We got rid of our security guards.saved a fortune and never had ant break ins since .we did before

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

On 6.6.2017 at 4:31 PM, digbeth said:

I'm not suggesting it's not possible or not done, but that there might not be a clear cut law supporting the practice

 

A lot off Moo baan sucessfully bars business like food trucks and such as well as outsiders from entering, good for them. I live in one too and prefer it that way; but my reading of some case in moo baan in Bangkok where a non-paying resident were barred from driving their car through the gate seem to suggest that there's a lot of things being done by juristic person that's not technically legal or has law supporting it.  Is having all members of the moo baan vote for such rules enough? We had times where the security won't let scurffy looking person enter but turns out they're resident, if they did that to me or my kids there'll be hell to pay, but our Moo Baan's pretty old now and I don't think we have rules about walking in and depositing ID and such, only cars sticker. 

 

Unlike a condo where every owners are co-owners in the whole building, ownership of moo baan's road is assigned to the juristic person, can they bar resident from not accessing common facilities? there must be bounds to this otherwise they could charge people for walking on their roads. 

 

For case where there's a non-paying household, barring them from accessing their own property is overstepping the law definitely, the consensus in Thai forums i've read up on seem to be that the most the juristic person can do is not having the security guys open the gate for members of that non-paying household but make them get out of the car to open the gate themselves. 

 

Sorry for derailing this  a bit off-topic 

1. Common sense to me would be that on a public road only public agencies can stop you and impose you nothing else than public law to access freehold property.

2. Private ground or access to common properties are likely to have different rules. As they also bare the full costs, it's likely to be a more expensive issue.

3. Management committees, including doormen (some call them guards) also have currently a set of basic rules set by the law.

One can deplore that laws changed over the years, nevertheless we have to keep up with changes everywhere.

37 minutes ago, speedybuffalo said:

1. Common sense to me would be that on a public road only public agencies can stop you and impose you nothing else than public law to access freehold property.

2. Private ground or access to common properties are likely to have different rules. As they also bare the full costs, it's likely to be a more expensive issue.

3. Management committees, including doormen (some call them guards) also have currently a set of basic rules set by the law.

One can deplore that laws changed over the years, nevertheless we have to keep up with changes everywhere.

As for non-payment households on public roads: Some residents are not afraid of a lively open village with all the social interaction of a Thai 'village'. However, they remain silent with the current 'traditional' situation as long as they are not bothered more. So before 'waking up sleeping dogs' consider that the vision of a 'traditional situation' is economically still more attractive (even if you have to share among a few) than the massive running costs of a privately owned and managed village.

On 21/06/2017 at 4:01 PM, i claudius said:

We got rid of our security guards.saved a fortune and never had ant break ins since .we did before
 

Well now we know it was your security guards breaking into people's houses. Good riddance they're finally gone!

Edited July 30, 20178 yr by bbi1

>> is economically still more attractive  than the massive running costs of a privately owned and managed village. <<

 

We pay B4,300 a year which i think reasonable .No pool though but plenty nearby .