Work permit and M.E visa to non b

[webfact]

Movie director arrested for trespass in derelict Phuket hotel
Darawan Naknakhon


Spooky: The Crown Nai Yang has been derelict since the 2004 tsunami. Image Google Street View

PHUKET: -- Well known Thai movie director Anon “Poj Anon” Mingkhwan was arrested at Suvarnabhumi airport yesterday (December 29) on a warrant issued in Phuket.

The warrant was issued for his arrest on a charge of trespassing in the Crown Nai Yang hotel at Nai Yang Beach, abandoned since the 2004 Asian Tsunami.

After his arrest Anon, 48, was sent back to Phuket where he was freed on bail of B100,000 at Tha Chat Chai police station.

The arrest came after a complaint was filed on September 12 by Niphon Rungsimunwong, 30, spokesperson of Mahalap Co, accusing Anon’s company, Filmguru, of using the hotel as a set between June 17 and 25 to shoot a new teen flick, Tsunami Ghost, without permission.

The complaint said that Anon, the director of the movie, arrived with his film crew and told security guards that he had received permission to shoot the film in the abandoned hotel.

The complaint said that Mahalap had already rejected a request by Filmguru to shoot film in the hotel.

Anon and his assistant Jakkapan Janbeng – who had completed filming at the hotel – were both charged with trespassing on private property.

Source: http://www.thephuketnews.com/movie-director-arrested-for-trespass-in-derelict-phuket-hotel-50372.php


-- Phuket News 2014-12-30

[chooka]

This is a joke right? Sounds like someone is after royalties because they don't have the money to rebuild thier hotel. Took 3 months to make a complaint, yep I think it is all about the baht. When does restoration work start?

[Thai at Heart]

This is a joke right? Sounds like someone is after royalties because they don't have the money to rebuild thier hotel. Took 3 months to make a complaint, yep I think it is all about the baht. When does restoration work start?

If you owned the spookiest looking hotel on the beach smashed by the tsunami and some idiot wanted to make "story in the spookiest hotel after the tsunami", you would charge him too.

[hansgruber]

Thais are superstitious. Good luck getting Thai customers if they think the place is spooked with ghosts once they get it up and running.

[simon43]

If you owned the spookiest looking hotel on the beach smashed by the tsunami ...

That hotel was not smashed by the tsunami. It was closed and abandoned prior to the tsunami. I remember having meetings in the hotel around early 2003 and it closed shortly afterwards.

I understand that the hotel has not been renovated/land sold etc due to a partnership dispute. The land must be worth a good amount now.

But Nai Yang beach would look much better if the hotel was razed by the army.

[Old Croc]

I read this line in the OP,

The complaint said that Mahalap had already rejected a request by Filmguru to shoot film in the hotel

so I don't think this is about getting money.

I would think Hans' theory more likely.

Edited December 31, 2014 by Old Croc

[jabis]

If you owned the spookiest looking hotel on the beach smashed by the tsunami ...

That hotel was not smashed by the tsunami. It was closed and abandoned prior to the tsunami. I remember having meetings in the hotel around early 2003 and it closed shortly afterwards.

I understand that the hotel has not been renovated/land sold etc due to a partnership dispute. The land must be worth a good amount now.

But Nai Yang beach would look much better if the hotel was razed by the army.

Well it's right on the beach so saying it was not smashed by the tsunami is quite obviously erroneous, eventhough it might've been closed prior to the event - here's the street view: https://goo.gl/maps/78RAo. Also looking at the property it's not really hard to get by security

[rickirs]

The alleged trespass may not be true. It seems the hotel is owned by a partnership and its current state of disrepair is due to partner differences. The director may have permission from one partner to film, perhaps not being aware of the partnership division. Even who has authority to grant permission for access may disputable.

Furthermore, the trespass may be more a civil dispute than a criminal issue. The hotel in its present state is an "attraction." It is open to public movement - it is not fenced or barricaded to prevent casual access. I also don't see "No Trespass" notices nor any other type of warnings to keep people off the property.

The police should not be involved in this case.

[harrry]

The alleged trespass may not be true. It seems the hotel is owned by a partnership and its current state of disrepair is due to partner differences. The director may have permission from one partner to film, perhaps not being aware of the partnership division. Even who has authority to grant permission for access may disputable.

Furthermore, the trespass may be more a civil dispute than a criminal issue. The hotel in its present state is an "attraction." It is open to public movement - it is not fenced or barricaded to prevent casual access. I also don't see "No Trespass" notices nor any other type of warnings to keep people off the property.

The police should not be involved in this case.

What do you think is written on that sign?

[Frank James]

That's a very interesting looking property. Is the large building in back part of this resort? Looks like the buildings could be re-habbed, although it wouldn't be cheap.

[elgordo38]

This is a joke right? Sounds like someone is after royalties because they don't have the money to rebuild thier hotel. Took 3 months to make a complaint, yep I think it is all about the baht. When does restoration work start?

100,000 baht bail? Must be very very very serious offence.

[simon43]

so saying it was not smashed by the tsunami is quite obviously erroneous

It was not smashed by the tsunami. Please don't assume that the tsunami devastated all beaches in Thailand. That hotel is not on the beach side of the road, and the sea did not come a great distance inland at Nai Yang. Only the wooden beach bars were destroyed, whilst the ground floor of some buildings on the other side of the beach road suffered very minor water damage.

The hotel was abandoned prior to the tsunami and had already been looted before any water damage.

Anyway, all a bit off-topic and of no consequence

[jabis]

so saying it was not smashed by the tsunami is quite obviously erroneous

It was not smashed by the tsunami. Please don't assume that the tsunami devastated all beaches in Thailand. That hotel is not on the beach side of the road, and the sea did not come a great distance inland at Nai Yang. Only the wooden beach bars were destroyed, whilst the ground floor of some buildings on the other side of the beach road suffered very minor water damage.

The hotel was abandoned prior to the tsunami and had already been looted before any water damage.

Anyway, all a bit off-topic and of no consequence

A local restaurateur, a security guard, and an older Thai lady all told me that the wave reached the first living floor and estimated between two and three meters were spoken of, and yeah the place, from waterline, is "massively" 100 meters away on low land - you can use the ruler on the google map I provided earlier to check this yourself - but most importantly I'd like to know were you there in person to rebutt the information I've received first hand, or where have you learned it was only "minor water damage"? Kinda pointless to bicker on my half as I was inland at the time, so I was personally spared of that horrible event, but most of my coastal friends were not so lucky.

[LeungKen]

I can confirm the the waves from the 2004 tsunami reached as far as the main swimming pool, in Indigo Pearl (Was then Pearl Village) and the water was knee deep in some of the ground-floor rooms, debris was spread throughout their grounds & I remember picking up the sign from Mama Mia Bar a good 3 or 4 hundred metres from the normal highwater mark. There was also a small sedan tumbled & compacted halfway up the little laneway between Indigo & Nai Yang Beach Resort.

Crown Nai Yang was affected, it had closed briefly before the tsunami and did in fact open again for a short spell after the tsunami, I was lucky to get all my family off the beach that fateful day and many of the events are etched upon my mind. I sincerely hope I never experience another one.

[grumpyoldman]

Too bad the army couldn't have taken a moment to level the thing while they were there.

[hansgruber]

Too bad the army couldn't have taken a moment to level the thing while they were there.

Can't level something thats on private property.

Their land titles checked out correct so why would they level it?

[LeungKen]

Too bad the army couldn't have taken a moment to level the thing while they were there.

... and what about the derelict monstrosity at the other end of the beach on the headland ?

I wish they'd demolish that eyesore too.

http://oilinki.com/blog/abandoned-hyatt-regency-hotel-nai-yang-beach

[Tywais]

The alleged trespass may not be true. It seems the hotel is owned by a partnership and its current state of disrepair is due to partner differences. The director may have permission from one partner to film, perhaps not being aware of the partnership division. Even who has authority to grant permission for access may disputable.

Furthermore, the trespass may be more a civil dispute than a criminal issue. The hotel in its present state is an "attraction." It is open to public movement - it is not fenced or barricaded to prevent casual access. I also don't see "No Trespass" notices nor any other type of warnings to keep people off the property.

The police should not be involved in this case.

What do you think is written on that sign?

Yep, No Entry.

[hansgruber]

Too bad the army couldn't have taken a moment to level the thing while they were there.

... and what about the derelict monstrosity at the other end of the beach on the headland ?

I wish they'd demolish that eyesore too.

http://oilinki.com/blog/abandoned-hyatt-regency-hotel-nai-yang-beach

The army can't go and demolish private property.

That land also checked out legal except for their entry to the beach.

Army isn't in the beautification of private land business.

[simon43]

I'd like to know were you there in person

Yes, and I have lived in this area since 2002. Water damage was fairly minor to that hotel, as was the same for the concrete, public toilet building further along the beach road (southern direction). Water of a few metres in height is not a great problem if there is little force with that water.

On the other hand, there is/was an expensive house standing on the beach at Khao Lak, probably the same distance from the high water mark as the Crown Hotel. All the solid, ground floor walls were swept away by the tsunami, leaving the house standing on it's corner, reinforced columns.

Again, not relevant to the original post

[Shot]

I hope he can finish the movie, so I can complete my Poj Anon collection.

Edited January 1, 2015 by Shot

[simon43]

The army can't go and demolish private property.

I know that, but a pity they can't 'clean up' that ugly building and the Hyatt shell as well

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

100,000 baht bail for a trespassing charge??? Murderers get off with lower bail amounts than that around these parts.