Condo Built Higher Than Allowed At Survanabhumi Airport Area

[PrasitPC]

I bought a condo unit near the Survanabhumi Airport, just off Bangatrad Road. I bought this condo because of the facilities available. Golf course, Clubhouse facilities and also because I want to be near the airport as I travel very frequently. I found out recently on the condo Notice Board that the Condo was built higher than what was allowed by the authorities. It is two floor highers. The authorities have written to the condo management office and have asked for the two floors to be taken down and said the condo is too high. Also they want the co-owners of the condo unit in the meantime to install different Airplanes Warning Lights Systems than what they had earlier installed. It will cost a lot of money and will have to come out from the co-owners sinking funds. My friends who bought the penthouse units are now having second thoughts because the authorities will want to remove the two floors eventually and therefore they will lose their units through no fault of their own. The condo is a hazard to planes landing and taking off. I understand that the developers have been in financial trouble and not sure whether the company which they used to build the condos have been winded up or not. The condo is more than 10 years old.

The developer have built the condos higher than what is allowed. The buyers of this project now felt cheated. We also wonder why the relevant authorities allowed his building to have its licence when it is built higher than what has been allowed in the plans.

Can the Co-owners sue the developers still even though they may have closed down their company. Can the co-owners also sue the government authorities in charge of taking care of the building permits of the condo ? I think there is a law stating that if it is too long , you cannot do anything to the developers or those relevant persons in charge? Some of us have just bought the condos over the last few years and we do not know anything about this condo being built higher than what is allowed and want to seek compensation from the developer.

Any comments appreciated . By Popular

[trogers]

There are 2 groups of 6 blocks in this location. Are both groups similarly affected?

[PrasitPC]

There are 2 groups of 6 blocks in this location. Are both groups similarly affected?

I am not sure about Nouvelle. But certainly the condo that I stay is affected. It is like an accident awaiting to happen. Probably the planes flying in have the aeronautical charts understating the real height of these buildings. Probably the officers who approved the building permits was sleeping or closed an eye. We must not forget Santika pub, the fire that killed so many people last year and also maimed so many of the survivors. Will these officers be liable if anything happens in the future ? How about the developer of the condo ? Will he escape any prosecution if such an accident occurs ? He already sold all the units and washed his hands off the whole project. He built the condos knowing that the heights are wrong ! How many buyers physically go and measure the height of the building that he is going to buy ? The persons who suffer will be the passengers on the planes and the current co-owners of the condos . Why such greed by the developer ? He already have so much money.

[trogers]

There are 2 groups of 6 blocks in this location. Are both groups similarly affected?

I am not sure about Nouvelle. But certainly the condo that I stay is affected. It is like an accident awaiting to happen. Probably the planes flying in have the aeronautical charts understating the real height of these buildings. Probably the officers who approved the building permits was sleeping or closed an eye. We must not forget Santika pub, the fire that killed so many people last year and also maimed so many of the survivors. Will these officers be liable if anything happens in the future ? How about the developer of the condo ? Will he escape any prosecution if such an accident occurs ? He already sold all the units and washed his hands off the whole project. He built the condos knowing that the heights are wrong ! How many buyers physically go and measure the height of the building that he is going to buy ? The persons who suffer will be the passengers on the planes and the current co-owners of the condos . Why such greed by the developer ? He already have so much money.

Building permit was approved and construction started for Prestige was actually in 3rd quarter of 1992 and construction completed in the last quarter of 1994. Construction for Nouvelle started before Prestige and completed in 1993.

Earthworks for the airport only started in 1996 and the airport completed in 2006.

It is debatable who is in the wrong. The developer, the officers approving the building permits, or the airport authority who come in late in the day and say these buildings are too tall.

[PrasitPC]

There are 2 groups of 6 blocks in this location. Are both groups similarly affected?

I am not sure about Nouvelle. But certainly the condo that I stay is affected. It is like an accident awaiting to happen. Probably the planes flying in have the aeronautical charts understating the real height of these buildings. Probably the officers who approved the building permits was sleeping or closed an eye. We must not forget Santika pub, the fire that killed so many people last year and also maimed so many of the survivors. Will these officers be liable if anything happens in the future ? How about the developer of the condo ? Will he escape any prosecution if such an accident occurs ? He already sold all the units and washed his hands off the whole project. He built the condos knowing that the heights are wrong ! How many buyers physically go and measure the height of the building that he is going to buy ? The persons who suffer will be the passengers on the planes and the current co-owners of the condos . Why such greed by the developer ? He already have so much money.

Building permit was approved and construction started for Prestige was actually in 3rd quarter of 1992 and construction completed in the last quarter of 1994. Construction for Nouvelle started before Prestige and completed in 1993.

Earthworks for the airport only started in 1996 and the airport completed in 2006.

It is debatable who is in the wrong. The developer, the officers approving the building permits, or the airport authority who come in late in the day and say these buildings are too tall.

Thank you for your reply. I am not sure about the history. The problem that we are having is that the height shown in the building permit does not tally with the actual height of the condo built. it is 2 floors higher. I suspect that the developer must have submitted two sets of plans. One to his contractor and one to the building authorities. Probably the plans were mixed up during the submission. TiTs. I have a friend who bought a condo at Thonglor. It seems that zoning only permits a certain height for the condo to be built. There is a maximum height restriction. The developer built the condo much higher probably to squeeze in as many units as possible. Because of the dispute between the authorities and the developer, he could not move into his condo. I read somewhere last year, that a a relatively big developer got into trouble because most of his development were higher than what was actually stated in his building permits.

My opinion is that the developer is in the wrong. He build not according to the plans submitted. And the authorities are also in the wrong, because they never monitor or check. And finally the Airport authority who came in an built the airport without an EIA. It is like a dog chasing its tail.

[trogers]

There are 2 groups of 6 blocks in this location. Are both groups similarly affected?

I am not sure about Nouvelle. But certainly the condo that I stay is affected. It is like an accident awaiting to happen. Probably the planes flying in have the aeronautical charts understating the real height of these buildings. Probably the officers who approved the building permits was sleeping or closed an eye. We must not forget Santika pub, the fire that killed so many people last year and also maimed so many of the survivors. Will these officers be liable if anything happens in the future ? How about the developer of the condo ? Will he escape any prosecution if such an accident occurs ? He already sold all the units and washed his hands off the whole project. He built the condos knowing that the heights are wrong ! How many buyers physically go and measure the height of the building that he is going to buy ? The persons who suffer will be the passengers on the planes and the current co-owners of the condos . Why such greed by the developer ? He already have so much money.

Building permit was approved and construction started for Prestige was actually in 3rd quarter of 1992 and construction completed in the last quarter of 1994. Construction for Nouvelle started before Prestige and completed in 1993.

Earthworks for the airport only started in 1996 and the airport completed in 2006.

It is debatable who is in the wrong. The developer, the officers approving the building permits, or the airport authority who come in late in the day and say these buildings are too tall.

Thank you for your reply. I am not sure about the history. The problem that we are having is that the height shown in the building permit does not tally with the actual height of the condo built. it is 2 floors higher. I suspect that the developer must have submitted two sets of plans. One to his contractor and one to the building authorities. Probably the plans were mixed up during the submission. TiTs. I have a friend who bought a condo at Thonglor. It seems that zoning only permits a certain height for the condo to be built. There is a maximum height restriction. The developer built the condo much higher probably to squeeze in as many units as possible. Because of the dispute between the authorities and the developer, he could not move into his condo. I read somewhere last year, that a a relatively big developer got into trouble because most of his development were higher than what was actually stated in his building permits.

My opinion is that the developer is in the wrong. He build not according to the plans submitted. And the authorities are also in the wrong, because they never monitor or check. And finally the Airport authority who came in an built the airport without an EIA. It is like a dog chasing its tail.

I remember attending a discussion on the design of the airport terminal in late 1995 at the architect's office, that is, the building design was still being worked on. Not sure when the layout of the airport was finalised - and this layout would specify the location of the runways.

I only knew that Prestige had to make a change during construction. They had to turn the tinted glass around, with the tinting film placed on the outside to prevent glare to aircraft.

[stgrhe]

If the building was made two stories higher than what its building permit allowed a question should also be raised on what basis the construction calculations were made. In a worst case scenario the construction could be weaker than allowed.

A bit OT but I know of a condo slightly East of Ban Phe that was build two stories too high. That was many years ago and it is still unoccupied as it is not allowed to live in by the local authorities. A lot of people lost their money in that scam.

[PrasitPC]

If the building was made two stories higher than what its building permit allowed a question should also be raised on what basis the construction calculations were made. In a worst case scenario the construction could be weaker than allowed.

A bit OT but I know of a condo slightly East of Ban Phe that was build two stories too high. That was many years ago and it is still unoccupied as it is not allowed to live in by the local authorities. A lot of people lost their money in that scam.

Very interesting comments. We have to look into the structural rigidity of the whole complex then. The pilings may not be enough or the steel formwork also insufficient. The developer is a multi billion dollar organisation. The complaint is backed up by the government authority letter that the additional height is illegal. Can we still take the developer to court ? The lapse of period is so many years. We are the new transferees and purchased the property not so long ago. Some of the condo owners have also sued the AOT because of the noise problems and this is one of the defense that the AOT have came up with. You are too high. Pull down your floors before we talk even though I have not done an EIA.

[trogers]

If the building was made two stories higher than what its building permit allowed a question should also be raised on what basis the construction calculations were made. In a worst case scenario the construction could be weaker than allowed.

A bit OT but I know of a condo slightly East of Ban Phe that was build two stories too high. That was many years ago and it is still unoccupied as it is not allowed to live in by the local authorities. A lot of people lost their money in that scam.

Very interesting comments. We have to look into the structural rigidity of the whole complex then. The pilings may not be enough or the steel formwork also insufficient. The developer is a multi billion dollar organisation. The complaint is backed up by the government authority letter that the additional height is illegal. Can we still take the developer to court ? The lapse of period is so many years. We are the new transferees and purchased the property not so long ago. Some of the condo owners have also sued the AOT because of the noise problems and this is one of the defense that the AOT have came up with. You are too high. Pull down your floors before we talk even though I have not done an EIA.

I think you can take action against the developer as they relaunched sales of Prestige a few years back, after modifying unit layouts. Original floor layouts constructed in 1992-1994 were for large units of min 180+m2 space. I noticed the new launch was for smaller units.

[jcon]

If the buildings were above autorized height, how then were the allowed the occupancy permits? (that may seem like a ridiculous question given that this is Thailand, but clearly there are certain projects - the one stgrhe mentioned in Ban Phe and the one PrasitPC mentioned on Thonglor which I'm assuming is The Clover Thonglor - that can't get occupancy permits because they built above the legal height limit)

Similarly, all of the Condo One projects that got the 9th floors lopped off because of the height issue - they weren't allowed occupancy permits until they solved the problem, correct? So why did the OPs condo in question get occupancy permits? Or is the reason because the condo in question was built some 15 years ago before Condo One got busted which basically set precedent? Or (even scarier) are there just tons of projects out there (older) that are over specifications regarding height, and are just disasters waiting to happen (either in the structural integrity issue or in the issue of just one day "oops your condo is not legal, sorry get out" in the case of the OP)?

[trogers]

If the buildings were above autorized height, how then were the allowed the occupancy permits? (that may seem like a ridiculous question given that this is Thailand, but clearly there are certain projects - the one stgrhe mentioned in Ban Phe and the one PrasitPC mentioned on Thonglor which I'm assuming is The Clover Thonglor - that can't get occupancy permits because they built above the legal height limit)

Similarly, all of the Condo One projects that got the 9th floors lopped off because of the height issue - they weren't allowed occupancy permits until they solved the problem, correct? So why did the OPs condo in question get occupancy permits? Or is the reason because the condo in question was built some 15 years ago before Condo One got busted which basically set precedent? Or (even scarier) are there just tons of projects out there (older) that are over specifications regarding height, and are just disasters waiting to happen (either in the structural integrity issue or in the issue of just one day "oops your condo is not legal, sorry get out" in the case of the OP)?

There may be a contention of what is legal or not in the surrounding areas of the airport. Remember that it took over 40 years to actually completed it as today. There was even a suggestion by PM Chavalit in 1996 to relocate it across the river towards Nakorn Pathom. For this reason, housing estates that were build in the 90s and being affected by noise are getting compensations.

[PrasitPC]

If the buildings were above autorized height, how then were the allowed the occupancy permits? (that may seem like a ridiculous question given that this is Thailand, but clearly there are certain projects - the one stgrhe mentioned in Ban Phe and the one PrasitPC mentioned on Thonglor which I'm assuming is The Clover Thonglor - that can't get occupancy permits because they built above the legal height limit)

Similarly, all of the Condo One projects that got the 9th floors lopped off because of the height issue - they weren't allowed occupancy permits until they solved the problem, correct? So why did the OPs condo in question get occupancy permits? Or is the reason because the condo in question was built some 15 years ago before Condo One got busted which basically set precedent? Or (even scarier) are there just tons of projects out there (older) that are over specifications regarding height, and are just disasters waiting to happen (either in the structural integrity issue or in the issue of just one day "oops your condo is not legal, sorry get out" in the case of the OP)?

Maybe this is a stupid idea. A few of the co-owners is thinking of getting the Developer to buy back their condo units because they have units on the higher floors and will be affected by the Lopping off of the Upper two floors as it was built higher than the allowed building permit. Thinking out loud, maybe the developer better buy back all the condos and he can lop off the two higher floors and resell the condos to other future buyers ? But this is a serious affair because the government authorities have asked the condo to lop off the two higher floors. The government officer literally came to the condo and used ropes from the top of the condo to the foot of the condo and confirmed that the height is not according to the permit. Do you think an easier way out and get an immediate decison is to report to the Consumer Association ?

[trogers]

If the buildings were above autorized height, how then were the allowed the occupancy permits? (that may seem like a ridiculous question given that this is Thailand, but clearly there are certain projects - the one stgrhe mentioned in Ban Phe and the one PrasitPC mentioned on Thonglor which I'm assuming is The Clover Thonglor - that can't get occupancy permits because they built above the legal height limit)

Similarly, all of the Condo One projects that got the 9th floors lopped off because of the height issue - they weren't allowed occupancy permits until they solved the problem, correct? So why did the OPs condo in question get occupancy permits? Or is the reason because the condo in question was built some 15 years ago before Condo One got busted which basically set precedent? Or (even scarier) are there just tons of projects out there (older) that are over specifications regarding height, and are just disasters waiting to happen (either in the structural integrity issue or in the issue of just one day "oops your condo is not legal, sorry get out" in the case of the OP)?

Maybe this is a stupid idea. A few of the co-owners is thinking of getting the Developer to buy back their condo units because they have units on the higher floors and will be affected by the Lopping off of the Upper two floors as it was built higher than the allowed building permit. Thinking out loud, maybe the developer better buy back all the condos and he can lop off the two higher floors and resell the condos to other future buyers ? But this is a serious affair because the government authorities have asked the condo to lop off the two higher floors. The government officer literally came to the condo and used ropes from the top of the condo to the foot of the condo and confirmed that the height is not according to the permit. Do you think an easier way out and get an immediate decison is to report to the Consumer Association ?

Since the contention is the top 2 floors, the owners of units on these 2 floors are the aggrieved parties, plus the unit owners below that who need assurance that after demolition, the slab above their heads is a proper watertight and heat insulated roof.

The question is, if the 6 buildings are constructed to an illegal height, why did the relevant government departments issued occupancy permit and land title deeds? A property lawyer will be the best person to give legal advice, and which court to take the case to, and who are the parties to be sued.

[Serpico]

Don't they have building inspectors that oversee construction projects?

[PrasitPC]

If the buildings were above autorized height, how then were the allowed the occupancy permits? (that may seem like a ridiculous question given that this is Thailand, but clearly there are certain projects - the one stgrhe mentioned in Ban Phe and the one PrasitPC mentioned on Thonglor which I'm assuming is The Clover Thonglor - that can't get occupancy permits because they built above the legal height limit)

Similarly, all of the Condo One projects that got the 9th floors lopped off because of the height issue - they weren't allowed occupancy permits until they solved the problem, correct? So why did the OPs condo in question get occupancy permits? Or is the reason because the condo in question was built some 15 years ago before Condo One got busted which basically set precedent? Or (even scarier) are there just tons of projects out there (older) that are over specifications regarding height, and are just disasters waiting to happen (either in the structural integrity issue or in the issue of just one day "oops your condo is not legal, sorry get out" in the case of the OP)?

Maybe this is a stupid idea. A few of the co-owners is thinking of getting the Developer to buy back their condo units because they have units on the higher floors and will be affected by the Lopping off of the Upper two floors as it was built higher than the allowed building permit. Thinking out loud, maybe the developer better buy back all the condos and he can lop off the two higher floors and resell the condos to other future buyers ? But this is a serious affair because the government authorities have asked the condo to lop off the two higher floors. The government officer literally came to the condo and used ropes from the top of the condo to the foot of the condo and confirmed that the height is not according to the permit. Do you think an easier way out and get an immediate decison is to report to the Consumer Association ?

Since the contention is the top 2 floors, the owners of units on these 2 floors are the aggrieved parties, plus the unit owners below that who need assurance that after demolition, the slab above their heads is a proper watertight and heat insulated roof.

The question is, if the 6 buildings are constructed to an illegal height, why did the relevant government departments issued occupancy permit and land title deeds? A property lawyer will be the best person to give legal advice, and which court to take the case to, and who are the parties to be sued.

Thailand works in a mysterious way. Lots of Ingenuity. Lots of Magic. Lots of Sleight of Hand. The Alpine Golf Club saga, even though it has been ruled illegal by law is still outstanding. Lots of moneys wasted. The judgement becomes in your favour. But there is no enforcement. Yes, you are right, we will need a good lawyer and invoke the help of the higher beings in Thailand. But you know when it comes to take money out of the pocket, the majority is very slow on the draw. This forum is good in the sense that facts in the situation are pointed out from different points of views. And those concerned will be enlightened and take the appropriate action.

[quiksilva]

Don't they have building inspectors that oversee construction projects?

Yes, but unfortunately their signatures are sometimes for sale...

Prasit don't waste time getting the developers to buy back condo's as it simply will not happen, not unless their hand is forced. It might however be a suitable settlement arrangement if it can be agreed with all parties.

Initiate legal action first, after seeking advice from the Consumer Protection Association (who might help with the legal battle themselves).

The telephone number for the CPA is 1166

Good luck.

[PrasitPC]

Don't they have building inspectors that oversee construction projects?

Yes, but unfortunately their signatures are sometimes for sale...

Prasit don't waste time getting the developers to buy back condo's as it simply will not happen, not unless their hand is forced. It might however be a suitable settlement arrangement if it can be agreed with all parties.

Initiate legal action first, after seeking advice from the Consumer Protection Association (who might help with the legal battle themselves).

The telephone number for the CPA is 1166

Good luck.

Thank you for your opinion and advice and the tel no.

[jcon]

Prasit don't waste time getting the developers to buy back condo's as it simply will not happen, not unless their hand is forced. It might however be a suitable settlement arrangement if it can be agreed with all parties.

Initiate legal action first, after seeking advice from the Consumer Protection Association (who might help with the legal battle themselves).

I would agree that trying to get the developers to buy back the condos is time wasted as it will never happen - I mean this condo is 10+ years old, correct? So the developers are long gone from this project and have already spent the profits elsewhere. So then it's down to speaking with the management? Sounds like a tough spot.

There is one giant problem in Thailand, and it is that once the money has changed hands, regardless of legality or whatever may be the case, it's really hard to get the money back. This is hard anywhere in the world, but especially difficult here. This is where due diligence is so important.

But since we're beyond that point, I suppose quiksilva's recommendation is the best way to go - although I think that the developers/management will not be concerned with any CPA threats.... at least that's the impression I got when I was dealing with trying to get money back from developers earlier in the year.

For the penthouse owners, they are pretty much screwed - I guess if I were in their position I'd try to salvage something by trading the unit with perhaps other units on lower floors (but definitely not the floor directly under the floors to be chopped off - that's just a disaster waiting to happen - do you think they will build a proper roof - I don't think so).

[PrasitPC]

Prasit don't waste time getting the developers to buy back condo's as it simply will not happen, not unless their hand is forced. It might however be a suitable settlement arrangement if it can be agreed with all parties.

Initiate legal action first, after seeking advice from the Consumer Protection Association (who might help with the legal battle themselves).

I would agree that trying to get the developers to buy back the condos is time wasted as it will never happen - I mean this condo is 10+ years old, correct? So the developers are long gone from this project and have already spent the profits elsewhere. So then it's down to speaking with the management? Sounds like a tough spot.

There is one giant problem in Thailand, and it is that once the money has changed hands, regardless of legality or whatever may be the case, it's really hard to get the money back. This is hard anywhere in the world, but especially difficult here. This is where due diligence is so important.

But since we're beyond that point, I suppose quiksilva's recommendation is the best way to go - although I think that the developers/management will not be concerned with any CPA threats.... at least that's the impression I got when I was dealing with trying to get money back from developers earlier in the year.

For the penthouse owners, they are pretty much screwed - I guess if I were in their position I'd try to salvage something by trading the unit with perhaps other units on lower floors (but definitely not the floor directly under the floors to be chopped off - that's just a disaster waiting to happen - do you think they will build a proper roof - I don't think so).

My opinion is that the penthouse owners will get screwed and so will those directly under the floors to be chopped off. But this is Thailand. I don't stay on the top floors, thank God. But a few of us are concerned co-owners. I stayed at several condos units before and most of the people at apathetic. It is the nature of people. I myself am guilty of that. They just refused to participate in anything. Even in the AGM, we cannot even get enough turnout to form a quorum unless it is something close to their pockets. The co-owners threw out the previous committee members and also got the Juristic Manager kicked out because of mismanagement , abuse of power and mis-spending without agreement from the co-owners and whittling down the condo funds with grandidose projects.

The developer I understand still owes the condo the common fees for many years. So getting money from them will be rather difficult.

I think lopping off the roofs will affect the whole complex. I suspect they have to do by stages, one block at a time and the owners have to move out with their belongings.

But this is Thailand. Life will go on. Aeroplanes will still fly overhead the condos. The developer have their legal defences. And they will make it rock solid. The Condo will claim that they do not deserve the airport ( who came first, the Chicken or the Egg ). Very fatalistic thinking. But those on the top floors and just below them have to start to put on their thinking caps. They better wake up.

[hhgz]

"I stayed at several condos units before and most of the people at apathetic....The co-owners threw out the previous committee members and also got the Juristic Manager kicked out because of mismanagement , abuse of power and mis-spending without agreement from the co-owners and whittling down the condo funds with grandidose projects."

If the condo owners accomplished all of that, I'm not sure why you'd consider them to be "apathetic".

[trogers]

Forgot to mention.

There will be additional cost and disruption of occupancy to the others co-owners as services have to be demolished and reinstated:

- roof water tank and pumps

- lift machine room and the equipment inside - thus lift cars have to be parked on the lift pits for the duration

- master TV antenna system, satellite system, etc

- lightning arrester

In a sense, these other co-owners are also injured parties, but they do not lose property ownership.

[ripley]

Check out the TVF site "Condo Owners Sue". Almost 100 pages involving a Jomthien highrise project which received a permit even tho it is clearly illegal. Litigants have taken their objections to the max but the bldg is built and looks like it ain't going nowhere. The case is currently languishing in Administrative Supreme Court, but there aren't any serious doubts of the outcome. The litigating condo has spent millions on this. And apparently no satisfaction to be had from the developer as to sue them for selling the land to the highrise company exposes the plaintiffs to ruinous countersuits.

This could be good news for you as it demonstrates how strictly the building laws are actually enforced and that loopholes exist. Maybe they'll leave you alone or forget about you for years. Perhaps you can discover the right people to chat with.

Still, check out the site and you might save yourselves some grief and expense on legal fees if you're considering a straight legal court solution.

[PrasitPC]

Forgot to mention.

There will be additional cost and disruption of occupancy to the others co-owners as services have to be demolished and reinstated:

- roof water tank and pumps

- lift machine room and the equipment inside - thus lift cars have to be parked on the lift pits for the duration

- master TV antenna system, satellite system, etc

- lightning arrester

In a sense, these other co-owners are also injured parties, but they do not lose property ownership.

It will be a big knock on effect. Even the swimming pools etc etc. Finally to reapprove the structure again. However, I think the condo had been strongly built since it was built many years ago by Sino Thai ( I am not quite sure on this ). The building strength shows when u want do some rennovations. But my main hope is that the authorities will not carry out the demolition. I like the place.

[PrasitPC]

Check out the TVF site "Condo Owners Sue". Almost 100 pages involving a Jomthien highrise project which received a permit even tho it is clearly illegal. Litigants have taken their objections to the max but the bldg is built and looks like it ain't going nowhere. The case is currently languishing in Administrative Supreme Court, but there aren't any serious doubts of the outcome. The litigating condo has spent millions on this. And apparently no satisfaction to be had from the developer as to sue them for selling the land to the highrise company exposes the plaintiffs to ruinous countersuits.

This could be good news for you as it demonstrates how strictly the building laws are actually enforced and that loopholes exist. Maybe they'll leave you alone or forget about you for years. Perhaps you can discover the right people to chat with.

Still, check out the site and you might save yourselves some grief and expense on legal fees if you're considering a straight legal court solution.

Nice information. Thanks. People always think that if they can bend the laws without due regards to others interest will always find that somewhere down the road, he may need some repentance. It is only just the time factor. I know of some developers who employs Goons to shut down the protestors.

[trogers]

Forgot to mention.

There will be additional cost and disruption of occupancy to the others co-owners as services have to be demolished and reinstated:

- roof water tank and pumps

- lift machine room and the equipment inside - thus lift cars have to be parked on the lift pits for the duration

- master TV antenna system, satellite system, etc

- lightning arrester

In a sense, these other co-owners are also injured parties, but they do not lose property ownership.

It will be a big knock on effect. Even the swimming pools etc etc. Finally to reapprove the structure again. However, I think the condo had been strongly built since it was built many years ago by Sino Thai ( I am not quite sure on this ). The building strength shows when u want do some rennovations. But my main hope is that the authorities will not carry out the demolition. I like the place.

Sino-Thai was not the building contractor. It was a Singapore-based company called L&M System, while PPS was the construction manager, and the designer was A49.

[trogers]

One word of caution on demolishing the top 2 floors: the floor slabs are unbonded post-tension system. They cannot be cut and knock down as the anchors may shoot off like projectiles. A post-tension contractor should be employed to expose the tendons and de-stress them before cutting and removing the floor slabs.

[PrasitPC]

Forgot to mention.

There will be additional cost and disruption of occupancy to the others co-owners as services have to be demolished and reinstated:

- roof water tank and pumps

- lift machine room and the equipment inside - thus lift cars have to be parked on the lift pits for the duration

- master TV antenna system, satellite system, etc

- lightning arrester

In a sense, these other co-owners are also injured parties, but they do not lose property ownership.

It will be a big knock on effect. Even the swimming pools etc etc. Finally to reapprove the structure again. However, I think the condo had been strongly built since it was built many years ago by Sino Thai ( I am not quite sure on this ). The building strength shows when u want do some rennovations. But my main hope is that the authorities will not carry out the demolition. I like the place.

Sino-Thai was not the building contractor. It was a Singapore-based company called L&M System, while PPS was the construction manager, and the designer was A49.

This information will be very useful for the co-owners. All we need then is to look for the architect A49 and ask them for the various plans ? Maybe we can approach the Juristic office and ask them to give a copy of the building plans and compare ? Then all it needs is a measuring tape or some sort of laser equipment to point at the roof of the building to reconfirm its height.

I noted one of the replies stated that there are also loopholes in the laws. No doubt the developer will get the best minds that money will buy and at the same time convince the co-owners that they have no case at all since it is an older development before the airport came. But there are zoning laws in place all the time as to the height of the buildings. This forum is quite interesting because some of the members seems to have information at their fingertips and rather experienced. L and M = ? PPS= ? Could you give me the unabbreviated names so I can check up on them for data.

[trogers]

L and M = ? PPS= ? Could you give me the unabbreviated names so I can check up on them for data.

L&M system belongs to a public-listed construction company in Singapore called L&M group. The mother company in Singapore was taken over by Suharto's son in 1996, and after the 1998 riots in Indonesia, Suharto was disposed. The company went down hill and was de-listed a few years back. The Bangkok office was closed in 1998.

PPS website: http://www.pps.co.th/pps_profile.htm

[PrasitPC]

L and M = ? PPS= ? Could you give me the unabbreviated names so I can check up on them for data.

L&M system belongs to a public-listed construction company in Singapore called L&M group. The mother company in Singapore was taken over by Suharto's son in 1996, and after the 1998 riots in Indonesia, Suharto was disposed. The company went down hill and was de-listed a few years back. The Bangkok office was closed in 1998.

PPS website: http://www.pps.co.th/pps_profile.htm

Thanks again for the reply on L & M. So best way is still to get the architectural plans. I doubt the developer will co-operate of course.

[erniebyrne]

Gents,

Just thought i'd chip in here.

i'm thinking of buying a condo here on the 14th floor, a friend sent me this link and it's a bit worrying.

As I rent here anyway i've been down to the juristioc office and spoken to them, they have given me a letter from AOT that states that there is no requirement to knock down the two top floors(15/16) of this building, they state the reason as being that it would cause unecessary disruption and inconvenience to the owners, the only requirement that AOT have of prestige condo is that they install new warning lights on top of their building.

This documnet is available in both thai and english from the office at PC3.

as with everything in Thailand I would suggest that the document isn;t worth the paper it's writtin on, there's nothing saying that they won't chnage their mind in the future.