BMA saddled with Bt1.47m bill as ‘furious aunts’ win case

By THE NATION

 

 

A FAMILY could receive more than Bt1.47 million compensation for inconvenience because of the authorities’ failure to prevent “illegal markets” from operating around their house if the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) loses its appeal against a lower court verdict.

 

The Central Administrative Court on Wednesday decided to award compensation to the Saengyoktrakarn family and also ordered the relevant authorities to ensure there were no markets or stalls around the family’s house. 

 

“I agree with the decision to remove the market. But regarding the compensation, I will first consult my legal team. I think we will have to appeal on the compensation part,” Bangkok Governor Aswin Kwanmuang said. 

 

The ordeal of the Saengyoktrakarn family has attracted widespread attention this year after two elderly family members earned the nickname “furious aunts” (pictured) for attacking a pickup parked in front of their house gate. 

 

Initial public condemnation of the two women turned into sympathy after they revealed to media how activity from several markets around their house in the Seri Villa project had made their lives a misery. They said they suffered glaring spotlights from the markets during the night, while bad smells, exhaust fumes from shoppers’ and vendors’ vehicles, and loud noise had added to their woes. Often, people parked their vehicles in front of their gate making it impossible to drive out of their own house. 

 

The Central Administrative Court on Wednesday ruled in favour of the family because by law, relevant authorities had the duty to uphold sanitary standards and ban illegal markets. 

 

According to the court, Seri Villa is a housing project and thus cannot be used for commercial activity. 

 

The Saengyoktrakarn family had lodged a complaint against the Bangkok governor, the director of the Prawet District Office, the Prawet District Office, and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration with the court after they allegedly failed to properly control “illegal markets” around their house. 

 

The complaint went to the Central Administrative Court’s Environmental Division. 

 

On wednesday, the court also ruled that structures erected for illegal markets must be removed within 60 days of the final court ruling. Any request to build market-related structures near Seri Villa must be rejected. 

 

Compensation shall be subject to 7.5 per cent interest per year, calculated from 2010 or the year the first market structure was built. 

 

Boonsri Saengyoktrakarn said she was happy with the court’s ruling and hoped the authorities would not appeal. 

 

“We have been suffering for too long already,” she said. 

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30345557

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-5-16

An off topic trolling post has been removed. 

Woooow,....Apparently there would be some justice found in Thailand. there might be hope for the future !

It isn't over yet, court case notwithstanding.

Are there market stalls blocking Bangkok Sukhumvit pavements still?

Do motorcycles still use the pavements?

Are there still masses of cables on Pattaya Nua and Klang despite the efforts to remove them?

 

So now we can all trash cars blocking the parking bays of multistory car parks and blame the shopping centres bad planning. Coooool

So pleased for the Aunties .After years of disturbance and getting the finger instead of help  from the authorities  .Drastic action was required for justice to prevail . This is a victory for all the people whose daily life is made a living hell from people  who flout the law by paying backhanders to those in authority

There are going to be a few mia nois not happy about the courts ruling.

All the officials getting kickbacks before, will have to find new scams for financing their love nests.

5 hours ago, jacko45k said:

re there market stalls blocking Bangkok Sukhumvit pavements still?

Not when I was there 3 weeks ago, the pavements were completely clear on both sides.

17 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

I think we will have to appeal on the compensation part,” Bangkok Governor Aswin Kwanmuang said. 

Who's this "we?"

Aswin was appointed Governor by Prayut after Prayut invoked Article 44 to remove the elected Governor from office and promoted Deputy Aswin to the position.

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2016/10/30/meet-bangkoks-new-governor-aswin-kwanmuang/

If BMA was negligent as the court ruled, compensation should be paid by the NCPO junta budget, not by Thai taxpayer funds. Or by Aswin personally if Prayut claims immunity.

4 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

So now we can all trash cars blocking the parking bays of multistory car parks and blame the shopping centres bad planning. Coooool

You live in a parking bay? 

Can't wait for my next aggravation at the airport parking... tool box has been loaded!

The problem with governments, national or local, being ordered to pay compensation, is ... they don't. The taxpayer has to fund the fall out from their incompetence, ignorance, corruption, stupidity, or all of these.