Jomtien Condo Owners Sue For Sea View

[nucag]

good time to put a deposit on an apartment in vt7 , i beleive that a mucher lower sale price could be negotiated with this sale price with all this controversy, and common sense will prevail , eventually a very nice Y shaped vt7 will be built opposite the beach and tidy up that corner of beautiful jomtien and hide that mouldy jomtien towers from view ( its so ugly its not funny ) .

You see a precedent has already been set in pattaya with so many premium apartment towers being built within the 200 m limit and i am sure development will overide pulling all the other ones down. if you want to look at what will happen to pattaya in 20 yrs do a google search on surfers paradise Australia , its a suburb on the gold coast , all the premium apartment towers are beach side and all the old crap is left at the back.and there not mucher dear than vt7 , probaly about 5-600,000 usd for a 2 bed 2 bath apt

[Tammi]

good time to put a deposit on an apartment in vt7 , i beleive that a mucher lower sale price could be negotiated with this sale price with all this controversy, and common sense will prevail , eventually a very nice Y shaped vt7 will be built opposite the beach and tidy up that corner of beautiful jomtien and hide that mouldy jomtien towers from view ( its so ugly its not funny ) .

You see a precedent has already been set in pattaya with so many premium apartment towers being built within the 200 m limit and i am sure development will overide pulling all the other ones down. if you want to look at what will happen to pattaya in 20 yrs do a google search on surfers paradise Australia , its a suburb on the gold coast , all the premium apartment towers are beach side and all the old crap is left at the back.and there not mucher dear than vt7 , probaly about 5-600,000 usd for a 2 bed 2 bath apt

So how many are you buying?

Name me one thing that is beautiful about Jomthien.

You must be a real estate agent.

[stopvt7]

nucaq “good time to put a deposit on an apartment in vt7 , i beleive that a mucher lower sale price could be negotiated with this sale price with all this controversy, and common sense will prevail” haha!

Here a person without common sense and most like a real estate agent! Who could care less about the laws of Thailand as long he can but money from Thailand into his pocket?

Why don’t you read the law?

[nucag]

ok i will answer the following posters ,if i was going to buy it would be one with a 10 % deposit and see what happens , and if nothing happens i would be confident of getting my 10 % back, answer to second question name one thing beatiful about jomtien well thats easy , the answer is it is not pattaya , and the beach it is easy to get into water compared t0 phuket where u have to walk hundres of metres becuase the fall is so flat to get swimming depth, so i think ol tammi u better pack ur bags and go back to good ol usa , if u hate jomtien so much.

and to the other poster . lets see what happens regarding the law , usually common sense prevails , especially for the long term development of jomtien and pattaya . i personally think the most important things are in this order , clean the quality of the water , allow new nice develpments along beach line , complete the freeway to bkk and airport , and upgrade and extend the railway line to bkk.

[hughden]

Clean the quality of the water? I agree, it is disgusting; and I wonder what plans there are to process the waste from several hundred toilets in VT7.....

[nucag]

Clean the quality of the water? I agree, it is disgusting; and I wonder what plans there are to process the waste from several hundred toilets in VT7.....

the water from vt7 has to go into the sewer system like all the other buildings , then it has to be either cleaned or partially cleaned and recycled onto plants , thats basic urban infrastructure which has to be done on a larger scale by the pattaya govt , and yes they are capable of that. then you have to work on bkk

[Tammi]

ok i will answer the following posters ,if i was going to buy it would be one with a 10 % deposit and see what happens , and if nothing happens i would be confident of getting my 10 % back, answer to second question name one thing beatiful about jomtien well thats easy , the answer is it is not pattaya , and the beach it is easy to get into water compared t0 phuket where u have to walk hundres of metres becuase the fall is so flat to get swimming depth, so i think ol tammi u better pack ur bags and go back to good ol usa , if u hate jomtien so much.

and to the other poster . lets see what happens regarding the law , usually common sense prevails , especially for the long term development of jomtien and pattaya . i personally think the most important things are in this order , clean the quality of the water , allow new nice develpments along beach line , complete the freeway to bkk and airport , and upgrade and extend the railway line to bkk.

Who said I hated Jomthien. I said there is nothing beautiful about it. In the mid 80s it was beautiful.

If you knew anything about spelling you would know I am not American. But I do like every American I have had the pleasure to meet.

What is most important is that the Law is upheld; everything else follows on, sensibly and properly.

[nucag]

ok i will answer the following posters ,if i was going to buy it would be one with a 10 % deposit and see what happens , and if nothing happens i would be confident of getting my 10 % back, answer to second question name one thing beatiful about jomtien well thats easy , the answer is it is not pattaya , and the beach it is easy to get into water compared t0 phuket where u have to walk hundres of metres becuase the fall is so flat to get swimming depth, so i think ol tammi u better pack ur bags and go back to good ol usa , if u hate jomtien so much.

and to the other poster . lets see what happens regarding the law , usually common sense prevails , especially for the long term development of jomtien and pattaya . i personally think the most important things are in this order , clean the quality of the water , allow new nice develpments along beach line , complete the freeway to bkk and airport , and upgrade and extend the railway line to bkk.

Who said I hated Jomthien. I said there is nothing beautiful about it. In the mid 80s it was beautiful.

If you knew anything about spelling you would know I am not American. But I do like every American I have had the pleasure to meet.

What is most important is that the Law is upheld; everything else follows on, sensibly and properly.

sorry for guessing u were american , my humble apologies , i just assumed tammi was an american name , as i have only heard it used there. yes maybe ur right as in tammy wynette the country music singer , again sorrry

[Tammi]

ok i will answer the following posters ,if i was going to buy it would be one with a 10 % deposit and see what happens , and if nothing happens i would be confident of getting my 10 % back, answer to second question name one thing beatiful about jomtien well thats easy , the answer is it is not pattaya , and the beach it is easy to get into water compared t0 phuket where u have to walk hundres of metres becuase the fall is so flat to get swimming depth, so i think ol tammi u better pack ur bags and go back to good ol usa , if u hate jomtien so much.

and to the other poster . lets see what happens regarding the law , usually common sense prevails , especially for the long term development of jomtien and pattaya . i personally think the most important things are in this order , clean the quality of the water , allow new nice develpments along beach line , complete the freeway to bkk and airport , and upgrade and extend the railway line to bkk.

Who said I hated Jomthien. I said there is nothing beautiful about it. In the mid 80s it was beautiful.

If you knew anything about spelling you would know I am not American. But I do like every American I have had the pleasure to meet.

What is most important is that the Law is upheld; everything else follows on, sensibly and properly.

sorry for guessing u were american , my humble apologies , i just assumed tammi was an american name , as i have only heard it used there. yes maybe ur right as in tammy wynette the country music singer , again sorrry

U r 4given. Tammy Wynette singing Stand By Your Man - great!

[icecubes]

'Tammi' date='2007-04-22 18:19:13' post='1264832'][Who said I hated Jomthien. I said there is nothing beautiful about it. In the mid 80s it was beautiful.

If you knew anything about spelling you would know I am not American. But I do like every American I have had the pleasure to meet.

What is most important is that the Law is upheld; everything else follows on, sensibly and properly

.

Tammi' If you knew anything about spelling

Tammi U r 4given.

[Tammi]

Hello Jomthien Complex co-owners! Is VT doing any work on VT7 or has work definitely stopped?

By the way, your condominium should not have developed cracks because cars moved around - the building would have been designed for cars moving around a car park.

[stopvt7]

Hello Jomthien Complex co-owners! Is VT doing any work on VT7 or has work definitely stopped?

By the way, your condominium should not have developed cracks because cars moved around - the building would have been designed for cars moving around a car park.

NO ONE IS WORKING! IF THEY START WORKING THEY JAIL VT7 OWNER. HE FIND OUT WHAT JAIL LIKE IF HE DISREGARD THE COUR ORDER

[Artisan]

Hello Jomthien Complex co-owners! Is VT doing any work on VT7 or has work definitely stopped?

By the way, your condominium should not have developed cracks because cars moved around - the building would have been designed for cars moving around a car park.

The indisputable fact is that cracks did appear within the Jomtien Complex Condotel (the Twin Towers) about 7 or 8 years ago. The swimming pool cracked and the garden developed a long crack that was maybe 1'' to 2" wide.

Sure, the building should have been designed for cars moving around the car park. However, I do not innocently assume that it was nor do I assume that it was constructed to meet this design. They can be quite different elements of the same project. Haven't you heard of "eating"?

[Tammi]

Hello Jomthien Complex co-owners! Is VT doing any work on VT7 or has work definitely stopped?

By the way, your condominium should not have developed cracks because cars moved around - the building would have been designed for cars moving around a car park.

The indisputable fact is that cracks did appear within the Jomtien Complex Condotel (the Twin Towers) about 7 or 8 years ago. The swimming pool cracked and the garden developed a long crack that was maybe 1'' to 2" wide.

Sure, the building should have been designed for cars moving around the car park. However, I do not innocently assume that it was nor do I assume that it was constructed to meet this design. They can be quite different elements of the same project. Haven't you heard of "eating"?

No, haven't heard of "eating". Please explain. Many thanks.

[Artisan]

No, haven't heard of "eating". Please explain. Many thanks.

All concrete structures will crack to some extent so special design precautions are taken to ensure crack control. This means including secondary reinforcing to limit the crack width to an acceptable level.

What if the architects of Jomtien Complex Condo recognised the potential implications of the raised carpark and the overhanging swimming pool and specified the appropriate reinforcement to the concrete in this area? What if the contractor tendered for the civil work meeting the architects specification throughout, but purchased lighter reinforcement and pocketted the cost difference? What if it wasn't the contractor but the site foreman who installed the lighter reinforcement and sold the specified reinforcement off site? What if it was the concrete supplier who took the money for the right concrete formula but sent a lower graded mix instead? All these people are guilty of "eating".

Think about the very rapid deterioration of some new roads in Thailand. Think about Suvarnabhumi Airport and the runway cracks....and what about the CTX scanner debacle? "Eating" is a feature in all of these.

It's the Thai way of explaining how unprincipled people with the opportunity, and the inclination, get richer by creaming off money from contracts and projects, whether public or privately funded.

I hope that's clear Tammi.

Edited April 24, 2007 by Artisan

[nucag]

why is jomtien towers more run down than view talay aparments , is there a lousy expenditure committe or what , or just the construction being so white it gets mouldy quick , at least they should clean the outside glass near the elevators, thats one of the reasons i was keen on vt7 was to block out that awful run down building , maybe if someone tidied it up and built some low rise development in front i might not be so pro vt7

[Tammi]

why is jomtien towers more run down than view talay aparments , is there a lousy expenditure committe or what , or just the construction being so white it gets mouldy quick , at least they should clean the outside glass near the elevators, thats one of the reasons i was keen on vt7 was to block out that awful run down building , maybe if someone tidied it up and built some low rise development in front i might not be so pro vt7

I haven't looked closely at Jomthien Complex but can tell you that condos I have looked closely at are a mess. Jomthien Condotel, Grand Condotel, View Talays (the older ones) leave a lot to be desired. Why? Maybe co-owners don't pay annual fees; maybe General Manager is not good; maybe Management Committee is no good; maybe co-owners (who I think are mostly men) haven't a clue about housekeeping and gardening or seeing that safety and security measures are in place and are followed. So long as the swim pool is the right colour, who cares about anything else! Co-owners (mostly men) don't see deterioration until it's impossible to not see it.

[fisherd3]

I have recently learned that some Thai nob actiually the guy who cut the tape when Jomtien Complex was opened, owns a whole floor in Jomtien complex about floor 12 , and actually uses it, he stands to lose his entire 'view' and really virtually everything thats worth alight in the property, he is not a happy bunny.

He has some connection with Rayong like maybe his home town, so we all know thats where the relevant court sits, he probably knows people on the court.

So in a round about way the 'Thai wobble' might have two sides, the bribery that got the permission in the first place, and the man who knows the guy on the bench!

Considering the building of that place where it is obviosly has no connection with the word 'planning' perhaps the Jomtien Complex lot stand a chance!

[ThaiBob]

“I'm not referring to Administrative Court taking action as that would obviously discourage people from pursuing their legal rights. But a citizen who believes he has been damaged I would think has every right to take court action.”

No! What part of NO do you not understand, the “n” or is it the “o”. They are not aloud to take action in any other court against the complainants! The King set up Administrative court that people in Thailand have a place to take action when government and their partners do questionable acts that violates Thai laws. Administrative Court studies the case and the laws before accepting the filing. Then they can probe into why this law was broken? The complainants have no control over this investigative action. And at the April hearing City hall and VT7 admitted the 200 meter law was correct but said it should not be enforce. City hall and VT7 asked for a fast final decision to stop future investigation.

Ministerial Regulation

Issue 9 (B.E. 2521)

Issued under the Building Construction Control Act

B.E. 2479

By the virtue of the Section 15 of the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479, the Ministry of Interior issued the following Ministerial Regulations:

1. No. 1 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 to be amended by the followings statement:

“No. 1. This Ministerial Regulation applies within the boundary line of the map annexed to the Royal Decree Promulgating the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 in the regions of Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Khua and Tambol Nhong Prue of Amphur Bang Lamung of Chonburi Province B.E. 2520”

2. No. 3 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 to be amended by the following statement:

“No 3. Setting of 200 meters measured from the map annexed to the Royal Decree Promulgating the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 in the regions of Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Khua and Tambol Nhong Prue of Amphur Bang Lamung of Chonburi Province B.E. 2521 at the seaside in which the following constructions shall not be built:

• Building of 14 meters higher than road level.
  

The Ministerial Regulation is hereby given on the date of twenty-third of November B.E. 2521 (1978).

We used: Asia LawWorks Ltd.

Markus Klemm and Amnat Thiengtham

Phone 38-411-591 or e-mail [email protected]

Thailand has law which courts enforce. If you like to read the court case or injunction ruling go and check the Blog at: http://stopvt7.blogspot.com/

I wish I shared your confidence. "They later were aware that if they proceeded with the lawsuit, this firm suggested that they could be at great risk of a countersuit, which would ruin them financially. The residence committee found it impossible to get accurate information from lawyers, local and government agencies. (From Pattaya People)" so there does appear to be another opinion. If in fact, the court rules there was no corruption by the City official(s), then he/she could file a legal action in the criminal or civil court (not Administrative Court). This is not retribution but simply somebody excercising their legal rights.

Edited April 24, 2007 by ThaiBob

[Irene]

"I'm not referring to Administrative Court taking action as that would obviously discourage people from pursuing their legal rights. But a citizen who believes he has been damaged I would think has every right to take court action."

No! What part of NO do you not understand, the "n" or is it the "o". They are not aloud to take action in any other court against the complainants! The King set up Administrative court that people in Thailand have a place to take action when government and their partners do questionable acts that violates Thai laws. Administrative Court studies the case and the laws before accepting the filing. Then they can probe into why this law was broken? The complainants have no control over this investigative action. And at the April hearing City hall and VT7 admitted the 200 meter law was correct but said it should not be enforce. City hall and VT7 asked for a fast final decision to stop future investigation.

Ministerial Regulation

Issue 9 (B.E. 2521)

Issued under the Building Construction Control Act

B.E. 2479

By the virtue of the Section 15 of the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479, the Ministry of Interior issued the following Ministerial Regulations:

1. No. 1 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 to be amended by the followings statement:

"No. 1. This Ministerial Regulation applies within the boundary line of the map annexed to the Royal Decree Promulgating the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 in the regions of Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Khua and Tambol Nhong Prue of Amphur Bang Lamung of Chonburi Province B.E. 2520"

2. No. 3 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 to be amended by the following statement:

"No 3. Setting of 200 meters measured from the map annexed to the Royal Decree Promulgating the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 in the regions of Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Khua and Tambol Nhong Prue of Amphur Bang Lamung of Chonburi Province B.E. 2521 at the seaside in which the following constructions shall not be built:

• Building of 14 meters higher than road level.
  

The Ministerial Regulation is hereby given on the date of twenty-third of November B.E. 2521 (1978).

We used: Asia LawWorks Ltd.

Markus Klemm and Amnat Thiengtham

Phone 38-411-591 or e-mail [email protected]

Thailand has law which courts enforce. If you like to read the court case or injunction ruling go and check the Blog at: http://stopvt7.blogspot.com/

I wish I shared your confidence. "They later were aware that if they proceeded with the lawsuit, this firm suggested that they could be at great risk of a countersuit, which would ruin them financially. The residence committee found it impossible to get accurate information from lawyers, local and government agencies. (From Pattaya People)" so there does appear to be another opinion. If in fact, the court rules there was no corruption by the City official(s), then he/she could file a legal action in the criminal or civil court (not Administrative Court). This is not retribution but simply somebody excercising their legal rights.

ThaiBob,

You got the wrong end of the stick.

First, the aggrieved parties did not accuse the City Hall of any corruption. They took the City Hall to the Administrative Court because they sincerely believed with no malice that the City Hall's building permit issued to a developer to build a building was in breach of the law. Since the building will be higher than the law allows.

Second, the Court gave a judgement in April agreeing with the claimants of their bona fide grievances and temporarily issued an order to stop any further construction. The Court set the date for the next hearing in November, 2007 to hear of the City Hall's defence.

Third, after the due process, the Court can either agree with the City Hall or the claimants depending on the position of the proposed building and interpretation of the law. It is agreed that there is doubt either way. The due process is to allow fairness to both parties.

With that background, you think there could be a countersuit if the Court favours the City Hall. Hardly likely, since the Court has already judged that the claimants have got their rights to at least stop the construction while the Court is in process of the case. It is not frequent for the Court to issue an injunction. The injunction has a strong implication that the claimants have got their points.

The claimants purely relied on their rights to defend their legal rights of ownership. Now they suspected that their rights are now being encroached because of the City Hall's action.

I think the threat of countersuits is a red herring, just to tell the claimants to cool down and regard those claimants as nuisance. Another aim is to re-energise the condominium market in Pataya where their building positions could also be dubious. Yes, the claimants may not know it but there is a lot of dole involved.

EGAT was also stopped with the Court's injunction from selling their shares to the public only a few weeks before shares offering to the public. A few months after that injunction, the Court decided in favour of the claimants and viewed the privatising process was not in accordance with the laws.

Not that this case will follow that EGAT's pattern. It now hangs on the strength of the City Hall's defence and the claimants' lawyer countering with facts of within 200 metres and the intention of the law.

[ThaiBob]

"I'm not referring to Administrative Court taking action as that would obviously discourage people from pursuing their legal rights. But a citizen who believes he has been damaged I would think has every right to take court action."

No! What part of NO do you not understand, the "n" or is it the "o". They are not aloud to take action in any other court against the complainants! The King set up Administrative court that people in Thailand have a place to take action when government and their partners do questionable acts that violates Thai laws. Administrative Court studies the case and the laws before accepting the filing. Then they can probe into why this law was broken? The complainants have no control over this investigative action. And at the April hearing City hall and VT7 admitted the 200 meter law was correct but said it should not be enforce. City hall and VT7 asked for a fast final decision to stop future investigation.

Ministerial Regulation

Issue 9 (B.E. 2521)

Issued under the Building Construction Control Act

B.E. 2479

By the virtue of the Section 15 of the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479, the Ministry of Interior issued the following Ministerial Regulations:

1. No. 1 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 to be amended by the followings statement:

"No. 1. This Ministerial Regulation applies within the boundary line of the map annexed to the Royal Decree Promulgating the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 in the regions of Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Khua and Tambol Nhong Prue of Amphur Bang Lamung of Chonburi Province B.E. 2520"

2. No. 3 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 to be amended by the following statement:

"No 3. Setting of 200 meters measured from the map annexed to the Royal Decree Promulgating the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 in the regions of Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Khua and Tambol Nhong Prue of Amphur Bang Lamung of Chonburi Province B.E. 2521 at the seaside in which the following constructions shall not be built:

• Building of 14 meters higher than road level.
  

The Ministerial Regulation is hereby given on the date of twenty-third of November B.E. 2521 (1978).

We used: Asia LawWorks Ltd.

Markus Klemm and Amnat Thiengtham

Phone 38-411-591 or e-mail [email protected]

Thailand has law which courts enforce. If you like to read the court case or injunction ruling go and check the Blog at: http://stopvt7.blogspot.com/

I wish I shared your confidence. "They later were aware that if they proceeded with the lawsuit, this firm suggested that they could be at great risk of a countersuit, which would ruin them financially. The residence committee found it impossible to get accurate information from lawyers, local and government agencies. (From Pattaya People)" so there does appear to be another opinion. If in fact, the court rules there was no corruption by the City official(s), then he/she could file a legal action in the criminal or civil court (not Administrative Court). This is not retribution but simply somebody excercising their legal rights.

ThaiBob,

You got the wrong end of the stick.

First, the aggrieved parties did not accuse the City Hall of any corruption. They took the City Hall to the Administrative Court because they sincerely believed with no malice that the City Hall's building permit issued to a developer to build a building was in breach of the law. Since the building will be higher than the law allows.

Second, the Court gave a judgement in April agreeing with the claimants of their bona fide grievances and temporarily issued an order to stop any further construction. The Court set the date for the next hearing in November, 2007 to hear of the City Hall's defence.

Third, after the due process, the Court can either agree with the City Hall or the claimants depending on the position of the proposed building and interpretation of the law. It is agreed that there is doubt either way. The due process is to allow fairness to both parties.

With that background, you think there could be a countersuit if the Court favours the City Hall. Hardly likely, since the Court has already judged that the claimants have got their rights to at least stop the construction while the Court is in process of the case. It is not frequent for the Court to issue an injunction. The injunction has a strong implication that the claimants have got their points.

The claimants purely relied on their rights to defend their legal rights of ownership. Now they suspected that their rights are now being encroached because of the City Hall's action.

I think the threat of countersuits is a red herring, just to tell the claimants to cool down and regard those claimants as nuisance. Another aim is to re-energise the condominium market in Pataya where their building positions could also be dubious. Yes, the claimants may not know it but there is a lot of dole involved.

EGAT was also stopped with the Court's injunction from selling their shares to the public only a few weeks before shares offering to the public. A few months after that injunction, the Court decided in favour of the claimants and viewed the privatising process was not in accordance with the laws.

Not that this case will follow that EGAT's pattern. It now hangs on the strength of the City Hall's defence and the claimants' lawyer countering with facts of within 200 metres and the intention of the law.

I agree with you, but my comments were based on the Pattaya Mail article which stated, "The complaint was filed by 10 homeowners in Jomtien Complex, located on Thappraya Road, on November 29 last year. Addressed to the Administrative Court of Rayong, the complaint cited a Pattaya City officer and View Talay Jomtien Condominium (1999) Co Ltd, and alleged inappropriate behavior on behalf of officers." I don't know the details of the complaint, but it would seem the City official(s) in the complaint would be now be a matter of public record. I think the JC complaintants have an excellent, potentially winning case based on interpretation of ministerial regulation without aledging "hanky-panky" by City official(s).

[laurus77]

So, what come to happen next, have we wait to November, before to get know more about this case and shall it be then the last hearing around this case.

I am interested about it bce i have made a contract to buy a unit from vt7 and it looks it never can be ready??

And now i am willing to disclaim that paper, yes they are not willing to get promise to do it!! Anyway yet, but maybe people only come to lost more and more money , if pay by payment shedule and vt7 project do itself bankgroup???

And if i will stop to pay them and wait the final decision, tv7 shall take all inside money which is paid, not easy to decide what to do

[Irene]

So, what come to happen next, have we wait to November, before to get know more about this case and shall it be then the last hearing around this case.

I am interested about it bce i have made a contract to buy a unit from vt7 and it looks it never can be ready??

And now i am willing to disclaim that paper, yes they are not willing to get promise to do it!! Anyway yet, but maybe people only come to lost more and more money , if pay by payment shedule and vt7 project do itself bankgroup???

And if i will stop to pay them and wait the final decision, tv7 shall take all inside money which is paid, not easy to decide what to do

Laurus 77,

November is only the first hearing. It will go on for many months. After the Court's decision, there will definitely an appeal by either party to the Supreme Administrative Court. It will be for a while.

You better check with your purchase contract and your lawyer whether the disruption of the construction could be a cause for discontinuing payments and obtaining a refund.

[laurus77]

Yes i have thought by same way.

Anyway, does somebody to know , where that 200m have to start count, from hidetide or lowtide or mean of tides??

Yesterday and today they are doing meter about that 200m, there is people from bkk and cityhall, office worker told me yesterday about it!

Edited April 25, 2007 by laurus77

[stopvt7]

JCC group of ten file our court case the 12 of March and had a court hearing 28 of March and receive the protection of temporarily court injunction on 9 of April. Which stop the construction of View Talay Project 7. That is fasts!

I heard dozen of times from farang what I was wasting my time organizing ten co-owners and raising funds for a court case. This court decision shows that Administrative Court applies the law without looks at ones nationality. Thailand is a country of laws and Administrative Court in Rayon applied the law fairly. The regulation is that any building over 14 meters tall (about 3 stories) is prohibited within 200 meters of the “sea shore”. There is other Thai law which states that “sea shore” is measured from “the high tide line.

Remember the admin court did not want to give a final decision because they investigates government agency for “c”. So they left the question of where to measure from unanswered to keep their investigation open.

In the final decision the line will be high tide, their many cases which set high tide as the place to beginning measurements. And 200 meter from high tide is about where JCC fence line is in front of their building.

November 28 is the last date for the case to be held open. We expect the case to close before that date but we can not answer the question when?

Richard Haines

And Thaibob needs to stop blow smoke!

[Ground Engineer]

This might be slightly off topic but I would be very interseted to know if North Point Condominium falls under the same legislation as VT7 in respect to not being able to build within 200m of the mean tide line.

As you may know the south tower of NorthPoint is being constucted only 100m from the mean tide line.

[stopvt7]

Thaibob

By the way at the end of the Admin court hearing both the city hall lawyer and VT7 lawyers (and old man who was shaking so bad he could hold his pen and I thought he was going to have a heart attack) admitted that the Ministerial Regulation Issue 9 (B.E. 2521) Issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 was the correct legal law. They were just not sure where to measure from? They question will be answered and it will be 200meters from the high tide marker!

[stopvt7]

This might be slightly off topic but I would be very interseted to know if North Point Condominium falls under the same legislation as VT7 in respect to not being able to build within 200m of the mean tide line.

As you may know the south tower of NorthPoint is being constucted only 100m from the mean tide line.

YES! Not only North Point, but their other buildings under construction which are in violating the 200 meter law. Ministerial Regulation Issue 9 (B.E. 2521) Issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479.

By the virtue of the Section 15 of the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479, the Ministry of Interior issued the following Ministerial Regulations: 2. No. 3 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 to be amended by the following statement: Setting of 200 meters measured which the following constructions shall not be built: Building of 14 meters higher than road level.

[DrFisher]

Well, the condo owners are already beat the judge will point there is no "sea" in Thailand thus the "sea view can not possibly be blocked by construction, in fact they will have to start a new suit for the "ocean view" being obstructed however by that time the new condos will be constructed and grandfathered in.

[Artisan]

This might be slightly off topic but I would be very interested to know if North Point Condominium falls under the same legislation as VT7 in respect to not being able to build within 200m of the mean tide line.

As you may know the south tower of NorthPoint is being constructed only 100m from the mean tide line.

YES! Not only North Point, but their other buildings under construction which are in violating the 200 meter law. Ministerial Regulation Issue 9 (B.E. 2521) Issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479.

By the virtue of the Section 15 of the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479, the Ministry of Interior issued the following Ministerial Regulations: 2. No. 3 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 to be amended by the following statement: Setting of 200 meters measured which the following constructions shall not be built: Building of 14 meters higher than road level.

This entire issue is slowly opening a can of worms and now has incredibly far-reaching implications. I have a gut feeling that that this might detract from the complainants goal.

Will they all be pulled down? Of course they won't.....But I hope that the complainants from JCC are successful and VT7, and other projects like this in the planning pipeline, are quashed.

Does anyone know if the legislation also applies to the opposite side of the Gulf where towering beach-side condominiums and hotels litter the shore between Cha-am and Hua Hin?