Amending size of committee

[smutcakes]

A GM can vote to only elect people named Fred if it wants to, as long as that decision gets a majority vote according to the rules.

I agree with most of your points, except that a 75% vote to amend the building regulations would be needed. The highest requirement in the Act is 50% of total Co-owners (not just those in the meeting).

Actually i believe to dissolve the Condominium you need a unanimous decision.

Yes, that was the reason I wrote "majority ... according to the rules".

In my building a vote to change the rules permanently requires a 75% majority of the total ownership (not just those present).

However a one-off vote at a second AGM just requires a simple majority of those present, regardless of how many they are. Voting to apply a specific number between 3 and 9 to the committee as a one-off does not alter building rules, which merely state "between 3 and 9". Such a vote just defines that rule.

My objection to applying a fixed number is that it is unnecessary, anti-democratic and probably just some devious trick by interested parties (management/JPM) to manipulate the committee structure to their benefit.

If I was a management company I would much rather have a committee of 3 to deal with than a committee of 9, as the committee of 3 would probably be much easier to manipulate. Especially so if one or two of them were my shills.

Never underestimate the true extent of deceit and underhandedness in some Thai condo buildings. Sometimes it seems that absolutely everyone is on the make.

Well i presume your management company never made amendments to the Building Regulations following the Condominium Act Amendment which reduced that from 75% to 50%, so your rules are contrary to the Act and would not be enforceable should someone challenge that point.

Not all buildings suffer from poor and corrupt Committee's and management. Many have good management and Committee's. It is often better to have smaller more committed Committees who have time on their hands than larger Committee where people are busy a lot and not committed. Personally i think 7 is a good number. Having 9 is often very difficult to get quorum or approval for issues

[KittenKong]

Well i presume your management company never made amendments to the Building Regulations following the Condominium Act Amendment which reduced that from 75% to 50%, so your rules are contrary to the Act and would not be enforceable should someone challenge that point.

I was aware of that. There are some other quite important modifications to the rules that need to be made also.

Given that we have never been able to get even 50% of the vote together it's fairly irrelevant.

[LannaGuy]

Well i presume your management company never made amendments to the Building Regulations following the Condominium Act Amendment which reduced that from 75% to 50%, so your rules are contrary to the Act and would not be enforceable should someone challenge that point.

I was aware of that. There are some other quite important modifications to the rules that need to be made also.

Given that we have never been able to get even 50% of the vote together it's fairly irrelevant.

a subsequent meeting within 15 days requires 1/3rd so the 50% is irrelevant of course

[KittenKong]

Well i presume your management company never made amendments to the Building Regulations following the Condominium Act Amendment which reduced that from 75% to 50%, so your rules are contrary to the Act and would not be enforceable should someone challenge that point.

I was aware of that. There are some other quite important modifications to the rules that need to be made also.

Given that we have never been able to get even 50% of the vote together it's fairly irrelevant.

a subsequent meeting within 15 days requires 1/3rd so the 50% is irrelevant of course

Not sure but I think that the 75% of the total vote (not the present vote) to vary the rules is written in stone, even at a second meeting.

Given that we never get 1/3rd of the total vote either it's still irrelevant, which is why I've never bothered to look at the question very closely.

[smutcakes]

Well i presume your management company never made amendments to the Building Regulations following the Condominium Act Amendment which reduced that from 75% to 50%, so your rules are contrary to the Act and would not be enforceable should someone challenge that point.

I was aware of that. There are some other quite important modifications to the rules that need to be made also.

Given that we have never been able to get even 50% of the vote together it's fairly irrelevant.

a subsequent meeting within 15 days requires 1/3rd so the 50% is irrelevant of course

Not sure but I think that the 75% of the total vote (not the present vote) to vary the rules is written in stone, even at a second meeting.

Given that we never get 1/3rd of the total vote either it's still irrelevant, which is why I've never bothered to look at the question very closely.

Its not written in stone, as regardless of whether your regulations have been amended to align with the amended act, it would take precedent over what is in your regulations. Eg. you tried to amend the building regulations with 51% or 34%, it would be accepted as it meets the criteria of the law. The Act overrides what is in your building regulations, so you cannot have clauses which are over and above that required in law.

[LannaGuy]

Its not written in stone, as regardless of whether your regulations have been amended to align with the amended act, it would take precedent over what is in your regulations. Eg. you tried to amend the building regulations with 51% or 34%, it would be accepted as it meets the criteria of the law. The Act overrides what is in your building regulations, so you cannot have clauses which are over and above that required in law.

cannot change percentages they are set in stone sir, 50%+ for common area changes to common area etc. and if not reached 33/33% at subsequent 15 day meeting. committee is majority of owners present as to vote each and every member and that is the law period

[smutcakes]

Its not written in stone, as regardless of whether your regulations have been amended to align with the amended act, it would take precedent over what is in your regulations. Eg. you tried to amend the building regulations with 51% or 34%, it would be accepted as it meets the criteria of the law. The Act overrides what is in your building regulations, so you cannot have clauses which are over and above that required in law.

cannot change percentages they are set in stone sir, 50%+ for common area changes to common area etc. and if not reached 33/33% at subsequent 15 day meeting. committee is majority of owners present as to vote each and every member and that is the law period

I know you cannot change that. I was saying his 75% regulation can be changed as it is contrary to the law. His regulations have not been amended to reflect the new act, so regardless of his regulations stating 75% to amend the regs this would not stand up and the legal amount to amend the regs would be as per the voting ratios you state.