Jomtien condo building security

[wpcoe]

As I've been in the market for a condo, I've noticed the distinct lack of effective security at many buildings which in the past seemed a bit stricter:

View Talay 2: Used to actually raise and lower the gate at the main entrance, and the booth that still sits at the entrance to VT2A used to require visitors to surrender an ID to get a parking pass. Now, it's unrestricted entrance and exit.

View Talay 1: Also used to use the gate at the main entrance, but don't any more.

For all four of the VT buildings above, the building front/rear doors have card-restricted access. However, the guards happily open the door for visitors who don't have a key card. (Why bother with the key card access?)

Jomtien Complex: Closed the guard shack at the entrance. There used to be guards there to open/close rolling barricades for each vehicle. (ISTR before the rolling barricades, there were gates that raised/lowered?)

View Talay 5: Though a new building that I don't think ever had restricted vehicle entrance, there aren't even security doors in the lobbies.

Is this apparent trend due to condo associations cutting costs by reducing guard staffing? Even if so, why pay guards to sit inside the building front door and then have them give unfettered access to anyone who shows up?

Security is something I would value as a feature of a condo. Am I that much of an old fart?

[Basil B]

I used to have a condo at JBC (Jomtien Beach Condominium), firstly there was no keycard system, this seemed not a problem, ID cards issued were available but seldom requested, occasionally there would be checks on those using the pools or gyms but that was about all.

There were checks on vehicles entering, sometimes the driver would have to hand something over (I assume his ID), other times probably if I was in a marked Taxi, Baht Bus or say other known vehicles like the dive shops mini van, they would just be waved through.

There was also security in each lobby, normally just one guy and on occasions he would not be there if he went to turn on water etc, these guys were good I recall every time I came back from a big shop they would help me up to my room.

There was also CCTV in operation and I recall no issue with unwanted guests, in actual fact all the ground floor unit were shops, bars and other businesses so restricting access at the gate would not be welcomed by the business owners.

[KittenKong]

The main problem isn't security, it's short-term tenants.

In the good old days even the big condo buildings were mostly lived in by owners and long-term tenants. People knew each other, the guards were regular and visitors were rare. These days many residents are just there for a couple of weeks and quite likely have no working key-card, or forget to bring it with them. Even if security didnt open the door for them they would only have to wait a few seconds for someone else to come along with a keycard.

This is really hard for a committee/management to deal with.

Restricting access to car parks is a lot easier, but even so many guards (who often are immigrants who speak little English or Thai) will just open the gate to avoid conflict.

[Pattaya46]

The main problem isn't security, it's short-term tenants //

These days many residents are just there for a couple of weeks //

Is that authorised ?

I mean, some condominium have clear rules like 2 months or 3 months as minimal rent duration.

I think that the Condominium Act also has a rule on this point,

to forbid any owner to use his condominium units as an hotel,

but I can't find reference to this "rule" ? Anyone who knows about it ?

[alocacoc]

A few years ago i thought the same way. To be honest, today i appreciate the relaxed way how they handle it. It's easy for my friends and also for girls to visit me. Latter have to leave their ID card at the reception. There is a barrier at the entrance. But i never saw it closed. It is what it is and i'm fine with it.

It's common that guests book only for one month. As long they are quiet and follow the house rules...no problem.

[KittenKong]

The main problem isn't security, it's short-term tenants //

These days many residents are just there for a couple of weeks //

Is that authorised ?

I mean, some condominium have clear rules like 2 months or 3 months as minimal rent duration.

I think that the Condominium Act also has a rule on this point,

to forbid any owner to use his condominium units as an hotel,

but I can't find reference to this "rule" ? Anyone who knows about it ?

My understanding of the law and our individual condo rules (which can vary from building to building, of course) is as follows:

1) Businesses may only function on the ground floor, so commercial rentals of units on higher floors are not allowed at all. Private rentals are permitted.

2) Rentals of less than 30 days duration are not legal unless the landlord has a hotel licence (never met one that has).

3) Income should be declared and tax should be paid (unlikely).

All that said, people have got into the habit over the years of allowing all sorts of short-term rentals, with many committees/managements being very lax. Once the habit is in place it's very hard to break it. I certainly have no idea where one could even start trying to prevent short-term rentals in a building. About the best one could do is to prevent people advertising short-term rentals on the premises.

At some point I would expect legal hoteliers and the revenue department to object, and perhaps the government will also realise how detrimental these rentals are.

It's really a great shame as short-term tenants only damage the building and use up its resources, whilst adding nothing at all to it. But most people who have bought as a rental investment don't care about that, of course. They just want the money. Many people who own multiple rental units don't even live the same buildings in which they own.

Roll on real property ownership taxes.

[questionsreplies]

Its anywhere in Thailand, even when i visit a friend who owns a 25 millions condo i dont stop at the gate and they open it.

[KittenKong]

Its anywhere in Thailand, even when i visit a friend who owns a 25 millions condo i dont stop at the gate and they open it.

I disagree. Some buildings are extremely strict and wont let any visitors in without handing over ID.

But they tend to be the quieter condos where they only see a handful of visitors each day.

In the end it's all down to how determined the management and committee are.

[fosseway]

The main problem isn't security, it's short-term tenants.

In the good old days even the big condo buildings were mostly lived in by owners and long-term tenants. People knew each other, the guards were regular and visitors were rare. These days many residents are just there for a couple of weeks and quite likely have no working key-card, or forget to bring it with them. Even if security didnt open the door for them they would only have to wait a few seconds for someone else to come along with a keycard.

This is really hard for a committee/management to deal with.

Restricting access to car parks is a lot easier, but even so many guards (who often are immigrants who speak little English or Thai) will just open the gate to avoid conflict.

I have served as a committee member for many terms, also as an advisor when my term expired, in a large Jomtien Condominium, the security question has been on many of our agendas, I agree with KK that condos are much more secure if occupied by owners or long term lease holders, our condo falls into that category, but it is a constant battle to get it completely right. At the end of the day, if you keep your windows and doors secure, with the added protection of a door viewer or camera, plus a phone link to security, a condo is one of the safest places to live.

[Brit_Doggie]

Sad fact is your not alone my complex keycarded main doors,60% of renters/owners wouldnt pay the 200 baht for said secure entry cards,gate lifted for anyone without checks,oh yah forgot to mention sign put up by management concerning many thefts of rooms and to make sure that doors are locked.i leave my door open in the hope that someone takes pity on me and furnishes my room ขอบคุณ.

[lou62]

Having recently sold my condo, I'm in the process of buying another. I already have access (keys) and drive there on a daily basis to move possessions.

The security guards at the new place are very polite and friendly. The guy who allows me out in the car waves and smiles as I leave.

The guard who lets me in, opens the barrier and then stands and salutes as I drive past.

All very nice but they don't have a clue who I am, I've never been asked for any ID and don't have any issued disk/stamp to display in my window.

They're nice lads but it does concern me somewhat as a prospective buyer.

[maimeephom]

I would suspect that View Talay PLC , do in fact have a hotel license.

The lower 6 floors in VT8 are run as a hotel.

Last year we had Russians staying 1/2 weeks.

This year they are coaching in Chinese, for 1/2 night stays.

All VT staff involved in guest reception and catering, wear orange and brown uniforms.

Security- bare minimum.

Pool supervision-zero.

[KittenKong]

I would suspect that View Talay PLC , do in fact have a hotel license.

The lower 6 floors in VT8 are run as a hotel.

Last year we had Russians staying 1/2 weeks.

This year they are coaching in Chinese, for 1/2 night stays.

All VT staff involved in guest reception and catering, wear orange and brown uniforms.

Security- bare minimum.

Pool supervision-zero.

VT8 is a different situation. The building is not fully sold and so the developer (who, I think, is still also the management) is running some unsold rooms as a hotel. And they may well have a proper licence, as you say.

But the likes of VT1, VT2, VT5C etc are fully sold and each unit has an individual owner, though some owners own more than one unit, of course. I dont think anyone in those buildings has a hotel licence.

I seem to remember there was some talk of the developer running a hotel with the unsold units in VT5D, but I dont know what came of it.

[Basil B]

VT1,VT2,and so on may have been built by the same developer but once sold the communal property becomes the assets of a company that all owners basically hold shares in, thus have a right to elect their own committee (Board of Directors).

As for the hotel licence I do not know if has to be the owner or persons managing it could hold a licence, maybe if a condominium was to hold a licence it could be enforced that all guests would have to register at the office on arrival this could certainly aid security.

As for many condo units doing short term rents, as I recall there has been a issue with many small hotels, guest houses even bars that rent out rooms not being licenced

[balo]

I shouldnt really mention this but sometimes I park the car inside VT1 if I am out travelling and pick it up a week later. Location is convinient next to the bus station. Yes, security is very lazy there.

[Pattaya46]

Its anywhere in Thailand, even when i visit a friend who owns a 25 millions condo

i dont stop at the gate and they open it.

It's not anywhere.

In my condo on South Rd visitors cars are stopped at the gate, registered, and send to the visitors park.

To access the main area and main park you need a badge opening the second barrier. Only owners get one.

Edited March 18, 2015 by Pattaya46

[KittenKong]

VT1,VT2,and so on may have been built by the same developer but once sold the communal property becomes the assets of a company that all owners basically hold shares in, thus have a right to elect their own committee (Board of Directors).

This is my point. VT8 is not completely sold, unlike VT1 and VT2. So the developer still owns many units. Of course he also has a proportionate vote according the ratio of the units he still owns, though under no circumstances can he (or anyone) have more votes than all the other owners put together.

As for the hotel licence I do not know if has to be the owner or persons managing it could hold a licence, maybe if a condominium was to hold a licence it could be enforced that all guests would have to register at the office on arrival this could certainly aid security.

The licence would be issued to the entity owning or operating the units that were being used, not to the juristic person which normally would only own common areas.

I wouldn't want to be in a building in which the JP owned units and ran them as a hotel. Management would be a nightmare. Also there are tax and legal implications as the JP (in our building at least) is not structured to rent out anything at all.

[ThaiBob]

I shouldnt really mention this but sometimes I park the car inside VT1 if I am out travelling and pick it up a week later. Location is convinient next to the bus station. Yes, security is very lazy there.

Consider yourself lucky. VT condos have parking passes (window stickers) and security walks the parking lot daily logging license plates. The date/time you entered and left is logged. You have not been challenged because the the condo committee does not consider consider it a major problem (now). If this were a problem there would be illegal parking signs posted and your car subject to towing.

[balo]

I shouldnt really mention this but sometimes I park the car inside VT1 if I am out travelling and pick it up a week later. Location is convinient next to the bus station. Yes, security is very lazy there.

Consider yourself lucky. VT condos have parking passes (window stickers) and security walks the parking lot daily logging license plates. The date/time you entered and left is logged. You have not been challenged because the the condo committee does not consider consider it a major problem (now). If this were a problem there would be illegal parking signs posted and your car subject to towing.

I highly doubt it, I have lived in VT1 on a weekly basis for many years before and never witnessed anyone logging cars. And I have never been asked to use a window sticker when I rented there. But maybe new rules now?

Edited March 18, 2015 by balo

[questionsreplies]

View talay now check cars every night.

[tolsti]

Part of the problem is developers who sell the apartments as "investments" encouraging co-owners to use their unit to generate income. Hence you get short term rentals which makes it very difficult for the CJP to enforce rules particularly if they are Russian or Chinese only speakers. However the same co-owners bitch if the CAM fee is raised to cover the additional costs these short term rentals impose on every co-owner regardless if they are living there full time, weekends only or 2 - 3 months in the case of occidental owners.

[GaryB1263]

The security at View Talay 5C is just about right. They log cars and motorbikes several times a day and record times the vehicles are in and out. I don't remember how many cameras the building has. It's over 100 I believe.

[GaryB1263]

I wanted to add I haven't heard of a problem around the condo in the 2 years I have been here.

[ThaiBob]

The security at View Talay 5C is just about right. They log cars and motorbikes several times a day and record times the vehicles are in and out. I don't remember how many cameras the building has. It's over 100 I believe.

It's the same at the other View Talays except VT1 and VT2 where the security is outsourced and not to the same standard in my opinion.

[Basil B]

Part of the problem is developers who sell the apartments as "investments" encouraging co-owners to use their unit to generate income. Hence you get short term rentals which makes it very difficult for the CJP to enforce rules particularly if they are Russian or Chinese only speakers. However the same co-owners bitch if the CAM fee is raised to cover the additional costs these short term rentals impose on every co-owner regardless if they are living there full time, weekends only or 2 - 3 months in the case of occidental owners.

Problem is Condominiums can not raise the maintenance fees without a 2/3 (or 3/4 not sure which it is) of all owners voting in favour, I used to own a Condo and our AGM's were never even quorate.

[ThaiBob]

Part of the problem is developers who sell the apartments as "investments" encouraging co-owners to use their unit to generate income. Hence you get short term rentals which makes it very difficult for the CJP to enforce rules particularly if they are Russian or Chinese only speakers. However the same co-owners bitch if the CAM fee is raised to cover the additional costs these short term rentals impose on every co-owner regardless if they are living there full time, weekends only or 2 - 3 months in the case of occidental owners.

Problem is Condominiums can not raise the maintenance fees without a 2/3 (or 3/4 not sure which it is) of all owners voting in favour, I used to own a Condo and our AGM's were never even quorate.

True. What is done is an emergency AGM is declared. Even without a quorum a special maintenance assessment can be voted upon.

[KittenKong]

Problem is Condominiums can not raise the maintenance fees without a 2/3 (or 3/4 not sure which it is) of all owners voting in favour, I used to own a Condo and our AGM's were never even quorate.

True. What is done is an emergency AGM is declared. Even without a quorum a special maintenance assessment can be voted upon.

Interpretations of the law vary from JPM to JPM and from building to building, but in the ones I know well when an initial AGM fails to get the required 75% of the total voting rights to agree to a common fee increase (this never happens, given that attendance rarely exceeds 25%) then a second AGM is called in 15 days. At this second AGM a special fee can be agreed by a simple majority of those present.

It isnt an E(xtraordinary)GM though. Nor is it an emergency. It's just an AGM part 2.

Happens in my building every year, regular as clockwork. And a vast waste of time, money and resources it is. Anyone with half a brain would have allowed for the possibility of adding the motion for a supplementary fee to other business in the first meeting, thus saving all the costs of holding the second one.

This pointless waste of money due to inept organisation really gets me down. There are so many much more sensible things the money could be spent on.

Edited March 27, 2015 by KittenKong

[ThaiBob]

Problem is Condominiums can not raise the maintenance fees without a 2/3 (or 3/4 not sure which it is) of all owners voting in favour, I used to own a Condo and our AGM's were never even quorate.

True. What is done is an emergency AGM is declared. Even without a quorum a special maintenance assessment can be voted upon.

Interpretations of the law vary from JPM to JPM and from building to building, but in the ones I know well when an initial AGM fails to get the required 75% of the total voting rights to agree to a common fee increase (this never happens, given that attendance rarely exceeds 25%) then a second AGM is called in 15 days. At this second AGM a special fee can be agreed by a simple majority of those present.

It isnt an E(xtraordinary)GM though. Nor is it an emergency. It's just an AGM part 2.

Happens in my building every year, regular as clockwork. And a vast waste of time, money and resources it is. Anyone with half a brain would have allowed for the possibility of adding the motion for a supplementary fee to other business in the first meeting, thus saving all the costs of holding the second one.

This pointless waste of money due to inept organisation really gets me down. There are so many much more sensible things the money could be spent on.

You are right it is not an emergency AGM (although some could view dire consequences for the condominium balance sheet an emergency) and the Thailand condominium act calls it an extraordinary meeting when the first meeting doesn't have a quorum. If the second meeting doesnt have a 25% quorum then a third meeting can be held within 15 days and whoever shows up can vote and make the decisions for all.

[KittenKong]

If the second meeting doesnt have a 25% quorum then a third meeting can be held within 15 days and whoever shows up can vote and make the decisions for all.

God spare us!

[balo]

View talay now check cars every night.

Stayed there last night, they didnt check mine,