Jomtien Condo Owners Sue For Sea View

[Tammi]

Dear jpm76,

Please show us where any of the Jomthien Complex Condominium plaintiffs made slanderous remarks.

[lookat]

Dear jpm76,

Please show us where any of the Jomthien Complex Condominium plaintiffs made slanderous remarks.

Look at a quote from Pattaya_Fox "A number of posts referring to unsubstantiated allegations of corruption have been deleted.”

Read jpm76 posting and you see he posted unsubstantiated allegations of corruption slander the courts, Thai government and the stopvt7 group with any prof. Lets keep things simple, jpm76 tells lies!

Were is Pattaya_Fox action now?

[Pattayaseven]

Can anyone please post a picture of the building process? How many stories is the building now?

Edited April 25, 2008 by Pattayaseven

[Tammi]

Can anyone please post a picture of the building process? How many stories is the building now?

I think about 10.

[ThaiBob]

Can anyone please post a picture of the building process? How many stories is the building now?

Taken about a week ago with a friend's cell phone camera. It is hard to tell but it looks like 11 or 12 floors.

Edited April 25, 2008 by ThaiBob

[jpm76]

Dear jpm76,

Please show us where any of the Jomthien Complex Condominium plaintiffs made slanderous remarks.

Look at a quote from Pattaya_Fox "A number of posts referring to unsubstantiated allegations of corruption have been deleted."

Read jpm76 posting and you see he posted unsubstantiated allegations of corruption slander the courts, Thai government and the stopvt7 group with any prof. Lets keep things simple, jpm76 tells lies!

Were is Pattaya_Fox action now?

I only read these postings every week or so, but anyone who has followed it over the last few months is quite clear upon plenty of scenarios whereby the reasons implied why your side lost in the courts was due to "corruption" charges, rather than the fact that the interpretation of the THAI language versions of the laws (since we have had to rely upon StopVT7's English accounts on this site, and I know not how well he translates from Thai to English, nor how well he reasons legally). You even attack your own lawyer and "imply" corruption on his behalf also in him being admitted into the government circles. One does not need go back further than the last page to "understand" what you are implying all throughout this whole case - you accuse of illegal building permits being allowed because of "money under the table", courts being paid off to interpret the law in certain ways, and VT have been accused on many instances of paying off government officials as a matter of normal business. VT7 investors have been accused all throughout also of supporting (as if we knowingly engage in the support of such activities) corruption to line our own pockets, and I am just absolutely amazed that you do not understand the implications of the charges, implicit and explicit, that you put forth in this public arena. We are fortunate that the moderator does intervene on occasions to take out the worst of these abuses (and you can hardly argue that it is VT7 investors making these unsubstantiated accusations at our own side), and you actually acknowledge that the moderator has been deleting posts due to instances of this. And if you think that my post could be charged with making accustaions of corruption of courts, government and stopvt7 group, then you have obviously completely missed the whole point of my argument of not making such accusations without evidence. To date, stopvt7 sympathisers have enjoyed the control of this post and have posted with liberty anything that they like, but I should think that you should also acknowledge the rights of others to make their "opinions" (because the majority of the content on this post is no more than opinions, and misguided in places depending upon which side you sit) heard, and my opinion happens to be that VT7 sympathisers have often crossed the line that would lead to legal action in environments that take such matters more seriously. So I will not, cannot and should not have to apologise, because even "Blind Freddy" could see what I am referring to, and the evidence is quite clear that the moderator has also thought that "unsubstantiated allegations of corruption" are also occuring, else he would not have deleted them. They must have been blatant cases, because "corruption" has been implied all throughout this case, and I really doubt, language difficulties aside, that any of you could truly believe that you are not making such charges at times when you write what you write. So, if you are looking for an apology from me, you are kidding yourselves, because I do not think that I owe any of you any apology on any account. So where exactly are my lies??? I do not have time to count all the crosses against StopVT7 sympathisers, but anyone who is new to this site will not have to look back very far at all. To use Stopvt7's own phrase "anyone with a brain" will see what I refer to, and those with a brain that have actually written here in the past are well aware that the bulk of these posts have been little more than opinions and unsubstantiated ponderings. I doubt that you have even met the owner of VT, but only a page back are several posts also referring to the subjective "feelings of anger" of the VT owner, if it happens to be one person. I have no idea, and do not claim to be as knowledgeable upon Pattaya affairs as many here, nor even VT and its management, but I think that I am inclined to seperate the "facts" from the dribble of "opinions" that have often occured here. That being said, I have followed Stopvt7's "reasoning" and I only wish that the posts could be limited to "facts" and reasoning, rather than speculation surrounding "feelings of VT owners" and "reasons for past lawyers heading into government" as they are subjective speculations without any evidence to back any "theories". The three of you who have actually responded to my posting have actually admittedly often kept to this task much better than many who post to the support of your cause, but I believe that you are slipping a little, and I post to remind you and all others of the need to keep people informed of facts, not your speculations and unsubstantiated theories. Fact is that the Rayong court ruled in the favour of the arguments of City Hall and its specialists, regardless how "wrong" (a personal category of judgement) you may have thought this to be. On that note, I leave you to it, and hope that these posts continue to provide us all with the facts for us all to work off. Thanks ThiaBob for the picture that shows recent progress - this is perhaps most important to VT7 investors at this point in time, as we continue to make our payments towards what I hope will be a glorious VT7 project.

[jpm76]

[/color]Dear jpm76

Subject: Your posting 2008-04-24 at 19:35:16 on Thaivisa.com

The Stopvt7 group does not think or call the Thailand Courts, the government or VT7 owns "corrupt"! We have much respect for the government, courts and the laws of Thailand and have received very high government advice to use the Administrative Court.

So DO NOT accuse US of calling anyone CORRUPT!

People with brains understand court are for people to settle their difference and all people living in country are given access to the country courts.

Thailand is a country of laws! We are thankful of thier court system and will let it work!

Your statements in your posting are "slanders" and we demand you apologize!

Here is my apology.... sorry that I do not think how you want me to think. I have "opinions" too, and I "think" that the Rayong court probably ruled from a standpoint of knowing Thai law and its interpretations better than any non-native to the country. In Lookat's reply I have corrected some of the misunderstandings of my post, and it is quite clear from my post that I was referring to the "StopVT7 team" as all those who have blogged off in its arguments against the "legality" of the building permit issued for the VT7 project. That "team" includes posters such as Jessica and OneMikeinBangkok, regardless of the fact that they are most likely not "plaintiffs", but I was clear in that I was writing to the general public who would be possibly reading the one sided posts, rather than limiting it to the plantiffs. I have there also outlined where the "plaintiffs" (of which my understanding is that you are the only one here, maybe Lookat I do not know) are garbling away from the facts, and inputting their own speculations into the equation. I believe that the implications are quite clear from the posts, and claims of corruption have been a staple throughout this forum post. Once this is understood, it is clear that I am not slandering you (which would make me hypocritical) because you could hardly deny that some of your posts have left no real doubt as to what you are implying about certain matters. Implicit, explicit...does not change the purpose of the communication. And I guess that I can count myself among those with a brain because I remind you that I am the VT7 investor that actually came out in your defense a while ago clearly stating my "opinion" that you had every right to go to the courts and make your case there. I completely supported that, and still do. My concern is that, in legal systems I am accustomed to, the courts would actually silence you and prevent you from taking to such public forums as these in an attempt to raise an army of moral crusader knights who know far less than you about all the htings that have transpired, and may or may not have a lesser ability than you on how to read Thai legal statutes, rulings etc in Thai, and consider themselves proficient enough to interpret them better than the courts. I am a property developer, part law degree and 3 other university degrees to add, but yet, I have to admit that I realise that my lack of Thai and knowledge of Thai law, and engineering jargon prevents me from forming any real judgements in this case. I instead leave it all to the courts, and lawyers, and accept that I can only speculate on their rulings and judgements. You are far closer to the game than I am, but quite obviously, you have a bias (as even do I), and for that reason, I have to discount your reasoning where you are merely trying to "inform" people of the facts of the case, or repeatedly reiterate your case in this public space. I welcome your intent to keep us informed, but only hope that those reading through this realise that you are actually the Plaintiff that the post is centred around, and that there are many who are relying upon the "facts" that you have given them without actually sourcing the material themselves (highly impractical). On that note, I cannot retract any of my "opinions", nor my "interpretations" of your true intent which includes the things implied. I believe that you are quite clearly of the belief that there is corruption against your side, and that you do not think that the "expert witness" has merely made a judgment in error, because you have written that you think it incredulous that they have arrived at such a end interpretation. Your "points" made about your past lawyers are just the latest examples of the type of communications that I refer to, and I am sure that you could not expect us to draw inferences otherwise. Yes, you now have your appeal court to look forward to, but look back to some of your posts just after the court ruling came out also.... I do not believe you to be as innocent as you would like for us to believe, and that is another of my points. Again though, I was more referring to the posts that are blatantly accusatory enough to need to be removed, but the opportunity has arisen for me to "not apologise" for the things that I have said that I actually think that you are doing. Slander, I believe, can be implied, as well as explicitly stated where the average reasonable person could assume your communication to be something that you have not explicitly said. If you do not believe that there has been corruption in this case, then I doubt that you would have brought up the matter several times of the anti-corruption investigation into the whole affair. I would have to wonder why they were there, if there were no questions of corruption in this case, or rather accusations of corruption since this would have come first. It is quite clear to all that you must allege corruption in this case, particularly in light of all your posts. But if you want to continue to defend your innocence, sobeit... let others judge whether you at times imply corruption or not. It is of little consequence to me in these posts, but since you DEMAND that I apologise (as if your will should just be done in Thailand and in these postings), I have to point out that I am not answerable to you, nor do I see the need to where I have not actually wronged you in any manner. I am merely expressing OPINIONS, just like you have taken your right to make all yours known to the whole world, and to any who would listen. My last opinion is that my accusations are far less slanderous than the things that have come from your end, but I will not DEMAND that you apologise, and nor will I even ask it of you. After all, the world is full of opinions... hopefully though, in the end, the correct decision will be made, and in my opinion, Thailand is better off with projects such as VT7, regardless of any ambiguity in the law.

[jpm76]

Dear jpm76,

Please show us where any of the Jomthien Complex Condominium plaintiffs made slanderous remarks.

I was not really referring to the plaintiffs specifically, but rather the postings that argue for the StopVT7 cause. Their slander has been duly noted, and it has often been deleted. As to the plaintiffs, I have responded more against his intent of focussing the facts (which as I understand them are still highly disputed) as he sees fit in a public space, but I have also noted a few cases of implicit accusations that would add to slander, and this is where it gets out of line in my opinion and moves from "disputed" facts for debate, and moves into a harmful mode. The lack of evidence behind these accusations however only threatens the public space if it is not recast into its proper perspective, and this is why I have posted. I have absolutely no idea whether there could in fact be corruption (as some have charged) in this case or not, but that is what I expected the court case to bring out if it was true. There seemed to be no evidence of corruption brought to light, and the court took the side of the CityHall-VT. When accusations of corruption are not even brought out in court (ie and then courts are cast as wrong, and lawyers are implied to be receiving government "jobs"), then the sour grapes need to be declared so that the reputation of Thailand is not brought too much into disrepute because people are influenced to believe that everything in Thailand only works for money. The "conspiracy theory" must now widen to add to the big business-government link to now include court judges and even own defence teams... how much further will it spread before it can be seen that the law was open to more than just the interpretation of StopVT7? Both sides must be heard, and all the public have been getting is the StopVT7 version, which in my opinion, clearly make implied accusations of corruption. I would think that it is generally understood that people are supposed to infer corruption throughout this case, so I do not understand why I am asked to supply evidence when it has been there all along, and most people will see this. But now, we are starting to infer "grand conspiracies" that have the potential to damage the perception of Thailand further than what has already been done. And for what end, other than to protect the sea views (and hence part investment capital, of a few). Richard is fighting the "illegality" of a building permit issues to VT, and I doubt that they think that it was "accidentally" issued - in any case, there have been numerous counts of comments about money being handed over under the table, and you have been on these posts longer than I, so I am sure that you are well aware of this "fact". I have not yet seen any evidence from any quarter, nor do I expect to, but only a page back there are "assertions" of perhaps a big amount of money being exchanged? Are we supposed to be stupid, and not think that these are attempts to place the idea of corruption in people's minds? What about his pointing out that his previous lawyer is now running for government? Perhaps just coincidental chit-chat??? Let's put it out in the open. StopVT7 are clearly trying to imply corruption is at hand here, but they do not want to upset anyone. nstead they want to respond with their "reader friendly" responses of the greatness of Thai courts, government etc. As anyone who has read these posts over time knows, StopVT7 is arguing that corruption is at hand, and any attempt for his to hide his implications is just taking his credibility away. I would rather that he make his accusations and then prove it instead of making insinuations about how "money is rumoured to have been exchanged and now being investigated by this anti-corruption body" (what is his source of reliability for this one?) and "how his previous lawyer managed to run for government" (the fact may be that he is, but only shows a conflict of interest, not a conspiracy) etc. Where are these rumours and speculations being started from??? The posts of StopVT7 himself. Now he is trying to imply that he has inside knowledge of VT owner being "angry" - was Richard there??? I doubt it. He is becoming a conspiracy theorist without wanting to appear one, and this is one step away from slander (and in my mind amounts to it). And when one talks about aliens, one asks to see the evidence instead of spouting stories and hearsays. Let's get back to facts, and the fact is that there is no evidence of corruption (unless Richard has the evidence of money exchanging hands), and there appears to be more than one interpretation of the law, so let's not assume that Thailand must be corrupt because it does not agree with Richard's interests. It might just be that the law was not as concrete as Richard believes, and that the judges are using the ambiguity to do what is best for Thailand, not a handful of upset foreign investors. So far, the facts support this assertion moreso than accusations of corruption from any blogger.

[jpm76]

A number of posts referring to unsubstantiated allegations of corruption have been deleted.

unsubstantiated or just scary?

Without any evidence to date whatsoever of corruption, then it is unsubstantiated, as the meaning of the word makes clear.

[Tammi]

A number of posts referring to unsubstantiated allegations of corruption have been deleted.

unsubstantiated or just scary?

Without any evidence to date whatsoever of corruption, then it is unsubstantiated, as the meaning of the word makes clear.

Thank you for your 3 large posts. Will have to print them out and use for bedtime reading. They are a bit difficult to take in as weren't broken down into paragraphs. BTW - Welcome to Thailand!

[wpcoe]

Thank you for your 3 large posts. Will have to print them out and use for bedtime reading. They are a bit difficult to take in as weren't broken down into paragraphs. BTW - Welcome to Thailand!

Yes, indeed, jpm76, your posts are practically unreadable as you post them. I am not taking sides, and don't wish to detract from your points, but would you consider one simple change to your posts which would VASTLY improve them:

After you finish a sentence, press the <enter> key twice after each period, question mark or exclamation point.

In order to read your posts I literally have to cut-and-paste them into a word processor and break them into paragraphs!

Your posts are worthy of reading, but are VERY difficult to read.

(I was tempted to post edited versions of your posts, but this thread is certainly long enough as it is.)

[stopvt7]

Is the homes in Spain a good explains what can in store for Pattaya?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=home

A quote: "Each of Spain's 8,111 town halls has the authority to make planning decisions and issue building permits with little oversight from the regional or national governments. As property prices soared, some local officials were drawn into schemes to profit from new home construction.

The former head of urban planning in Marbella has been charged with money laundering and accepting bribes to issue building permits. When Juan Antonio Roca was arrested in March 2006, police seized 2.4 billion euros ($3.8 billion) of assets, including two hotels, sports cars and 103 horses. Roca denies any wrongdoing.

``When everyone is making money, for example the real estate agent, the town hall and the administration, everyone turns a blind eye,'' says Bernardo del Rosal, former ombudsman for the Valencia region. ``The system as a whole fails and the law is worthless when that happens.'' ??

[prospero]

You should not compare corrupt Spain with Thailand. This is offensive to jpm 76.

[stopvt7]

You should not compare corrupt Spain with Thailand. This is offensive to jpm 76.

I did not read the word corrupt in the report? Are you acting like jpm76? That is by claiming words said by others which they never said to hassle them!

Thailand is a country of laws! But, some people have a hard time understanding them?

[JaiDeeFarang]

I agree absolutely 100% with jpm, as soon as these 'day dreamers' wake up and smell the coffee and realise they cannot make allegations of corruption to government officials in a foreign country the better.

I haven't bothered to post on here or even look at it that often because stopVT7 still keeps regurgitating the same old b*ll*cks each time he switches his PC on. Get over it please, how can everyone except you be wrong? You are not Thai and it will not be considered that you have lost face, just accept your fate graciously and you will be a better person for it.

[lookat]

I agree absolutely 100% with jpm, as soon as these 'day dreamers' wake up and smell the coffee and realise they cannot make allegations of corruption to government officials in a foreign country the better.

I haven't bothered to post on here or even look at it that often because stopVT7 still keeps regurgitating the same old b*ll*cks each time he switches his PC on. Get over it please, how can everyone except you be wrong? You are not Thai and it will not be considered that you have lost face, just accept your fate graciously and you will be a better person for it.

There is a group on this blog which has a very hard time reading and understanding the court case and the laws of Thailand. Even when the legal case and laws are translated into English and posted on this blog.

So they make false claim of a group which asks the local government to follow the nation laws. These false claims are that they call the local government “corrupt” which they have not done.

Stop the talk of corruption and let the courts decide! Any way it is in the Admin Supreme Court and I have been told they expect an answer this month.

[Tammi]

I agree absolutely 100% with jpm, as soon as these 'day dreamers' wake up and smell the coffee and realise they cannot make allegations of corruption to government officials in a foreign country the better.

I haven't bothered to post on here or even look at it that often because stopVT7 still keeps regurgitating the same old b*ll*cks each time he switches his PC on. Get over it please, how can everyone except you be wrong? You are not Thai and it will not be considered that you have lost face, just accept your fate graciously and you will be a better person for it.

There is a group on this blog which has a very hard time reading and understanding the court case and the laws of Thailand. Even when the legal case and laws are translated into English and posted on this blog.

So they make false claim of a group which asks the local government to follow the nation laws. These false claims are that they call the local government “corrupt” which they have not done.

Stop the talk of corruption and let the courts decide! Any way it is in the Admin Supreme Court and I have been told they expect an answer this month.

Good. And all crooked places will be made straight.

[jpm76]

Is the homes in Spain a good explains what can in store for Pattaya?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=home

A quote: "Each of Spain's 8,111 town halls has the authority to make planning decisions and issue building permits with little oversight from the regional or national governments. As property prices soared, some local officials were drawn into schemes to profit from new home construction.

The former head of urban planning in Marbella has been charged with money laundering and accepting bribes to issue building permits. When Juan Antonio Roca was arrested in March 2006, police seized 2.4 billion euros ($3.8 billion) of assets, including two hotels, sports cars and 103 horses. Roca denies any wrongdoing.

``When everyone is making money, for example the real estate agent, the town hall and the administration, everyone turns a blind eye,'' says Bernardo del Rosal, former ombudsman for the Valencia region. ``The system as a whole fails and the law is worthless when that happens.'' ??

Once again StopVT7, we are not stupid, and we all know what you are inferring when you make posts like this. Else, why include the part about Juan Antonio Roca under a heading of "Is Thailand becoming like Spain". Tammi, you have asked me for examples of slander, and I think that this goes under that heading. It is blatantly putting into the minds of the public the issue of corruption, and yet there is no evidence provided by StopVt7, only "hidden" accusations. (Nice short post for you all)

[jpm76]

Thank you for your 3 large posts. Will have to print them out and use for bedtime reading. They are a bit difficult to take in as weren't broken down into paragraphs. BTW - Welcome to Thailand!

Yes, indeed, jpm76, your posts are practically unreadable as you post them. I am not taking sides, and don't wish to detract from your points, but would you consider one simple change to your posts which would VASTLY improve them:

After you finish a sentence, press the <enter> key twice after each period, question mark or exclamation point.

In order to read your posts I literally have to cut-and-paste them into a word processor and break them into paragraphs!

Your posts are worthy of reading, but are VERY difficult to read.

(I was tempted to post edited versions of your posts, but this thread is certainly long enough as it is.)

Thanks for feedback, the reason why there are not paragraphs is because paragraphs are only used in English when there is a completely new topic at hand. My posts are focussed upon the same point, and whilst I understand it takes a little concentration to follow it, I am perhaps too wordy in labouring my points. I take note, and will restrict my postings to conventional lengths.

[jpm76]

Thank you for your 3 large posts. Will have to print them out and use for bedtime reading. They are a bit difficult to take in as weren't broken down into paragraphs. BTW - Welcome to Thailand!

Yes, indeed, jpm76, your posts are practically unreadable as you post them. I am not taking sides, and don't wish to detract from your points, but would you consider one simple change to your posts which would VASTLY improve them:

After you finish a sentence, press the <enter> key twice after each period, question mark or exclamation point.

In order to read your posts I literally have to cut-and-paste them into a word processor and break them into paragraphs!

Your posts are worthy of reading, but are VERY difficult to read.

(I was tempted to post edited versions of your posts, but this thread is certainly long enough as it is.)

Thanks for feedback, the reason why there are not paragraphs is because paragraphs are only used in English when there is a completely new topic at hand. My posts are focussed upon the same point, and whilst I understand it takes a little concentration to follow it, I am perhaps too wordy in labouring my points. I take note, and will restrict my postings to conventional lengths.

OR BETTER YET...perhaps

Thanks for the feedback, the reason why there are not paragraphs is because paragraphs are only used in English when there is a completely new topic at hand.

My posts are focussed upon the same point, and whilst I understand it takes a little concentration to follow it, I am perhaps too wordy in labouring my points.

I take note and will restrict my postings to conventional lengths.

Thanks.

[ThaiBob]

I agree absolutely 100% with jpm, as soon as these 'day dreamers' wake up and smell the coffee and realise they cannot make allegations of corruption to government officials in a foreign country the better.

I haven't bothered to post on here or even look at it that often because stopVT7 still keeps regurgitating the same old b*ll*cks each time he switches his PC on. Get over it please, how can everyone except you be wrong? You are not Thai and it will not be considered that you have lost face, just accept your fate graciously and you will be a better person for it.

.....

So they make false claim of a group which asks the local government to follow the nation laws. These false claims are that they call the local government “corrupt” which they have not done.

.....

Sounds rather strange coming from one of primary singers in the stopVT7 choir. Perhaps read some of your own posts (e.g., #123, 940, 981) and you can understand what jpm76 means.

It is unfortunate that the City of Pattaya did not take the stopVT7 lawsuit more seriously and go to court properly prepared. If the expert witness who testified and explained the maps to the Court last January had been at the very first hearing the judge would never have issued the original temporary injunction is the first place.

[stopvt7]

I agree absolutely 100% with jpm, as soon as these 'day dreamers' wake up and smell the coffee and realise they cannot make allegations of corruption to government officials in a foreign country the better.

I haven't bothered to post on here or even look at it that often because stopVT7 still keeps regurgitating the same old b*ll*cks each time he switches his PC on. Get over it please, how can everyone except you be wrong? You are not Thai and it will not be considered that you have lost face, just accept your fate graciously and you will be a better person for it.

.....

So they make false claim of a group which asks the local government to follow the nation laws. These false claims are that they call the local government "corrupt" which they have not done.

.....

It is unfortunate that the City of Pattaya did not take the stopVT7 lawsuit more seriously and go to court properly prepared. If the expert witness who testified and explained the maps to the Court last January had been at the very first hearing the judge would never have issued the original temporary injunction is the first place.

The expert witness never testified about the map! When ask in by the judge in an early court hearing the expert witness said he did not know the “technic” use my city hall to explain (100m into the sea) the map!

Wait for the Supreme Admin Court decision.

[Pattayaseven]

So according to Stopvt7 the court case was like this:

Expert witness: I do not know the technique used by city hall to explain (100m into the sea) the map!

Court: Okay, lets lift the injunction.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course the court got an expert witness to clarify the matter or else the injuction would not have been lifted. Earlier you have stated in your blogg that the expert witness testified in favor of Pattaya city hall and VT7. When did this change?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you are trying to discredit the Royal Thai courts, StopVT7. Or perhaps since the hearings were in Thai, you were not able to understand what was said.

[stopvt7]

So according to Stopvt7 the court case was like this:

Expert witness: I do not know the technique used by city hall to explain (100m into the sea) the map!

Court: Okay, lets lift the injunction.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course the court got an expert witness to clarify the matter or else the injuction would not have been lifted. Earlier you have stated in your blogg that the expert witness testified in favor of Pattaya city hall and VT7. When did this change?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you are trying to discredit the Royal Thai courts, StopVT7. Or perhaps since the hearings were in Thai, you were not able to understand what was said.

Twist it any way you want! Know one discrediting a court by appealing a decision .

I wait to hear what the court says. Because when reading the map or the regulation, Issue 8 or 9, their no where it states to measure into the sea before you measure onto the land.

Edited May 5, 2008 by stopvt7

[ZZZ]

I wait to hear what the court says. Because when reading the map or the regulation, Issue 8 or 9, their no where it states to measure into the sea before you measure onto the land.

When will this court make the decision, is there a date set for this??

[OhdLover]

So according to Stopvt7 the court case was like this:

Expert witness: I do not know the technique used by city hall to explain (100m into the sea) the map!

Court: Okay, lets lift the injunction.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course the court got an expert witness to clarify the matter or else the injuction would not have been lifted. Earlier you have stated in your blogg that the expert witness testified in favor of Pattaya city hall and VT7. When did this change?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you are trying to discredit the Royal Thai courts, StopVT7. Or perhaps since the hearings were in Thai, you were not able to understand what was said.

Twist it any way you want! Know one discrediting a court by appealing a decision .

I wait to hear what the court says. Because when reading the map or the regulation, Issue 8 or 9, their no where it states to measure into the sea before you measure onto the land.

It's always funny to see how people try to convince others that they are right.

In my opinion, if you are certain of the outcome, you should just relax and sit back in your chair, enjoying the seaview you won't lose.

However, people who try to convince others of their truth, mostly are uncertain whether they are right.

Unless you think the judge will read this topic, there's really no need to try and convince others, they are of no interest.

That's the reason I didnt post here longtime, I'm sitting back and enjoy my future seaview...

[marekm1]

How very true Ohdlover. I could carry on but I won’t. Hilton just got permission to build 2 towers in Pattaya within 100m of the beach. Just wonder if stopvt7 gonna go against them as it will affect the Thai beach. You should if you really want to protect it. But on second thought you already lost.

[lookat]

How very true Ohdlover. I could carry on but I won't. Hilton just got permission to build 2 towers in Pattaya within 100m of the beach. Just wonder if stopvt7 gonna go against them as it will affect the Thai beach. You should if you really want to protect it. But on second thought you already lost.

Stopvt7 group did not lose! Asian LawWorks lost their case in a lower court but they have faith in the Admin Supreme Court!

Asian LawWorks lost their case when they wrote "The Litigant and 9 Associates filed a motion dated 15 January 2008 to clarify on matter of fact and matter of law which can be summarized that the ten Litigants accepted the MSL measurement process conducted by the Department of Civil Engineer and City Planning that the method should be correct in theory, but the Litigants are of opinion that the building control area prescribed in the map annexed to the Royal Decree is at the 100 meter distance from the original shoreline toward the sea and not from the MSL point." this is a quote from the January 16 2008 court order.

Why did Asian LawWorks do this??

The stopvt7 group understands you measure from MSL only one direction which is 200 meters onto the land. I wait to read the high court decision.

Edited May 11, 2008 by lookat

[jpm76]

So according to Stopvt7 the court case was like this:

Expert witness: I do not know the technique used by city hall to explain (100m into the sea) the map!

Court: Okay, lets lift the injunction.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course the court got an expert witness to clarify the matter or else the injuction would not have been lifted. Earlier you have stated in your blogg that the expert witness testified in favor of Pattaya city hall and VT7. When did this change?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you are trying to discredit the Royal Thai courts, StopVT7. Or perhaps since the hearings were in Thai, you were not able to understand what was said.

I completely agree with you, and noticed this immediately also since I am familiar with StopVt7's past posts. He has always held that the "expert witness" (I use parenthesis because some of his past posts seemed to mock the "expert" part since it did not agree with his beliefs) testified in favour of Pattaya City Hall and the VT7 group against him in backing the way that City Hall had measured it. Now he claims that the expert witness is stating that "he did not know the technique used by city hall".

This is a complete inconsistency, and brings into question the credibility of StopVt7, particularly in light of the fact that ThaiBob has also pointed to the specific posts where StopVT7 has alleged corruption that he claims that he certainly does not claim. I just hope that the people who have been rushing to StopVT7's side (with little more than a Greenpeace leaning and "no evidence" of the corruption) are paying attention.

The "facts" are disputed, but they cannot change according to the whims of StopVT7, and whatever he is brewing up next to protect his seaviews at the expense of VT7 investors (all of who have invested at least 30K in this project to date). Anyone who needs examples of this, just read his earlier posts. Sooner this is all over, and we are all enjoying our condos, the better.

If is it true that the Hilton Group have also been approved for a project recently and it is on the same lines as VT7's project, then Pattaya City Hall are certainly not worried about any Supreme Court Appeal. Thanks Marek for letting us know. You can bet that StopVT7 is not going to be there fighting for the environment - it has always been as the post heading states it "Jomtien Condo Owners sue for Sea View". It is a personal battle for personal gain (and he has every right to challenge grounds of law). Personally i think, in the presence of any ambiguity in the law, that the greater interest is served if you give Thailand sustainable economic development, and I do not think that these projects are unsustainable or do the damage to the environment that some have claimed.

But that will be a matter of opinion depending upon where one sits, and what attitue one has to the economics vs environmental argument. I personally am a supporter of "sustainable", vs the school of "nothing that must move sand".

Since StopVT7 recently brough the example of Spain into it, I would argue, in my opinion, that what happened in the Costa Del Sol in some parts really pushes (and perhaps passes) the senses of "sustainable", but Jomtien Beach hardly does this. There is barely one row of high-rises there, and it is certainly nowhere near being overbuilt. If additional infrastructure may be required for the future, then this is the job of city planners, so hopefully they will do their job in this regard.

Importantly, lets keep the "facts" as the "facts" and not change them, and recognise where the "facts" and opinions diverge. The only thing that matters here will be the opinions of the courts.

[jpm76]

How very true Ohdlover. I could carry on but I won't. Hilton just got permission to build 2 towers in Pattaya within 100m of the beach. Just wonder if stopvt7 gonna go against them as it will affect the Thai beach. You should if you really want to protect it. But on second thought you already lost.

Stopvt7 group did not lose! Asian LawWorks lost their case in a lower court but they have faith in the Admin Supreme Court!

Asian LawWorks lost their case when they wrote "The Litigant and 9 Associates filed a motion dated 15 January 2008 to clarify on matter of fact and matter of law which can be summarized that the ten Litigants accepted the MSL measurement process conducted by the Department of Civil Engineer and City Planning that the method should be correct in theory, but the Litigants are of opinion that the building control area prescribed in the map annexed to the Royal Decree is at the 100 meter distance from the original shoreline toward the sea and not from the MSL point." this is a quote from the January 16 2008 court order.

Why did Asian LawWorks do this??

The stopvt7 group understands you measure from MSL only one direction which is 200 meters onto the land. I wait to read the high court decision.

It is with similar facts and reasoning as this that astounds me, but also helps me understand the arguments of the StopVt7 group at times ie as being completely illogical. I believe that it may be Aristotle's syllogistic reasoning of his logic (I could be wrong here though) that can be followed to demonstrate my point.

FACT 1. StopVT7 hired AsiaLawWorks to represent them and their case.

FACT 2. The court case went against AsiaLawWorks (and StopVt7's plaint) ie they lost.

ERGO

FACT 3. StopVT7 LOST the Initial court case !!!

It matters not that StopVt7 has a right of appeal to the FACT that StopVt7 lost the initial court case. This is undeniable, and since StopVt7 hired Asia Law Works and they were paid lots of money no doubt, I would argue further that it was StopVt7 lost more than Asia Law Works.

I can only assume that you must be familiar with the concept of the PRINCIPAL and AGENT relationship in law, and this clearly would state that the agent was only representing the principal. To state that StopVt7 did not lose is burying your head in the sand away from all logic, but go right ahead. Bring it out in a year or two and hopefully you will get a great view of VT7 that will make you want to stick it right back in the sand again. Maybe too much sand has found its way through to your brain. "StopVT7 did not lose - REALLY?"