Problems with Juristic office granting permission to make home improvements

[moontang]

If I was your neighbor I would not appreate the runoff from your roof onto my patio.  It looks like you didn't address drainage issues.  Seen several brilliant Europeans extend their structures to the property line with taking one iota of consideration into the large amount of water getting dumped onto the neighbors. 

[arick]

7 hours ago, synetos said:

Apologies in advance for the long post but I really need advice on an absurd scenario.

 

I recently bought a condominium with a rooftop - in fact the rooftop was the ONLY reason I bought this condominium.

 

When discussing the purchase with the sales agent, I told him of the ideas I had for making the rooftop into a nicer living space. He informed me that other residents in the building had previously done so, and as such I could also see some other properties within view who had built additional features such as rooftop shades, and higher side wall panels for better privacy.

 

I put some plans together and enquired with the Juristic office about the process I needed to follow to submit my plans and then get approval.  

They gave me the necessary paperwork and told me the procedure.  My plans were to build a wooden structure that basically would provide a further rooftop covering to keep the existing rooftop dry and make the outside space more usable during the wet season and also to add some wooden privacy walls similar to ones I have seen on other properties.

 

On getting the paperwork the staff in the juristic office had expressed that getting permission could take time and that that they would need proper plans (which was my intention anyway as want everything done right)  - and while doing this i got the impression that it didnt matter what i asked they were going to say no anyway as my girlfriend who also lives with me had a small argument with them over a separate issue when we first moved in - then from then they saw her as being rude.  From that moment I told my girlfriend to stay away from the juristic office and let me deal with things. I have been overly polite with them at every opportunity.

 

I employed an architect to design and make proper architectural drawings and also employed a structural engineer to make sure that the existing structure is solid enough to accommodate the additional work I wanted doing (the building is 20 years old and as solid as they come, and I already knew it would be fine but felt getting the structural engineer gives my plans more legitimacy)

 

After talking to a friend who knew some of the staff in the juristic office they had told me that they would approve the plans if I paid a bribe.  Given that I am aware of such "procedures" in some countries I agreed to this (which would be paid once the plans are approved)  

 

After submitting the plans they then still refused the permission to go ahead with the work. 

 

After further enquiries from people I know it seems there is just one juristic officer who has repeatedly caused problems for residents in the condo over many years by refusing almost every request at every opportunity.  I dont know much about this guy and dont want to judge but I was also told he is vehemently racist towards farang.

 

Upon speaking to juristic officers who oversee the other buildings in the complex - they said that if i lived in their building the plans would be approved as they clearly do not present any issues with health and safety, or questionable construction problems or issues for any neighbours etc.  Their advice was to then go to the district office to try to get permission.  However I was also told by my architect and structural engineer that this is something I can do but potentially could create a big drama for every person in the condo complex who has ever done any building work - as the district office would want to review why my plans were refused against the plans of others that were approved - and be a lengthy and costly process.

 

I know that Thailand can be a country with red tape but i now feel like this has become totally ridiculous.  I cannot understand how this person does not see that by me spending money to improve my property it also is good for everyone else because average property prices will increase also. 

 

I have thought to up the bribe offer but at this point im more inclined to try to get these people voted out at the upcoming AGM and propose a vote of no confidence in them as juristic officers - however I am also aware this would make me a target more for them to make my life as difficult as they can should i fail or if they have other connections.

 

My next step would be to consult a lawyer to take on the case - im determined to go ahead with my plans even if it takes me 10 years to do so.

 

Does anyone else have any other advice on how to approach this ?

 

 

Can't do it 

[newnative]

    The rooftop may be your property but that doesn't mean you can make changes to it.  You are living in a condominium, not a house.  Changes you make could potentially harm the values of the other condo owners.  Sorry, but I side with the Juristic in turning you down.  If you drive around Pattaya you will see examples of condo projects with weak management that have allowed owners to do what they want with their units--it is not a pretty sight.  The condos started out with a uniform look and ended up mismatched messes. 

     As a condo buyer, I would give these projects a thumbs down and move on to a better managed project.  I don't want to live in a project that allows the owners to run amuck--a lesson I learned  back in 2010.  My partner and I were then new to Thailand and we bought at a project in Rayong.  One of the condo owners was allowed to construct an ugly, protruding thatched roof to his balcony as a sun shade.  Not only was it ugly and entirely out of character with the modern building, it was also a fire hazard--a dropped cigarette from a condo above could have set the dry palm fronds on fire.  This is an example of why there are condo rules--to try to prevent things like this.  Or more serious things like an owner deciding he doesn't like that support pillar.  

[richard_smith237]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

OP: Follow this arrogant tool to the Ab-Op-Nuat - then present him with photo evidence and threaten to tell his wife !!!

Seriously though, you need ’something on him’... or a ’senior Thai’ with you who this guy will at least listen to so he is forced to acknowledge your request like an adult and not a petulant child. 

Are you serious?

Maybe that would work somewhere back home. But who gives a %$#* about anybody who has a "massage" in Thailand?

And threatening a (more or less) influential Thai is probably the best way to get thrown in jail or deported.

I guess you were not serious but just thinking about that idea is already a very bad idea IMHO.

 

[I guess you were not serious but just thinking about that idea is already a very bad idea IMHO.] - thought I had that covered with the next sentence... Seriously though....  (just in case, no, I’m not seriously suggesting the Op stakes out the Juristic guys property for weeks on end following him everywhere he goes and if he enters a massage place go in there and take photos of him in the act !!!!).

 

Something on him may be an option, a common contact etc to get this guy to the table to talk. Something so he doesn’t just flippantly reject any request for an explanation or dialogue. 

 

This guy is also unlikely to be an influential he’s behaving like a petulant child. He’s just a member of the juristic committee.

Many foreigners here have connections which could resolve this issue quite quickly - the Op appears to be struggling with this though. 

 

 

 

 

 

[thcosh]

quite ridiculous to try to do things the proper way in this country.

almost 20 years that I do what I want without asking and that I cheat the law without any problem.

it's so much easier to stop speaking to all these idiots that I would never ask permission for anything !

 

[OneMoreFarang]

22 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

[I guess you were not serious but just thinking about that idea is already a very bad idea IMHO.] - thought I had that covered with the next sentence... Seriously though....  (just in case, no, I’m not seriously suggesting the Op stakes out the Juristic guys property for weeks on end following him everywhere he goes and if he enters a massage place go in there and take photos of him in the act !!!!).

 

Something on him may be an option, a common contact etc to get this guy to the table to talk. Something so he doesn’t just flippantly reject any request for an explanation or dialogue. 

 

This guy is also unlikely to be an influential he’s behaving like a petulant child. He’s just a member of the juristic committee.

Many foreigners here have connections which could resolve this issue quite quickly - the Op appears to be struggling with this though. 

Yes, but...

 

There is always someone who knows someone. And at some stage the problem is if your someone if higher up the hacking order than the other guys someone. And then there is the "face" problem. Do you really want to live in a building were your did your very best that at least one of the committee guys lost face?

In my experience lots of Thai people are pretty sensitive and you don't want to mess around with them if you don't absolutely need to.

 

Or to say it clearly: Do you really want to constantly look over your shoulder because someone hates you? Even, or maybe especially, if you get what you want?

 

 

[Dan O]

I would again suggest you look carefully at the condo documents and regulations.  Anything discussed with the sales agent during the purchase process is not a legal opinion or approval. Their agreement with your ideas were nothing more than a sales tactic and holds no sway legally.

 

Condo property ownership is almost always restricted to a limitation of ownership from Wall Surface to Wall Surface and Floor to Ceiling Surface only. Anything past that is part of the Master Property or a Common or Shared Area.  Areas like balconies, roof tops or adjacent space like exterior gardens can be listed as Master Property, Shared Use or Restricted or Exclusive Use Area, most generally Restricted or Exclusive Use but not true Condo Ownership. Either way it will be listed in the Property Deed\Ownership and\or Condo Docs and Regulation. If it is listed as your true ownership the same limitations apply, you own surface to surface but nothing beyond that surface including penetrating or attachment to what is know as Exterior Envelope and  it can not be altered or attached to legally. If it's listed as Exclusive Use which I suspect it is you may not have any true ownership but just the right for your use only.  If it is yours legally then you may have the same issue of not being allowed to penetrate or attach to the Exterior Envelope.  I would also look at your design concept to verify if your alterations include penetrations or attachments to the exterior building envelope or creating a "new" exterior building elevation. Free standing structures may be your alternative approach versus a true build on attachment.  If it is your ownership and clearly defined in your property paperwork I would again record your non confrontational discussion with the Building Juristic person, point this out along with any building regulations listed and asked for his assistance or direction on how to move forward or gain approval. I would try to capture his request or demand for a bribe, kickback etc... as a leverage point 

[condohope]

You have the possibility to make it a point at the next AGM to vote for or against your plan if there is no other way around.

[synetos]

13 hours ago, thcosh said:

quite ridiculous to try to do things the proper way in this country.

almost 20 years that I do what I want without asking and that I cheat the law without any problem.

it's so much easier to stop speaking to all these idiots that I would never ask permission for anything !

 

I'm fast learning this approach

[chilly07]

Try an awning with side flaps to  do the same  thing  which  can be rolled back when not in use-you won't need permission for a  temporary  structure 

[Delight]

 As I see it you need permission obtained at co -owner general meeting.

You have to obtain minimum 50 % of the total building for permission to be granted.

 

I attach a jpeg detailing the relevant section.  The last part of paragraph 3 is relevant. of the condo act.

[Monkeyrobot]

You could install a couple of those wind out umbrellas or awnings in green and some palm or big leaf shrubs on the side walls , you won’t be spending the hot season up there, it will just look like a rooftop garden , then add the wooden section bit by bit over time. Nothing really they can do, just play the long game. 

[arick]

On 12/15/2020 at 8:52 PM, Dan O said:

I would again suggest you look carefully at the condo documents and regulations.  Anything discussed with the sales agent during the purchase process is not a legal opinion or approval. Their agreement with your ideas were nothing more than a sales tactic and holds no sway legally.

 

Condo property ownership is almost always restricted to a limitation of ownership from Wall Surface to Wall Surface and Floor to Ceiling Surface only. Anything past that is part of the Master Property or a Common or Shared Area.  Areas like balconies, roof tops or adjacent space like exterior gardens can be listed as Master Property, Shared Use or Restricted or Exclusive Use Area, most generally Restricted or Exclusive Use but not true Condo Ownership. Either way it will be listed in the Property Deed\Ownership and\or Condo Docs and Regulation. If it is listed as your true ownership the same limitations apply, you own surface to surface but nothing beyond that surface including penetrating or attachment to what is know as Exterior Envelope and  it can not be altered or attached to legally. If it's listed as Exclusive Use which I suspect it is you may not have any true ownership but just the right for your use only.  If it is yours legally then you may have the same issue of not being allowed to penetrate or attach to the Exterior Envelope.  I would also look at your design concept to verify if your alterations include penetrations or attachments to the exterior building envelope or creating a "new" exterior building elevation. Free standing structures may be your alternative approach versus a true build on attachment.  If it is your ownership and clearly defined in your property paperwork I would again record your non confrontational discussion with the Building Juristic person, point this out along with any building regulations listed and asked for his assistance or direction on how to move forward or gain approval. I would try to capture his request or demand for a bribe, kickback etc... as a leverage point 

EIA! 

[arick]

EIA

 

[Dan O]

On 12/17/2020 at 2:52 AM, Monkeyrobot said:

You could install a couple of those wind out umbrellas or awnings in green and some palm or big leaf shrubs on the side walls , you won’t be spending the hot season up there, it will just look like a rooftop garden , then add the wooden section bit by bit over time. Nothing really they can do, just play the long game. 

There's plenty they can do if the area in question is not owned properly and completely as part of the condo. If the area is a restricted use then it is owned by the condo property. A lien can be placed on the condo owner or other legal action for dismantling along with a fine. All depends in the Condo Regulations and By Law

[Dan O]

2 hours ago, arick said:

EIA

 

No idea what EIA means. Perhaps you can explain  

[arick]

18 hours ago, Dan O said:

No idea what EIA means. Perhaps you can explain  

Environmental Impact Assessment in Thailand (EIA)building a covered structure on a roof would be like adding another floor even if it is a meter by meter