Jomtien Condo Owners Sue For Sea View

[Taijitu]

There have been days (weeks?) when there has been no posts and then someone asks what is happening and StopVT7 kindly replies and then those who have interests in seeing VT7 built start jumping on StopVT7 for his English. Those people should back off and do what StopVT7 has said time and time again that he is happy to do - wait for the Court's decision.

Recently a developer in Bangkok was ordered to remove floors from condominiums so I would say that it could certainly happen at VT7.

What is happening at Hua Hin? Any buildings over 14 metres within 200 metres from the seashore?

Tammi, please note that I have no interests whatsoever in VT7 or Jomtien Complex Condotel nor have I ever "jumped on StopVT for his English". Howver I would like him to refrain from saying "Thailand is a country of laws". That's as maybe, but it's certainly not a country of justice.

I know about this development in Bangkok. The reason why the developer had to remove floors was that planning permission was given for a certain number of floors and the developer sneakily added another two floors. VT7 is not doing that.

It's obvious from your question that you've never been to Hua Hin. I suggest that you go there someday and observe the huge condos and hotels stretching along the beaches from Cha Am to Hua Hin and beyond. Also check out some of the on-line Hua Hin news-media and real estate agencies that are promoting even more developments along the beaches there.

[JaiDeeFarang]

There have been days (weeks?) when there has been no posts and then someone asks what is happening and StopVT7 kindly replies and then those who have interests in seeing VT7 built start jumping on StopVT7 for his English. Those people should back off and do what StopVT7 has said time and time again that he is happy to do - wait for the Court's decision.

Recently a developer in Bangkok was ordered to remove floors from condominiums so I would say that it could certainly happen at VT7.

What is happening at Hua Hin? Any buildings over 14 metres within 200 metres from the seashore?

Tammi, please note that I have no interests whatsoever in VT7 or Jomtien Complex Condotel nor have I ever "jumped on StopVT for his English". Howver I would like him to refrain from saying "Thailand is a country of laws". That's as maybe, but it's certainly not a country of justice.

I know about this development in Bangkok. The reason why the developer had to remove floors was that planning permission was given for a certain number of floors and the developer sneakily added another two floors. VT7 is not doing that.

It's obvious from your question that you've never been to Hua Hin. I suggest that you go there someday and observe the huge condos and hotels stretching along the beaches from Cha Am to Hua Hin and beyond. Also check out some of the on-line Hua Hin news-media and real estate agencies that are promoting even more developments along the beaches there.

Taijitu you are totally correct, however there is no point trying to tell this lot what is happening outside of their blinkered vision or their beloved beach. VT7 is building in accordance with their building permit and enviromental impact assessment. To obtain an EIA the developer must adhere to strict enviromental issues according to the Thai government. I do not think there are any regulations about casting a shadow as one only has to look at the 91 storey Ocean 1 Tower, which also received it's EIA.

It's very difficult to educate the uneducated as you can probably gather by now. Just because these people 'believe' they are right, doesn't make it right in the Thai judicial system. They even question a court appointed expert witness and undermine his credibility. Next thing we'll hear about after the appeal, is they have slandered the judge and wound up in the monkey house, which wouldn't be a bad thing.

[marekm1]

Thank you for the last 2 posts by Thaijtu and JaiDeeFarang. Very true. StopVT7 people have been watching developments around the beaches of Thailand many years and haven’t done anything. It’s the case of as long I am O.K., I don’t care. Now they view is in danger and they want to change the law and accusing everyone against them for corruption and belittle the Thai legal system and their representative in the fight to “protect the Thai beaches”.

Thai beaches are protected by the legible authorities without the help of selfish and clueless farangs, who take few words out of context and twist them to their advantage.

And yes this case might be watched but only to see if the authority and legal permits in Thailand are valid and not undermined by bunch of bully farangs having their own interest in mind. See if the investor can feel safe in Thailand following all the legal procedures.

[JaiDeeFarang]

Dear OhdLover and JaiDeeFarang

We read your BS! Everyone knows you dislike the facts of the case. Also, you are investors in VT7. You have no concern about the Thailand beach or the law protecting the beach!

We respect the Admin Supreme Court and we are waiting the their decision.

Your post is incorrect yet again. I do have concern for the Thailand beach, which is why I purchased a condo in VT7 as I enjoy the nearby beach. Your only concern regarding the beach is that you soon won't be able to see it. As long as VT7 builds my condo to meet with the requirements of the enviromental impact assessment and building permit regulations, I have no problems and will soon have a lovely beach nearby and a great sea view.

Can anyone tell me, are there any bargains to be had in Jomtien Condo Complex? I may be interested as many investors in Pattaya don't really care about views, providing there are plenty of bars, restaurants and shops nearby. Surely prices have dropped dramatically, what with the blocked views and construction noise day in, day out. Please PM me if you want to sell. Thx.

[Taijitu]

From my balcony, which is some way from the VT7 site, I can see the development rising amongst the other high-rise buildings. I see that it has now been draped in green....not shrouds but drapes. Does anyone know how many floors now? It looks to be around 10 or 11 floors high from my viewpoint ..........and heading skywards.

[Wiresok]

I have considered the differring arguments put forward by stopvt7 and pattaya city hall/vt.

Whilst on the face of it both views could sit in isolation as legitimate and arguable,it seems to me that it is some of the inverse considerations that give one argument more gravitas than the other.

Taking the stopvt7 case,this would mean restricted building 200m landward from MSL .

This would appear a sensible scenario.and a reasonable improvement over the earlier 100m value.

ie this step takes high rise buildings away from the sea.

If the pattaya city hall/vt version about the plus/minus 100m zone is taken as correct then this would allow high rise buildings to be built closer to the sea than before.This for me is a negative step so I cannot believe that this is what the lawmakers would have intended.

Also this viewpoint restricts high rise buildings being built 100m out into the sea from MSL.

Why would the lawmakers want to specifically prevent this?

How many applications have pattaya city hall had in the last 20 years to build high rises 100m out into the sea?,that they would need specific legislation in issue 9 to prevent.not a lot?

Therefore for me,the stopvt7 argument is more convincing because it leads to a more plausible,realistic scenario.

On this common sense basis I think that stopvt7 have proved their case better than pattaya city hall/vt beyond reasonable doubt.

[OhdLover]

Dear OhdLover and JaiDeeFarang

We read your BS! Everyone knows you dislike the facts of the case. Also, you are investors in VT7. You have no concern about the Thailand beach or the law protecting the beach!

We respect the Admin Supreme Court and we are waiting the their decision.

Stopvt.... you are a big joke and a big liar!!!,

Respect????? where exactly is your respect???? Somewhere in between the "so called", the , the implied accusations of corruption, the.... I can go on, but you know what I mean.

Protecting the beaches, come on.... not even yourself will take you seriously

There's only one protection in your bag, and we all know what it is.

Now, I think it's already over 24 hours ago that you copy/pasted your famous blue/bold/marked issue 8/9 mantra, so go ahead.

Surprise us with a new color, a new smiley, maybe we will finally believe you .

From the beginning I have stated that it's your good right to fight for your seaview, I showed respect for you as long as possible,

but you have never showed respect for the people who didnt agree with you. That makes you a sad person as well.

Have your lapdog lookat answer this one, I think it's her turn again, right???

Edited May 28, 2008 by OhdLover

[Taijitu]

I would like to ask the StopVT7 lobby one simple and obvious question which they have seem unable to address................and that is:

Why is the upward construction of VT7 continuing apace and with no defensive reaction, or comment, from anyone in the View Talay Group? (Maybe they know that no defence is necessary).

If VT7 is in danger of having some floors removed (that's a laugh, isn't it?), or if VT7 is about to be penalised for breaking some law, then it seems to me that some seriously bad and expensive business decisions have been made, and are continuing to be made, by them.........but I doubt that.

The StopVT7 advocates are much like the little Dutch boy with his finger poked in the dyke and hoping that the sea will stay out!!! It won't.

Please, no more of these confusing "cut and paste" responses that have littered this topic ad nauseum.

[marekm1]

Dear OhdLover and JaiDeeFarang

We read your BS! Everyone knows you dislike the facts of the case. Also, you are investors in VT7. You have no concern about the Thailand beach or the law protecting the beach!

We respect the Admin Supreme Court and we are waiting the their decision.

Stopvt.... you are a big joke and a big liar!!!,

Respect????? where exactly is your respect???? Somewhere in between the "so called", the , the implied accusations of corruption, the.... I can go on, but you know what I mean.

Protecting the beaches, come on.... not even yourself will take you seriously

There's only one protection in your bag, and we all know what it is.

Now, I think it's already over 24 hours ago that you copy/pasted your famous blue/bold/marked issue 8/9 mantra, so go ahead.

Surprise us with a new color, a new smiley, maybe we will finally believe you .

From the beginning I have stated that it's your good right to fight for your seaview, I showed respect for you as long as possible,

but you have never showed respect for the people who didnt agree with you. That makes you a sad person as well.

Have your lapdog lookat answer this one, I think it's her turn again, right???

You hit the nail on the head with that OhdLover. StopVT7 never had respect for the investors in VT7 and called them “what they think, they are above the law”. Now it’s all turned backed to him. That’s what you get from laughing from somebody’s misfortune. Just read the earliest posts.

For people not familiar with the case one third of the buildings in Pattaya region are within 200m., the same as VT7, now stopVT7 singled out one building because it gonna block his sea view. Just look around, they not gonna change the law because you don’t like it.

[chickenslegs]

I would like to ask the StopVT7 lobby one simple and obvious question which they have seem unable to address................and that is:

Why is the upward construction of VT7 continuing apace and with no defensive reaction, or comment, from anyone in the View Talay Group? (Maybe they know that no defence is necessary).

If VT7 is in danger of having some floors removed (that's a laugh, isn't it?), or if VT7 is about to be penalised for breaking some law, then it seems to me that some seriously bad and expensive business decisions have been made, and are continuing to be made, by them.........but I doubt that.

The StopVT7 advocates are much like the little Dutch boy with his finger poked in the dyke and hoping that the sea will stay out!!! It won't.

Please, no more of these confusing "cut and paste" responses that have littered this topic ad nauseum.

Call me a pedant, but isn't the whole point of 'the little Dutch boy' story that he did stop the sea from breaking through.

[OhdLover]

Call me a pedant, but isn't the whole point of 'the little Dutch boy' story that he did stop the sea from breaking through.

I am dutch, I'm not quite tall, but I've never put my finger in a dyke.....

[ThaiBob]

From my balcony, which is some way from the VT7 site, I can see the development rising amongst the other high-rise buildings. I see that it has now been draped in green....not shrouds but drapes. Does anyone know how many floors now? It looks to be around 10 or 11 floors high from my viewpoint ..........and heading skywards.

Pic taken a few days ago. It looks to me like they are working on floor #12 but it is hard to tell.

[Tammi]

You hit the nail on the head with that OhdLover. StopVT7 never had respect for the investors in VT7 and called them “what they think, they are above the law”. Now it’s all turned backed to him. That’s what you get from laughing from somebody’s misfortune. Just read the earliest posts.

For people not familiar with the case one third of the buildings in Pattaya region are within 200m., the same as VT7, now stopVT7 singled out one building because it gonna block his sea view. Just look around, they not gonna change the law because you don’t like it.

As far as we know no one went to court about the other buildings that are within the 200 metre zone. Obviously the impact on pre-existing buildings was not great enough to p/o the owners of the pre-existing buildings. But residents in Grand Condotel questioned the Juristic Person Manager about VT5 being built so far forward. (Grand Condotel hi-rise is 200 metres from the sea shore). The residents were told that 'law can be changed every 5 years'. BS?

At the beginning of this topic it was declared that a case can be made against VT5 to have it removed but case must be filed within 5 years.

[stopvt7]

Is this not the liberal fascist way to attack the massager? Attack the massager when the facts of Issue 8 and 9and the their maps our against you argument!

Thanks for helping to prove our point. That VT7 building permit is in violation of Issue 9. Also the VT7 support group on this blog doesn’t care about protecting the Pattaya Beach Area.

Thailand is a country of laws and we believe in the king’s Admin Court system. We are waiting the court decision.

[Taijitu]

Call me a pedant, but isn't the whole point of 'the little Dutch boy' story that he did stop the sea from breaking through.

I am dutch, I'm not quite tall, but I've never put my finger in a dyke.....

Hee hee, I was waiting for that one!!!!........

[Taijitu]

I would like put my question (Post #1411) directly to StopVT7, as he and his cohorts refuse to acknowledge or answer it. Come on StopVT7, stand up and let us hear your answer and without the rolling emoticons and the technicolour postings, please. Maybe Tammi or Lookat would like to comment on this if StopVT can't.

Why is the upward construction of VT7 continuing apace and with no defensive reaction, or comment, from anyone in the View Talay Group? (Maybe they know that no defence is necessary).

I will also repeat my comment that if VT7 is in danger of having some floors removed, or if the View Talay company is about to be punished for breaking one of "Thailand's laws", then it seems to me that the company is making some regretful commercial decisions or that the company management is simply naive........which I doubt very much. I do not see the View Talay company making any foolish assumption that things can only get better.

StopVT7 and his supporters need to open their minds to this.

I will also repeat that Thailand is a country of laws but not a country of justice.

[Taijitu]

Call me a pedant, but isn't the whole point of 'the little Dutch boy' story that he did stop the sea from breaking through.

No, you're not a pedant..........but the story can't end with the boy standing there forever with his finger in the hole. The deluge will come ultimately.

[stopvt7]

Taijitu statement: “I will also repeat that Thailand is a country of laws but not a country of justice.”

This Taijitu can not say with certainly. Because the Admin Supreme Court understood the issues in their first decision.

The first decision quote: "Nevertheless, where No. 3 (8) under the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued by the virtue of the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 9 (B.E. 2521) issued by the virtue of the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 prescribed that the 200 meter line measured from the construction control line shown in the map ...............on the seaside shall be restricted from constructing of any building exceeding 14 meter high from road surface.

Therefore, if the Construction Permit No. 162/2007 dated 28 November 2006 granted by the Defendant No. 1 to the Defendant No. 2 should appear to be unlawful against the Ministerial Regulation thereto as being claimed by the ten plaintiffs, the Court of First Instance should have sentenced this point of being unlawful, i.e. the judgment shall be focused on the permission of construction the building exceeding height limit by the Defendant No. 2. Whilst the Administrative Court of First Instance ordered the provisional measure to cease construction before judgment, the building’s base rocks were built, the construction did not reach the height limit of 14 meter above the road surface. Where the Administrative Court of First Instance issued the order of provisional measure to effect temporary protection by ceasing the entire construction is, therefore, in excess of what reasonable under the circumstances.

The Supreme Court, therefore, gives an order to amend the order of the Administrative Court of First Instance. That the Defendant No. 2 shall cease the construction performed, under the Work Permit No. 162/2007 dated 28 November 2007, on the part exceeding 14 meter height. On a temporary basis until the Court has ordered otherwise.

Chief Judge of the Supreme Administrative Court"

Sorry, that this is a upsetting fact to the VT7 condo investors and other who don’t care about protecting the Pattaya beach area.

[chickenslegs]

Call me a pedant, but isn't the whole point of 'the little Dutch boy' story that he did stop the sea from breaking through.

No, you're not a pedant..........but the story can't end with the boy standing there forever with his finger in the hole. The deluge will come ultimately.

Now I really am being pedantic.

If you read the story of The Little Dutch Boy at www.pantheon.org/articles/l/little_dutch_boy you will see that the moral of the story supports, exactly, the stance of the stopvt7 campaigners.

Perhaps you should have chosen a different story to illustrate your point - David & Goliath???

Edited May 29, 2008 by chickenslegs

[Taijitu]

Taijitu statement: "I will also repeat that Thailand is a country of laws but not a country of justice."

This Taijitu can not say with certainly. Because the Admin Supreme Court understood the issues in their first decision.

Oh, yes I can say it with certainty. This is off topic, I know, but nationally what about the young woman who had her arm chopped off by a policeman whist she was riding a motor bike and the policeman had to pay her a paltry sum? What about the wayward and murderous sons of a certain Minister of the Interior who got off scot free and were re-instated in the military? What about the 20-year old girl who was sentenced to 14 years in prison because she was found guilt simply by association with a youth who had some drugs stashed above the ceiling of his room in Burirum? She had known him for one week only but the police wanted to set an example!!!

Justice...my aRse!

And you still refuse to answer my question!!

Why is the upward construction of VT7 continuing apace and with no defensive reaction, or comment, from anyone in the View Talay Group? Do you think that no defence is necessary?.

Edited May 29, 2008 by Taijitu

[Taijitu]

Perhaps you should have chosen a different story to illustrate your point - David & Goliath???

Now you are being pedantic but I do take your point. Thank you

[JaiDeeFarang]

Wow, no PM's from JCC owners wishing to sell yet! I've just heard that there is a bit of a problem at the Jomtien Condo Complex, which seems to have been kept under wraps so far and was wondering if someone could shed some light on the matter.

Is it or is it not true that a levy of 10,000 baht has been added to the maintenance charges of EVERY co-owner by the juristic committee in order to cover the legal costs to fight VT7? The reason I ask is because I understand that there are many co-owners who are not happy with this and refusing to pay, as they never wanted to start legal action in the first place because they realised they could never win!

Now Mr. StopVT7, Lookat & Co. can you answer this question honestly without putting any spin on it?!

[Taijitu]

Wow, no PM's from JCC owners wishing to sell yet! I've just heard that there is a bit of a problem at the Jomtien Condo Complex, which seems to have been kept under wraps so far and was wondering if someone could shed some light on the matter.

Is it or is it not true that a levy of 10,000 baht has been added to the maintenance charges of EVERY co-owner by the juristic committee in order to cover the legal costs to fight VT7? The reason I ask is because I understand that there are many co-owners who are not happy with this and refusing to pay, as they never wanted to start legal action in the first place because they realised they could never win!

Now Mr. StopVT7, Lookat & Co. can you answer this question honestly without putting any spin on it?!

Good question JaiDeeFarang. Now we wait for answers to two questions.

[JaiDeeFarang]

Wow, no PM's from JCC owners wishing to sell yet! I've just heard that there is a bit of a problem at the Jomtien Condo Complex, which seems to have been kept under wraps so far and was wondering if someone could shed some light on the matter.

Is it or is it not true that a levy of 10,000 baht has been added to the maintenance charges of EVERY co-owner by the juristic committee in order to cover the legal costs to fight VT7? The reason I ask is because I understand that there are many co-owners who are not happy with this and refusing to pay, as they never wanted to start legal action in the first place because they realised they could never win!

Now Mr. StopVT7, Lookat & Co. can you answer this question honestly without putting any spin on it?!

Good question JaiDeeFarang. Now we wait for answers to two questions.

Anyone from stopVT7 care to comment?

[OhdLover]

Is this not the liberal fascist way to attack the massager? Attack the massager

Where is your salon????

[JaiDeeFarang]

Is this not the liberal fascist way to attack the massager? Attack the massager

Where is your salon????

I always thought the correct term was 'Masseuse'

Sorry for using the irritating emoticons, but I thought if stopVT7 can do it, why can't I?

[JaiDeeFarang]

Is this not the liberal fascist way to attack the massager? Attack the massager

Where is your salon????

I always thought the correct term was 'Masseuse'

Sorry for using the irritating emoticons, but I thought if stopVT7 can do it, why can't I?

Can someone please explain what 'liberal fascist' is? Seems a bit of an Oxymoron and stopVT7 is just a Moron.

[Taijitu]

To bring some discussion back into this topic........

In the introductory posting to this topic by George, it was quoted by StopVT7 (alias Richard Haines) that "the new View Talay 7 building will block me from ever seeing another sunset from my condo".

Reading on through the whole topic (a marathon in itself) it seems that, for the View Talay Company to erect a building up to, and including an eighth floor and no more, is quite satisfactory to Mr. Haines, as it compies with some ill-defined and manipulative regulation.

So, I guess that Mr. Haines (alias StopVT7) lives on a high floor in JCC and <deleted> to those people who live between Floor 4 and and Floor 9. He's not crusading for them.

I'm of the opinion that Mr. Haines has presented his case very selfishly ( and foolishly) ......concerned primarily with himself and his own advantage to the exclusion of others. In other words "Yes View Talay, build your project seven floors high and I'll be all right Jack"!

(Information: The first four floors of JCC are 1.... the Reception/Lobby/Commercial Areas, 2 and 3......the car park, 4...the swimming pool and admistration offices).

[JaiDeeFarang]

To bring some discussion back into this topic........

In the introductory posting to this topic by George, it was quoted by StopVT7 (alias Richard Haines) that "the new View Talay 7 building will block me from ever seeing another sunset from my condo".

Reading on through the whole topic (a marathon in itself) it seems that, for the View Talay Company to erect a building up to, and including an eighth floor and no more, is quite satisfactory to Mr. Haines, as it compies with some ill-defined and manipulative regulation.

So, I guess that Mr. Haines (alias StopVT7) lives on a high floor in JCC and <deleted> to those people who live between Floor 4 and and Floor 9. He's not crusading for them.

I'm of the opinion that Mr. Haines has presented his case very selfishly ( and foolishly) ......concerned primarily with himself and his own advantage to the exclusion of others. In other words "Yes View Talay, build your project seven floors high and I'll be all right Jack"!

(Information: The first four floors of JCC are 1.... the Reception/Lobby/Commercial Areas, 2 and 3......the car park, 4...the swimming pool and admistration offices).

So you're saying and Richard Haines agrees that 8 storeys are acceptable near the beach? Is this right? I've been holding off on another purchase on Dongtan, but if this is the case I may well look into it.

[marekm1]

Is this not the liberal fascist way to attack the massager? Attack the massager

Where is your salon????

Sorry, I couldn’t resist. That’s the good one. Cannot stop laughing.