The other members of condo committee want to fire one committee member -can they do this?

[uhuh]

Can only the AGM of the condo co-owners fire a member of the committee? 

The other members of the committee want to get rid of one co-owner who doesn't agree with their ideas how to run the place (they are trying to raise the common fees for several reasons and he does not go along). 

Today they suggested he resign, otherwise they threaten to fire him. 

Can they fire him? 

Can they make any serious trouble if he just does not resign?

Should he resign? 

[JohnC]

As a committee member of a condo I would expect each member to have a copy of the Condo Act detailing responsibilities etc so why doesn't one of the committee check the said act and find out what their duties are! 

[trogers]

Why do you need to achieve unanimous votes in your committee meetings?

 

So, you would always fire those voices in opposition to the majority?

 

Why have a committee in the first place? Just a Juristic Manager would do. 

 

And the issue on raising the common fees has to be approved by majority of the co-owners, not the committee.

Edited November 12, 2017 by trogers

[dotpoom]

"And the issue on raising the common fees has to be approved by majority of the co-owners, not the committee."

   Interesting. In 17 yrs.at my building, my approval has never been sought concerning a hike in the common fees?

[trogers]

12 minutes ago, dotpoom said:

"And the issue on raising the common fees has to be approved by majority of the co-owners, not the committee."

   Interesting. In 17 yrs.at my building, my approval has never been sought concerning a hike in the common fees?

My building of over 35 years in age had the common fees raised by 50% two years ago. It was proposed by the committee in an AGM and approved by 54% of all co-owners, not just those who attended the meeting.

 

Just for info, the building has only 80 co-owners and we get over half of them attending all our AGMs.

Edited November 13, 2017 by trogers

[KittenKong]

10 hours ago, uhuh said:

Can they fire him? 

Can they make any serious trouble if he just does not resign?

Should he resign? 

 

No. No. No.

 

A committee member is elected by co-owner vote and cannot be removed by other committee members.

[KittenKong]

1 hour ago, dotpoom said:

In 17 yrs.at my building, my approval has never been sought concerning a hike in the common fees?

 

Then your building is apparently not obeying the law. The committee and JPM have no power at all to vary the common fee. Only by co-owner vote can this be varied.

 

The committee cant even impose a one-off special assessment: that also has to be voted on by co-owners.

[uhuh]

 the other members of the committee threaten to write an anouncement that he is no longer a committee member and publish it in the elevator. 

If they do this,  what's a good way to deal with it? 

He doesn't want to resign,  but he doesn't want to enter a law suit either

 

[trogers]

7 minutes ago, uhuh said:

 the other members of the committee threaten to write an anouncement that he is no longer a committee member and publish it in the elevator. 

If they do this,  what's a good way to deal with it? 

He doesn't want to resign,  but he doesn't want to enter a law suit either

 

No need to go to court. Take that notice and report it to the Land Office as illegal dismissal.

[KittenKong]

3 minutes ago, uhuh said:

the other members of the committee threaten to write an anouncement that he is no longer a committee member and publish it in the elevator. 

If they do this,  what's a good way to deal with it? 

 

I doubt that there is any "good" way but the other committee members certainly have no power to make any such announcement or decision.

 

What does your JPM have to say about this? Or is he in bed with the rest of the committee?

 

What do other co-owners think?

 

I would be inclined to approach your local Land Office, preferably accompanied by a Thai-speaking person. Of course the Land Office may also be biased for some reason, or may simply not care.

 

[KittenKong]

10 hours ago, uhuh said:

The other members of the committee want to get rid of one co-owner who doesn't agree with their ideas how to run the place (they are trying to raise the common fees for several reasons and he does not go along). 

 

I'm curious as to why the other committee members feel that they need to remove him. All committee decisions should be made by majority vote, so a single opposing voice is irrelevant. Unless perhaps he has other supporters on the committee, in which case what do they think about this attempt to remove him?

[trogers]

34 minutes ago, KittenKong said:

 

I doubt that there is any "good" way but the other committee members certainly have no power to make any such announcement or decision.

 

What does your JPM have to say about this? Or is he in bed with the rest of the committee?

 

What do other co-owners think?

 

I would be inclined to approach your local Land Office, preferably accompanied by a Thai-speaking person. Of course the Land Office may also be biased for some reason, or may simply not care.

 

A committee member is registered as such with the Land Office after voted in by an AGM.

 

He loses his post only when his name is struck off from the registry of the Land Office. Any announcements made by the committee or JPM has no legal effect.

 

He remains a committee member should the Land Office not care nor bother with the issue.

 

And any attempt by this committee or the JPM to increase the common fees in the monthly billings can be legally ignored by co-owners, since the latter have not voted on the issue.

Edited November 13, 2017 by trogers

[KittenKong]

26 minutes ago, trogers said:

A committee member is registered as such with the Land Office after voted in by an AGM.

 

He loses his post only when his name is struck off from the registry of the Land Office. Any announcements made by the committee or JPM has no legal effect.

 

He remains a committee member should the Land Office not care nor bother with the issue.

 

I'm fully aware of that and indeed I pointed it out myself.

 

My point was that if the Land Office are not interested in helping then the committee member in question will be more or less obliged to get (pay for) his own legal help, unless perhaps the JPM or some co-owners are aware of the situation and in favour of him. Hence my questions.

 

The Land Office should be the first port of call though, and hopefully they will do their job.

 

In practice of course, if the committee member is indeed on his own then it really makes no difference whether he attends meetings or votes as presumably he would always be outvoted. Hence my other question about why the other members are so keen to get rid of him.

Edited November 13, 2017 by KittenKong

[jippytum]

The committee member was elected for a two year term at the last AGM . The committee according to the poster want to increase fees .Please note 75 % of  co owners  must vote in favour  at an agm to increase the common area or maintenance  fees.It would seem the committee member has a valid opinion and cannot be dismissed by the committee for this reason .Incidentally the min. number of committee members is three and the maximum nine  and the majority vote would decide on any proposal that is legally proposed at a committee meeting . 

[CMBob]

4 hours ago, trogers said:

And the issue on raising the common fees has to be approved by majority of the co-owners, not the committee.

While slightly off topic, I don't believe that's correct.  What the Board (committee) cannot do without the approval of a the co-owners (which may not be a majority of the total owners under changing quorum rules) is to change the ratio of the expenses (i.e., the co-owners must approve a change of what percentage that a given unit has to pay).  I do believe the Board has the power to set the monthly/annual dues and assessments.

 

 

[lkn]

Section 37/3 of the Thai Condo Act lists the reasons that can be used to have a committee member resign. He would basically need to be corrupt, previously have been imprisoned, or similar.

 

Simply disagreeing with him is not a reason. If more than half the committee really wants to get rid of him, they need to summon an extraordinary general meeting and pass a resolution to remove him.

 

Likewise, as has been already said, raising the management fee is not a committee decision but an AGM decision. And normally such proposal should be followed by a budget that show why it is necessary to increase the management fee.

 

I don’t see the point in going to the Land Office because they will just confirm that he is still a committee member, regardless of what the other members say and do.

 

I also don’t think there is much sense in involving a lawyer, unless the plan is to sue the other committee members for defamation (after they post the note that he is not a committee member), but there is probably not much chance of getting anything out of such suit.

 

What I would do, if I were the committee member that opposes the management fee increase is to present my case on the next AGM and then let the co-owners decide which of the committee members they want to keep.

[lkn]

6 minutes ago, CMBob said:

While slightly off topic, I don't believe that's correct.  What the Board (committee) cannot do without the approval of a the co-owners (which may not be a majority of the total owners under changing quorum rules) is to change the ratio of the expenses (i.e., the co-owners must approve a change of what percentage that a given unit has to pay).  I do believe the Board has the power to set the monthly/annual dues and assessments.

Normally management fee is mentioned in bylaws, so changing the management fee requires changing the bylaws, which require a majority vote.

 

As for changing the ratio of expenses, this cannot be changed at all, as the Thai Condo Act makes it clear that you pay in relation to your ownership ratio. Only if units derive a special advantage, like private parking, storage room, or similar, can you charge them more than their ratio of the common expenses.

[CMBob]

10 minutes ago, lkn said:

As for changing the ratio of expenses, this cannot be changed at all, as the Thai Condo Act makes it clear that you pay in relation to your ownership ratio. Only if units derive a special advantage, like private parking, storage room, or similar, can you charge them more than their ratio of the common expenses.

Up to you...but you might want to review Section 48 (5) of the Condominium Act which expressly covers the issue.

[bkkdriller]

We have a similar situation where one committee member will not accept a (large) majority MC decision if he has a different opinion.  We aim for unanimous decisions but that is not always possible with this particular MC member. The real problem is that he is very outspoken and will do whatever he can to obstruct and frustrate implementation of the majority vote, including lying, misrepresentations and accusation against other MC members.

Unfortunately I can not find any info in the Condo act or in our Condo bylaws (Condo rules and regulations registered with the land office) how to remove an MC member. I would think that unless there is a proven criminal act an elected MC member can only be removed in an AGM (or EGM) by majority co-owners vote. The Condo JPM should contact the land office for their advise on this matter.

[thairookie]

1 hour ago, KittenKong said:

 

I'm curious as to why the other committee members feel that they need to remove him. All committee decisions should be made by majority vote, so a single opposing voice is irrelevant. Unless perhaps he has other supporters on the committee, in which case what do they think about this attempt to remove him?

Perhaps this one odd member of the committee is incorruptible.  He has to be removed.

[trogers]

28 minutes ago, bkkdriller said:

We have a similar situation where one committee member will not accept a (large) majority MC decision if he has a different opinion.  We aim for unanimous decisions but that is not always possible with this particular MC member. The real problem is that he is very outspoken and will do whatever he can to obstruct and frustrate implementation of the majority vote, including lying, misrepresentations and accusation against other MC members.

Unfortunately I can not find any info in the Condo act or in our Condo bylaws (Condo rules and regulations registered with the land office) how to remove an MC member. I would think that unless there is a proven criminal act an elected MC member can only be removed in an AGM (or EGM) by majority co-owners vote. The Condo JPM should contact the land office for their advise on this matter.

The committee has voted and conclusions passed by the majority would be passed on to the building manager for implementation. You don't need unanimous votes.

 

How does a committee member obstruct the implementation?

Edited November 13, 2017 by trogers

[lkn]

1 hour ago, CMBob said:

Up to you...but you might want to review Section 48 (5) of the Condominium Act which expressly covers the issue.

That section is about what it requires to change the bylaws, where yes, the ratio is defined.

 

However, section 18 says “Joint owners shall jointly share the payments of expenses […] in accordance with the ratio of the freehold in common property”. My interpretation is that you can change the ratio of payments, but that would imply you changed the ratio of freehold in common property, for example if a building were to allow a co-owner to expand their unit into the hallway, the ratio of ownership in the common area would increase and so would their share of the expenses.

 

[Johnboxer]

3 hours ago, uhuh said:

 the other members of the committee threaten to write an anouncement that he is no longer a committee member and publish it in the elevator. 

If they do this,  what's a good way to deal with it? 

He doesn't want to resign,  but he doesn't want to enter a law suit either

 

What if you do not have a elevator?

[KittenKong]

1 hour ago, CMBob said:

While slightly off topic, I don't believe that's correct.  What the Board (committee) cannot do without the approval of a the co-owners (which may not be a majority of the total owners under changing quorum rules) is to change the ratio of the expenses (i.e., the co-owners must approve a change of what percentage that a given unit has to pay).  I do believe the Board has the power to set the monthly/annual dues and assessments.

 

If committees could do that then I think they would. I know many buildings where the common fee has not been increased for decades and is now completely inadequate. But the committees do not increase the fee simply because they cant. In my building even co-owners at an AGM/EGM cant do so because we never have a large enough number present for a legal vote on such an issue. So every year we impose a supplementary fee to make up the shortfall but the amount of this is decided by co-owner vote (and in theory the entire fee could be refused by the same vote).

 

I dont personally know of any building that allows the committee a free hand to impose any common fee increase it cares to, and I would not want to be a co-owner in such a building as it leaves the door wide open to all sorts of abuses.

[KittenKong]

1 hour ago, thairookie said:

Perhaps this one odd member of the committee is incorruptible.  He has to be removed.

 

That was one of my interpretations of this also.

[KittenKong]

1 hour ago, bkkdriller said:

We have a similar situation where one committee member will not accept a (large) majority MC decision if he has a different opinion.  We aim for unanimous decisions but that is not always possible with this particular MC member. The real problem is that he is very outspoken and will do whatever he can to obstruct and frustrate implementation of the majority vote, including lying, misrepresentations and accusation against other MC members.

 

Desirable as they may be you dont need unanimous decisions. You just need a majority. Regardless of what your committee member thinks of the decision it is valid as long as most members vote for it.

 

If he is really going to such lengths then I would have thought that clear reporting of the truth (ie publishing full and complete transcripts of all meetings) would take the wind out of his sails. But in 40 years in Thailand I have yet to see anything even approaching full and complete reporting.

 

As for lying and accusations, there are laws designed to protect other members from this so perhaps they should approach the police?

 

But there are two sides to every story. I know of a building where the situation was reversed with just one honest committee member up against a completely dishonest management and dishonest/stupid committee. The committee in question never published proper minutes of meetings, and all reports were full of omissions and errors. So depending on which side of the fence you are looking from, that could be your building also.

 

 

1 hour ago, bkkdriller said:

Unfortunately I can not find any info in the Condo act or in our Condo bylaws (Condo rules and regulations registered with the land office) how to remove an MC member. I would think that unless there is a proven criminal act an elected MC member can only be removed in an AGM (or EGM) by majority co-owners vote. The Condo JPM should contact the land office for their advise on this matter.

 

If he is really being a nuisance then all the other committee members should just resign. This will force an immediate EGM at which all can make their case to co-owners, and stand for re-election if they wish. That's the proper way of handling it.

[anfh]

As previously stated, you can only really remove a member for illegal activities etc. 

 

But also as stated, as a committee, you do not need unanimous votes etc to carry out any changes.

 

as far as fees are concerned, you need a vote at the AGM to alter the amount, and, regardless of how many people attend the meeting, you still need 51% of total ownership to carry a vote.

 

However, if you cannot get a vote at the AGM, you can call another meeting within a two week period of the original, and have a re- vote, and according to the Condo Act, you only need a 30% vote to carry this.

 

please remember that the voting system is actally based on the square meterage of the block, so each owners vote is the based on condo size, therefore if one person were to have knocked two condos together for example, he would have a larger vote than others etc. This is a bizzare Thai system, if there are a couple of people with multiple condos they can sway the voting at AGMs etc, to a greater effect. 

 

 

[lkn]

44 minutes ago, anfh said:

[…] you need a vote at the AGM to alter the amount, and, regardless of how many people attend the meeting, you still need 51% of total ownership to carry a vote.

 

However, if you cannot get a vote at the AGM, you can call another meeting within a two week period of the original, and have a re- vote, and according to the Condo Act, you only need a 30% vote to carry this […]

 

[…] This is a bizzare Thai system, if there are a couple of people with multiple condos they can sway the voting at AGMs etc, to a greater effect. 

It is “not less than half” so I think 50% would be enough to pass a resolution. For the EGM, it is 1/3 of the total joint owners’ votes (so 33.3…%) but I think you can only do that if a quorum was not reached at the AGM (i.e. less than 25% of the total joint owners’ showed up as counted in voting ratio).

 

As for voting based on your share, that is a very common way to do things and definitely not a bizarre Thai thing.

[lkn]

 

1 hour ago, KittenKong said:

I know of a building where the situation was reversed with just one honest committee member up against a completely dishonest management and dishonest/stupid committee

Sounds like my building — though I would say it was our manager who was incompetent and the committee members who were (in my opinion) unethical and did not understand that being committee member is not the same as being CEO of a private company.

 

So yes, it can definitely be done! The challenge is that many people are just not so obsessed about details like actually ensuring decisions are in compliance with that long boring Thai Condo Act (that none of the committee members have read), that someone takes on that tedious job of controlling the monthly ledger, and think that keeping meeting minutes private is a good way to avoid complaints from co-owners…

[Delight]

5 hours ago, jippytum said:

The committee member was elected for a two year term at the last AGM . The committee according to the poster want to increase fees .Please note 75 % of  co owners  must vote in favour  at an agm to increase the common area or maintenance  fees. committee meeting . 

 Not true about the 75% . It used to be 75% -it is now 50%

 

However getting even 50% to attend a general meeting is typically impossible

 

The solution is a special assessment.

These only need a majority at a general meeting and are good for 3 years. This timescale is acceptable to the L.O (it appears)

 

We have had 2 such special assessment in my condo. One for 8 baht the 2nd for 7 Baht

 

Without these the condo would be seriously starved of cash.

Not a  single co -owner has registered any complaint about these increases.