Interior Ministry orders further checks on Waterfront Residence in South Pattaya

[pattayadude]

11 hours ago, champa said:

Yesterday, the buyers met with deputy lord mayor of Pattaya City. It was the first time that Pattaya City did official announcement that there are MANY issues of Waterfront Project.

 

Unfortunately, it was not detail on any issues

Why are these "issues" such a top secret that no one dares to share them with public after almost 3 years? who is afraid of spilling the beans here?

Or is it their intention to take these facts with them to the grave?

I just can't comprehend this anymore

11 hours ago, Asiantravel said:

It was the first time that Pattaya City informed the buyers that the developer had changed the building without permission

Champa, there is an old quote: But isn't the thief culpable at all?

Realizing the doors and windows unlocked,a thief breaks in a house and steals everything.

Next day all neighbors blame the owner of the house for being very negligent and harshly criticize him for leaving the doors and windows wide open.

Frustrated with being the only culpable for this break-in, the owner finally lashes out " But isn't the thief culpable at all???

 

Profit-driven, opportunistic and greedy developers are known for "changing the buildings", building extra floors without permission and try to bribe authorities for various reasons for extra profit all over the world for centuries. Yes.. they are culpable for doing so!

But aren't the authorities ALSO culpable for turning blind eye, lack of inspection during the construction of a mega structure such as the Waterfront???

It is so easy to put the blame on one party and having said this, I am not trying to protect the developer. on the contrary, I think they ARE to be blamed for all this mess

But we aren't talking a hen-house here..its a 50floor high-rise building for God's sake!

Why didn't the authorities catch these variations from the beginning before it was too late?

"what" did or didn't happen that was not supposed to or supposed to?

 

If not this, then what is the City's responsibility???

Help build, coordinate, beautify  or destroy?

 

 

[Asiantravel]

3 hours ago, pattayadude said:

Why are these "issues" such a top secret that no one dares to share them with public after almost 3 years? who is afraid of spilling the beans here?

Or is it their intention to take these facts with them to the grave?

I just can't comprehend this anymore

Champa, there is an old quote: But isn't the thief culpable at all?

Realizing the doors and windows unlocked,a thief breaks in a house and steals everything.

Next day all neighbors blame the owner of the house for being very negligent and harshly criticize him for leaving the doors and windows wide open.

Frustrated with being the only culpable for this break-in, the owner finally lashes out " But isn't the thief culpable at all???

 

Profit-driven, opportunistic and greedy developers are known for "changing the buildings", building extra floors without permission and try to bribe authorities for various reasons for extra profit all over the world for centuries. Yes.. they are culpable for doing so!

But aren't the authorities ALSO culpable for turning blind eye, lack of inspection during the construction of a mega structure such as the Waterfront???

It is so easy to put the blame on one party and having said this, I am not trying to protect the developer. on the contrary, I think they ARE to be blamed for all this mess

But we aren't talking a hen-house here..its a 50floor high-rise building for God's sake!

Why didn't the authorities catch these variations from the beginning before it was too late?

"what" did or didn't happen that was not supposed to or supposed to?

 

If not this, then what is the City's responsibility???

Help build, coordinate, beautify  or destroy?

 

 

But what can be done about it? For example under British law a developer  in a similar position who would be trying to pin part of the blame on government authorities themselves would need to seek equitable relief in the courts. I don’t know enough about the Thai legal system to know whether they have the equivalent of common law and equity as in the UK.

But I do know the famous phrase regarding those who do seek equitable relief in the British courts

" He who comes into equity must come with clean hands." .

In other words, if you ask for help from the courts about the actions (or inactions this case ) of someone else but have acted wrongly yourself, then you do not have clean hands and you may not receive the help you seek.

On that note I would be extremely surprised if the developers would be able to come anywhere near  being able to persuade the courts that they satisfied this criteria.

[pattayadude]

36 minutes ago, Asiantravel said:

But what can be done about it? For example under British law a developer  in a similar position who would be trying to pin part of the blame on government authorities themselves would need to seek equitable relief in the courts. I don’t know enough about the Thai legal system to know whether they have the equivalent of common law and equity as in the UK.

But I do know the famous phrase regarding those who do seek equitable relief in the British courts

" He who comes into equity must come with clean hands." .

In other words, if you ask for help from the courts about the actions (or inactions this case ) of someone else but have acted wrongly yourself, then you do not have clean hands and you may not receive the help you seek.

On that note I would be extremely surprised if the developers would be able to come anywhere near  being able to persuade the courts that they satisfied this criteria.

I don't think this whole thing can be simplified as "overbuilt area and parking space" anymore.Otherwise an agreement could have been reached by now.

I bet you there are "extremely sensitive" issues among the two parties that can not be made public. No one can convince me city hall inspectors assigned with this project with a $5 calculator couldn't figure out the gross floor area multiplied by 50 wouldn't have amounted to the permitted total area but allowed this construction to rise to its full height, tens of millions($) got spent and then surrendered to less than 100 protesters.This isn't a child's play. This is a skyscraper.

People lost their a$$es and dreams.

 

everybody loses at the end of this  including Thailand and it's reputation!

Nobody will buy crap after this!

Edited March 29, 2017 by pattayadude

[CRUNCHER]

7 hours ago, pattayadude said:

Why are these "issues" such a top secret that no one dares to share them with public after almost 3 years? who is afraid of spilling the beans here?

Or is it their intention to take these facts with them to the grave?

I just can't comprehend this anymore

Champa, there is an old quote: But isn't the thief culpable at all?

Realizing the doors and windows unlocked,a thief breaks in a house and steals everything.

Next day all neighbors blame the owner of the house for being very negligent and harshly criticize him for leaving the doors and windows wide open.

Frustrated with being the only culpable for this break-in, the owner finally lashes out " But isn't the thief culpable at all???

 

Profit-driven, opportunistic and greedy developers are known for "changing the buildings", building extra floors without permission and try to bribe authorities for various reasons for extra profit all over the world for centuries. Yes.. they are culpable for doing so!

But aren't the authorities ALSO culpable for turning blind eye, lack of inspection during the construction of a mega structure such as the Waterfront???

It is so easy to put the blame on one party and having said this, I am not trying to protect the developer. on the contrary, I think they ARE to be blamed for all this mess

But we aren't talking a hen-house here..its a 50floor high-rise building for God's sake!

Why didn't the authorities catch these variations from the beginning before it was too late?

"what" did or didn't happen that was not supposed to or supposed to?

 

If not this, then what is the City's responsibility???

Help build, coordinate, beautify  or destroy?

 

 

You are right Pattayadude.  It is time to sort this farce out one way or another.

 

The developer has put some information into the public domain, but I doubt he has disclosed everything. City Hall has put nothing in the public domain which I find surprising.  You would think they would want to offer something to justify their position.

 

City Hall waited for about (if my memory serves me right) 2 weeks after the building was topped off before issuing the stop order.  I find the timing odd to say the least, but perhaps I am being overly suspicious. Certainly they should have acted much sooner if this was necessary.

 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  Personally I think when (and if) finished it will look good.  Others disagree and I respect their opinion.  Whichever side of the equation you are on, I suspect that most people would prefer to see it finished rather than have the shell remain in that state for the next 10 years.  That is what will happen, with the inevitable litigation, if the project is ended. 

[fforest1]

3 hours ago, pattayadude said:

I don't think this whole thing can be simplified as "overbuilt area and parking space" anymore.Otherwise an agreement could have been reached by now.

I bet you there are "extremely sensitive" issues among the two parties that can not be made public. No one can convince me city hall inspectors assigned with this project with a $5 calculator couldn't figure out the gross floor area multiplied by 50 wouldn't have amounted to the permitted total area but allowed this construction to rise to its full height, tens of millions($) got spent and then surrendered to less than 100 protesters.This isn't a child's play. This is a skyscraper.

People lost their a$$es and dreams.

 

everybody loses at the end of this  including Thailand and it's reputation!

Nobody will buy crap after this!

everybody loses at the end of this  including Thailand and it's reputation!

 

 

Well not everybody is loosing...I bet the lawyers have been making

a bundle off this mess....

 

There is also a monstrous amount of money to be made if someone

is able to resell all the condos in the building with-out paying off

all the original condo buyers using bankruptcy laws or what ever

legal shenanigans they can to pull some thing  like this off.....

[pattayadude]

3 minutes ago, CRUNCHER said:

You are right Pattayadude.  It is time to sort this farce out one way or another.

 

The developer has put some information into the public domain, but I doubt he has disclosed everything. City Hall has put nothing in the public domain which I find surprising.  You would think they would want to offer something to justify their position.

 

City Hall waited for about (if my memory serves me right) 2 weeks after the building was topped off before issuing the stop order.  I find the timing odd to say the least, but perhaps I am being overly suspicious. Certainly they should have acted much sooner if this was necessary.

 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  Personally I think when (and if) finished it will look good.  Others disagree and I respect their opinion.  Whichever side of the equation you are on, I suspect that most people would prefer to see it finished rather than have the shell remain in that state for the next 10 years.  That is what will happen, with the inevitable litigation, if the project is ended. 

Agreed!

here we just express our opinions and I never claim I am right.

However, if it looks,walks and quacks like a duck, then it is a duck.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure if this construction is deemed illegal, it's only fair to think someone did something illegal.

There are discrepancies here stinking to high heavens.

On the other hand,if developer bankrupts(and I doubt it as it's a $30B company) and walks, how is this City gonna cough up millions of dollars to demolish it

if they can't even put together 50-100million baht ($3M) to fix the freakin marina!

There is no money in the piggy.period.

They will just auction it and the next developer will pick it at 50 cents on the dollar and everybody will go home.they will pick up the pieces and find a way to resume the construction.

or.....

the City eventually will have it "their way"(however you perceive it) and make Bali hai  kncok off 10 floors (not 5), and they will save their face, Bali Hai will lose quite a bit but in the long run the hotel business  will make up for the loss when it opens its doors and will probably run with no vacancy

[CRUNCHER]

2 minutes ago, pattayadude said:

Agreed!

here we just express our opinions and I never claim I am right.

However, if it looks,walks and quacks like a duck, then it is a duck.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure if this construction is deemed illegal, it's only fair to think someone did something illegal.

There are discrepancies here stinking to high heavens.

On the other hand,if developer bankrupts(and I doubt it as it's a $30B company) and walks, how is this City gonna cough up millions of dollars to demolish it

if they can't even put together 50-100million baht ($3M) to fix the freakin marina!

There is no money in the piggy.period.

They will just auction it and the next developer will pick it at 50 cents on the dollar and everybody will go home.they will pick up the pieces and find a way to resume the construction.

or.....

the City eventually will have it "their way"(however you perceive it) and make Bali hai  kncok off 10 floors (not 5), and they will save their face, Bali Hai will lose quite a bit but in the long run the hotel business  will make up for the loss when it opens its doors and will probably run with no vacancy

Again you are right. If Bali Hai goes to the wall the permit will lapse.  They will not be able to demolish. The bank will take the land that will be worth peanuts.  The bank wont put more money in to demolish.  Who will buy the land with that shell on it?  No one.  As you said City Hall can't afford to demolish and would probably screw it up anyway.

 

[pattayadude]

6 minutes ago, CRUNCHER said:

Again you are right. If Bali Hai goes to the wall the permit will lapse.  They will not be able to demolish. The bank will take the land that will be worth peanuts.  The bank wont put more money in to demolish.  Who will buy the land with that shell on it?  No one.  As you said City Hall can't afford to demolish and would probably screw it up anyway.

 

and it will be quite a sight with the decaying marina and the building!

im sure the birds and the fish will love all this!

[champa]

It is hard to explain about Thai laws and regulations for building. As I understand, city hall has involved with the developer in 3 parts.

First,  city hall inspects the construction plan (Paper) and issue the construction permit. Normally the permit period will be 2-3 years depend on the scale of the building.

 

Second, city hall inspects the work in process (ฺBuilding) when the developer request for expend the building period.

 

Third, when the building is finished. City hall inspects the building to ensure about securities and regulations. For public building such as hotel, apartment, school, condominium, etc. city hall must approves the license for the building usage. 

 

In August 2014, Pattaya Mayor announced the suspense order of waterfront project. He said that the construction permit would be expired by September 2014. The develop request for expend the permit on June. Then city hall had to inspect the building and the construction plan. So they found that the developer change the building without permission in July. He specified only 2 parts, the elevators and fire exit stairway. 

 

After that he went to the construction site at late August 2014. He said that to change the building match the construction plan. The developer must revoke the most part of the building. He found that the building was incorrectly counting from its foundation. 

 

Pattaya watchdog group had compliant Pattaya city hall for this issue. They found that the developer had requested for expend the building period 2 times before 2014. How come pattaya city hall did not find the incorrect thing? The previous pattaya city management team had never answer this question.

 

The developer had met with previous pattaya city management team many times during 2 years. If you remember on July 2015 Pattaya city team has inspect the building. It seem like they would reissue the construction permit then but finally it was not happen. One or two week before the previous management team end of their period in June 2016. It was a last meeting of developer and the previous management team.It was quoted in the press that the developer requested the permission before the previous management team end their period. 

 

The current management team just started working last month. They met with the buyers and the lawyer. They informed the fact of everything to the buyers.

 

I am not sure how many issue for the construction plans. The developer once confirmed to the press on December 2016 that pattaya city request  to inspect in 42 issues. There are not only 2 issues, parking area and over space area. But what else?

 

Finally if the building is illegal. City hall must order to be demolished. If the owner refuse to do so. City hall should demolish and bill the owner. The sample case is Balihai plaza and hotel which were demolished on mid of 2016. The total cost is 1.2 million baht will be billed to the owner. 

[CRUNCHER]

10 minutes ago, champa said:

It is hard to explain about Thai laws and regulations for building. As I understand, city hall has involved with the developer in 3 parts.

First,  city hall inspects the construction plan (Paper) and issue the construction permit. Normally the permit period will be 2-3 years depend on the scale of the building.

 

Second, city hall inspects the work in process (ฺBuilding) when the developer request for expend the building period.

 

Third, when the building is finished. City hall inspects the building to ensure about securities and regulations. For public building such as hotel, apartment, school, condominium, etc. city hall must approves the license for the building usage. 

 

In August 2014, Pattaya Mayor announced the suspense order of waterfront project. He said that the construction permit would be expired by September 2014. The develop request for expend the permit on June. Then city hall had to inspect the building and the construction plan. So they found that the developer change the building without permission in July. He specified only 2 parts, the elevators and fire exit stairway. 

 

After that he went to the construction site at late August 2014. He said that to change the building match the construction plan. The developer must revoke the most part of the building. He found that the building was incorrectly counting from its foundation. 

 

Pattaya watchdog group had compliant Pattaya city hall for this issue. They found that the developer had requested for expend the building period 2 times before 2014. How come pattaya city hall did not find the incorrect thing? The previous pattaya city management team had never answer this question.

 

The developer had met with previous pattaya city management team many times during 2 years. If you remember on July 2015 Pattaya city team has inspect the building. It seem like they would reissue the construction permit then but finally it was not happen. One or two week before the previous management team end of their period in June 2016. It was a last meeting of developer and the previous management team.It was quoted in the press that the developer requested the permission before the previous management team end their period. 

 

The current management team just started working last month. They met with the buyers and the lawyer. They informed the fact of everything to the buyers.

 

I am not sure how many issue for the construction plans. The developer once confirmed to the press on December 2016 that pattaya city request  to inspect in 42 issues. There are not only 2 issues, parking area and over space area. But what else?

 

Finally if the building is illegal. City hall must order to be demolished. If the owner refuse to do so. City hall should demolish and bill the owner. The sample case is Balihai plaza and hotel which were demolished on mid of 2016. The total cost is 1.2 million baht will be billed to the owner. 

Problem is, if Bali Hai is bankrupt, where does City Hall send the bill?

[champa]

City hall will be another creditor. 

[CRUNCHER]

53 minutes ago, champa said:

City hall will be another creditor. 

I don't know much about the Thai bankruptcy laws, but as I understand it the bank is likely to be the only secured creditor via a lien on the land (but not the building). Even if the bank can sell the land (difficult) there will not be much left over when they get their money back. I believe City Hall will have no priority.

 

Bali Hai will not have much in the way of other assets and unsecured creditors will be lucky to get  ten cents on the dollar.  If I am right the tax payer will foot the bill - if it ever gets demolished. The current bankruptcy protection proceeding can drag on for 5 or 7 years, I am not sure which

 

There are still examples in Bangkok from the 1997 financial crisis.

Edited March 29, 2017 by CRUNCHER

[Asiantravel]

20 minutes ago, CRUNCHER said:

I don't know much about the Thai bankruptcy laws, but as I understand it the bank is likely to be the only secured creditor via a lien on the land (but not the building). Even if the bank can sell the land (difficult) there will not be much left over when they get their money back. I believe City Hall will have no priority.

 

Bali Hai will not have much in the way of other assets and unsecured creditors will be lucky to get  ten cents on the dollar.  If I am right the tax payer will foot the bill - if it ever gets demolished. The current bankruptcy protection proceeding can drag on for 5 or 7 years, I am not sure which

 

There are still examples in Bangkok from the 1997 financial crisis.

 I hope they don’t leave that crane perched on top of the building for another 6 to 7 years

[CRUNCHER]

5 minutes ago, Asiantravel said:

 I hope they don’t leave that crane perched on top of the building for another 6 to 7 years

Don't worry.  It will fall down before then.  City Hall would not even allow Bali Hai to carry out maintenance or safety checks.

[Gopro]

bali hai don't even own it anymore, it was disposed of long ago

 

[CRUNCHER]

4 minutes ago, Gopro said:

bali hai don't even own it anymore, it was disposed of long ago

 

Actually Bali Hai is the legal owner of the Waterfront project.  Bali Hai in turn is owned by Park Plaza Hotels/Red Sea

[champa]

Do you know how  much money Park Plaza Hotels/Red Sea invests in Balihai company? 

 

[CRUNCHER]

7 minutes ago, champa said:

Do you know how  much money Park Plaza Hotels/Red Sea invests in Balihai company? 

 

No I don't

[champa]

guess? 

[CRUNCHER]

1 minute ago, champa said:

guess? 

I wouldn't even like to try.  Do you know?

[champa]

The registered capital of Balihai company is 8 million baht. According to the regulation of department of business development, It is not allow foreigner invest more than 50% on Thai company. Foreigner invest in Balihai was limited at 3.99 million baht.

 

Mr. Eli Papov Chado founder and major share holder of the red sea group reported that he invests in Leno Finance Limited (UK based) which holds 3,920,000 baht in Balihai company. He explained about his investment in low value because Waterfront is a project finance. Most of money on this project was supported by bank.

 

[Gopro]

You will find Park plaza disposed of it, the bank owns it.

 

http://www.pphe.com/~/media/Files/P/PPHE/documents/Annual Report 20150311.pdf

[pegman]

2 hours ago, Gopro said:

You will find Park plaza disposed of it, the bank owns it.

 

http://www.pphe.com/~/media/Files/P/PPHE/documents/Annual Report 20150311.pdf

That's not what the report says. Park Plaza transferred it to sister company Red Sea.

[johng]

Here is a google translate of  Manager Online story here

http://manager.co.th/Local/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9600000031537

 

Sriracha News Center - Condo Lease "Waterfront Pattaya" launched a project to report inaccurate information. After the fact. Sending an email message to the owner of the suite Specify Pattaya Green light on building permit Last but not least, it only extends the time for consideration. The need to accelerate the Central Bankruptcy Court's request for repayment. And have the right to consider if the court approves the rehabilitation Dreadful loss if insolvency
       
       The case of Bali Hai Co., Ltd. project owner. "Waterfront Condo and Residence", which was ordered by Pattaya City to suspend the construction of the project. Due to many environmental and planning issues. Since September 16, 2014, or lasted more than 2 years and 6 months, and still does not seem to continue. Until recently The project filed a petition with the Central Bankruptcy Court for debt restructuring of more than Bt2.39bn on January 16, 2017. The Central Bankruptcy Court issued the notice and informed the interested parties. Or object to the business rehabilitation by filing an objection to the court before the appointment date of a three-day trial, with a request for a hearing on April 24, 2560.
       
       The leasing group has launched a statement saying that. There will be a gathering of over 250 condominium unit owners to prepare their requests for creditor status. And application for debt repayment to the Central Bankruptcy Court. In order for the buyer to be granted the right to vote approving the affairs of the case. Including the rehabilitation plan. Also, to maintain the legal right to receive payment from the plan debtor, whether it be to repay the debt. Or ownership of the suite.
       
       Recently at Pattaya City Hall, Chonburi has a group of renters project apartment. "Waterfront Condo and Residence" with over 20 attorneys have visited the Pattaya city administration. And related staff for questioning the facts. Especially in the case of the progress of the construction permit for the project in Pattaya has issued a suspension order under the construction. Building control Since September 2014, and still does not seem to be able to continue when. With Mr. Suwat Suksawat, together with Mr. Wichian Phongpanich Vice President Pattaya. And the head of government attended the hearing.
       
       Mr. Chalermwat Wimook, a lawyer of the leasing group, said that after the leasing group opened the statement to get legal debt. And gather for ownership to participate in the rehabilitation. After the project has been submitted to the Central Bankruptcy Court, it appears that the project has sent a letter via email to all leases. Currently, the project has been considered by Pattaya City to renew a building permit, which will bring the project back to construction. And to complete the process so that the apartment can be delivered to the lease. And entered the rehabilitation process at the request of the Central Bankruptcy Court.
       
       But from past lessons, that is unclear. And informative information from the project is not very clear. This causes uncertainty in the group of leases. They gathered together to meet with staff from Pattaya. To inquire the fact that the information provided by the project is true.
       
       Mr. Chalermwat Went on According to the information from the city of Pattaya, it was found that the current Pattaya has not allowed the project to continue construction in any way. Because of the problem of excess area of over 5,000 square meters of parking space in the building. Demolition of the building from 51 floors to 45 floors and other effects
       
       Including the detailed plan of the project to Pattaya is unclear. And there are many parts that have not passed approval. As a result, the extension of the submission period was extended to 30 days until May 11. It's not about granting permission to build anything. It is considered confusing. And discrepancy If the leasing group did not check and let go according to the method of the project. Finally, if you go into the process of bankruptcy, it can be enormous damage.
       
       While Mr. Suwat Suksawat, Pattaya Vice Mayor, said that for the problem of the Waterfront Project in Pattaya It is a problematic project for a long time. It was still in the process of suspension of construction. However, for Pattaya City, the main task is to oversee the construction of the building. Building Control Act The project itself must follow the prescribed procedure until it is accurate so it can be allowed.
       
       The case of land ownership. Or other problems It is the responsibility of the agency responsible for the assigned task. However, after receiving the complaint, it will make a report to the mayor of Pattaya for the meeting. And discuss with the relevant parties for consideration. And expeditiously solve the problem.

 

 

[Gopro]

2014  annual report

 

Under the terms of the UOB facilities received for the construction in Pattaya Bay, Thailand (the “Project”) the Company is currently obliged to provide certain financial support in the event of a cost overrun or funding shortfall in relation to the Project and, in certain circumstances, may be required to purchase serviced apartments after completion of the Project for a maximum consideration of Thai Baht 600 million (€15.0 million) to fund any amounts that are outstanding under the UOB facilities. The support deed provides that the Company shall maintain a net gearing ratio (the ratio of (i) any interest bearing indebtedness owed to financial institutions or under financial debt instruments of the Company less any cash balances or cash equivalent instruments maintained by the Company to (ii) its tangible net worth (total tangible assets less all external liabilities in respect of money borrowed or raised by the Company) not exceeding 3:1. As at 31 December 2014 the Company is in compliance with the aforementioned covenants. In addition, the Company guaranteed practical completion of the Project. Red Sea Hotels Limited has agreed to indemnify the Company in respect of certain of these continuing obligations and as security Red Sea Hotels Limited has pledged the shares held by it in Bali Hai Company Limited (the company that owns the project in Pattaya Bay, Thailand), and certain affiliated Thai companies.

Edited March 30, 2017 by Gopro

[Gopro]

2016 news

 

Under the terms of the United Overseas Bank (UOB) facilities received for the construction of the Project, the Company is currently obliged to provide certain financial support in the event of a cost overrun or funding shortfall in relation to the Project, to satisfy the payment of unpaid interest or fees and, in certain circumstances, may be required to purchase serviced apartments after completion of the Project for a maximum of Thai Baht 600 million to fund any amounts that are outstanding under the UOB facilities.

 

 As at 31 December 2016, the Company is in compliance with the aforementioned covenants. The Project encountered planning issues and as a result construction has been halted until these are resolved. Bali Hai, with the knowledge of UOB, has filed a court petition for rehabilitation. The petition has been preliminarily granted and therefore results, for the time being, in an automatic stay of all creditors’ claims. Meanwhile, Bali Hai continues its efforts to resolve and restore the planning. The Company believes that, given the status of the Project and, so far as the Company is aware, the efforts of the parties involved to restore the works on the Project and taking into account the Red Sea indemnity in favour of the Group, it is not probable that any material outflow of resources embodying economic benefits will be required to settle the above obligations of the Company under the sponsor support deed.

 

In September 2016, the Company received the amounts outstanding in a loan to Red Sea Hotels Limited, due from the disposal of a site in Pattaya, in the amount of Thai Baht 600 million.

Edited March 30, 2017 by Gopro

[Asiantravel]

I noticed there are many pages of information but in Thai posted on the entrance door of the small office / marketing building next to the development and it looks as though the office building itself ihas been closed.

There is also this sketch plan. What this is the shaded part? does this mean the office building has also encroached onto public land?

Edited April 30, 2017 by Asiantravel

[CRUNCHER]

18 minutes ago, Asiantravel said:

I noticed there are many pages of information but in Thai posted on the entrance door of the small office / marketing building next to the development and it looks as though the office building itself ihas been closed.

There is also this sketch plan. What this is the shaded part? does this mean the office building has also encroached onto public land?

I believe the sales office was closed in January by order of City Hall.

 

Looking at the sketch it looks like a case of encroachment.  All I can say is that it has taken City Hall two and half years of having Waterfront under the microscope to work this out and do something about it. 

 

If that is the level of efficiency of City Hall it is small wonder that this is taking so long to resolve. Whatever faults that Bali Hai might or might not have, it is clear that a major contributing factor to this fiasco lies at the door of City Hall. 

[pattayadude]

22 minutes ago, Asiantravel said:

I noticed there are many pages of information but in Thai posted on the entrance door of the small office / marketing building next to the development and it looks as though the office building itself ihas been closed.

There is also this sketch plan. What this is the shaded part? does this mean the office building has also encroached onto public land?

the office has already been closed for some time now for "security concerns" and buyers were informed according to a previous post.

encroached office?

I don't think that makes much difference at this point.

That's  like having a minor headache while fighting an advanced cancer

[CRUNCHER]

1 minute ago, pattayadude said:

the office has already been closed for some time now for "security concerns" and buyers were informed according to a previous post.

encroached office?

I don't think that makes much difference at this point.

That's  like having a minor headache while fighting an advanced cancer

Pettiness on the part of City Hall???