Hall were upset when the developer filed for bankruptcy protection. They had hoped the project would quietly slip into bankruptcy and get them off the hook.
I agree. Waterfront should be finished or demolished. If the latter who is going to do it and who is going to pay. This will be difficult and cost a fortune. City Hall have problems demolishing a small hotel in Soi VC!! If not finished the carcass will be there in 20 years, right next to the "PATTAYA" sign.
-
5
-
1
-
-
How they going to demolish Waterfront - 50 stories when they can't get 13 stories down????
-
Its a free world. If you want to live life in a fish tank then FB is for you.
It is not just the loss of privacy that frightens me; it is that I will never know exactly who has got exactly what information about me. Using Google is bad enough, but for me FB is a step too far - much too far.
-
If you have been the victim of identity theft you should also consider other things e.g. credit cards, banks etc. The next thing is you will have debt collectors chasing you.
-
Thanks teddog. I'll check them out
-
Andy's car wash on Third Road has closed down. Can anyone recommend a good car wash in North Pattaya?
Thanks
-
There but for the grace of God go I. A few people on this thread need to show a bit more sympathy.
I am afraid I can't provide a magic solution, but can anyone supply this guy with an Immigration e-mail address. It probably won't completely solve the problem, but he could start the ball rolling and save some time when comes back.
Good luck OP.
-
1 hour ago, Grusa said:
If the book does not show movement in the account - any movement will do - it is an "inactive account" and they will reject it: it has happened to me. They want to see a movement in the three days preceding the application.
This has been so for at least 1 1/2 years! ( my last two renewals). One week ahead was not good enough!
Don't know why you have a problem. I have been doing it for years with no movement; the last one 2 months ago.
-
6 minutes ago, Grusa said:
You could still have a problem, because at Jomtien at least, they want to see it is an "active account". This means they want to see movement in the account in the three days preceding the application! If you do nothing, account invalid, go away. If you take money out, not enough money, go away. So, you need to put a few thousand in, immediately before you get your book made up and the bank letter printed, not more than three days before you apply. Might be difficult if it's a holiday weekend, you have no margins for error!
Imm might be kind and work on the basis of working days, not calander days. All depends on how much or how little they like the look of you, so dress up well, and on which side of whose bed the officer got up that morning........
For Jomtien no need to put money in. When you get your letter from the bank they will update your passbook. Never had a problem.
-
50 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:
Which means he only had 799,750 baht in the bank on the date he applied for the extension. Why would anybody only have exactly 800k baht in the bank.
I usually put my "visa money" on fixed deposit at least 3 months before the renewal date. It is kept separate from all my other banking.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
What is this about a medical certificate? I have never needed one at Jomtien. Is this a new requirement?
-
9
-
5 minutes ago, rkidlad said:
And who are the people most likely to have 20k in cash in nice new crisp 1000 baht notes? The very people they're trying to get rid of.
Well, until they change the rules again.
Well if they have got the cash they are less likely to have a problem.
Rule have not changed; only enforcement. Enforcement powers are a tool which can be used if necessary. Authorities have discretion as to when to use them. Clearly immigration have decided it is time to deal with people who break or circumvent Thai laws.
No problem there.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, billd766 said:
I was responding to your post which is misleading .
It doesn't really matter in this case because the thread is NOT about 3, 6 or 9 month METV, NOR is it about married or retirement extensions, but about people who are not really tourists using 30 day entries and 30 day tourists visas for a lot of entries to Thailand per year. They are the ones complaining about having to show 20,000 thb on entry to Thailand.
Well said sir!
There is too much obfuscation in this thread. People do not get their pockets picked because they are carrying (so called) large amounts of cash. They get their pockets picked because they do not take sensible precautions. These people make airports a pick pockets paradise and this is nothing to do with Thai Immigration.
Why don't they target bus loads of Chinese tourists? Because immigration know they are tourists and not people trying to live (and perhaps work) in Thailand full time.
The bits about taxi drivers really lost me.
Every country has its own laws and customs. You don't have to like them, but if you live there obey and follow.
-
1
-
-
Wait until they try to demolish Waterfront.
-
Last year, when traveling in Europe, my credit card got scammed and I had to cancel it. Because I was traveling it took over a week to replace. Without a wad of cash I would have been in real trouble, not the least paying for hotels.
I make good use of my credit card, but when acting the tourist it makes sense to have some cash just in case.
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, AsianAtHeart said:
This might seem easy to say, and perhaps you are just simplistic enough to believe in such a vain pipe dream as you describe. The facts are often different. Just as no two humans are alike, no two circumstances are identical either. There are not enough visa categories to encompass all of the possibilities. Consider, for a moment, the foreigner living and working in Laos. He/she has a valid one year work permit/visa to stay in Laos and would like to cross the border regularly to access some much-need supplies that are unavailable or high-priced in Laos. What visa type should he or she apply for? Non-immigrant? Business? …..tourist visa perhaps? But it's not really a genuine tourist situation, is it? So, the system has to be played--and tourist visa it is. This means heaps of tourist visas in the passport--just the kind that you might assume to be a "red flag." Of course, if Thailand doesn't want shoppers or their money . . . .
I know a few people who do this (although not Laos). Because they work in another country there is a limit to the number of visits and the length of such visits. They are not living in Thailand; they are living elsewhere. Visa exempt entry is appropriate to their stay.
In your scenario their passports would show they spend most of their time in Laos and I would guess details of work permit.
People who spend most of their time in Thailand claiming to be tourists are the targets.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
The Thai Governments position has always been that foreigners can stay in Thailand as long as they have a visa appropriate to their stay. Nothing wrong with that. Most other countries expect the same.
The problem is that too many people stay here, some times for years, using tourist visa or visa exempt entries. Whether working or not they are clearly not tourists and do not have a visa appropriate to their stay. The Thai Government has clearly had enough.
The answer is simple - get a visa appropriate to your stay in Thailand.
-
3
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
2 minutes ago, darksidedog said:Asking tourists to show they have the means to support themselves is fair enough. I have read of reports though when a person without the cash has been refused the opportunity to go to the ATM to withdraw the required monies. That is utterly wrong.
As I understand it there is no ATM air-side of immigration. If you pass immigration to get to an ATM you have in fact entered the Kingdom and the only way to remove you is deportation - at least it is not as simple as being refused entry.
Another problem in respect of producing a bank book is that it is only accurate as at the date is was last updated. Even showing a credit card only shows you have a credit card; it does not show whether you are over limit etc.
Demanding to see cash is the simple way out for immigration. Having said that I am sure there is room for some leeway in handling this situation.
-
4
-
1
-
Below is a letter sent to buyers on 2nd July. Does not seem that there is likely to be any "...developments later this month".
I have seen a few of these over the past couple of years. City Hall has no obligation to respond, but it is shame they do not in the interests of openness and transparency. Perhaps they do not have a good answer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Client
Subject: Bali Hai Limited – Waterfront Pattaya Project
Further to our communication of 08 May 2017, we write to update you on the latest developments concerning the Waterfront Pattaya Project.
Construction Permit
As previously reported, after Bali Hai’s submission lodged on 12 January 2017, Pattaya City Hall (“PCH”) further postponed its decision from the end of March 2017 to mid-May 2017. On the 1st of June 2017 Bali Hai received, with much disappointment, PCH’s reply dated 11 May 2017, notifying that the Company’s building modification application had not been approved due to incompleteness of certain information and some discrepancies. By the reply, Bali Hai is legally allowed now to file a new application for building modification permit with PCH. As you are aware, the general understanding following discussions between the Company’s professional team and PCH in 2016, was that should the Company be willing to compromise, by demolishing the top 5 floors of the building to observe the floor area limits of the approved scheme, PCH would view the new reduced floor area scheme favourably by approving the application and accommodating other minor changes. This was evidenced by the Company submitting an application for modification permit for the reduced floor area scheme, together with detailed demolition plans, an updated EIA report and all relevant plans and documents as required by law, for proceeding with the same. Many questions which were subsequently raised by PCH regarding this scheme had confirmed that this was indeed the mutual understanding.
Throughout the process, the Company complied and co-operated with all orders raised by PCH in good faith and it is disappointing to now discover that, despite PCH having twice extended the statutory deadline for its decision and despite having had many months to review Bali Hai’s submission, it chose not to inform the Company during this period at all and rejected the Company’s request for a meeting for mutual discussion.
Having reviewed PCH’s comments to the Company’s submission in PCH’s reply, many of the queries had in fact previously been responded to while some remain unclear or are minor in nature and could easily have been addressed.
Future Plans
Before the Company can submit a new application for building modification permit as instructed by PCH, and in order to ensure that such course of action will be correctly executed to PCH’s complete satisfaction, particularly in the context of the above, the Company considers it is highly essential that our representatives meet with PCH’s relevant officials to have the opportunity to discuss and clarify exactly what PCH’s comments and requirements are, to avoid any future misinterpretations.
The Company has therefore submitted the letter to PCH to formally request a meeting between the professional teams of PCH and the Company on 29 June 2017. As you may appreciate, the process for resubmission is complicated and likely to take considerable time. The Company hopes to be able to resubmit as soon as reasonably practical after the said meeting (or meetings) take place.
Rehabilitation Status
As previously reported, the court had to postpone the previous hearing due to an internal court error and the new hearing date has been scheduled on 17 July 2017 at 9.00 a.m. We will advise you of the outcome after the hearing.
As previously advised, the rehabilitation process has been embarked upon to preserve the value of the Project and enable it to survive this extraordinary crisis which it has been challenged with. The Company remains steadfast in its objective to see to it that the construction is resumed and completed so that all buyers will eventually receive their condominium unit’s title.
We remain most grateful for your continued support and patience.
Yours faithfully,
Mr. Lior Widenfeld
Authorized Director, Bali Hai Limited
-
1
-
-
Try Gulliver's on Beach Road
-
If the narrative is correct, the Thai woman started the fight. Perhaps some advice on how Thai women should behave might also be appropriate
-
Buakhaw Soi 15, Tulip Condo
in Pattaya
Posted
Taken on board by the new owners of the project.