Ownership of Common Land In Village

[Association]

I live in a Village we are currently collecting Proxy Votes to form a Juristic Association and have been told our Village has 137 Chanotes. Of those Chanotes the Developer has 12 because their name is still on the Chanotes.

Question 1. How does a Development Company that is dissolved have voting rights of Common Land when they no longer even operate or have any assets

Q2. Aren't the Common Land areas for the owners in the Village and any voting rights should not be counted as votes at all? Or at least in favour of the majority.

Any advise would be great

[Langsuan Man]

The Development company has 12 proxy votes so long as they have their name on the Chanotes and as such they are subject to share in the fees for the maintenance of the village

If they don't want to pay, then a lien can be placed upon those Chanotes by the Juristic Association and they would have to have those liens removed before the Land Office will authorize a transfer

[fosseway]

In our 30 year old Condo complex there was a Mo Ban, this was under the "Umbrella" of the condo itself until a few years ago when they formed their own Juristic association.

The original Thai developer never transferred certain plots of land to the then condo complex, a one Rai beachside plot was the subject of a 15 year court battle, but of course we lost that one, far to much detail and very complicated to explain here.

Several other plots within the Village boundary were also never transferred and were still held in the original developers name, therefore could not be transferred to the newly formed Juristic.

In my opinion, and from bitter experience ,if the original development was built by a Thai company and you have a Moban committee without at least one very influential Thai being a member, the chances of transferring the land or winning in court would be minimal at best.

This is the oldest developer trick in the book "Never transfer all of your land"

[stgrhe]

It is common practice among Thai developers to transfer the titles of the sois to the local authorities. This practice says that this should take place when ownership of 50% plus one plot have been trnasferred to their respective owners. Most, if not all, of foreign developers keep the titles in their company names or sell them - once more - to the village occupants.

In the purchase and build agreement one should ensure that this transfers of common areas are clearly defined. Furthermore, it is recommended that one also gets a servitute on the titles of common areas that are not sois. If the seller/developer does not comply, walk away!

[Langsuan Man]

It is common practice among Thai developers to transfer the titles of the sois to the local authorities. This practice says that this should take place when ownership of 50% plus one plot have been trnasferred to their respective owners. Most, if not all, of foreign developers keep the titles in their company names or sell them - once more - to the village occupants.

In the purchase and build agreement one should ensure that this transfers of common areas are clearly defined. Furthermore, it is recommended that one also gets a servitute on the titles of common areas that are not sois. If the seller/developer does not comply, walk away!

Only if the residents do not opt to form a juristic person to run the village

Most developers want to get in, sell , and then get out. They don't make any money running villages, so I don't know where you come up with the "common practice" notion

[AlQaholic]

second fosseway #3.

I understand moobaans are not same as condos from a legal point of view. I am not sure the developer have any legal obligations to transfer any property that they own within the moobaan fences to anyone, unless it is agreed at time of selling properties, for example there may be a section in purchase contracts that stipulates that certain properties regarded as "common" will be transferred to a moobaan committee once the committee has been formed.

I have seen some high end (luxury) moobaans where this is the case, and where they have regulations very similar to condos as I have seen (I have a condo as well as a house).

The moobaan that I live in (which is average) the developer has just recently handed over "common" properties and management to the committee, even though there was not initially anything mentioned about this at least in my contract. So I suspect this is all very grey if not mentioned specifically in contracts.

Edited February 8, 2016 by AlQaholic

[kirkieb]

have some interesting points so far. The problem is the Common Land is all in Developers Name, The Pool and Clubhouse were sold to a private owner who we are still fighting after already winning Servitude years ago. Thai Law Protects third parties so we cant touch him but he can certainly try and get the property back by appealing in court. The Developer was interested in transferring the Village including the Utilities until he found out we knew all Villages must have a Sinking Fund. He has by all reports used that money and if its not where its supposed to be it becomes criminal activity with many years Jail. Since then he has done nothing to help.

The Village is 17 years old and this has been dragging on all these years and in the meantime has become run down and in bad need of some repairs.

Any suggestions anyone