Big condo parking rules. Comments welcome

[prk888]

Concerns a 400+ out-of-town condo building with a very large car park. Car park usually 10-15% used (and that's at weekends).

Only time it was full was at the time of the BKK floods some years ago.

A very few co--owners (some of whom have multiple condos) park their jet-skis or small dinghies to the very rear of the car park. I am not one of the owners

Someone seems to have had a bee in the bonnet and now The Committee has told these few owners they must move their 'vessels' or face million dollar daily fines, eventual boat confiscation and then a lifetime in a Thai jail .................

They say it's in the Rules & Regs. which well it may be.

There are in my view many important issues The Committee could be handling and many, many more serious R & R broken by other co-owners

So the LAW threatens to disrupt this now tranquil & exquisite condo complex !

Many co-owners, including me, think it is absurd to create this mountain out of a wee molehill and corners have been backed into.

What say you and by 'you' I really mean clear-thinking TV members who have a sensible contribution to make? I'd certainly like to read such comments.

Who knows, if there are really some intelligent views expressed here then even The Committee might have a rethink and maybe keep their eyes closed until it becomes a real issue.

[KittenKong]

First off you need to actually read the regulations of your building and see what they say in relation to this matter. The building regs should be obeyed, unless they specifically contradict the Condo Act 2008 (which doesnt actually have much to say about parking).

The committee and management has to obey the building regs and the Condo Act and also it has to implement any decisions legally taken at an AGM or EGM.

The committee can impose small fines if they wish but large fines would probably not be legal. Jail time is out of the question and it would be difficult to legally remove a trailer belonging to a co-owner (an abandoned vehicle or trailer belonging to some third party would be easier). Proper warning would have to be given before imposing any new fine, unless the trailers are parked in no-parking areas.

The committee can also insist that trailers be left in particular parts of the parking lot and they could impose a (reasonable) fee for parking trailers. Any co-owner could question such a fee at an AGM/EGM and could move for a vote to lower or discontinue the fee. Co-owners can also question the actions of the committee in relation to this trailer parking at an AGM/EGM.

As a committee member I agree that it seems fairly pointless to bother about a few trailers left by co-owners in a large car park that is never full. We occasionally have to clamp down (haha) in our car park because it does actually get full in high season and not all vehicles belong to co-owners or even tenants.

Edited July 9, 2015 by KittenKong

[ThaiBob]

The illegal parking has no sympathy from me. Committee members can not be selective on what rules to enforce. I cannot criticize members for being proactive.

[KittenKong]

The illegal parking has no sympathy from me. Committee members can not be selective on what rules to enforce. I cannot criticize members for being proactive.

I'm not sympathetic to real illegal parking either, but I doubt that this parking is really illegal. If it is illegal then the building regs should say so.

If sufficient co-owners attend the AGM and vote for it then the building regs can be changed to specifically prohibit leaving boats in the car park. But if the car park has plenty of empty space, why bother?

[mikebell]

If sufficient owners feel strongly enough, an EGM could be called & the Committee changed.

[steven100]

There are 'legal' rules and regulations set out in the Condo Act.

Firstly, all parties need to clearly understand what the specific rule or reg states on condo owner parking rights.

Secondly, if the rule or reg is being compromised then the committee has an obligation under their role to act and if that means imposing a fine or whatever, then thats the rule.

The owners cannot argue if it's there in black and white. They must read the fine print.

[ThaiBob]

The intent is for coowners parking for cars and probably a special area for motorbike parking. If the owners want to make a special allowance for jetski trailer parking, commercial vehicles, recreational vehicles, buses, taxis, etc. they can do so at the next AGM. I am on a condo committee and we have made special parking for handicapped, 5 minute unloading area, expanded the motorbike parking area, limited some parking areas to 7 days, etc. Condo RandR's are often very general about items like this and the committee has a lot of leeway.

[Guderian]

I think the OP's original point was that there are more important matters that the committee should be attending to at this time, rather than worrying about issues regarding the car park which apparently don't inconvenience anybody. The trouble is that residential committees usually like to feel that they are doing something useful, but many of the matters they perhaps should be focusing on are complicated and difficult and will take a long time to sort out, if ever. So the tendency is to avoid these things and focus on simple stuff, like stopping people from parking their jet skis in an otherwise almost deserted car park. Perhaps if the OP gave us some examples of the issues that he feels the committee should be concentrating on rather than the car park then people here might be able to tell him if they agree or not?

[prk888]

I think the OP's original point was that there are more important matters that the committee should be attending to at this time, rather than worrying about issues regarding the car park which apparently don't inconvenience anybody. The trouble is that residential committees usually like to feel that they are doing something useful, but many of the matters they perhaps should be focusing on are complicated and difficult and will take a long time to sort out, if ever. So the tendency is to avoid these things and focus on simple stuff, like stopping people from parking their jet skis in an otherwise almost deserted car park. Perhaps if the OP gave us some examples of the issues that he feels the committee should be concentrating on rather than the car park then people here might be able to tell him if they agree or not?

no washing of dirty linen in public Guderian but ............. e.g. how about focussing on a 7-figure amount of outstanding annual fees?

Thanks for all the views expressed so far some of which include simple but effective suggestions.

[Guderian]

I think the OP's original point was that there are more important matters that the committee should be attending to at this time, rather than worrying about issues regarding the car park which apparently don't inconvenience anybody. The trouble is that residential committees usually like to feel that they are doing something useful, but many of the matters they perhaps should be focusing on are complicated and difficult and will take a long time to sort out, if ever. So the tendency is to avoid these things and focus on simple stuff, like stopping people from parking their jet skis in an otherwise almost deserted car park. Perhaps if the OP gave us some examples of the issues that he feels the committee should be concentrating on rather than the car park then people here might be able to tell him if they agree or not?

no washing of dirty linen in public Guderian but ............. e.g. how about focussing on a 7-figure amount of outstanding annual fees?

Thanks for all the views expressed so far some of which include simple but effective suggestions.

Funnily enough the condo where I used to live in Jomtien had the same problem. Turned out that the Thai manager had been pocketing fees on the side, along with one of the expat committee members. It all went to court and that was the last I heard of it as I left there four years ago. I've seen the expat committee member (presumably ex-committee now, but who knows, TIT!) walking around so he evidently didn't feel the full weight of the law. Now I gather that the committee is busy with really important stuff like making everyone relocate their satellite dishes onto the roof, and people who've enclosed their balconies with glass windows (this is a seafront condo so it can get pretty windy and wet on the balconies) are being told they have to remove them. They don't cause problems for anyone else but hey, the committee has to be seen to be doing something, right?

[KittenKong]

If sufficient owners feel strongly enough, an EGM could be called & the Committee changed.

This is true. If 20% of co-owners (by voting ratio) think this is a waste of time then pointing out to the committee that they are prepared to ask the JPM to call an EGM should be enough to get the committee to see reason and to delay any action over trailers until the next AGM. They shouldn't actually need to call the EGM at all.

[ToddinChonburi]

All rules need to be enforced they never should have been stored there.