Juristic Committee

[Dazzler]

Where I live the father of one of the owners appears to run the Committee. He is non-resident, not an owner, and is not eligible in any legal capacity e.g. Site Manager. for a few of us residents he is a pain, but the Thai residents are too Kreng Jai to oppose him.

1. Does he have the right to serve on the Committee purely as a representative of his son?

2. Does his role, if legal, remove all voting (and probably other) rights from his son?

BTW, this guy is well connected and his son is 50 years old.

Thanks...

[quiksilva]

It depends on whether his son has given him the power of attorney to act on his behalf, if this is the case, then he may be able to vote in AGM EGM's etc on his son's behalf (although the actual extent of his powers will be limited to what is included in the PoA), but it would probably not remove rights from his son.

Yes he can serve on the committee as his son's representative, if his son (or him via proxy) has been elected to stand in the Juristic AGM.

[Dazzler]

Thanks Quiksilva.

So it appears that unless he is voted off he can stay on the Committee indefinitely.

I suppose I could ask to see the document authorising him to represent his son if I wanted to be really stupid!

[quiksilva]

I suppose the best that could happen would be for someone else to stand for election to the committee, but be warned they are usually terribly political.

[Moonfruit]

After just attending the AGM of a certain condo building while the committee election was taking place i can honestly say that it is not an election.

Every single owner complained about the management, very vocally, the majority of them being Thai owners. However, the election revealed interesting results. The exact same member of the committee were re-elected, with the same president.

[quiksilva]

Proxies are a terrible thing

[palm]

Where I live the father of one of the owners appears to run the Committee. He is non-resident, not an owner, and is not eligible in any legal capacity e.g. Site Manager. for a few of us residents he is a pain, but the Thai residents are too Kreng Jai to oppose him.

1. Does he have the right to serve on the Committee purely as a representative of his son?

2. Does his role, if legal, remove all voting (and probably other) rights from his son?

BTW, this guy is well connected and his son is 50 years old.

Thanks...

The Condominium Act specifically does NOT allow this. We had the same problem recently with someone on the committee who was not legally allowed to be on it. It was very quickly sorted out with the threat of legal action against the entire committee for breaking the law. You will find all sorts of fun and games going on with these committees, many of whom have zero management experience, and many don't even know a Condominium Act law exists.

Only the owner or the spouse of the condo owner can be on the committee (i.e. their name on the chanoot). A proxy cannot be used by a relative. Go see a lawyer for confirmation, or get hold of a book that lists the Act in Thai and English. I saw one in the bookstore recently that was more of a rant by a pissed-off owner living in Pattaya; funny and covering law at the same time which is quite a rarity.

The only case a proxy can be used is for normal voting at AGMs and EGMs etc.

Hope this helps.

[Dazzler]

Thank you all for the info.

A few of us will get together to plan our strategy...

[jbaldwin]

Where I live the father of one of the owners appears to run the Committee. He is non-resident, not an owner, and is not eligible in any legal capacity e.g. Site Manager. for a few of us residents he is a pain, but the Thai residents are too Kreng Jai to oppose him.

1. Does he have the right to serve on the Committee purely as a representative of his son?

2. Does his role, if legal, remove all voting (and probably other) rights from his son?

BTW, this guy is well connected and his son is 50 years old.

Thanks...

The Condominium Act specifically does NOT allow this. We had the same problem recently with someone on the committee who was not legally allowed to be on it. It was very quickly sorted out with the threat of legal action against the entire committee for breaking the law. You will find all sorts of fun and games going on with these committees, many of whom have zero management experience, and many don't even know a Condominium Act law exists.

Only the owner or the spouse of the condo owner can be on the committee (i.e. their name on the chanoot). A proxy cannot be used by a relative. Go see a lawyer for confirmation, or get hold of a book that lists the Act in Thai and English. I saw one in the bookstore recently that was more of a rant by a pissed-off owner living in Pattaya; funny and covering law at the same time which is quite a rarity.

The only case a proxy can be used is for normal voting at AGMs and EGMs etc.

Hope this helps.

In fact, I understand that, the Condominium Act requires that a Committee Member is a co-owner, spouse or the representative of a corporate owner. If any condo is held in a company name anyone can act as a representative on the Committee

[KondoKitty]

get hold of a book that lists the Act in Thai and English. I saw one in the bookstore recently that was more of a rant by a pissed-off owner living in Pattaya; funny and covering law at the same time which is quite a rarity.

Can anyone please tell me the name and author of this book? "Palm" mentioned it. Sounds classic & useful.

Thanks!

KondoKitty

[Tammi]

get hold of a book that lists the Act in Thai and English. I saw one in the bookstore recently that was more of a rant by a pissed-off owner living in Pattaya; funny and covering law at the same time which is quite a rarity.

Can anyone please tell me the name and author of this book? "Palm" mentioned it. Sounds classic & useful.

Thanks!

KondoKitty

The book is "Your Thai Condo Rights" by Tony Crossley and includes The Condominium Act B.E. 2522 (1979) in both THai and English. Well worth reading as it shows the sort of nonsense that can go on in condos.

But there is a new Condominium Act due to come into force on 4 July 2008 that is going to change quite a few things - some for the better and some for the worse. For the better is that a committee member or a committee member's spouse cannot be a proxy of any co-owner; committee has a 2 year term; committee may be reelected for a 2nd term, but shall not be entitled to be the committee longer than 2 consecutive terms except when no replacement can be recruited; appointment of the committee has to be submitted for registration by the Juristic Person Manager within 30 days after the resolution is approved at an AGM.

[KondoKitty]

Thank you, Tammi I will check out the book. Looking forward to the July Condo Law amendments - especially on Proxies!!

Do you know the current Condo Law re. dismissing committee members?

I'm the only foreigner on the committee at my condo (it is my 2nd term) and a select group of current & ex-committee (all Thai) find me too outspoken. So they're trying to fire me on the grounds that I'm violating condo regulations by having 2 pet cats. There'll be an Extraordinary General Meeting next Sunday where they will ask co-owners to vote on this.

At the Annual General Meeting 8 months ago (Aug07), the Pet topic was raised for co-owners to vote formally. In most condos the topic never comes up, but at my condo I'm a target so this is grounds for attack. Majority of co-owners agreed that any "non-nuisance" pets already living at the condo would be accepted, but there should be no additional pets. So I registered my 2 cats with the Property Management by the given deadline, and 2 other co-owners registered their pets too. Obviously, the AGM vote didn't go the way certain people had hoped!!

All was quiet until Nov07 when certain committee members manipulated the Property Management to informally carry out the vote again. A lesser number of co-owners responded to the vote (vs. the number that had voted/attended the AGM), but responses were solicited from the 3 floors with pets. Not surprisingly , the outcome this time was what these people wanted - the majority of co-owners on the 3 floors with pets voted "NO PETS ALLOWED".

I have sent complaints to Committee/Property Management/Juristic Person Manager - all of which have been ignored. The Juristic Person Manager instructed the Property Management (back in Dec07) to check with all the Aug07 AGM attendees to confirm they had voted to allow existing Pets, but the Office staff have not done their job. Instead, they are busy supporting the committee members - First sending me letters demanding that I remove my pets from the building, and now, hosting an EGM where co-owners will be asked to vote to dismiss me as I am "violating condo regulations". (There'll be a lot of proxies too, I'm sure!!)

Any advice? I love being on the committee!!

Thanks! KondoKitty

PS - I should also mention that it's in the interests of the well established international Property Management company to get me removed from the committee as I am one of the few people that dares to openly criticize them for their unsatisfactory performance. They have also been exposed recently for illegally raising the CAM fee, but certain committee members are still protecting them.

[Tammi]

Thank you, Tammi I will check out the book. Looking forward to the July Condo Law amendments - especially on Proxies!!

Do you know the current Condo Law re. dismissing committee members?

I'm the only foreigner on the committee at my condo (it is my 2nd term) and a select group of current & ex-committee (all Thai) find me too outspoken. So they're trying to fire me on the grounds that I'm violating condo regulations by having 2 pet cats. There'll be an Extraordinary General Meeting next Sunday where they will ask co-owners to vote on this.

At the Annual General Meeting 8 months ago (Aug07), the Pet topic was raised for co-owners to vote formally. In most condos the topic never comes up, but at my condo I'm a target so this is grounds for attack. Majority of co-owners agreed that any "non-nuisance" pets already living at the condo would be accepted, but there should be no additional pets. So I registered my 2 cats with the Property Management by the given deadline, and 2 other co-owners registered their pets too. Obviously, the AGM vote didn't go the way certain people had hoped!!

All was quiet until Nov07 when certain committee members manipulated the Property Management to informally carry out the vote again. A lesser number of co-owners responded to the vote (vs. the number that had voted/attended the AGM), but responses were solicited from the 3 floors with pets. Not surprisingly , the outcome this time was what these people wanted - the majority of co-owners on the 3 floors with pets voted "NO PETS ALLOWED".

I have sent complaints to Committee/Property Management/Juristic Person Manager - all of which have been ignored. The Juristic Person Manager instructed the Property Management (back in Dec07) to check with all the Aug07 AGM attendees to confirm they had voted to allow existing Pets, but the Office staff have not done their job. Instead, they are busy supporting the committee members - First sending me letters demanding that I remove my pets from the building, and now, hosting an EGM where co-owners will be asked to vote to dismiss me as I am "violating condo regulations". (There'll be a lot of proxies too, I'm sure!!)

Any advice? I love being on the committee!!

Thanks! KondoKitty

PS - I should also mention that it's in the interests of the well established international Property Management company to get me removed from the committee as I am one of the few people that dares to openly criticize them for their unsatisfactory performance. They have also been exposed recently for illegally raising the CAM fee, but certain committee members are still protecting them.

There's nothing in current Act about dismissing committee members though a resolution could be voted on at an AGM or EGM. In new Act Section 37/6 " A resolution of the committee must be approved by a majority of committee members present for which one member shall have one vote. In case of a tie in the voting the chairperson shall have an additional vote." So under new Act committee can pass resolutions (which I think is bad) and you could get voted off!

Also under new Act Section 37/3 "In addition to being retired on rotation, committee member may be retired for the following reasons: death, resignation, is no longer a person under Section 37/1 or hasa disqulaification under Section 37/2, is dismissed at a general meeting".

Is it actually in the Regulations that no pets are allowed or is it only in the so called "house rules"?

The current law Section 43 states "To form a quorum, a General Meeting must be attended by at least one third of the total eligible to vote and Section 44 states" Resolutions of a General Meeting shall be determined by the majority of votes of the co-owners attending the meeting unless this Act determines otherwise." The "otherwise" is the provision in the current Act that certain resolutions need at least 50% and at least 75%.

Many condos believe that the last paragraph in Section 48 (Resolutions requiring more than 50%) "If co-owner votes are not present at a GM in numbers to pass a resolution in accordance with paragraph 1 above, a second GM shall be called within 15 days from the date of the original meeting. Such resolution at the second meeting shall be determined by the majority of votes attending the meeting" means that if there is no quorum a second meeting can be called and a quorum is not needed at 2nd meeting. That belief is not correct. The last paragraph in Section 48 applies only to Section 48 and anyway Section 43 is explicit that a GM must have a quorum. Unfortunately in the new Act quorums are not required at 2nd called meeting - two persons (one to move and one to second) can turn up and hold a meeting. Section 43 of the new Act: " For this new meeting the constitution of a quorum shall be irrelevant." And this applies to resolutions requiring not less than half the votes at the 1st called meeting. In new Act there are no items requiring at least 75% of the votes and those too can be voted on and passed by a couple of people. So fees, disposal of common property, change of use of common property, can be voted on by a couple of people. Co-owners will have to be more interested and involved or ----------!

Good luck. I think if I were you I would resign from the Committee, really get to know the condo Act and the Regulations, and keep complaining/suggesting. There was a court case here where the judge ruled that management had to reply in writing to co-owners written complaints.

[Tammi]

Where I live the father of one of the owners appears to run the Committee. He is non-resident, not an owner, and is not eligible in any legal capacity e.g. Site Manager. for a few of us residents he is a pain, but the Thai residents are too Kreng Jai to oppose him.

1. Does he have the right to serve on the Committee purely as a representative of his son?

2. Does his role, if legal, remove all voting (and probably other) rights from his son?

BTW, this guy is well connected and his son is 50 years old.

Thanks...

Section 37 of the current Act says that co-owners set up a committee to supervise the management of the Condominium Juristic Person, and which committee shall consist of not more than 9 members appointed by resolution of the general meeting.

Section 38 of the current Act:

The following persons shall be eligible for appointment as the committee members:

1. the co-owners or spouses of the co-owners;

2. the legitimate representatives, caretakers or guardian in the case that a co-owner is a minor, an incompetent, or quasi-incompetent person, as the case may be;

3. a representative of a juristic person in the case that the juristic person is a co-owner.

Section 47: "Co-owners may assign power of atterney in writing to other persons to vote instead of them ------.

If 2 and 3 of Section 38 don't apply to son I think Dad has no right to sit on the committee. Even if he was site manager he would have no right.

Only one person per condo unit can vote the voting points of that unit.

[KondoKitty]

Thank you, Tammi I will check out the book. Looking forward to the July Condo Law amendments - especially on Proxies!!

Do you know the current Condo Law re. dismissing committee members?

I'm the only foreigner on the committee at my condo (it is my 2nd term) and a select group of current & ex-committee (all Thai) find me too outspoken. So they're trying to fire me on the grounds that I'm violating condo regulations by having 2 pet cats. There'll be an Extraordinary General Meeting next Sunday where they will ask co-owners to vote on this.

At the Annual General Meeting 8 months ago (Aug07), the Pet topic was raised for co-owners to vote formally. In most condos the topic never comes up, but at my condo I'm a target so this is grounds for attack. Majority of co-owners agreed that any "non-nuisance" pets already living at the condo would be accepted, but there should be no additional pets. So I registered my 2 cats with the Property Management by the given deadline, and 2 other co-owners registered their pets too. Obviously, the AGM vote didn't go the way certain people had hoped!!

All was quiet until Nov07 when certain committee members manipulated the Property Management to informally carry out the vote again. A lesser number of co-owners responded to the vote (vs. the number that had voted/attended the AGM), but responses were solicited from the 3 floors with pets. Not surprisingly , the outcome this time was what these people wanted - the majority of co-owners on the 3 floors with pets voted "NO PETS ALLOWED".

I have sent complaints to Committee/Property Management/Juristic Person Manager - all of which have been ignored. The Juristic Person Manager instructed the Property Management (back in Dec07) to check with all the Aug07 AGM attendees to confirm they had voted to allow existing Pets, but the Office staff have not done their job. Instead, they are busy supporting the committee members - First sending me letters demanding that I remove my pets from the building, and now, hosting an EGM where co-owners will be asked to vote to dismiss me as I am "violating condo regulations". (There'll be a lot of proxies too, I'm sure!!)

Any advice? I love being on the committee!!

Thanks! KondoKitty

PS - I should also mention that it's in the interests of the well established international Property Management company to get me removed from the committee as I am one of the few people that dares to openly criticize them for their unsatisfactory performance. They have also been exposed recently for illegally raising the CAM fee, but certain committee members are still protecting them.

There's nothing in current Act about dismissing committee members though a resolution could be voted on at an AGM or EGM. In new Act Section 37/6 " A resolution of the committee must be approved by a majority of committee members present for which one member shall have one vote. In case of a tie in the voting the chairperson shall have an additional vote." So under new Act committee can pass resolutions (which I think is bad) and you could get voted off!

Also under new Act Section 37/3 "In addition to being retired on rotation, committee member may be retired for the following reasons: death, resignation, is no longer a person under Section 37/1 or hasa disqulaification under Section 37/2, is dismissed at a general meeting".

Is it actually in the Regulations that no pets are allowed or is it only in the so called "house rules"?

The current law Section 43 states "To form a quorum, a General Meeting must be attended by at least one third of the total eligible to vote and Section 44 states" Resolutions of a General Meeting shall be determined by the majority of votes of the co-owners attending the meeting unless this Act determines otherwise." The "otherwise" is the provision in the current Act that certain resolutions need at least 50% and at least 75%.

Many condos believe that the last paragraph in Section 48 (Resolutions requiring more than 50%) "If co-owner votes are not present at a GM in numbers to pass a resolution in accordance with paragraph 1 above, a second GM shall be called within 15 days from the date of the original meeting. Such resolution at the second meeting shall be determined by the majority of votes attending the meeting" means that if there is no quorum a second meeting can be called and a quorum is not needed at 2nd meeting. That belief is not correct. The last paragraph in Section 48 applies only to Section 48 and anyway Section 43 is explicit that a GM must have a quorum. Unfortunately in the new Act quorums are not required at 2nd called meeting - two persons (one to move and one to second) can turn up and hold a meeting. Section 43 of the new Act: " For this new meeting the constitution of a quorum shall be irrelevant." And this applies to resolutions requiring not less than half the votes at the 1st called meeting. In new Act there are no items requiring at least 75% of the votes and those too can be voted on and passed by a couple of people. So fees, disposal of common property, change of use of common property, can be voted on by a couple of people. Co-owners will have to be more interested and involved or ----------!

Good luck. I think if I were you I would resign from the Committee, really get to know the condo Act and the Regulations, and keep complaining/suggesting. There was a court case here where the judge ruled that management had to reply in writing to co-owners written complaints.

Thanks Tammi

1. PETS: They are referring to the "Rules and Regulations" (article 9 no 26.9); Here is an extract from a Committe Meeting Summary:

(Having pets) is against the Rules and Regulations in article 9 no. 26.9 under the heading "Private Property," reminding co-owners not to allow "stray animals in the unit and public property." Although majority of the (committee) meeting attendees agreed on this prohibition, some co-owners {i.e. me} still allowed strays animals {nb: I assume "stray animals" is just their poor translation..I don't bring in strays...I have two 7 year old cats that stay inside at all times}, thus, the building management decided {actually, it was the co-owners who voted at the 2007 AGM} that all pet owners must register their animals and supply an identification photo to the building management. Moreover, co-owners must undertake no breeding of any animals in the premises.

Are these Regulations the same for all condos in Thailand? Would you have the English version of these Regulations? I believe the section about Pets is a "grey area" anyway. Is that true? But these people want to make it black and white so I can be expelled.

Can they dismiss me on these grounds even when there was an AGM where co-owners said existing pets were OK? Any experience with this kind of thing in other condos?

2. CHAIRPERSON. What is the role of the Chairperson and how should they be elected? At my condo, this wasn't really voted on. By default, the committee member who had received the most votes was awarded this title (they got it for the 2nd year in a row). I asked the Juristic Person Manager (who actually works for the Developer) to clarify the role and reason why we need a Chairperson. He didn't really know and didn't get back to me about it later - said it was just needed for legal reasons, but confirmed that they had no extra voting power/rights.

Thanks...

[KondoKitty]

Thanks Tammi

1. PETS: They are referring to the "Rules and Regulations" (article 9 no 26.9); Here is an extract from a Committe Meeting Summary:

(Having pets) is against the Rules and Regulations in article 9 no. 26.9 under the heading "Private Property," reminding co-owners not to allow "stray animals in the unit and public property." Although majority of the (committee) meeting attendees agreed on this prohibition, some co-owners {i.e. me} still allowed strays animals {nb: I assume "stray animals" is just their poor translation..I don't bring in strays...I have two 7 year old cats that stay inside at all times}, thus, the building management decided {actually, it was the co-owners who voted at the 2007 AGM} that all pet owners must register their animals and supply an identification photo to the building management. Moreover, co-owners must undertake no breeding of any animals in the premises.

Are these Regulations the same for all condos in Thailand? Would you have the English version of these Regulations? I believe the section about Pets is a "grey area" anyway. Is that true? But these people want to make it black and white so I can be expelled.

Can they dismiss me on these grounds even when there was an AGM where co-owners said existing pets were OK? Any experience with this kind of thing in other condos?

2. CHAIRPERSON. What is the role of the Chairperson and how should they be elected? At my condo, this wasn't really voted on. By default, the committee member who had received the most votes was awarded this title (they got it for the 2nd year in a row). I asked the Juristic Person Manager (who actually works for the Developer) to clarify the role and reason why we need a Chairperson. He didn't really know and didn't get back to me about it later - said it was just needed for legal reasons, but confirmed that they had no extra voting power/rights.

Thanks...

One more thing:

3. MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY TO REPLY TO COMPLAINTS IN WRITING

You mentioned there was a ruling that Management must respond formally. Can you share any details? I'd like to be able to show them that since it is their regular behaviour to ignore all sorts of complaints and suggestions vs. proactively solve and communicate anything.

[Tammi]

3. MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY TO REPLY TO COMPLAINTS IN WRITING

You mentioned there was a ruling that Management must respond formally. Can you share any details? I'd like to be able to show them that since it is their regular behaviour to ignore all sorts of complaints and suggestions vs. proactively solve and communicate anything.

The book "Your Thai Condo Rights" by Tony Crossley Page 23, para 1: "Neither does Shelley advise new committee members of his court commitment to answer my questions or tell them that the magistrate told him it was a committee's duty to reply to all co-owner complaints. That he does not answer my questions is unsurprising given that truthful answers would send him to jail."

(Shelley was the management committee chairman at a "well known central Pattaya condominium" where Tony has a unit.)

[Tammi]

1. PETS: They are referring to the "Rules and Regulations" (article 9 no 26.9); Here is an extract from a Committe Meeting Summary:

(Having pets) is against the Rules and Regulations in article 9 no. 26.9 under the heading "Private Property," reminding co-owners not to allow "stray animals in the unit and public property." Although majority of the (committee) meeting attendees agreed on this prohibition, some co-owners {i.e. me} still allowed strays animals {nb: I assume "stray animals" is just their poor translation..I don't bring in strays...I have two 7 year old cats that stay inside at all times}, thus, the building management decided {actually, it was the co-owners who voted at the 2007 AGM} that all pet owners must register their animals and supply an identification photo to the building management. Moreover, co-owners must undertake no breeding of any animals in the premises.

Are these Regulations the same for all condos in Thailand? Would you have the English version of these Regulations? I believe the section about Pets is a "grey area" anyway. Is that true? But these people want to make it black and white so I can be expelled.

Can they dismiss me on these grounds even when there was an AGM where co-owners said existing pets were OK? Any experience with this kind of thing in other condos?

2. CHAIRPERSON. What is the role of the Chairperson and how should they be elected? At my condo, this wasn't really voted on. By default, the committee member who had received the most votes was awarded this title (they got it for the 2nd year in a row). I asked the Juristic Person Manager (who actually works for the Developer) to clarify the role and reason why we need a Chairperson. He didn't really know and didn't get back to me about it later - said it was just needed for legal reasons, but confirmed that they had no extra voting power/rights.

Thanks...

You have the clause on pets, more particularly "strays" in your Regulations which is a document required under the Condominium Act and which is registered at the Land Office. So to know everything about any condo one must read the 2 documents together. Seems that the clause in your condo's Regulations about "Pets" only applies to strays. (???) And a good thing that is too - one can get overrun by feral cats and mangy dogs. "Stray animals" is probably indeed what it says and is probably not poor translation.

Each condo has its own Regulations that the management committee will probably have very little idea about having never read the document and will totally disregard clauses - that's what happens in this condo - until a co-owner tells them what is in the Regs but still they won't follow.

Tell them that a Resolution was passed already about pets. Your Regs previously took care of the stray aspect.

There is nothing in present Act about a "Chairperson" but someone has to take control of the Committee meetings and sign off the Minutes, so we have a chairperson. However the new Act does have provision for a chairperson and a deputy chairperson and if they are not at meeting one of the other members will be chairperson. The new Act gives specific duties to the chairperson and he can be fined if he does not carry out these duties.

I don't like Juristic Person Manager hand in hand with the developer. There should be a contract for the JPM so find out when contract expires and try to get him voted out. That's my suggestion.

Edited April 21, 2008 by Tammi