Suggestions on dealing with at-capacity parking in condo building

[smutcakes]

If you are renting out car parking spaces, you are 'making benefit' from Common Area and require General Meeting approval. A lot of buildings dont do this, but if they are short of parking already and it is already starting to cause an issue then they should make sure it is dealt with properly.

How could you possibly enforce or stop people parking in the 'paid' for spaces. They are common area, so you or anyone else has as much right to use them as anyone else. If you want to make it official and rent them out, then you need majority approval at an General Meeting.

It is not within the Committee's power to simply remove the use of Common Area and rent it out to individual owners.

Clause 48 (7) of the Condo Act

I dont agree. I would have no qualms about allocating parts of a parking area to co-owners willing to pay for it and I doubt that anyone would complain.

It's just like sun-loungers as far as I'm concerned.

Those who dont like it can file a law suit, and good luck to them.

I and i am sure many co-owners would complain if they arrived home and the only spaces were 'reserved common area' ones. I would simply park it in those spaces and there would literally be nothing the Committee could do to enforce it, unless of course you had the majority resolution of an General meeting allowing for it and yo be safe also agreeing on the penalties for it.

[smutcakes]

When we bought our condo it was part of the original sales agreement how many spaces you got, as a new condo. The bigger the condo the more spaces. Our spaces were also divided into "fixed" i.e. numbered so only you can park there, and "variable/ non-fixed" so anyone with entitlement could park there.

I cannot see how it can be legal for a developer to allocate common area

Is your space detailed on your Condo Title Deed ? If so then it is not common area-in which case all is ok. The contract alone is not sufficient-given that it may well be illegal.If it is illegal then in theory you could sue the developer

If not on the condo title deed then a 50% co -owner vote at a general meeting would have to agree to this action. That is a 50% vote for every space.

I would be interested if a subscriber to this blog could prove me wrong and explain how it could be done -legally that is.

This is the most popular way of doing it in Bangkok. When you buy a condo, depending on size you get e.g., one non fixed, one fixed, two fixed etc etc The spaces are not in the title deeds of the unit, but are registered to those units in the registered condominium regulations. The developers do it in the beginning when they register the condominium, and whilst it is possible to change peoples spaces it needs an amendment to the regulations as you mention, which would be practically impossible given the nature of the issue.

The only way it would be possible as if a much wider parking issue existed which everyone agreed needed to be changed.

In my opinion this is the best way for developers to handle the parking issue. Pattaya is more of an issue as generally the developers just leave it as a free for all, and regardless of unit/space regulations there appears to be far less spaces in buildings on a per unit basis than BKK.

[joshstiles]

as stated...getvrid of all "car collections"....abandon cars or cars collecting dust / not used regularly...and i am sure your problem will be less

try this first

[KittenKong]

This is the most popular way of doing it in Bangkok. When you buy a condo, depending on size you get e.g., one non fixed, one fixed, two fixed etc etc The spaces are not in the title deeds of the unit, but are registered to those units in the registered condominium regulations. The developers do it in the beginning when they register the condominium, and whilst it is possible to change peoples spaces it needs an amendment to the regulations as you mention, which would be practically impossible given the nature of the issue.

The only way it would be possible as if a much wider parking issue existed which everyone agreed needed to be changed.

In my opinion this is the best way for developers to handle the parking issue. Pattaya is more of an issue as generally the developers just leave it as a free for all, and regardless of unit/space regulations there appears to be far less spaces in buildings on a per unit basis than BKK.

Bangkok condo buildings have enough parking space for each unit to have one or more cars? So 100+% coverage? I'm impressed. Even 30% coverage is rare in Pattaya, with 20% being more common.

[KittenKong]

I and i am sure many co-owners would complain if they arrived home and the only spaces were 'reserved common area' ones. I would simply park it in those spaces and there would literally be nothing the Committee could do to enforce it, unless of course you had the majority resolution of an General meeting allowing for it and yo be safe also agreeing on the penalties for it.

You and the other co-owners would have the same option as anyone to pay for an allocated slot, so what would you have to complain about? Nothing. On the contrary such a procedure offers nothing but advantages (except perhaps for co-owners who own many vehicles, and they are the ones who should be penalised anyway).

If I was on the committee in your building your vehicle would be simply be clamped and the clamp would stay on until you paid the fine, which would accumulate daily.

From what you say in another post your building has one or more parking spaces for each unit anyway, so the issue doesn't really arise in your case. This is NOT the case in Pattaya where most buildings dont have anywhere near as many parking spaces as units.

[smutcakes]

This is the most popular way of doing it in Bangkok. When you buy a condo, depending on size you get e.g., one non fixed, one fixed, two fixed etc etc The spaces are not in the title deeds of the unit, but are registered to those units in the registered condominium regulations. The developers do it in the beginning when they register the condominium, and whilst it is possible to change peoples spaces it needs an amendment to the regulations as you mention, which would be practically impossible given the nature of the issue.

The only way it would be possible as if a much wider parking issue existed which everyone agreed needed to be changed.

In my opinion this is the best way for developers to handle the parking issue. Pattaya is more of an issue as generally the developers just leave it as a free for all, and regardless of unit/space regulations there appears to be far less spaces in buildings on a per unit basis than BKK.

Bangkok condo buildings have enough parking space for each unit to have one or more cars? So 100+% coverage? I'm impressed. Even 30% coverage is rare in Pattaya, with 20% being more common.

Generally in any half decent condominium yes they do. Most people i presume looking to buy a condominium would not even think about purchasing without secure and sufficient parking, which is why most developers if they want to sell their project provide it.

I would say developers can get away with it more in Pattaya as the average buyer may be less experienced, not intend on having a car or just not be bothered.

[bobbin]

I and i am sure many co-owners would complain if they arrived home and the only spaces were 'reserved common area' ones. I would simply park it in those spaces and there would literally be nothing the Committee could do to enforce it, unless of course you had the majority resolution of an General meeting allowing for it and yo be safe also agreeing on the penalties for it.

As stated, we are bumping up against capacity already.. occasionally now, and more so in the future, residents are arriving home to find no parking spaces. Vehicles are then parked wherever they can be fitted.

Allocating a relatively small percentage of spaces will relieve the pressure somewhat, as the residents most likely to complain will take up the offer of assured parking. People less inclined to complain will pay nothing and continue to tale their chances with the 80-85% unreserved spaces.

We are now taking the first steps by requiring registration of vehicles and providing building stickers.

Arguments regarding illegality or not must remember that this is Thailand. Look at the parking taking place all over every city. Double parking impeding traffic flow, shop-keepers blocking off parking in front of their shops on public roads etc. I don't think we are in fear of being sued in a Thai court, even if it came to that. Not that we would prevail but that a compromise with the offended party would likely be reached first.

The car "collection" and a couple of long-term unused vehicles are next on the list.

[smutcakes]

I and i am sure many co-owners would complain if they arrived home and the only spaces were 'reserved common area' ones. I would simply park it in those spaces and there would literally be nothing the Committee could do to enforce it, unless of course you had the majority resolution of an General meeting allowing for it and yo be safe also agreeing on the penalties for it.

As stated, we are bumping up against capacity already.. occasionally now, and more so in the future, residents are arriving home to find no parking spaces. Vehicles are then parked wherever they can be fitted.

Allocating a relatively small percentage of spaces will relieve the pressure somewhat, as the residents most likely to complain will take up the offer of assured parking. People less inclined to complain will pay nothing and continue to tale their chances with the 80-85% unreserved spaces.

We are now taking the first steps by requiring registration of vehicles and providing building stickers.

Arguments regarding illegality or not must remember that this is Thailand. Look at the parking taking place all over every city. Double parking impeding traffic flow, shop-keepers blocking off parking in front of their shops on public roads etc. I don't think we are in fear of being sued in a Thai court, even if it came to that. Not that we would prevail but that a compromise with the offended party would likely be reached first.

The car "collection" and a couple of long-term unused vehicles are next on the list.

You seem like you have a decent plan, but i would still question how you intend to enforce any of it, and if someone parks in 'reserved' spaces, what you could even do to stop them.

Noted on your comment on legality and it being Thailand, but that works both ways. Yes laws are not enforced, but on the other hand laws can suddenly be vigoursly enforced depending on a situation. If i was on the Committee, i would want to cover my back.

Its worth remembering when you are dealing with people's personal life/home/family situation, fairly often normal rational people can become extremely irrational and illogical.

[bobbin]

^^ Enforcement?

Well...there is always the option of the Solex wheel clamp, controversial I know. More likely is a confrontation between the resident who paid for that spot and the "free-loader" who is occupying it..

We would like to minimize the problem of potential "resident on resident" confrontations that will take place in the future.. i.e. between the owner of the car collection (approx. 10% of available space) and someone who can find no space

[smutcakes]

^^ Enforcement?

Well...there is always the option of the Solex wheel clamp, controversial I know. More likely is a confrontation between the resident who paid for that spot and the "free-loader" who is occupying it..

We would like to minimize the problem of potential "resident on resident" confrontations that will take place in the future.. i.e. between the owner of the car collection (approx. 10% of available space) and someone who can find no space

If you try clamping a Thai for no reason you are going to end up in trouble with the police. A resident v resident conflict is of course best avoided, but even if you do have it, it still won't be resolvable because you have no right to rent out common area spaces, so both residents still have as much right to park there as well.

Your problem will come when you have rented out these spaces and are taking the money for it, but are not able to enforce it.

Either way, i wish you luck. Despite it being time consuming i would always recommend doing it the long, difficult but correct way. If you cannot get things approved in an General meeting, you can bow out as a Committee member saying that you tried to resolve the problem.

[kotsak]

[KittenKong]

^^ Enforcement?

Well...there is always the option of the Solex wheel clamp, controversial I know. More likely is a confrontation between the resident who paid for that spot and the "free-loader" who is occupying it..

We would like to minimize the problem of potential "resident on resident" confrontations that will take place in the future.. i.e. between the owner of the car collection (approx. 10% of available space) and someone who can find no space

If you try clamping a Thai for no reason you are going to end up in trouble with the police.

There is a reason: the parking slot is reserved for someone who has paid for it. What more reason do you want?

The police wont be interested in clamps; at least our local police would not be interested. Maybe yours are different.

[fosseway]

Dear Bobbin,

We have undercover parking at my condo complex in Jomtien, we have 150 units, and about 80 of those had numbered spaces, one of the reasons I bought into the complex, was that my unit had a reserved space.

But, over the years the condo began to fill up, and some co-owners who had no numbered spaces started to complain, they were "Shot Down" at many AGM's but eventually one of them had his lawyer investigate the situation, he found that the numbered spaces were not registered at the land office to the individual owners on their Chanote, so the whole area was deemed as "common area".

We of course had to concede, it is now first come first served for co-owners. All residents are required to show their "Blue Book" as proof to owning a car, and the appropriate sticker is issued.

[smutcakes]

^^ Enforcement?

Well...there is always the option of the Solex wheel clamp, controversial I know. More likely is a confrontation between the resident who paid for that spot and the "free-loader" who is occupying it..

We would like to minimize the problem of potential "resident on resident" confrontations that will take place in the future.. i.e. between the owner of the car collection (approx. 10% of available space) and someone who can find no space

If you try clamping a Thai for no reason you are going to end up in trouble with the police.

There is a reason: the parking slot is reserved for someone who has paid for it. What more reason do you want?

The police wont be interested in clamps; at least our local police would not be interested. Maybe yours are different.

Well you can try that reason, but rest assured if someone does not want to listen you have zero way of enforcing it, and are technically breaking the law doing it, but up to each Condominium.

[Delight]

Dear Bobbin,

We have undercover parking at my condo complex in Jomtien, we have 150 units, and about 80 of those had numbered spaces, one of the reasons I bought into the complex, was that my unit had a reserved space.

But, over the years the condo began to fill up, and some co-owners who had no numbered spaces started to complain, they were "Shot Down" at many AGM's but eventually one of them had his lawyer investigate the situation, he found that the numbered spaces were not registered at the land office to the individual owners on their Chanote, so the whole area was deemed as "common area".

We of course had to concede, it is now first come first served for co-owners. All residents are required to show their "Blue Book" as proof to owning a car, and the appropriate sticker is issued.

I suspect that 100% of reserved parking is 100% illegal..

A useful post fosseway

[KittenKong]

Bangkok condo buildings have enough parking space for each unit to have one or more cars? So 100+% coverage? I'm impressed. Even 30% coverage is rare in Pattaya, with 20% being more common.

Generally in any half decent condominium yes they do. Most people i presume looking to buy a condominium would not even think about purchasing without secure and sufficient parking, which is why most developers if they want to sell their project provide it.

I would say developers can get away with it more in Pattaya as the average buyer may be less experienced, not intend on having a car or just not be bothered.

I dont think I have ever seen a condo in town with as many parking slots as units. Maybe the Royal Cliff does. Mine certainly doesnt.

Some of the old buildings down at Na Jomtien and beyond are built on very large plots and probably do have that many parking slots, or could easily concrete over some grassy area to make more if needed. But those buildings rarely have many people in at any one time so the question probably doesnt arise.

New build condos these days hardly seem to have any parking spaces at all. One that I looked at recently in Wong Amat apparently had 38 (unallocated) covered spaces for 300+ units, with a dozen or so more uncovered ones in front of the building. List price for the units was around 130kB/sqm so it wasn't exactly down-market. Ridiculously enough the entire ground floor of the building was given over to an open lobby with seats that will surely never be used. They probably could have put 50 parking spaces in there instead, at less cost.

[fosseway]

Kitten Kong,

I think we mostly read from the same hymn sheet, as I think we are both involved at committee level in our relative condo's. I agree that most of the recently constructed condos are built on plots the "size of postage stamps" and therefore have very little common area parking available outside of the boundary of the building.

However, I live in one of the oldest beachside Jomtien condo complex's built some 30 years ago, as I said in my previous post, we have 80 undercover spaces for our 150 residents, we also have at least another 100 outside, mostly tree shaded places.

So in this instance, "Oldest is best".

[Familyaffairs]

Issue stickers. One sticker = one car = one chanote. The stickers should show the vehicle registration number and should be non-transferable. Anyone with two cars can park the second one elsewhere, or sell it, or buy an extra sticker at the office.

Assuming that you have a security guard and a barrier, post notices that any vehicle without a sticker will be refused access in x days time and instruct security to enforce this rigorously. They should allow no exceptions. Employ extra security for a month or two if necessary. Make sure that the building manager patrols the car park several times a day and fines the security guard if any vehicles without stickers are found.

Allocate part of the car park for numbered parking slots and charge a yearly fee (5-10,000B?) to co-owners who want one of their own. If take-up is good then allocate more space or charge more.

Clamp any vehicles without stickers or parked in the wrong area and impose a serious fine to remove the clamp. Only remove clamps during regular office hours, and tell security to take their time about it.

Could the poster pls assist me in locating somewhere to buy wheel clamps, also is it legal to use them in private property ?????

[KittenKong]

Could the poster pls assist me in locating somewhere to buy wheel clamps, also is it legal to use them in private property ?????

I've never actually seen them (never looked for them either) but HomePro or Tai Watsudu would probably be good places to start.

[bobbin]

I saw a bright yellow Solex wheel clamp being demonstrated at the auto accessory shop next to Tesco-Lotus South in Pattya...

I would think any big key/lock shop could source one for you.

As for private property I don't see how it would be a (legal) problem..

Edited February 8, 2016 by bobbin