Condo Rules Before First Meeting

[JayBird]

I've found information on what are the rules for condos after the first meeting.
 
What is unclear is what are the rules before the first meeting.
 
In a situation where transfer of all the condos from developers to owners is not completed (some people do not have chanotes yet).
 
Anyone know where I can find the rules and laws that apply in this situation.
 
Are maintenance fees supposed to be paid by those who have chanotes?
 
Is the juristic office or developer required to keep books on the collection of fees, the spending of fees, and how much remains in the bank (sinking fund, etc).
 
Thank you.

[meinphuket]

. CAM fees are payable by Chanote holders

 

. Juristic Person Manager's office is supposed to hold all accounting details onsite by law, but is often not when a 'rogue' management is in charge.

 

there are many, many more potential snags to watch out for, feel free to ask.

[scorecard]

52 minutes ago, meinphuket said:

. CAM fees are payable by Chanote holders

 

. Juristic Person Manager's office is supposed to hold all accounting details onsite by law, but is often not when a 'rogue' management is in charge.

 

there are many, many more potential snags to watch out for, feel free to ask.

 

I reinforce the 'watch out for 'rogue' management' comment. This could mean many things, here's one example:

 

- Developer installed a management company before any discussion with the owners.

 

- Management team was headed by the developers female cousin who was in the condo office about 1 hour per week, she, with no discussion with the owners, had quickly installed: an accountant, 4 office staff, 2 building maintenance staff, 6 cleaners and 6 security guard, 90% of these folks were her relatives. 

 

Turned out she was a senior full-time civil service employee (still collecting her gov't salary and benefit), had taken over several rooms and civil-service employees (still collecting gov't salaries) in a government office tower, and she was running a management company supplying 'management teams' to about 12 condos. 

 

After years of no management work the condo was a sorry site plus the owners were afraid to talk the manager or anybody in the office, afraid of abuse.  

 

A new condo unit owner (a senior manager from a Thai bank) started to ask questions. Initially he was told the only person he could talk to was 'the manager' and he had to make an appointment to see her at least 3 weeks ahead.

 

The bank guy quickly did some serious investigation and discovered all the details 2 paragraphs above, also discovered there was a contract which mentioned things like: 'lift maintenance schedule' but further checking revealed the 2 maintenance men who came occasionally had no qualifications or experience. And the fees paid out of the owners common funds for lift maintenance were very high. And more.

 

The Bank guy asked many owners if they would support him at an extraordinary general meeting, most owners were initially frightened but eventually many agreed.

 

Many owners (incl. bank guy) signed a letter to the manager demanding a meeting and setting a date and time. Manager got angry and abusive and insisted she was the only person allowed to call / conduct a meeting.

 

Came the day, the bank guy had invited a lawyer well familiar with the appropriate laws. As people gathered the manager called the police, manager told the cops to remove the people from the big lobby area and tell them meeting not allowed. lawyer spoke to the cops and explained the law and showed the cops the written laws, gave the senior cop a copy of the appropriate laws. Cops refused to ask anybody to move etc., but they stayed.

 

Meeting started and within about 20 minutes a vote was taken to dismiss the management company on the spot. Unanimous YES. Manager refused to accept the decision and again asked the cops to intervene. There was a call from the crowd to the effect 'be gone within 2 hours', The senior cops asked who agreed with 'gone within 2 hours', everybody agreed. Cop now told the manager and her staff go within 2 hours or I will arrest all of you. (Not sure if he could legally arrest them but never mind.)

 

New committee elected, they agreed they would do the management activities, all subsequent decisions made at owners meeting, at least 15 owners present. 

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by scorecard

[JayBird]

. CAM fees are payable by Chanote holders

 

. Juristic Person Manager's office is supposed to hold all accounting details onsite by law, but is often not when a 'rogue' management is in charge.

 

there are many, many more potential snags to watch out for, feel free to ask.

Do you know where I can find the rules regarding this?

 

The condo act seems to refer only after the first meeting. It contains little information on when the first meeting must be held nor if fees are to be collected before the first meeting.

 

Section 42 states:

... registration of the condominium corporate.

 

Where can i find out if this has been done?

 

 

Thank you.

 

[lkn]

1 hour ago, JayBird said:

The condo act seems to refer only after the first meeting. It contains little information on when the first meeting must be held nor if fees are to be collected before the first meeting.

There must be an initial General Meeting no later than six months after the condominium has been registered.

 

At this meeting the co-owners will approve bylaws, elect a committee, etc.

 

Normally the sales contract will set the rate for the common fee, which will then be in effect until the first General Meeting (where bylaws are approved, and these will specify how common fee is to be paid).

 

But the Thai Condo Act does also say that expenses have to be shared according to your ratio of ownership, so even if the sales contract lacks a clause about common fee, I think it would still be possible to charge the co-owners for the expenses the building has incurred, but it would then have to be post-paid, rather than a fixed monthly fee.

[skatewash]

1 hour ago, JayBird said:

Do you know where I can find the rules regarding this?

 

The condo act seems to refer only after the first meeting. It contains little information on when the first meeting must be held nor if fees are to be collected before the first meeting.

 

Section 42 states:

... registration of the condominium corporate.

 

Where can i find out if this has been done?

 

 

Thank you.

 

I'm in the same position as outlined in your OP so I'm also interested in any answers.

 

My understanding of the registration of the condominium is that it must have occurred first in order for any owner to get their chanote from the Land Office under the freehold type of ownership.  In other words, freehold ownership of a condo unit can only be registered at the Land Office (by which a unit owner obtains their Chanote) after the condominium has been registered as such.  The fact that someone has a chanote for their condo unit indicates that the condo has been registered (under the Thai condominium act).  In the situation you describe in the OP (and in my case also) some owners have received their chanote from the LO and therefore I believe the condo has been legally registered.  I guess this could be confirmed by the Land Office, but probably not easy to do.

[skatewash]

30 minutes ago, lkn said:

There must be an initial General Meeting no later than six months after the condominium has been registered.

 

At this meeting the co-owners will approve bylaws, elect a committee, etc.

 

Normally the sales contract will set the rate for the common fee, which will then be in effect until the first General Meeting (where bylaws are approved, and these will specify how common fee is to be paid).

 

But the Thai Condo Act does also say that expenses have to be shared according to your ratio of ownership, so even if the sales contract lacks a clause about common fee, I think it would still be possible to charge the co-owners for the expenses the building has incurred, but it would then have to be post-paid, rather than a fixed monthly fee.

2

"There must be an initial General Meeting no later than six months after the condominium has been registered."  Does this language come from the Thai Condominium Act or somewhere else?

 

Does the fact that some owners have received their chanotes from the Land Office indicate that the condo itself has been registered under the TCA?  If not true, then what can one look at to determine that the condo itself has been registered?

 

I am an owner with a chanote from the LO for about four years and our condo has yet to have a general meeting (or any other kind of meeting as far as I can tell).  I live at the condo, it's my permanent address, and talk with the other owners and no one knows of a general or any other kind of meeting.  Probably because there hasn't been one.  So I have a similar question to the one posed by the OP, what rules govern the period before the first meeting?

 

In my case, the Sales and Purchase Agreement spelled out the annual maintenance fee and the one-time sinking fund fee (both based on the percentage of space owned by the individual owner).  My understanding is that all the other owners who have been through the registration process at the LO have done the same.  I have continued to pay my annual assessment for maintenance each year I have lived here.  Some other chanote owners do and some don't.  No owners (people who have paid all the money due) who have not registered their ownership at the LO yet) are paying the maintenance fee.  There are also still unsold units (which are presumably owned by the developer or the developer's bank).  In this messy scenario, how can a first general meeting be called?

 

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by skatewash

[lkn]

3 minutes ago, skatewash said:

I am an owner with a chanote from the LO for about four years and our condo has yet to have a general meeting (or any other kind of meeting as far as I can tell). 

That is clearly a violation of the TCA, it is the Act that states that a General Meeting must be held six month after the condominium has been registered, and if it hadn’t been registered, you would not have a chanote.

 

Furthermore, after this initial meeting, a meeting must be held 120 days (iirc) after the end of each financial year, on this meeting the financial report must be presented to the co-owners, and committee members are elected for a two year period (Juristic Person Manager is also elected, but the law does not stipulate for how long).

 

Do you know who is actually running the building? I would go ask them why there has been no annual meetings in all these years.

[Chrisswe]

3 hours ago, meinphuket said:

. CAM fees are payable by Chanote holders

 

. Juristic Person Manager's office is supposed to hold all accounting details onsite by law, but is often not when a 'rogue' management is in charge.

 

there are many, many more potential snags to watch out for, feel free to ask.

Yes for one example in my condo in Khao Yai where's they run the building as hotel with 100% short term renting with full ABF which is against the Thai Law and regulations !!!!

[thailand49]

Personally if one is worried about when a meeting is held it is too late!

 

Here in Thailand,  prior to putting money down all the questions being asked now should be asked prior to a person buying.

 

At the time of interest if none of the rules are being presented along with the financial records, which should include how many houses or units in the development, how many are owner-occupied, out of the total units how many aren't paying their dues for how long and why aren't they being collected and what are the consequences if dues aren't paid?  

 

Next, I would like access to every baht coming in and going out if none can be provided I walk it would be safer to just rent. I've seen and heard enough bad developments being run to the ground running one doesn't require a rocket scientist. But in Thailand who knows? 

 

 

[skatewash]

16 minutes ago, lkn said:

That is clearly a violation of the TCA, it is the Act that states that a General Meeting must be held six month after the condominium has been registered, and if it hadn’t been registered, you would not have a chanote.

 

Furthermore, after this initial meeting, a meeting must be held 120 days (iirc) after the end of each financial year, on this meeting the financial report must be presented to the co-owners, and committee members are elected for a two year period (Juristic Person Manager is also elected, but the law does not stipulate for how long).

 

Do you know who is actually running the building? I would go ask them why there has been no annual meetings in all these years.

Thanks for confirming my understanding that having a chanote is evidence that the condominium has been registered.  I see the section of the Thai Condominium Act (2008) that contains the six-month requirement (Section 42):

Quote

 

Section 42 The Manager shall arrange to have a General Meeting convened which shall be deemed to be the first Ordinary General Meeting within six months from the date of the registration of the condominium corporate in order that the Meeting can appoint the Board and consider for approval the Bylaws and the Manager having been registered in accordance with the application for the registration of the condominium corporate which has already been submitted.

In the case where the Ordinary General Meeting does not give the approval on the Regulations or the Manager under paragraph one, the Ordinary General Meeting shall consider the alteration or modification on such Bylaws or Manager or removal thereof and then appoint a Manager, as well.

 

-- https://www.samuiforsale.com/law-texts/new-thailand-condominium-act-2008.html#1

 

So, as you say this is a clear violation of the TCA.  I do know who they say is the Juristic Person.  Of course, in this case, the developer, owner of the condo company, and juristic person are all closely related.  As things stand, the condo is limping along.  The developer/owner are funding ongoing costs of operation at a minimal level using whatever small amount of money I and others are contributing according to the S&P agreement.  Electrical, water, plumbing, and common areas like the pool are maintained.  I guess why the owners (myself included) have permitted this situation to continue is that we can envision it becoming worse if we tried to make it better.  So there is a wait and see attitude while we muddle through.  Obviously, sales of units haven't lived up to the owner's or developer's expectations, or indeed, the expectations of the unit owners.  On the other hand, they haven't completely abandoned the condominium.  It's possible to live here, receive basic services (electrical, water, internet, etc that we pay individually, while the owner/developer provides some common internet, pool maintenance, rubbish removal, exercise room, and cable TV).  Of course, we have no insight into the financial picture (no monthly statements or statements of any sort), and we believe it's probably not good.  On the other hand, we don't see a way forward without the distinct possibility that things could get much worse.  Basically, we are existing outside the rules of the TCA and are afraid to pursue implementation of the TCA rules because it could lead to the owner/developer basically walking away from the condo.  So we are in limbo.

 

 

[skatewash]

11 minutes ago, thailand49 said:

Personally if one is worried about when a meeting is held it is too late!

 

Here in Thailand,  prior to putting money down all the questions being asked now should be asked prior to a person buying.

 

At the time of interest if none of the rules are being presented along with the financial records, which should include how many houses or units in the development, how many are owner-occupied, out of the total units how many aren't paying their dues for how long and why aren't they being collected and what are the consequences if dues aren't paid?  

 

Next, I would like access to every baht coming in and going out if none can be provided I walk it would be safer to just rent. I've seen and heard enough bad developments being run to the ground running one doesn't require a rocket scientist. But in Thailand who knows? 

 

 

Good advice!  Basically, don't purchase a condo in Thailand off-plan as there's no way to be certain that things will go as they were planned.  Rent instead of buy.  If you must buy, buy into a condo where the board is already actually functioning.  Look at the financial statements that are required of a condo under the TCA.  There are many things that I still like about my condo, but adherence to the TCA isn't one of them. ????  It's a precarious situation.  Life is much easier if you rent.

[skatewash]

29 minutes ago, Chrisswe said:

Yes for one example in my condo in Khao Yai where's they run the building as hotel with 100% short term renting with full ABF which is against the Thai Law and regulations !!!!

ABF?

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, skatewash said:

ABF?

American breakfast.

[skatewash]

To the OP.  The Thai Condo Act actually has more than I remembered to say about what should happen before the first general meeting, within six months of the condominium being registered.  Also, the consensus seems to be that if anyone in the condo has a chanote for their unit then that proves that the condominium is registered (otherwise the Land Office would have have issued the chanote).

Here's an English Translation of the TCA (2008).  Section 42 and following sections explain deadlines and how the first meeting is initiated.  Following sections even indicate recourse to hold meetings if they have not been scheduled.  Of course, you can't do much by yourself, you need fellow owners to agree, at least on the need to hold a meeting.  Or convince management that they should hold a meeting as legally required.

 

https://www.samuiforsale.com/law-texts/new-thailand-condominium-act-2008.html#1

[newnative]

     My partner and I recently bought an off-plan getaway condo in a new condo project in Bangkok.  Owners began moving in the beginning of November 2018, closing and receiving Chanotes.  The condo project is registered at the Land Office.  

     We had our first annual meeting last Sunday.   Although, theoretically, the first meeting is where you select a management company and Juristic Person, in my experience with new condos the management company and Juristic are already on site, having already been selected by the developer, and the owners are voting more to approve of what is already in place. 

     The same also goes for the rules and condo by-laws--with our new Bangkok condo they had already been written and we just voted to approve them.   I suppose at a first annual meeting an owner could object to a proposed rule or something in the by-laws but I've never seen that happen.  Other than voting for the owners to serve on the condo committee, the first meeting seems to be more of a formality to approval of what the developer has already done--management company, condo fees, Juristic, proposed budget, rules, etc.

      

[skatewash]

4 minutes ago, newnative said:

     My partner and I recently bought an off-plan getaway condo in a new condo project in Bangkok.  Owners began moving in the beginning of November 2018, closing and receiving Chanotes.  The condo project is registered at the Land Office.  

     We had our first annual meeting last Sunday.   Although, theoretically, the first meeting is where you select a management company and Juristic Person, in my experience with new condos the management company and Juristic are already on site, having already been selected by the developer, and the owners are voting more to approve of what is already in place. 

     The same also goes for the rules and condo by-laws--with our new Bangkok condo they had already been written and we just voted to approve them.   I suppose at a first annual meeting an owner could object to a proposed rule or something in the by-laws but I've never seen that happen.  Other than voting for the owners to serve on the condo committee, the first meeting seems to be more of a formality to approval of what the developer has already done--management company, condo fees, Juristic, proposed budget, rules, etc.

      

That would be a huge improvement in my situation.  Just seeing a proposed budget, rules, etc. would be awesome.  Knowing that our sinking fund is in escrow somewhere.  Seeing the balance in the maintenance fee account.  All would be a tremendous step in the right direction.  Congratulations to you and your fellow owners for getting to that point at least.

[KittenKong]

17 minutes ago, newnative said:

Other than voting for the owners to serve on the condo committee, the first meeting seems to be more of a formality to approval of what the developer has already done--management company, condo fees, Juristic, proposed budget, rules, etc.

That is what many developers/JPMs/management companies want it to be, but it doesnt have to be like that.

 

The first meeting is the only real opportunity co-owners will have to implement the rules that they want in their building. For example, they might want to include a rule specifically forbidding short-term rentals. The Condo Act doesnt cover this well, nor do most building by-laws (they are mostly copy/pasted from other buildings anyway). It is also the time to fix sensible common fees rather than whatever arbitrary sum was decided by the developer. The likelihood of ever being able to get agreement of 75% of co-owners at subsequent meetings is quite small, or even zero in many buildings. And 75% is what is needed to change the by-laws later.

[KittenKong]

6 hours ago, skatewash said:

My understanding of the registration of the condominium is that it must have occurred first in order for any owner to get their chanote from the Land Office under the freehold type of ownership.  In other words, freehold ownership of a condo unit can only be registered at the Land Office (by which a unit owner obtains their Chanote) after the condominium has been registered as such. 

That's right. And once the building is registered then co-owners should be paying common fees. This includes all unsold units, though most developers will try very hard not to pay what they owe. This is one major reason why they often try to implant their own management company and JPM.

[KittenKong]

15 hours ago, JayBird said:

In a situation where transfer of all the condos from developers to owners is not completed (some people do not have chanotes yet).
Anyone know where I can find the rules and laws that apply in this situation.
Are maintenance fees supposed to be paid by those who have chanotes?
Is the juristic office or developer required to keep books on the collection of fees, the spending of fees, and how much remains in the bank (sinking fund, etc).

You seem to be saying that you are in a building where chanotes have been issued but no initial meeting has been held.

 

You can ask the local Land Office if your building has been registered as a condo (it must have been if chanotes exist).

 

You can also complain to the Land Office in writing if the initial meeting has not been held in the first six months as the law requires. They wont do much apart from write to the JPM though.

 

Your best bet is to get together with as many other co-owners as possible and try to force the JPM to hold a meeting. You have the right to demand this if you can raise support of at least 20% of all co-owners in the form of a petition, though you may need 25% for some votes to be valid. At that meeting you can vote to elect a committee and a JPM of your choosing. They can then engage a new management company etc.

 

It will be an uphill struggle. If you think that you want to engage a proper management company (assuming your building is large enough) then they may be able to help you have your first meeting and kick out your JPM.
Corruption and illegality are both massive problems in many buildings here, but very few co-owners seem to be aware of it.

[newnative]

1 minute ago, skatewash said:

That would be a huge improvement in my situation.  Just seeing a proposed budget, rules, etc. would be awesome.  Knowing that our sinking fund is in escrow somewhere.  Seeing the balance in the maintenance fee account.  All would be a tremendous step in the right direction.  Congratulations to you and your fellow owners for getting to that point at least.

    In the case of the Bangkok condo the developer is good--project got finished early and the developer also manages its projects.  That could be good or bad but with this developer our experiences with several of their other projects have been positive.  Very professional and they provide good value for the money.

[KittenKong]

21 minutes ago, newnative said:

    In the case of the Bangkok condo the developer is good--project got finished early and the developer also manages its projects.  That could be good or bad but with this developer our experiences with several of their other projects have been positive.  Very professional and they provide good value for the money.

If you have a good developer or a good management company or a good JPM everything can be hunky dory. But there are many developers and managers here who are very bad indeed. And when you get one of those you know all about it, as there is very little effective legal framework to punish them with.

[newnative]

7 hours ago, KittenKong said:

That is what many developers/JPMs/management companies want it to be, but it doesnt have to be like that.

 

The first meeting is the only real opportunity co-owners will have to implement the rules that they want in their building. For example, they might want to include a rule specifically forbidding short-term rentals. The Condo Act doesnt cover this well, nor do most building by-laws (they are mostly copy/pasted from other buildings anyway). It is also the time to fix sensible common fees rather than whatever arbitrary sum was decided by the developer. The likelihood of ever being able to get agreement of 75% of co-owners at subsequent meetings is quite small, or even zero in many buildings. And 75% is what is needed to change the by-laws later.

    I totally agree--the first meeting is when the owners should be making rules, setting fees, selecting management and Juristic, etc.  However, in my experience attending the first meeting of a number of new condos, both in Pattaya and now in Bangkok, I haven't seen that happen.  For whatever reasons, the owners being too new at condo ownership, too unaware of condo law, too unorganized at the first meeting, too timid or polite at the first meeting to rock the boat so more inclined to just go along, too few new owners at the first meeting as some condos not sold yet, etc., the developer has been in the driver's seat at the first meetings I have attended. with new Thailand condo projects.  Perhaps others have had a different experience.

     At the Bangkok first condo meeting I mentioned, I definitely would have stood up and objected if there was not a rule in the condo by-laws to specifically forbid short-term condo rentals.  Fortunately, there was such a rule and the developer's representative singled out short-term rentals in the opening remarks and specifically stated they are against the law and the condo is a residence and not a hotel.  Whether the rule will be enforced remains to be seen.  

[JayBird]

Anyone have some good examples of condo charters i could use as a foundation for a new one should our condo have a meeting?

Thank you.