Parking pickle: Bangkok condo resident slapped with 20,000 baht fine

[AustinRacing]

Can someone explain this. If she’s a tenant and is allocated one parking spot then what does it matter if she leaves it there for however long. 

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, AustinRacing said:

Can someone explain this. If she’s a tenant and is allocated one parking spot then what does it matter if she leaves it there for however long. 

Some overpowered muppets in the juristic committee seem to have let their ‘imagines elevated status’ go to their heads and have put in place a ridiculous rule with the completely misguided idea that it solves a parking problem. 
 

Had the girl in question had a friend move the car to a different spot, or even drive the car forwards 4m, then reverse back into the same parking spot they’d have no ground for the fine…

 

…. the girl is a resident, it’s just stupid made up rules. 

 

 

[BusyB]

8 hours ago, Taboo2 said:

Always focus on "Attention to Details" when you live in a condo.  Just get some tea or coffer or a cold drink, go on your balcony and read everything in your Condo rule book.

 

 

Always read the small print about everything.

 

I even read Apple's and Google's through the first time. Now I just flag 'em through. I just hope I don't end up like South Park's Cartman. In one episode he clicked on 'Agree' which resulted in him being sentenced to death or something for some minor infringement.

[swm59nj]

If she is a resident it is her responsibility to be aware of the rules of the condominium.  Which she admits she is not. 
But the fine imposed is somewhat over the top. And if a person is a resident and has a permit on their vehicle. The rule is also extreme. 

[Sigma6]

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

In most condos the contract stipulates a number of spaces per unit, usually 1 per 1 or 2 BR condo unit. 
 

If so, I wonder if the juristic rules are in contradiction to the purchase contract & which supersedes the other. 
 

I would certainly never imagine such a ridiculous issue to arise when parking ‘at home’…. 
 

So many people go on holiday, this rule is completely ridiculous.

 

Just when I think things can’t get any sillier, I read of such issues. 
 

Condo committee could easily waive this fine. She should just ignore the pedantic nazis !!! 

 

Agreed, and yet some comment here as though it’s a reasonable rule. 
 

Most condos have around 60% parking, this is just the accepted level based on average car ownership. 
 

my room comes with 1 space included, and I can leave it parked for 15 days or 15 months. I wouldn't be paying that fine. 

 

Ridiculous. 

[soi3eddie]

I suppose each condo's co-owners can make up whatever rules they want at an AGM. There must have been a lot of issues with parking for them to vote this through. We used to have parking problems at our Bangkok condo (only 3 foreign owners out of 99 units so all Thai vehicle owners) but car ownership seems to have declined since the Thai government scheme to fund cars cheaply long since expired. We have about 75 spaces and only 40 are in regular use. None is attributed to any specific condo. Glad not to have issues like the OP story. 

[Captain Monday]

14 hours ago, Henryford said:

Crazy rule. So you can't go on holiday for more than 14 days !!!

Not at all. You don't have to own a car or put it somewhere else.

When I had a car in my country we had a much better procedure

These squatters heaps are removed by tow-truck/wreckers, by a private company under contract. Then only released when service and storage charges are paid, in full.

 

If  parked in a reserved or deeded spot on condo property can be removed,  immediately. 

[SAFETY FIRST]

18 hours ago, webfact said:

20,000 baht after leaving her car parked in the condo’s parking lot for 20 days

Geeze I wish our management company would be more forceful with long term parking. 

Out condo is around 5 years old, quite a few cars been here for many years, lots of dust on them, taking up valuable parking spaces. 

[Captain Monday]

12 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

In most condos the contract stipulates a number of spaces per unit, usually 1 per 1 or 2 BR condo unit. 
 

If so, I wonder if the juristic rules are in contradiction to the purchase contract & which supersedes the other. 
 

I would certainly never imagine such a ridiculous issue to arise when parking ‘at home’…. 
 

So many people go on holiday, this rule is completely ridiculous.

 

Just when I think things can’t get any sillier, I read of such issues. 
 

Condo committee could easily waive this fine. She should just ignore the pedantic nazis !!! 

 

The fine seems steep. If it is clearly within the rules. Ignorance of the rules not an excuse for something that has been presented and signed I do not think an “app”, if optional meets a reasonable standard of notification. 

[JayClay]

9 hours ago, BusyB said:

I just hope I don't end up like South Park's Cartman. In one episode he clicked on 'Agree' which resulted in him being sentenced to death or something for some minor infringement

Kyle. And it was a fate far worse than death.

 

That's the only South Park episode I can't bring myself to re-watch.

[digbeth]

11 hours ago, AustinRacing said:

Can someone explain this. If she’s a tenant and is allocated one parking spot then what does it matter if she leaves it there for however long. 

There is no allocation,, when there's 40-60% parking space to the number of rooms the salesperson can say each room is entitled to a parking space, but what happens if all residents turn up to park? 

Often if the room is allocated a spot and is included in the deed they'll have room number painted on the spot, or incase of posh condos that have like 110% parking space to room number, not needed. 

 

I understand most of us here can't imagine living in a place with such situation

condos around 1-1.3 million baht in Pattaya might not see the car park full all year due to foreign tenant not having car and only in the holidays that the Bangkok owners show up

but this is reality for most working class Thais in popular commuter areas for condos in this price range, with cars double or triple parked and spilling over onto the street and if you don't make it home before dinner time on Sunday you're not getting a spot

[jacko45k]

20 hours ago, Henryford said:

Crazy rule. So you can't go on holiday for more than 14 days !!!

'Rules iz rules', although we have not been told the full details of them. 

Ignorance is no excuse.

[ChipButty]

12 hours ago, AustinRacing said:

Can someone explain this. If she’s a tenant and is allocated one parking spot then what does it matter if she leaves it there for however long. 

I think you would need to see the contract how it's worded, In high end condo's you might have a designated spot with your number on it, I checked our contract we don't have a designated spot but we are allowed to park for free and that would apply to any tenant we have, but only 1 car per unit, it doesn't mention about the length of time we can park, only to let the juristic office know if you intend to be away for a while and leave a key in case of emergency, 

Maybe she was only a tenant we don't know, in the future when we have a tenant we will have to include it in the contract that yes he can park but not leave it there for any length of time without informing us, Only one car per unit, not run a car rental business from our car park, 

[ChipButty]

15 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Indeed.. that’s exactly what

that was about. 

When we bought this condo there was a clause written there even if we sold the unit within 3 years we would have to pay them 3% if they sold it, it would be 5%, 

After the 3 years my wife wrote to them just clarify we were clear of that clause, we have it it writing, 

I must admit the management and maintenance teams are good, 

[ballpoint]

If she was allowed 15 days, and parked for 20, then surely the fine should be 1,000 baht for each day over the 15 = 5,000 baht?

 

 

[Captain Monday]

We had derelict jalopies in our car park took ages for the board to take action

 

There are still 2 heaps in the Soi that have not moved since the late 2000’s 

Not really blocking traffic and other than a potential nest for vermin  ????‍♀️

 

 

[Captain Monday]

 

“Can someone explain this. If she’s a tenant and is allocated one parking spot then what does it matter if she leaves it there for however long. “

 

Those rules ensure the spots are there for reasonable use of all residents NOT near permanent storage of vehicles. (Always the case when you do not have deeded or allocated parking) similarly I used to have parking at an airport base where the maximum was 8 days. It was a place for work parking, not to go poncimg off on vacation leaving working crew unable to park. The longest trips were 6 days according to the contract. Sure some guys had friends move their car then the jobsworths with the colored chalk sticks went into HAWAII 50 investigation mode. 
 

 

Clear rules and penalties

Consistent enforcement

 

Without these necessary procedures in place SOME resident always seems to take advantage of these un-allocated condo parking situations. 

[richard_smith237]

On 9/23/2023 at 6:16 PM, Captain Monday said:

Without these necessary procedures in place SOME resident always seems to take advantage of these un-allocated condo parking situations. 

Take advantage ??? 

 

Take advantage of what exactly...  This is not a military base, your comparison is nonsensical. 

 

She was a resident, she'd parked her car in her parking at home and went on holiday for a couple of weeks. 

 

Nothing is being taken advantage of at all.

 

IF this was a friend parking at her condo, then you'd have a point - but this is her home. 

 

The regulation made up by the juristic committee is one of the dumbest I've heard of. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

On 9/23/2023 at 5:51 AM, Captain Monday said:

We had derelict jalopies in our car park took ages for the board to take action

 

There are still 2 heaps in the Soi that have not moved since the late 2000’s 

Not really blocking traffic and other than a potential nest for vermin  ????‍♀️

This was not a derelict jalopie...   It was a residents car which was parked while she was on holiday - what else was she supposed to do ????

 

I do agree with you that 'derelict vehicles' need to be dealt with and removed. But this so very clearly was not the case  at all. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

On 9/23/2023 at 5:01 AM, ChipButty said:

When we bought this condo there was a clause written there even if we sold the unit within 3 years we would have to pay them 3% if they sold it, it would be 5%, 

After the 3 years my wife wrote to them just clarify we were clear of that clause, we have it it writing, 

I'd reject that contract and look elsewhere unless the property was so incredible it was worth it, even with that dumb clause. 

 

... its just greed - and possibly illegal. Even IF something is in a contract, it doesnt mean its enforceable, contracts can be contested and some clauses that people put in contracts are actually illegal clauses. I'm not sure if this is, but I'd certain contest it. 

 

Slightly off topic - I rejected a job (in another country) because of a non-compete (I couldn't work for a competitor within 6 months of leaving that position) - I argued that the non-compete was illegal - they didn't care. It was an indication of the companies attitudes - I rejected there offer based on the poor contract conditions.

 

On 9/23/2023 at 5:01 AM, ChipButty said:

I must admit the management and maintenance teams are good, 

Thats good... but them insisting on 3% for doing no work (if you sold the unit) is greedy.

[ChipButty]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

I'd reject that contract and look elsewhere unless the property was so incredible it was worth it, even with that dumb clause. 

 

... its just greed - and possibly illegal. Even IF something is in a contract, it doesnt mean its enforceable, contracts can be contested and some clauses that people put in contracts are actually illegal clauses. I'm not sure if this is, but I'd certain contest it. 

 

Slightly off topic - I rejected a job (in another country) because of a non-compete (I couldn't work for a competitor within 6 months of leaving that position) - I argued that the non-compete was illegal - they didn't care. It was an indication of the companies attitudes - I rejected there offer based on the poor contract conditions.

 

Thats good... but them insisting on 3% for doing no work (if you sold the unit) is greedy.

Next month we are 6 years down the line so all is good, and the standards are still be kept too, they are about to start some maintenance outside painting which is good to see,