How to enforce short term rentals in Pattaya Condo

[dannywla]

Having informed and posted that rentals less than 30'days is illegal. Regardless the original builder is still operating a hotel without a proper license and many foreign owned units as well as a determinant to the property. 

How can we truly get Goverment or proper authority to put a stop. It was voted at Annual meeting to fine each unit but Juristic doesn't seem to enforce the rules and bylaws. 

Anyone had any success.  How would you suggest other than starting a legal lawsuit?

[Peterw42]

The Juristic works for the owners via the committee. If the Juristic is not acting on things voted for at AGM, the committee should be telling them what to do and checking that its happening. If the Juristic are failing to do things, sack the juristic, if the committee are failing to get the juristic to do things, its time for a new committee. 

My Condo block gets listings taken off airBnB, booking.com.

 

[dannywla]

How to remove the listings from Airbnb and Booking.com. Tried just a minute ago but unlikely to remove as I reported it on Airbnb but unlikely to result in the removal of the ad. Can write them and fine them stating rentals in our project less than 30 days is illegal and print out and fine them. I am leaving the committee after two years. Best to document the illegal listing and fine them to start a file as legal lawsuit is slow course of action in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Peterw42]

3 minutes ago, dannywla said:

How to remove the listings from Airbnb and Booking.com. Tried just a minute ago but unlikely to remove as I reported it on Airbnb but unlikely to result in the removal of the ad. Can write them and fine them stating rentals in our project less than 30 days is illegal and print out and fine them. I am leaving the committee after two years. Best to document the illegal listing and fine them to start a file as legal lawsuit is slow course of action in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Not sure how my block gets the listings removed, I will ask next time I am in the office.

Not sure, but I think it would need to be an actual condo bylaw to be able to enforce a fine. Most condo blocks will have a law against illegal activity and short term rental is illegal under the Hotel Act. Always hard to enforce unless you actually make a booking then fine them.

 

[KittenKong]

3 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

The Juristic works for the owners via the committee. If the Juristic is not acting on things voted for at AGM, the committee should be telling them what to do and checking that its happening. If the Juristic are failing to do things, sack the juristic, if the committee are failing to get the juristic to do things, its time for a new committee. 

 

This is a great idea in principle, but in some condo buildings the management and the committee are in bed together to the point of rigging the voting.

[KittenKong]

4 hours ago, dannywla said:

How can we truly get Goverment or proper authority to put a stop. It was voted at Annual meeting to fine each unit but Juristic doesn't seem to enforce the rules and bylaws. 

 

You have to make your management do its job, but that may not be easy for the reasons I mentioned.

 

You could approach your Land Office (who are technically responsible for policing the condo act but unlikely to want to get involved) and your local hotel association (who are the ones who are losing the most money from this illegal activity).

[KittenKong]

2 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

Not sure, but I think it would need to be an actual condo bylaw to be able to enforce a fine. Most condo blocks will have a law against illegal activity and short term rental is illegal under the Hotel Act. Always hard to enforce unless you actually make a booking then fine them.

 

Unlawful business activity seems like a good reason to me. I suppose that building management could insist on seeing long-term rental contracts for everyone who isn't an owner, but fake contracts would be easy to make. Again, getting management here to do their job may not be easy. I have found them to be an idle and fairly useless lot, more interested in playing Facebook and looking important than actually working.

[smutcakes]

If you want to enforce fines, i would suggest you need to do this with not less than 50% of the total Co-owners, and if the developer still has a number of units it is unlikely this was achieved in your AGM, possibly just a majority of those present.

 

As someone else alludes to, to do it you need to get a 50% of total co-owners, and at the same time approve an amendment to your registered rules & regs with the fines included. These would be registered at the LD within 30 days, with the minutes of the General Meeting. Once registered the Committee and the Management would have something solid to fall back on. Without it being in the registered rules and regulations of the Condominium, it would be very difficult to enforce. 

[KittenKong]

 

2 hours ago, smutcakes said:

As someone else alludes to, to do it you need to get a 50% of total co-owners, and at the same time approve an amendment to your registered rules & regs with the fines included. These would be registered at the LD within 30 days, with the minutes of the General Meeting. Once registered the Committee and the Management would have something solid to fall back on.

This supposes that the committee and management actually want to do something about the problem, which apparently isnt the case. The OP clearly said in his first post that suitable rules had been voted in at a GM but that management is not reacting to that.

[impulse]

I'd ask the local hotel association for suggestions.  They seem to be taking an active role in some of the areas around Thailand.  They may even make your committee redundant on this particular issue.

[smutcakes]

13 hours ago, KittenKong said:

 

This supposes that the committee and management actually want to do something about the problem, which apparently isnt the case. The OP clearly said in his first post that suitable rules had been voted in at a GM but that management is not reacting to that.

And perhaps the OP because it is necessary to ask, does not have working knowledge of the Condominium Act, and as such believes they have appropriate approval, but in reality do not. As with so many cases in Condominium's the truth is normally somewhere in between 2 parties. On the one side you have Chinese whispers of Co-owners, normally coming from some know nothing busy body who spreads half truths and innuendos, and on the other side you often have fairly lazy management who don't want to spend their existence at a building fighting with Co-owners for 10,000 baht per month.

[KittenKong]

1 hour ago, smutcakes said:

And perhaps the OP because it is necessary to ask, does not have working knowledge of the Condominium Act, and as such believes they have appropriate approval, but in reality do not. As with so many cases in Condominium's the truth is normally somewhere in between 2 parties.

 

One job of the JPM is to ensure that any votes taken at a GM are legal. I readily admit that this may not actually happen.

 

Without a transcript of the OP's meeting it would be impossible to know for sure but we have to assume that the vote was legal and correct if he says it was. Otherwise the discussion becomes totally pointless.

[trogers]

10 minutes ago, KittenKong said:

 

One job of the JPM is to ensure that any votes taken at a GM are legal. I readily admit that this may not actually happen.

 

Without a transcript of the OP's meeting it would be impossible to know for sure but we have to assume that the vote was legal and correct if he says it was. Otherwise the discussion becomes totally pointless.

One point to note is that voting to change the purpose of a condominium from residential to a business, like an inn or a office building, is void.

 

The purpose of a building is that which has been registered and approved by the Authorities.

[smutcakes]

18 minutes ago, KittenKong said:

 

One job of the JPM is to ensure that any votes taken at a GM are legal. I readily admit that this may not actually happen.

 

Without a transcript of the OP's meeting it would be impossible to know for sure but we have to assume that the vote was legal and correct if he says it was. Otherwise the discussion becomes totally pointless.

The crux of my point really was that unless you amend the registered rules and regulations, which requires 50% of total, to include fines, it would be extremely difficult to enforce. I presume that this was not done.

 

Many JPM's do not know the Condo Act well, as many of them are representatives of developers or Condo owners, as it is difficult to find someone with legal knowledge etc who is willing to do the job at a sensible rate.

[KittenKong]

4 hours ago, smutcakes said:

The crux of my point really was that unless you amend the registered rules and regulations, which requires 50% of total, to include fines, it would be extremely difficult to enforce. I presume that this was not done.

 

Maybe the OP will clarify exactly what was voted on and how it ended.

[bkk6060]

The Base=Chinatown

 

I have lived here over a year and like the place.  Great location and I have a high floor room with a nice view.  Once I am in my room, I have two 50" TV's and it is very quiet.

But this place I bet has to be the #1 short time Chinese rental condo in Pattaya.  All the major hotel/rental sites have The Base posted for short term rentals.  The builder in fact advertises "Holiday rentals" for short term.  A few weeks ago there must have been 100 Chinese between the 2 buildings in the lobbies with their big luggage waiting to check in.

They have posted these warnings in the past and nothing ever happens.  I have asked the management here and they always tell me: We cannot enforce it.  BS, as they have a full time security staff and it would be easy to do.  But when they are one of the biggest violators and making money, why enforce it?

Anyway, they posted this again recently,  so we will see.

Edited July 31, 2017 by bkk6060

[trogers]

The developer probably has 50% unsold units in the project...

[bkk6060]

1 hour ago, trogers said:

The developer probably has 50% unsold units in the project...

Sure you may be right.  But, does that then give them the right to rent short term?

 

Just to add on this, I know a person who has rented out almost 20 units.  One year leases then they have been renting them out ST from online sites.  Making some pretty big money.  If this is enforced, they will be in dire straits for sure.

Edited August 1, 2017 by bkk6060

[trogers]

59 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

Sure you may be right.  But, does that then give them the right to rent short term?

 

Just to add on this, I know a person who has rented out almost 20 units.  One year leases then they have been renting them out ST from online sites.  Making some pretty big money.  If this is enforced, they will be in dire straits for sure.

Rights to do what is deemed illegal? Same questions asked about breaking traffic laws and many others...

 

Lack of enforcement and inadequacy in the penalties make the question moot.

 

By buying in the secondary market can we have a good chance to avoid such a problem, because we can check on building and community before committing.

[KittenKong]

2 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

Just to add on this, I know a person who has rented out almost 20 units.  One year leases then they have been renting them out ST from online sites.  Making some pretty big money.  If this is enforced, they will be in dire straits for sure.

 

They deserve to be. I expect that their rental contract prohibits sub-letting and the internal building regs may prohibit it also.

[bkk6060]

1 hour ago, trogers said:

Rights to do what is deemed illegal? Same questions asked about breaking traffic laws and many others...

 

Lack of enforcement and inadequacy in the penalties make the question moot.

 

By buying in the secondary market can we have a good chance to avoid such a problem, because we can check on building and community before committing.

I rent and you did not understand the question. 

[inThailand]

Unless the condo's bylaws state no short term rentals, it's not the condo management's responsibility to enforce the Hotel Act.

[trogers]

42 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

I rent and you did not understand the question. 

A tenant would be in a more favourable position to check on the building and community before making the contract, and can always move if conditions alter.

Edited August 1, 2017 by trogers

[Peterw42]

56 minutes ago, inThailand said:

Unless the condo's bylaws state no short term rentals, it's not the condo management's responsibility to enforce the Hotel Act.

The Bylaws would have a broad "no illeagal activity" clause. Also, short term is contrary to the Condo Act and the management enforces the Condo Act. 

Edited August 1, 2017 by Peterw42

[inThailand]

Please provide the Condo Act clause that says no renting short time.

 

Would taking hookers back to your condo constitute illegal? You want the condo mgmt to enforce this? 

 

From a practical matter, how is the condo mgmt going to prove a condo was rented for less than 30 days? 

[trogers]

30 minutes ago, inThailand said:

Please provide the Condo Act clause that says no renting short time.

 

Would taking hookers back to your condo constitute illegal? You want the condo mgmt to enforce this? 

 

From a practical matter, how is the condo mgmt going to prove a condo was rented for less than 30 days? 

Taking lady friends (hookers) back by tenants is not an illegal act. If you seek to avoid such encounters, rent in a building that has only 2&3 or more bedrooms units that are suited for families.

 

Condo management can secure entry to the building to only residents. Tenants are to be registered as residents by the owners upon presenting their lease agreements with copies of passports attached.

 

Any guests or visiting friends of residents are to wait at the lobby and be brought up by the residents themselves.

Edited August 1, 2017 by trogers

[lkn]

On 8/1/2017 at 8:33 AM, inThailand said:

[…] it's not the condo management's responsibility to enforce the Hotel Act.

Is it even certain that the Hotel Act applies to condos? Because it has a few exemptions, and I have found no definite source saying it does indeed apply to (all) condos.

[KittenKong]

4 hours ago, lkn said:

Is it even certain that the Hotel Act applies to condos? Because it has a few exemptions, and I have found no definite source saying it does indeed apply to (all) condos.

 

It applies to anything that is being used as a hotel: ie rented out as accommodation for periods of less than a month. The exemptions relate to the number of rooms and as far as I remember they require registration for small numbers of rooms rather than licensing which applies to larger numbers: I think that 6 was the switching point.

 

It's a fair bet that few if any condos are either licensed or registered under the Hotel act.

 

The Condo act and all internal building rules I have seen seem to consider condos as being residential and not intended for commercial use (apart from areas that are specifically designated as being for commercial use, and these generally have to have separate access so as not to disturb residents). There can be little doubt that short-term rentals are 100% commercial and not residential at all.

Edited August 3, 2017 by KittenKong

[lkn]

15 minutes ago, KittenKong said:

It applies to anything that is being used as a hotel: ie rented out as accommodation for periods of less than a month. The exemptions relate to the number of rooms and as far as I remember they require registration for small numbers of rooms rather than licensing which applies to larger numbers: I think that 6 was the switching point.

The exemption is that if the place has less than five rooms, the Hotel Act does not apply.

 

What is not clear to me is if that is the entire building (so e.g. most townhouses would be exempt), the person doing the renting (having less than five rooms in total or in that building), or, that it means that the place being rented out does not fall under the act if said place has less than five rooms, which IMO would be the least logical interpretation of this exemption, yet, a Thai lawyer actually told me that this was the correct interpretation, which seems absurd to me.

[inThailand]

Good points!

 

A condo development or a condo owner can get a hotel license and pay all the associated taxes and income taxes. This is why no one does it.