Access to a public beach denied by the developer? what to do?

[Bsnuser]

No too long ago I bought a holiday apartment at The Venitian, now I know that it is not a beach front property but never the less I would like to go to the beach once in a while. Today I got this mail from my Real Estate agent regarding access to one of the local beaches I planned on using, which by the way is a public beach open for everybody to enjoy.

Quote:

"With Reference to CGR there has been some confusion lately regarding
the beach at the property. The beach is not private, but access to the
beach through our property is. Beach access is exclusively for Centara
Grand Buyers only. The hotel is also private property and the operator
has the rightNOT to allow non paying guests to enter the site,
especially as access to the grounds and beach will be only accessible
via the guest room key.

Owners of surrounding condominiums cannot access the beach through our
private property. Therefore if you are selling our project rest
assured that the grounds and beach access will remain exclusive, for
those of you that are not selling the project, we would kindly ask you
not to enter our project site to show potential clients of other
condominiums in the area our beach."

How can us regular Joes who can't afford a beach front condominium get access to a public beach when a company like that can just deny you access to "Their Beach" as you can read in the last line of the quote.

[ThaidDown]

At the start of their letter they clearly state 'the beach is not private' which is correct.

Of course they hey can deny you passage over their property. It's their property.

Your alternative is to find a public access to a nearby part of the seashore , possibly a road, or find the owner of another property who will grant access. Once on the beach you can walk along it and stop anywhere you like.

Due diligence before purchase of a condo unit would have revealed if you were buying with beach access legally included.

[casualbiker]

if you go to the land office and check the plans for that area.. I think but not 100% sure that they HAVE to provide access at certain places onto the beach, in this instance it may not be there but who knows!

[CraigSchuler]

Sorry but I agree with the property owner, they paid for that right. Just like I wouldn't like having average Joe use my restroom in my restaurant without being a customer.

Their main objective is to make a return on their investment, not provide you or anybody else free benefits.

Might think about buying a pool!

[Senechal]

Of course their property is their property and they have a right to control access to it. On the other hand, it seems quite clear that they are obstructing access to a public beach.

When CGR management promise that "access will remain exclusive", they are quite clearly making claims that the formerly public beach has now been privatized by blocking all access to the public. This hardly seems in keeping with the concept of "public property."

It seems to me that management may be in a bit if hot water as they clearly sold condominium units to buyers under the premise of a private beach -- which AFAIK it isn't.

This would seem to be an issue for a lawyer. In the US, the developer would be required to provide a right of way to the public.

Edited March 1, 2014 by Senechal

[smutcakes]

Although the beach is public, the adjoining land is not. Even before CGR built something, it was still private and if the owner chose to, could prevent access from people walking over it.

I am struggling to see what the issue is. No one is denying you the right to use the beach- you just cannot do it over someone's private property. Where is there any law which says individual land owners must provide a right over their land to someone else? There are plenty of beach accesses in the area.

I agree that the last sentence regarding 'our' beach is a bit stupid, but i would put that down to poorly thought out wording rather than anything else.

Have you actually been stopped going through the property? The fact they are directing it to agents might mean they are concerned with agents 'promising' potential buyers access in an effort to flog units, and would potentially prevent problems and disappointment for persons later. It says they have the right to not allow access, but not that they will every time. I am sure if you pass through on the way to the beach, no one would say anything, however if a package tour dropped off a load of people who came through the hotel, grabbed towels around the pool etc then quite rightly they would be stopped. Seems it is more an warning/informing letter to agents to prevent issues further down than line, than anything else. I am sure they dont want to get into a legal dispute with a person who was promised beach access etc by their sales agent.

There are 100's of kilometers of unencumbered beach front down the coast.

[Jerry Cornelius]

Although the beach is public, the adjoining land is not. Even before CGR built something, it was still private and if the owner chose to, could prevent access from people walking over it.

I am struggling to see what the issue is. No one is denying you the right to use the beach- you just cannot do it over someone's private property. Where is there any law which says individual land owners must provide a right over their land to someone else? There are plenty of beach accesses in the area.

I agree that the last sentence regarding 'our' beach is a bit stupid, but i would put that down to poorly thought out wording rather than anything else.

Have you actually been stopped going through the property? The fact they are directing it to agents might mean they are concerned with agents 'promising' potential buyers access in an effort to flog units, and would potentially prevent problems and disappointment for persons later. It says they have the right to not allow access, but not that they will every time. I am sure if you pass through on the way to the beach, no one would say anything, however if a package tour dropped off a load of people who came through the hotel, grabbed towels around the pool etc then quite rightly they would be stopped. Seems it is more an warning/informing letter to agents to prevent issues further down than line, than anything else. I am sure they dont want to get into a legal dispute with a person who was promised beach access etc by their sales agent.

There are 100's of kilometers of unencumbered beach front down the coast.

The letter clearly states: 'Owners of the surrounding condominiums cannot access the beach through our private property.'

The OP needs to establish whether his building is affected by that generic statement or not.

Rights of way do exist in Thailand and are mapped. Maps similar to the UK's Ordinance Survey maps exist. Creation of the maps was sponsored by the Government and the Military and I've seen them for sale in good bookshops around Bangkok and Chiang Mai.

The local Land Office can check, but it's best not to go alone. Owners of surrounding buildings will also be affected (residual values as well if direct access is lost). If these buildings have committees lobby them first and garner support before going there.

If the OP has a case for right of access, then it's best to act as quickly as possible. Delaying helps the developer.

Jerry

Edited March 1, 2014 by Jerry Cornelius

[ozziepete]

Of course their property is their property and they have a right to control access to it. On the other hand, it seems quite clear that they are obstructing access to a public beach.

When CGR management promise that "access will remain exclusive", they are quite clearly making claims that the formerly public beach has now been privatized by blocking all access to the public. This hardly seems in keeping with the concept of "public property."

It seems to me that management may be in a bit if hot water as they clearly sold condominium units to buyers under the premise of a private beach -- which AFAIK it isn't.

This would seem to be an issue for a lawyer. In the US, the developer would be required to provide a right of way to the public.

First thing is you are not in the US. Secondly they are only stopping the outsiders from transversing there land to access the beach. They state that the buyers of the condo have private access to the beach with the use of a key. So that tells me that they are fenced into the codo premises.

As stated before go to the land office and see where your nearest path/access to the beach is.

[rotary]

if you go to the land office and check the plans for that area.. I think but not 100% sure that they HAVE to provide access at certain places onto the beach, in this instance it may not be there but who knows!

I believe that only applies to allowing someone access to property they own, and that is a law in many countries, but might not apply in Thailand.

[saroq]

Access to the beach through private property is restricted in every country I have visited or lived in. Why would the OP think it should be different in Thailand? I had a nice beach front home and some locals thought they could walk through my propertyto get to the beach. I put a stop to that very quickly and never had a moments quilt about doing so. The condominium owners are correct and the OP should check where public access points are located.

[RigPig]

Get together with a bunch of Thai jet ski operators and have them run a business with access to the beach from the sea, sounds like they would have a "captive" clientele .........

[flakes]

Why did u buy at Venetian?

Seems indeed a remote location and mostly BKK Thais bought lower priced units there.

You will need a car there for sure going back forward to down town jomtien en Pattaya.

FYI the najomtien beach is not that far away from Venetian probably only 1 km distance.That jomtien beach is hunderds of kilometers wide so why not find another vacant piece of land to get access to your beach!

By the way how many years before venetian and Centara are built up ? 3 years? I think if you hurry you can still go for a swim now.

[Jerry Cornelius]

Access to the beach through private property is restricted in every country I have visited or lived in. Why would the OP think it should be different in Thailand? I had a nice beach front home and some locals thought they could walk through my propertyto get to the beach. I put a stop to that very quickly and never had a moments quilt about doing so. The condominium owners are correct and the OP should check where public access points are located.

Not if a public right of way is recorded. Even in Thailand.

If a public right of way is recorded on the land, the developer must allow access. A developer (of the land) can move the right of way to a boundary, to minimise any disruption to the planned development, but must allow transitional access to the public.

Jerry

[PC800]

I'm a bit confused. The Venetian is no where near the ocean. It must be a good 500 meters at least. The property with the beach, Centara Grand Residence, does have a condo building just behind it. It's Nam Talay and was going to be two buildings Nam Talay I and II. Now, the developer has cancelled Nam Talay II, and will develop Ocean Pacfic instead. The Venetian plans I have seen do include a large lagoon type pool. As a 7-year residence of the neighborhood, I use my condo pool almost daily, and the ocean but a few times a year. The ocean breeze is a definite asset, however.

[fredKroket]

No too long ago I bought a holiday apartment at The Venitian, now I know that it is not a beach front property but never the less I would like to go to the beach once in a while. Today I got this mail from my Real Estate agent regarding access to one of the local beaches I planned on using, which by the way is a public beach open for everybody to enjoy.

Quote:

"With Reference to CGR there has been some confusion lately regarding

the beach at the property. The beach is not private, but access to the

beach through our property is. Beach access is exclusively for Centara

Grand Buyers only. The hotel is also private property and the operator

has the rightNOT to allow non paying guests to enter the site,

especially as access to the grounds and beach will be only accessible

via the guest room key.

Owners of surrounding condominiums cannot access the beach through our

private property. Therefore if you are selling our project rest

assured that the grounds and beach access will remain exclusive, for

those of you that are not selling the project, we would kindly ask you

not to enter our project site to show potential clients of other

condominiums in the area our beach."

How can us regular Joes who can't afford a beach front condominium get access to a public beach when a company like that can just deny you access to "Their Beach" as you can read in the last line of the quote.

It'll cost you around 7,000 baht each year if you buy a Centara Hotels privilege card, how can they deny that?

[RubberBroke]

In all probability a public right of way has been recorded in the land office. Since it does not serve the developers best interest they will not be broadcasting the fact. The only way to find out is to make an inquiry at the land office.

[MMarlow]

If the OP had composed an accurate headline such as "Access to a public beach denied through a private property" he would have answered his own question and realised how daft it was.

As others have pointed out if he wants to access the beach all he needs to do is find a public way to do so and not expect those who have probably paid a lot more for their property near the beach than he did to allow freeloaders to trespass on their property to facilitate a short cut.

Maybe he should sell his Venetian property and buy a GCR one instead then see how he feels about non-GCR residents/owners using his private property to access the beach.

Edited March 2, 2014 by MMarlow

[duanebigsby]

Buy a rowboat and go to the beach anyways?

[dotpoom]

Of course their property is their property and they have a right to control access to it. On the other hand, it seems quite clear that they are obstructing access to a public beach.

When CGR management promise that "access will remain exclusive", they are quite clearly making claims that the formerly public beach has now been privatized by blocking all access to the public. This hardly seems in keeping with the concept of "public property."

It seems to me that management may be in a bit if hot water as they clearly sold condominium units to buyers under the premise of a private beach -- which AFAIK it isn't.

This would seem to be an issue for a lawyer. In the US, the developer would be required to provide a right of way to the public.

They are not blocking ALL access to the public beach, they are simply blocking access to it over their private property, quite right too and understandable considering they have to look after the interests of the people who have invested in ownership in their project. Who wants to see outsiders strolling through their property. As stated earlier, you can access the beach at a public point and walk to wherever you want to go from there.

[Jerry Cornelius]

If the OP had composed an accurate headline such as "Access to a public beach denied through a private property" he would have answered his own question and realised how daft it was.

As others have pointed out if he wants to access the beach all he needs to do is find a public way to do so and not expect those who have probably paid a lot more for their property near the beach than he did to allow freeloaders to trespass on their property to facilitate a short cut.

Maybe he should sell his Venetian property and buy a GCR one instead then see how he feels about non-GCR residents/owners using his private property to access the beach.

At the moment no-one has clarified whether there is a public right of way over the land or not.

If there is access via a public right of way, then the right of access is mandatory.

So, how is the enquiry 'daft.' It's 'daft' to just assume there isn't a right of way.

The OP should go to the Land Office and (having invested in a nearby property) check their rights. It's their right to do so.

Jerry

[rickirs]

Just a word about what part of the beach is public. It is generally accepted, though I don't know about specific Thailand laws, that the limit of private ownership of beach property extends only to the high watermark even if private title extends to submerged beach property. Thus, areas below the high watermark are public. Maybe someone can add more about Thailand law.

[davejones23]

They are not stopping you using the beach. Just find a public access point to the beach and use that. How would you react if you owned a house on the beachfront and everyone just walked through your property? I'm sure you'd be complaining.

[bob6130]

When they have built the condos just walk up to the security and smile. Then walk through, they will not know if you live there or not. Security??? is not the best in Thailnd

[delh]

Nothing wrong in the final sentence. It states 'grounds and beach ACCESS' not 'grounds and beach' which is a different proposition altogether. Of course they would deny access over their property, we all would

.

Edited March 4, 2014 by delh

[johnnyk]

He can walk along the beach all he wants. Nobody is stopping him. Just get on the beach without trespassing, not a difficult concept.

[impulse]

Shameless plug here: Find Club Loongchat Kitesurfing Club and pay 100 baht a day to use their beautiful, shaded, quiet stretch of beach- with parking. Monthly memberships available. Nice guy runs the place.

Or simply walk down one of the public roads to the beach and walk as far as you want for free. Looks to me like parking will be the big problem.

I noticed on Google Earth that there is a development adjoining the Centara Grand Residences where they built up out into the surf zone so you can't walk across "their beach". Looks like one of those deals where money trumps the rules.

Edited March 4, 2014 by impulse

[Doc50]

Gee the ocean water is crap in Pattaya so who cares.

Oh sorry meant to say full of crap.

Just check any water quality reports in Pats.

Doc