Distribution of sinking fund

[AHTOHuO]

Dear friends,

I need your advice on correct and fare distribution of sinking fund in the project.

Situation the following, we have a two condominium buildings and about 14 houses on the same territory.
Facilities: communal swimming pool, management office,  BBQ area, street car part lots. Apartment and house owners share this common area.
Question about sinking fund. How to how to distribute the fund spendings between project structures: building 1, building 2 and houses?

House owners use only common area: pool, parking, office, bbq area,
Condo owners use: pool, parking, office, bbq area, building elevators, buildings generators, reserved water system.

Sinking fund in the condo is 400 THB per sqm.
How to find a fair rate for home owners how to allocate costs .

Thank you for any suggestions.

 

[Delight]

 You need to explain more.

Do you have a common fee?  Do the houes pay this fee?

How can you mix condominiums with houses ? You cannot according to the condo Act.

Building 1 and building 2 are they seperate Juristic persons?

 

A sinking fund is used for major projects.

Example -painting the outside of the condo buildings and fixing the roof. Will the houses get painted and their roof's fixed.

It seems to me that you are mixing apples with oranges.

Based on what you state it may just be simpler to agree   an annual/monthly  fee that each house pays -for the supply of services.

This has nothing to do with the sinking fund

 

Edited October 5, 2018 by Delight
addes detail

[baansgr]

Roads,  security,  lighting.  The difference  is minimal.  It's usually the same 

[AHTOHuO]

On 10/5/2018 at 12:44 PM, Delight said:

 You need to explain more.

Do you have a common fee?  Do the houes pay this fee?

Yes, and condos and house has a common fees. 30 thb/sqm for condo and  2500 THB per house

 

On 10/5/2018 at 12:44 PM, Delight said:

How can you mix condominiums with houses ? You cannot according to the condo Act.

Building 1 and building 2 are they seperate Juristic persons?

 

What do you mean under "mix condominiums and houses"? It's built on one territory.
By law  and on paper they have separate Juristic persons, but in fact it's one company.
 

On 10/5/2018 at 12:44 PM, Delight said:

A sinking fund is used for major projects.

Example -painting the outside of the condo buildings and fixing the roof. Will the houses get painted and their roof's fixed.

It seems to me that you are mixing apples with oranges.

Based on what you state it may just be simpler to agree   an annual/monthly  fee that each house pays -for the supply of services.

This has nothing to do with the sinking fund

ok, maybe you are right, then where to read about what expenses should come from sinking fund and which from the maintenance fee?
Both houses and condominiums use the sw.pool, and for example one day, motor is fired.  What part should be paid by house owners, and what part should be paid by apartments owners?
And as this is a new condo and village project, it's means that both and owners of condos and owners of houses should pay a sinking  fund.  And as for the condo is everything clear  400 THB per  sqm, than how to find rate for houses.

[Delight]

 From what you state what you actually have is a walled estate which has 2 condo blocks within it.

The condo sinking funds  just cover the condo's long term needs only- and not  the rest of the walled estate. That sinking fund is valid and  has to remain.

 

I assume that the sw.pool and probably a club house is part of the walled estate and not part of the condos. Maybe it is the other way around -you have not specified.

If the 2500 baht /month/house covers the current and long term needs of the estate-then It seems to me that the management of the walled estate have to charge the 2 condos -not the other way around.

The owners of the condos have the benefit of security -gardeners -internal roads etc. etc

Currently they are not being charged for them.

Hence the very low 30 baht/m/month

As a suggestion maybe all the condo co -owners can pay an extra 5/10 baht/m/month to cover these services . This money to be paid to the management of the walled estate.

 

 

Edited October 7, 2018 by Delight
Added detail

[stud858]

Each condo or house will have a certain % of voting rights. The voting rights are inconspicuously printed on chanots. In Thai numerals.

So allocate money amount according to voting right.

 

[Delight]

26 minutes ago, stud858 said:

Each condo or house will have a certain % of voting rights. The voting rights are inconspicuously printed on chanots. In Thai numerals.

So allocate money amount according to voting right.

 

 Voting rights apply to condos only. This is as stated in the condo act.

There is no legislation to cover farang  walled estate. So no voting rights.

[stud858]

32 minutes ago, Delight said:

 Voting rights apply to condos only. This is as stated in the condo act.

There is no legislation to cover farang  walled estate. So no voting rights.

If no voting rights for house Estates who and how are things decided? Is it the builders management?

Must be mayhem,  but then again even in condos with voting rights things are Topsy turvey. 

 

It would seem fair to apply a percentage amount by square meterage owned anyway.

My condo does it the older way, I.e the initial sale price ratio of the property

Edited October 7, 2018 by stud858

[Delight]

55 minutes ago, stud858 said:

If no voting rights for house Estates who and how are things decided? Is it the builders management?

Must be mayhem,  but then again even in condos with voting rights things are Topsy turvey. 

 

It would seem fair to apply a percentage amount by square meterage owned anyway.

My condo does it the older way, I.e the initial sale price ratio of the property

 The typical problems that face walled estate relates to non  -payment.

House owners work out that there is no legal requirement to pay -so stop paying

In the 70's Thailand applied for a IMF loan. Conditional on that loan was the requirement to create the condo act.

The then Thai authorities hated being told what to do by foreigners. In the end they conceded.

No such pressure for legislation for Farang walled estates-so no legislation.

Edited October 7, 2018 by Delight
Added detail

[KittenKong]

This sounds like a real mess. The two condos should each own the land they stand on outright, plus perhaps some surrounding land and access land. Each condo should be a separate juristic person with its own accounts, its own management and its own committee. Each should also have its own internal rules and regulations which should describe the amount of the common fees and the sinking fund. The pool and other facilities should be owned outright by one juristic person, and the other juristic persons should eventually be allowed to use the facilities in return for some prearranged fee.

Anything less seems doomed to failure, though it would be possible (but not very neat) for the two buildings to be part of the same juristic person.

 

I dont even see how the two buildings that the OP describes could ever have been given condominium status by the Land Office in the first place, and I wonder if they have been? Are AGMs taking place? Are financial statements recorded?

[chickenslegs]

2 hours ago, Delight said:

 The typical problems that face walled estate relates to non  -payment.

House owners work out that there is no legal requirement to pay -so stop paying

In the 70's Thailand applied for a IMF loan. Conditional on that loan was the requirement to create the condo act.

The then Thai authorities hated being told what to do by foreigners. In the end they conceded.

No such pressure for legislation for Farang walled estates-so no legislation.

Apologies for going slightly off topic, but ...

 

Not quite true.

The Land Development Act 2543 (2000) allows for developed estates to be registered with the Land Office. The rules and regulations for those estates are similar (not identical of course) to the Condominium Act.

Payment of fees is most definitely enforceable, together with fines and interest payments. Also, in the case of unpaid fees, chanots can be seized until the debts are paid.

Edited October 7, 2018 by chickenslegs

[Delight]

41 minutes ago, chickenslegs said:

Apologies for going slightly off topic, but ...

 

Not quite true.

The Land Development Act 2543 (2000) allows for developed estates to be registered with the Land Office. The rules and regulations for those estates are similar (not identical of course) to the Condominium Act.

Payment of fees is most definitely enforceable, together with fines and interest payments. Also, in the case of unpaid fees, chanots can be seized until the debts are paid.

 You are right!

Reading the act it seems that  that which you are describing can only occur when a Juritic Person has been created. This is term demands that 50% of the total lots of land have bben sold.

Do you read it the same?

[chickenslegs]

5 minutes ago, Delight said:

 You are right!

Reading the act it seems that  that which you are describing can only occur when a Juritic Person has been created. This is term demands that 50% of the total lots of land have bben sold.

Do you read it the same?

As I understand it, it requires 51% of the owners to agree to create a juristic person and apply to the Land Office for recognition.

Of course, there are other stipulations.

[Delight]

8 minutes ago, chickenslegs said:

As I understand it, it requires 51% of the owners to agree to create a juristic person and apply to the Land Office for recognition.

Of course, there are other stipulations.

 That is the problem.

It allows the withdrawal of services from a non paying house owner.

It seems to me that in practice the only service that can be withdrawn is garbage collection.

In the case of the OP some house owners will not pay -knowing that it will be cheaper to clear their own garbage rather  than pay 2500 Baht per month.

Getting 51% of the house owners to agree will also be difficult in some cases.

 If the  ACT mandated that when 51% of the properties were sold then a Juristic person had to be created and the developer had to instigate the creation -then that would be a better circumstance

It also states that the developer has to pay the fees on unsold plots(not houses)