Was this AGM legal ?

[Chris Po]

Our AGM was managed by the JPM and its company, no bank books or bills were submitted at my request and finally the voting, agendas and election of the committee with 76% vote of the builder of the Condo.
Is there a way to view these problems where?
Is an AGM valid under these conditions?

 

Thank you for your comments

Chris 

[Peterw42]

Bank books and bills wouldn't usually be presented at The AGM. You should have received an audited set of accounts, balance sheet etc.

If the condo builder still owns 76% of the condos then they would have a 76% vote.

The site below has some information about Condo act, holding meetings etc.

 

https://www.samuiforsale.com/other-miscellaneous/condominium-admin-handbook.html

[Delight]

2 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

 

If the condo builder still owns 76% of the condos then they would have a 76% vote.

 

 

 

 Section 45 of condo act states something different

I attach. In the OP's circumstances the vote of the co owners is the same as the developer i.e.24%

Edited May 3, 2019 by Delight

[Peterw42]

11 hours ago, Delight said:

 Section 45 of condo act states something different

I attach. In the OP's circumstances the vote of the co owners is the same as the developer i.e.24%

Thanks, I was unaware of that ruling, it must be for situations like the OPs so the developer doesn't control the block.

[Chris Po]

The developer can not run the block when i look at this report

[Delight]

Of course a crafty developer  will spead his control. Using the OP's numbers the developer will have 49%. His associate will have 27%.

In effect the developer has the same 76%.

[Chris Po]

1 hour ago, Delight said:

Of course a crafty developer  will spead his control. Using the OP's numbers the developer will have 49%. His associate will have 27%.

In effect the developer has the same 76%.

Ok, we had an AGM run by the JPM, the votings i wrote before : 

legal or illegal ?

If illegal : what can we do ??

 

[lkn]

32 minutes ago, Chris Po said:

Ok, we had an AGM run by the JPM, the votings i wrote before : 

legal or illegal ?

According to section 43 of the Thai Condo Act the JPM shall be prohibited to chair the General Meeting.

 

It is unclear if this was the case, if it was, it is a violation of the Thai Condo Act.

 

Furthermore, section 38/2 require that the condominium corporate prepare an annual report that be forwarded to joint owners at least seven days prior to the General Meeting.

 

It is unclear what documents you received before the AGM.

 

As for your voting percentages, it’s based on square meters (well, ratio of ownership in the common area), not just number of units. I.e. it is not one vote per unit.

[Chris Po]

2 hours ago, lkn said:

According to section 43 of the Thai Condo Act the JPM shall be prohibited to chair the General Meeting.

 

It is unclear if this was the case, if it was, it is a violation of the Thai Condo Act.

 

Furthermore, section 38/2 require that the condominium corporate prepare an annual report that be forwarded to joint owners at least seven days prior to the General Meeting.

 

It is unclear what documents you received before the AGM.

 

As for your voting percentages, it’s based on square meters (well, ratio of ownership in the common area), not just number of units. I.e. it is not one vote per unit.

WE had 4 month no Committee, i posted about this before , so the JPM run the meeting. 

I mentioned that this is prohibited, but they did not care. 

The other owners stayed quiet.  

We got a message to pick up the annual report in the Office,....it was 7 days before.  If they send this the other owners per postmail ?  I dont know . 

What you mean with :   "it’s based on square meters (well, ratio of ownership in the common area)"  Swimming pool, beach, garage......?????

 

[KittenKong]

1 hour ago, Chris Po said:

WE had 4 month no Committee, i posted about this before , so the JPM run the meeting. 

I mentioned that this is prohibited, but they did not care. 

The other owners stayed quiet.  

We got a message to pick up the annual report in the Office,....it was 7 days before.  If they send this the other owners per postmail ?  I dont know . 

What you mean with :   "it’s based on square meters (well, ratio of ownership in the common area)"  Swimming pool, beach, garage......?????

 

The JPM cannot chair the meeting. If the committee chairman is not able to do it then the assembly should select someone to chair the meeting. This should be the first item on the agenda. If this is not done then someone should complain at the time as a point of order. You can also file a complaint with the land office about this after the event as it is grounds to have the meeting annulled. Do it within 30 days.

 

Most of your problems seem to stem from the fact that other co-owners say nothing. They only have themselves to blame.

 

I know of no building that sends out the annual report by post, not least because the damn things often weigh a ton and would not fit in an envelope. They are normally made available at the office when the letters are sent out.

 

Voting ratios are normally calculated according to the original sale price of each unit as a percentage of the whole. In some buildings this may mean that units on higher floors have greater voting ratios, or units on the ground floor with direct pool access, or corner units, or farang-name units. All could be worth more or less depending on the building. Technically fee payments should also be calculated the same way though some older buildings may have different arrangements in their by-laws.

[KittenKong]

6 hours ago, Delight said:

Of course a crafty developer  will spead his control. Using the OP's numbers the developer will have 49%. His associate will have 27%.

In effect the developer has the same 76%.

Unsold units will be in the developer's name and I dont see how they can be put in anyone else's except as a result of a sale. Proxies are not a way round it.

 

So in buildings that are not fully sold it should not be possible to manipulate the vote as you describe. Such manipulation would be possible in completed buildings where one person controls a large percentage of the units.

[lkn]

8 hours ago, Chris Po said:

What you mean with :   "it’s based on square meters (well, ratio of ownership in the common area)"  Swimming pool, beach, garage......?????

Section 45. In casting of votes, each joint-owner shall have the votes according to the ration of his ownership in the common property.

 

Section 14. Ownership on the part of joint-ownership in common property shall be according to ratio of the price of each apartment and the total price of all apartments at the time of application for registration of condominium under section 6.

 

Section 15. The following properties shall be regarded as common property:
(1) Land on which the condominium is situated; samuiforsale
(2) Land provided for mutual use or benefits;
(3) Frame structure and structures for stability and prevention and damages to the condominium;
(4) Building or part of the building and equipment provided for mutual use or benefits;
(5) Machines and tools provided for mutual use or benefits;
(6) Facilities and services provided for common use to the condominium;
(7) Other properties provided for mutual use or benefits;
(8) Office of the condominium juristic person;
(9) Immovable property bought or acquired under Section 48 (1);
(10) Structures or systems built for security operations or environmental condition conservation within the condominium: such as; fire hazard preventive system, lighting, air ventilation, air-conditioning, water drainage, waste water treatment or refuse and waste disposal.
(11) Property which the money is used in accordance with Section 18 in looking after and maintenance

 

[Chris Po]

The question is : Can the Developer "overvote" the owners, like he did ? 

It makes no sense to repeat the AGM when we have the same result. 

 

This year it gets 5 years that the guaranty for the building is ending,....it looks like the developer still makes what he wants,.... ! 

 

At the AGM where not 20 % of the owners ( including Proxis). 

 

41 % are not sold or "Hand over",....that means when there are not more than 42 % owners here, we always loose against a grappy developer ???

 

 

 

Edited May 6, 2019 by Chris Po

[lkn]

14 hours ago, Chris Po said:

The question is : Can the Developer "overvote" the owners, like he did ? 

If they have the majority vote, then yes.

 

But how exactly did they override the co-owners?

 

Did they present a financial report to the co-owners? Was a new committee elected (with at most one representative from the developer)?

 

If you have a new committee, the first thing they should do is open a bank account and take over the finances. The management company, nor the developer, should be able to pay their own bills.

 

Once the new committee has to sign the cheques, the new committee are able to hire a different management company, although before even considering this, it is important that you properly diagnose the problem you are trying to solve.

[Chris Po]

4 hours ago, lkn said:

If they have the majority vote, then yes.

 

But how exactly did they override the co-owners?

 

Did they present a financial report to the co-owners? Was a new committee elected (with at most one representative from the developer)?

 

If you have a new committee, the first thing they should do is open a bank account and take over the finances. The management company, nor the developer, should be able to pay their own bills.

 

Once the new committee has to sign the cheques, the new committee are able to hire a different management company, although before even considering this, it is important that you properly diagnose the problem you are trying to solve.

Hello, 

yes they present a financial report, from a company they hired. 

The new committee was elected.  

We have  a bank account, the old chairman told us, but we did not see the balance and we dont know if the developer paid the maintanance fee for the unsold condos on our bankbook.  ( there is a order for us owners : Who does not pay the maintanance fee can not vote ) 

We did not get the voting results after the meeting :  About 5 days later they where published in the elevator and at the entrance. 

The developer voted with about 76 % majority, - 24 % votes came from the owners. 

Our committee : 5 persons,  - 3 Thais ( 2 we never saw before, but they are owners,  1 Thai is the wife of the old chairman who gave up after 8 month - and their Condo is in internet for sale )  1 Japanese, honest man, but speaks no english or thai  , 1 Farang, living here only some weeks a year. 

So nobody will make the developer problems, therefore the developer voted for them . 

They overwrite to co- owners easily :  No result after the AGM and 5 days later they present the results. 

[KittenKong]

The financial report should include the bank balance at the end of the financial year.

 

The total income from fees -  which should be clearly listed in the financial report - will show whether the developer has been billed for fees or not. Just divide the total by the number of units. If your building uses accrual accounting then you wont have any direct indication in the report as to whether the developer has actually paid his common fees but you will know if they have been billed or not. Once billed he will have to pay them at some point. Comparing the bank balances at the beginning and end of the financial year (if you can) will of course indicate whether all the common fee bills have been collected or not.

 

It is quite common for results to be posted some time after the meeting, especially in large buildings. But of course that does leave a lot of scope for manipulation of ballots in a crooked building. And make no mistake many buildings here are completely crooked. You do have the right to insist that the ballots be counted at the meeting, but that would require support from other co-owners which clearly you do not have.

 

The percentage of votes cast by the developer appears to be illegal assuming that the developer is just one entity. I would make a written complaint to the Land Office though they may already have been paid off.

 

Presumably you also elected a juristic person manager. Is that person in the pocket of the developer? I would expect him to be.

 

Your description of your committee and meeting is very similar to the way I have seen other crooked management companies operate. They manipulate the votes to ensure that only weak or corruptable committee members are elected, and they may also rely on the fact that most Thai members do not attend committee meetings to ensure that few meetings are held. If there are no meetings held then even the decent committee members will be unable to do anything.

 

Until you can get more of the real owners interested in what is happening you will probably not get anywhere at all.

[lkn]

5 hours ago, KittenKong said:

If your building uses accrual accounting then you wont have any direct indication in the report as to whether the developer has actually paid his common fees

If the developer (or other co-owners) have been billed for management fee, water supply, or similar, but have not yet paid it at the end of the financial year, it should show up in the balance sheet under Assets → Accounts Receivable / Other Debtors.

 

Though you probably won’t get a breakdown of who the debtors are, or exactly what services/expenses are unpaid, but given the amount, it should be easy to deduct whether or not it corresponds to unpaid management fee and for roughly how many square meters/units.

 

And if you do have a significant amount under accounts receivable, it would not be unreasonable to ask for a breakdown/explanation at the AGM, as someone seems to be sleeping at the wheel.

 

Edited May 9, 2019 by lkn

[KittenKong]

57 minutes ago, lkn said:

If the developer (or other co-owners) have been billed for management fee, water supply, or similar, but have not yet paid it at the end of the financial year, it should show up in the balance sheet under Assets → Accounts Receivable / Other Debtors.

It may show up there but in my experience here such things may be incorrectly reported for whatever reason.

[lkn]

5 hours ago, KittenKong said:

It may show up there but in my experience here such things may be incorrectly reported for whatever reason.

 

Financial report is balance sheet + profit & loss statement created from the general ledger.

 

In the balance sheet you have assets with a breakdown into bank account(s), cash on hand, inventory, prepaid expenses, deposits, accounts receivable, etc. which will add up to the total assets, which in turn is last year’s total assets plus profit minus loss from the current year.

 

I really don’t see how things could be “incorrectly reported” because it is all generated from the same source data and there are several ways in which these numbers must “add up”.

 

Sure, the accountant/auditor can use some bad/misleading labels for some items in the report, but any numbers that look wrong would be the result of errors in the general ledger, i.e. errors in the bookkeeping done throughout the year.

 

Though my experience does not include having lived in the Upside Down dimension… ????

[KittenKong]

3 minutes ago, lkn said:

I really don’t see how things could be “incorrectly reported” because it is all generated from the same source data and there are several ways in which these numbers must “add up”.

 

Sure, the accountant/auditor can use some bad/misleading labels for some items in the report, but any numbers that look wrong would be the result of errors in the general ledger, i.e. errors in the bookkeeping done throughout the year. 

Well, yes.

 

I could show you some astounding examples of "creative" condo accounting and I suspect that many others who have posted on here could too. But most co-owners seem to completely unaware of such errors, or dont care.

[Chris Po]

Thank you all for your comments . 

Our owners are easy to cheat.  Nobody complains at the AGM, they sit there and keep quiet. 

Of course, end of April not many people are here, therefore they made the AGM so late.