3 hours ago, Gsxrnz said:

The top eight or the bottom eight?

 I would take the middle 8.

Would do nice for the 59,000,000 Scheineses Billionaires to come over and enjoy their Airbnb with few on the "Costa del Pattaya".

2 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

They should get some of those Vegas hotel demolishers and blow it up.

A part of me thinks nothing will ever happen and it will stand indefinitely.

Might be  a popular addition to The International Fireworks Display in November. 

Edited October 11, 20214 yr by jacko45k

Just get the brown envelope ready, you can build 100 stories.

1 hour ago, harada said:

Considering the brown envelope system in Thailand the thing that would concern me the most about this building would be the inspection and signing off of work done, I’d be keeping well clear of it. 

further,

 

Given the scaly history of: the developers, the local government officers and the constructors involved there can be little doubt that building inspections (if any did actually happened) will have been just a pile of papers with false/fake/paid for signatures.

 

Who in their right mind would want to live there, whether it's the unfortunate folks who have paid deposits/big deposits or new buyers?

 

A more appropriate decision by local government would be:

 

- Liquidate everything involved and give something back to the buyers (haha - never happen), then a total demolition paid for by the developers. Then jail the developers and the local gov't officials involved and confiscate all of their assets. 

Owners of the controversial Waterfront Condo on Bali Hai Pier ask for an opportunity to resume construction vs. demolish the building.

 

It can't be that difficult ,the building is either Illegal or Legal . the Lands department can easy Survey the Land/building and than they Know . 

If illegal knock it down . iI legal but too high , knock down floors till its legal . 

That's if a building inspector Checks Everything so it's within the Law/Building code.

6 hours ago, Destiny1990 said:

Just demolish the last 8 floors.

No. Demolish the ground floor and the other 52 will take care of themselves......

 

A demolition event on a Saturday night would pack them in on the beach and be a real money spinner for the city. There should be a raffle for who gets to push the plunger.

Edited October 11, 20214 yr by champers

Demolish it feel sorry for the investers but the building is unsafe and cannot be continued to be built

Its under a demolition order right ?

Then demolish the thing.

The Builders stopped building once, who is to say that if they are allowed to continue they will not do so again.

It's a monstrosity, especially in its prominent position by the sea.  I know that there are rules as to how high buildings can be within a certain distance of the sea, and I'm suddenly wondering if that new flat bit between it and the sea - where they feed the poor these days - was intended to increase that distance and help make it legal.

 

IMO, knock it down and burn it, and put that hideous new Walking Street sign on the pyre while you're at it.

... and people living at the building behing Viewtalay 7 at Pattaya still hope that viewtalay 7 will be destroyed to get back their view !

hahahahaahaha

 

can't stop laughing ! thank you !

9 hours ago, Harsh Jones said:

Yes indeed. But there still seems to be a never ending supply of people willing to take these risks. Its amazing that more of them aren't a total wipeout like this. I checked out a bunch of condo projects in 2010 and some ppl did fairly good on them. It all amounts to luck in my estimation. All of these developers are shady.

   'All of these developers' are not shady.  My partner and I have bought off-plan 5 times.  The projects were all completed and on time.  Several were finished early.  If you buy from a large, well-established, public company developer with a good track record of completed projects, there should be little risk.  Buying off-plan, we got a good price and we were able to sell all the condos at a profit.

4 hours ago, Cake Monster said:

Its under a demolition order right ?

Then demolish the thing.

The Builders stopped building once, who is to say that if they are allowed to continue they will not do so again.

   The builders were ordered to stop construction.  At the time work was stopped, the project was ahead of its construction schedule.  

9 hours ago, newnative said:

   The builders were ordered to stop construction.  At the time work was stopped, the project was ahead of its construction schedule.  

Several meters ahead onto public land?

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

Several meters ahead onto public land?

    One of the muddled issues I mentioned.  A report by a law firm that was at one point involved in the litigation indicated that the public land encroachment issue actually just involved the sales office--the low-rise separate  building next to the project.  Apparently, one corner of the sales office was slightly on public land.  Easily fixed by demolishing the office.  

     One current issue given by the city in the article that I had not seen before was the issue that the 'front part of the building... ' does not 'connect to public roads on both sides'.  Rather vague wording on how you would (or could, if you wanted to punish)  interpret 'connect', 'on both sides', 'front part of the building', and 'public road'.   You could bend that vagueness about anyway you want and I can think of a few highrise condos that could possibly also fall into that category depending on how the clause was interpreted.  

13 hours ago, newnative said:

   'All of these developers' are not shady.  My partner and I have bought off-plan 5 times.  The projects were all completed and on time.  Several were finished early.  If you buy from a large, well-established, public company developer with a good track record of completed projects, there should be little risk.  Buying off-plan, we got a good price and we were able to sell all the condos at a profit.

Maybe you are one of the foreigners here in Thailand that does develop condos? I saw a youtube video on a farang couple a few yrs ago. Afterwards I thought that they had a risky occupation and a lot of stress

23 hours ago, digger70 said:

Owners of the controversial Waterfront Condo on Bali Hai Pier ask for an opportunity to resume construction vs. demolish the building.

 

It can't be that difficult ,the building is either Illegal or Legal . the Lands department can easy Survey the Land/building and than they Know . 

If illegal knock it down . iI legal but too high , knock down floors till its legal . 

That's if a building inspector Checks Everything so it's within the Law/Building code.

Whether the land plot is legal is a good point.

 

My overriding concern would be the quality of the original building work and the fact it's been open to the elements for several years.

56 minutes ago, bbabythai said:

Maybe you are one of the foreigners here in Thailand that does develop condos? I saw a youtube video on a farang couple a few yrs ago. Afterwards I thought that they had a risky occupation and a lot of stress

No, I am not.  And, as I said, if I buy off-plan it will not be with a foreign developer.  

On 10/11/2021 at 6:37 AM, newnative said:

   'All of these developers' are not shady.  My partner and I have bought off-plan 5 times.  The projects were all completed and on time.  Several were finished early.  If you buy from a large, well-established, public company developer with a good track record of completed projects, there should be little risk.  Buying off-plan, we got a good price and we were able to sell all the condos at a profit.

At the end of the day, you are still rolling the dice when you're buying a presale condo in SE Asia. Its always easy with hindsight to call anyone who bought into this particular project a fool because it didn't work out.

1 hour ago, Harsh Jones said:

At the end of the day, you are still rolling the dice when you're buying a presale condo in SE Asia. Its always easy with hindsight to call anyone who bought into this particular project a fool because it didn't work out.

      Your post in response to mine makes it sound like I called anyone who bought into the Waterfront project a fool.  I never said that in my post, nor do I believe it.  Had my partner and I had the money at the time, we might have also bought into the project because we liked it.  It's getting tiring responding to posters who throw out their thoughts while at the same time including me.  

      Most projects, by foreign and domestic developers, get built.  What I said was you can minimize your risk buying off-plan by selecting a well-financed, publicly-traded developer with a good track record of completing projects.  That statement comes from what I have learned after 10 years living here and buying 20 condos, 5 off-plan.   Part of the learning for me was observing what happened with Waterfront.  If a buyer has some uncertainty about a project, he or she can wait until it's completed and buy then.  Even with fully booked projects, units usually become available around the time the project is done and buyers have to come up with  the funds to purchase.  

11 hours ago, newnative said:

      Your post in response to mine makes it sound like I called anyone who bought into the Waterfront project a fool.  I never said that in my post, nor do I believe it.  Had my partner and I had the money at the time, we might have also bought into the project because we liked it.  It's getting tiring responding to posters who throw out their thoughts while at the same time including me.  

      Most projects, by foreign and domestic developers, get built.  What I said was you can minimize your risk buying off-plan by selecting a well-financed, publicly-traded developer with a good track record of completing projects.  That statement comes from what I have learned after 10 years living here and buying 20 condos, 5 off-plan.   Part of the learning for me was observing what happened with Waterfront.  If a buyer has some uncertainty about a project, he or she can wait until it's completed and buy then.  Even with fully booked projects, units usually become available around the time the project is done and buyers have to come up with  the funds to purchase.  

Wow, you bought 20 condos in amazing thailand? How many do you have now? Are they rented? Monthly rentals have tanked across the country. Are you crying in your sleep?

35 minutes ago, bbabythai said:

Wow, you bought 20 condos in amazing thailand? How many do you have now? Are they rented? Monthly rentals have tanked across the country. Are you crying in your sleep?

    Had several rental condos a number of years ago, all sold.  Still have a bkk condo and a Pattaya condo my partner and I use.  No crying in my sleep.   

One of the "cited" reasons for construction to be halted was that the contractor (and/or developer) decided to cut costs by making the fire stairs significantly smaller than had been approved in the original plans.

If they were cutting costs there, where else were they also cutting costs ? Low grade steel maybe ? Low grade cement, wiring, fixtures ?

And yes, there was some funny business when it was first approved. They didn't have enough land to build it without encroaching on public land (i.e. the waterfront). 
They got around that when the city announced they were going to expand Bali Hai, thus pushing the "waterfront" further out and making the land the condo building was going to use "legal".

Once the building plans, on what was to be "legal" land, were approved and construction started, the planned Bali Hai expansion was "postponed indefinitely".
Oops ! Too late. The condo building had already started !  (Over 6 years later and that planned expansion still hasn't happened and probably never will. Probably was never actually "planned" in the first place.)

Still a lot of lawsuits going on and even a dispute about who actually owns the land. It seems there are 7 land titles for the 2 rai of land involved. (One story says the "courts" deemed the land titles had been granted illegally.)

The developers have already declared bankruptcy after their "restructure plan" failed back in 2017.

Can't see how they could start working it again, especially without major construction alterations to bring the fire escapes (and elevators) to where they were supposed to be in the beginning.
Knocking a few floors off the top won't miraculously change the size of the fire escapes, or the impact of the building on the skyline.

Got to love when the former Mayor says they originally objected to the height of the building but were over ruled by the "building board" ?
Say what ? Who the **** do the "building board" report to if not city council and the Mayor ? 

Actually the fire escape issue was not a cost cutting measure.  It occurred when the developer decided to change the low block to a hotel.  A hotel needs more lifts than a condo and the extra 3 (?) lifts were built at the expense of the width of corridors and staircases aka fire escapes. 

 

As far as I know Bali Hai might have more liabilities than assets, but it has not filed for bankruptcy.  The bank is owed more money than the land is worth in its present state and Park Plaza (PPHE) may well be in the hole for some of that.

2 hours ago, Kerryd said:

One of the "cited" reasons for construction to be halted was that the contractor (and/or developer) decided to cut costs by making the fire stairs significantly smaller than had been approved in the original plans.

If they were cutting costs there, where else were they also cutting costs ? Low grade steel maybe ? Low grade cement, wiring, fixtures ?

And yes, there was some funny business when it was first approved. They didn't have enough land to build it without encroaching on public land (i.e. the waterfront). 
They got around that when the city announced they were going to expand Bali Hai, thus pushing the "waterfront" further out and making the land the condo building was going to use "legal".

Once the building plans, on what was to be "legal" land, were approved and construction started, the planned Bali Hai expansion was "postponed indefinitely".
Oops ! Too late. The condo building had already started !  (Over 6 years later and that planned expansion still hasn't happened and probably never will. Probably was never actually "planned" in the first place.)

Still a lot of lawsuits going on and even a dispute about who actually owns the land. It seems there are 7 land titles for the 2 rai of land involved. (One story says the "courts" deemed the land titles had been granted illegally.)

The developers have already declared bankruptcy after their "restructure plan" failed back in 2017.

Can't see how they could start working it again, especially without major construction alterations to bring the fire escapes (and elevators) to where they were supposed to be in the beginning.
Knocking a few floors off the top won't miraculously change the size of the fire escapes, or the impact of the building on the skyline.

Got to love when the former Mayor says they originally objected to the height of the building but were over ruled by the "building board" ?
Say what ? Who the **** do the "building board" report to if not city council and the Mayor ? 

Great story. What a complete cluster fxxk of a project. Who would ever want to be a developer....

17 hours ago, CRUNCHER said:

As far as I know Bali Hai might have more liabilities than assets, but it has not filed for bankruptcy.  The bank is owed more money than the land is worth in its present state and Park Plaza (PPHE) may well be in the hole for some of that.

"Yesterday (October 9th), the Bali Hai Construction Company on behalf of the Bali Hai Company Limited, which has previously claimed to be bankrupt due to all the lawsuits surrounding the building, has officially filed a request for re-construction permission from the Pattaya City despite the demolition order"
https://thepattayanews.com/2021/10/10/owners-of-the-controversial-waterfront-condo-on-bali-hai-pier-ask-for-an-opportunity-to-resume-construction-vs-demolish-the-building/

Another article about the bankruptcy:
http://thai-property-embargo.blogspot.com/2017/05/how-many-looser-after-waterfront.html

 

And from the law office handling many of the lawsuits against the Bali Hai project:
https://magnacarta.co.th/waterfront-rehabilitation-case-2/

 

On 10/14/2021 at 12:25 PM, Kerryd said:

One of the "cited" reasons for construction to be halted was that the contractor (and/or developer) decided to cut costs by making the fire stairs significantly smaller than had been approved in the original plans.

If they were cutting costs there, where else were they also cutting costs ? Low grade steel maybe ? Low grade cement, wiring, fixtures ?

And yes, there was some funny business when it was first approved. They didn't have enough land to build it without encroaching on public land (i.e. the waterfront). 
They got around that when the city announced they were going to expand Bali Hai, thus pushing the "waterfront" further out and making the land the condo building was going to use "legal".

Once the building plans, on what was to be "legal" land, were approved and construction started, the planned Bali Hai expansion was "postponed indefinitely".
Oops ! Too late. The condo building had already started !  (Over 6 years later and that planned expansion still hasn't happened and probably never will. Probably was never actually "planned" in the first place.)

Still a lot of lawsuits going on and even a dispute about who actually owns the land. It seems there are 7 land titles for the 2 rai of land involved. (One story says the "courts" deemed the land titles had been granted illegally.)

The developers have already declared bankruptcy after their "restructure plan" failed back in 2017.

Can't see how they could start working it again, especially without major construction alterations to bring the fire escapes (and elevators) to where they were supposed to be in the beginning.
Knocking a few floors off the top won't miraculously change the size of the fire escapes, or the impact of the building on the skyline.

Got to love when the former Mayor says they originally objected to the height of the building but were over ruled by the "building board" ?
Say what ? Who the **** do the "building board" report to if not city council and the Mayor ? 

 

Interesting, but it's still perfectly fine to invest in property here.  ????