Condominium Acts

[Delight]

Condominium Acts-How it affects Co –owners

The 1979 Act had 62 Sections .

Some of these are of no specific interest to running a condo.

The act was amended in 1999 and 2008.

The 1999 amendment was largely concerned with defining' Aliens '.

This part was further amended in 2008.

The list of the 1979 Sections(which are of interest to co –owners in respect of day to day running of a Condo) are still in force to day and have never been amended are as follows:

Section 35 –Condo must have a Manager

(note 35/1 35/2 35/3 added in 2008)

Section 40 -Co –owners have to pay ..

Section 41 –Juristic Person has power to enforce payments

Section 42 General meeting to be called within 6 months of registration of condo

(note: 42/1 42/2 42/3 added 2008)

Section 44- Resolutions at general meeting determined by majority vote

Section 45 – Voting by ownership ratio-Limit of a single owner

Section 46 –Some co –owners pay more.

So 7 of the original 1979 Act are still in force today

I attach 7 JPEG's detailing them.

If I am right (and I welcome corrections ) then these 7 plus the 2008 amendment gives an overview of info relevant to a co –owner who is dis –satisfied

(Note : The only official Condominium Acts are in Thai Language)

[cigar7]

Here is complete translation of the Thailand Condominium Act 2008

New Thailand Condominium Act 2008.doc

[bouph12]

Two useful posts - thank you both.

I am still unsure which section is relevant to a resolution proposing an increase in annual maintenance fees. Section 44 - "a majority of voters attending" or Section 48 - "a resolution on the following

matters must have the votes of not less than a half of the total votes of the joint owners"

To further complicate things, some translations I've seen for Section 48 state "........not less than a half of the total votes of the joint owners attending ".

Does anyone have definitve experience of which section applies?

Edited May 14, 2011 by bouph12

[cigar7]

Two useful posts - thank you both.

I am still unsure which section is relevant to a resolution proposing an increase in annual maintenance fees. Section 44 - "a majority of voters attending" or Section 48 - "a resolution on the following

matters must have the votes of not less than a half of the total votes of the joint owners"

To further complicate things, some translations I've seen for Section 48 state "........not less than a half of the total votes of the joint owners attending ".

Does anyone have definitve experience of which section applies?

I do not have any direct experience in this matter. However, in my opinion section 48 paragraph(5) does not apply unless the ratio changes. For example, if the expense changes from a calculation based on sq. mt. to just, every unit shall pay x, regardless of size, then 48(5) would apply because the ratio or the formula to calculate the expense is changing.

[Delight]

Two useful posts - thank you both.

I am still unsure which section is relevant to a resolution proposing an increase in annual maintenance fees. Section 44 - "a majority of voters attending" or Section 48 - "a resolution on the following

matters must have the votes of not less than a half of the total votes of the joint owners"

To further complicate things, some translations I've seen for Section 48 state "........not less than a half of the total votes of the joint owners attending ".

Does anyone have definitve experience of which section applies?

In my view to get 50% by voting allocation to increase the Maintenance fees is a triumph of fantasy over reality

The way around the issue is get a majority vote at a General meeting (AGM or EGM)

The vote will be for as 'Special Assessment'. ie X baht per square meter /month

The invoices for Fees now has 2 separate details:

One for the Maintenance fee.

The 2nd for the 'Special Assessment'.

Arguments must be well presented to get a majority vote of those who attend the meeting (bodies and proxies)

Also a fixed term must be specified.

The aforementioned was achieved at a EGM that I chaired

The term was 3 years only.

So it has to voted on again 3 years down the road.

Interestingly enough not one Non attending co -owner complained.

You must however spend the money wisely

[ripley]

"Section 44- Resolutions at general meeting determined by majority vote"

This is the tricky one which always needs to be checked against the Thai Condo Law before proceeding. Some issues require a minimum of 20% of the total co-owners, some 25%, etc. Different percentages depending on what you're voting on.

If the meeting doesn't have an adequate percentage of total owners' votes, then a second meeting must be called (an EGM) for the vote to be taken again. At the EGM the percentage of votes doesn't have to represent the total number of co-owners, but rather a percentage of those attending or proxied.

Here's where information gets fuzzy. Is it a simple majority of votes, or the Condo Law percentage rate of votes according to issue that is required at an EGM? Does anyone know for sure about this? I've actually heard that - taken to its logical extreme - that if only one person attends or proxies, that one person carries the vote at an EGM.

Please tell me it ain't so!

[harrry]

"Section 44- Resolutions at general meeting determined by majority vote"

This is the tricky one which always needs to be checked against the Thai Condo Law before proceeding. Some issues require a minimum of 20% of the total co-owners, some 25%, etc. Different percentages depending on what you're voting on.

If the meeting doesn't have an adequate percentage of total owners' votes, then a second meeting must be called (an EGM) for the vote to be taken again. At the EGM the percentage of votes doesn't have to represent the total number of co-owners, but rather a percentage of those attending or proxied.

Here's where information gets fuzzy. Is it a simple majority of votes, or the Condo Law percentage rate of votes according to issue that is required at an EGM? Does anyone know for sure about this? I've actually heard that - taken to its logical extreme - that if only one person attends or proxies, that one person carries the vote at an EGM.

Please tell me it ain't so!

No

[Delight]

"Section 44- Resolutions at general meeting determined by majority vote"

This is the tricky one which always needs to be checked against the Thai Condo Law before proceeding. Some issues require a minimum of 20% of the total co-owners, some 25%, etc. Different percentages depending on what you're voting on.

If the meeting doesn't have an adequate percentage of total owners' votes, then a second meeting must be called (an EGM) for the vote to be taken again. At the EGM the percentage of votes doesn't have to represent the total number of co-owners, but rather a percentage of those attending or proxied.

Here's where information gets fuzzy. Is it a simple majority of votes, or the Condo Law percentage rate of votes according to issue that is required at an EGM? Does anyone know for sure about this? I've actually heard that - taken to its logical extreme - that if only one person attends or proxies, that one person carries the vote at an EGM.

Please tell me it ain't so!

Just to clarify this issue.

At General meetings there is no such thing as 'one man one vote'

Each room has a specific voting allowance. This is the only number that counts voting wise.

If at the initial meeting 25% of total building vote does not attend (bodies and proxies )then the meeting is terminated and a further meeting can be convened within 15 days. This 25% quorum requirement is suspended for this 2^nd meeting

Resolutions can be passed at this 2^nd meeting by simple majority of voting .allowances.

Those issues that require that the winning vote must also attain a minimum percentage of the building total vote, can be on the agenda .However no actual vote can be taken unless the minimum vote , appropriate to the issue, (bodies and proxies) is in attendance.

Some issues require that the vote must be won and attain a minimum 25%of total building vote. Other issues require that 50% of total vote support it.

In the extreme case if only one person attended this 2^nd meeting then the scrutinisers could accept that person as chair of the meeting and that one person could (if the meeting was AGM ) then vote and decide the following issues:

1) Considering for approval the balance sheet,

(2) Considering the annual report,

(3) Appointing an auditor,

(4) Considering other matters.

The other matters could be :

i) Creating a sinking fund.

ii) Generate a 'Special Assessment 'fee (effectively increasing the maintenance fees)

All voting topics have to be fully detailed on the agenda.

(No doubt at the end of the meeting then the individual will probably think:

Today- Pattaya

Tomorrow –The World)

For all meetings to be legal then certain communication procedures must be observed –including the sending of fully detailed agendas to all co –owners(delivered to their condo address) by registered post.

An AGM (by definition ) has to be convened annually

Extra General Meetings (EGM) can be called at any time (Conditions apply) .

They deal with issues that require co –owner decisions -where waiting for the next AGM is deemed to be un satisfactory.

Edited June 3, 2011 by Delight

[ripley]

In our theoretical "one person" AGM/EGM, a vote on increase in maintenance fees cannot be passed. This one, amongst others, really does require the vote of percentage of Owners.

[Delight]

In our theoretical "one person" AGM/EGM, a vote on increase in maintenance fees cannot be passed. This one, amongst others, really does require the vote of percentage of Owners.

Maintenance fees -Yes. 50% requirement

But a 'Special Assessment' only requires a majority

One was passed at the condo where I live.

The initiative came from the Management Company which is employed by the condo.

The meeting (an EGM ) had 26.4% attendance.

The land office accepted it

It appears as a separate line on the invoices to the co -owners.The increase was 8 Baht/m2/month . It only has a 3 year life.

Edited June 6, 2011 by Delight