"Waterfront" condo purchasers in Pattaya could see some developments later this month

[webfact]

"Waterfront" condo purchasers in Pattaya could see some developments later this month

Picture: STV Pattaya

 

PATTAYA: -- Sophon Cable TV reported that people who have bought condos in the "Waterfront Condominium Pattaya" may see some light in their fight against the developers this month.

 

Chalermwat Wimuktayon of Magna Carta said that prospective buyers should go to the local courts to present documents from July 17.

 

The developers are trying to get the mega project back on track after it was shut down by Pattaya authorities more than two years ago amid a swathe of difficulties including possible land encroachment issues.

 

Source: STV Pattaya

 

-- © Copyright Thai Visa News 2017-07-04

[NormanW]

Fingers and everything else crossed ?

[trogers]

City authorities changed hands...

 

Remember the Hopewell project? That saw three governments...

[champers]

11 minutes ago, trogers said:

City authorities changed hands...

 

Remember the Hopewell project? That saw three governments...

Not very aptly named then.

 

[mikebell]

Somebody got rich then scarpered before their passport could be seized.

[williamgeorgeallen]

wonder how many people are now throwing money away on lawyers trying to get their money back. i walked away from my 30% deposit on another condo project. better to cut your losses and move on.

[phantomfiddler]

A major blot on the landscape, this project should never have been allowed to start.

[newnative]

Finish it or tear it down--just don't leave it how it is.  This has been dragging on way too long now.

[gk10002000]

4 hours ago, phantomfiddler said:

A major blot on the landscape, this project should never have been allowed to start.

yep. it is butt ugly, an insult t the skyline and natural lines of area.  and now, leaving it open and exposed to the elements for a few years can't have been good for the infrastructure.  Tear it down for safety

[Destiny1990]

16 minutes ago, chakatee said:

bringing off-topic reactions to another level

Isnt it great to own a condo and being able just to walkover in 2 minutes to night life entertainment such as that?

[gk10002000]

17 hours ago, Destiny1990 said:

Isnt it great to own a condo and being able just to walkover in 2 minutes to night life entertainment such as that?

Yep. It breaks up a boring retirement! 

[George FmplesdaCosteedback]

2 hours ago, gk10002000 said:

Yep. It breaks up a boring retirement! 

Time to take up golf?

[CRUNCHER]

Below is a letter sent to buyers on 2nd July.  Does not seem that there is likely to be any "...developments later this month".

 

I have seen a few of these over the past couple of years.  City Hall has no obligation to  respond, but it is shame they do not in the interests of openness and transparency.  Perhaps they do not have a good answer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Dear Client

Subject: Bali Hai Limited – Waterfront Pattaya Project

Further to our communication of 08 May 2017, we write to update you on the latest developments concerning the Waterfront Pattaya Project.

Construction Permit

As previously reported, after Bali Hai’s submission lodged on 12 January 2017, Pattaya City Hall (“PCH”) further postponed its decision from the end of March 2017 to mid-May 2017. On the 1st of June 2017 Bali Hai received, with much disappointment, PCH’s reply dated 11 May 2017, notifying that the Company’s building modification application had not been approved due to incompleteness of certain information and some discrepancies. By the reply, Bali Hai is legally allowed now to file a new application for building modification permit with PCH. As you are aware, the general understanding following discussions between the Company’s professional team and PCH in 2016, was that should the Company be willing to compromise, by demolishing the top 5 floors of the building to observe the floor area limits of the approved scheme, PCH would view the new reduced floor area scheme favourably by approving the application and accommodating other minor changes. This was evidenced by the Company submitting an application for modification permit for the reduced floor area scheme, together with detailed demolition plans, an updated EIA report and all relevant plans and documents as required by law, for proceeding with the same. Many questions which were subsequently raised by PCH regarding this scheme had confirmed that this was indeed the mutual understanding.

Throughout the process, the Company complied and co-operated with all orders raised by PCH in good faith and it is disappointing to now discover that, despite PCH having twice extended the statutory deadline for its decision and despite having had many months to review Bali Hai’s submission, it chose not to inform the Company during this period at all and rejected the Company’s request for a meeting for mutual discussion.

Having reviewed PCH’s comments to the Company’s submission in PCH’s reply, many of the queries had in fact previously been responded to while some remain unclear or are minor in nature and could easily have been addressed.

 

Future Plans

Before the Company can submit a new application for building modification permit as instructed by PCH, and in order to ensure that such course of action will be correctly executed to PCH’s complete satisfaction, particularly in the context of the above, the Company considers it is highly essential that our representatives meet with PCH’s relevant officials to have the opportunity to discuss and clarify exactly what PCH’s comments and requirements are, to avoid any future misinterpretations.

 

The Company has therefore submitted the letter to PCH to formally request a meeting between the professional teams of PCH and the Company on 29 June 2017. As you may appreciate, the process for resubmission is complicated and likely to take considerable time. The Company hopes to be able to resubmit as soon as reasonably practical after the said meeting (or meetings) take place.

 

Rehabilitation Status

As previously reported, the court had to postpone the previous hearing due to an internal court error and the new hearing date has been scheduled on 17 July 2017 at 9.00 a.m. We will advise you of the outcome after the hearing.

As previously advised, the rehabilitation process has been embarked upon to preserve the value of the Project and enable it to survive this extraordinary crisis which it has been challenged with. The Company remains steadfast in its objective to see to it that the construction is resumed and completed so that all buyers will eventually receive their condominium unit’s title.

We remain most grateful for your continued support and patience.

Yours faithfully,

Mr. Lior Widenfeld

Authorized Director, Bali Hai Limited 

[thaibeachlovers]

I'm lovin' it.

 

Hopefully the entire building is going to be demolished.

[YetAnother]

On 7/4/2017 at 8:30 AM, webfact said:

including possible land encroachment issues.

kidding right ? project this size and they didnt do due diligence ?

[Oink]

This project will never progress as the Thai authorities (who are normally asleep or at lunch) have finally woken up to the fact that a foreign (falang) construction company has taken them for a bunch of idiots.

Being stupid is not an offence in Thailand. But don't tell anyone that they are stupid. That is an offence!

My personal take on this situation does not revolve around the relationship between the developer and authorities, but how the hell did they think they could get away with it?

The whole project is bullshit from start to finish, for more reasons I can even begin to address here!

[johng]

I'm lovin' it.
 
Hopefully the entire building is going to be demolished.

Maybe..
but If the south Pattaya
"Boutique hotel"
demolition team are employed it could take 30 + years !

[sharecropper]

Does anyone know how long the building can remain in its unfinished state before seriously expensive remedial work would be required to complete it? And if it does become necessary, do all the current buyers have to pay for those works?

Reading Cruncher's copied letter above I just cannot understand why the developer didn't strictly comply with its then-planning permits. Why overbuild etc?

[KittenKong]

13 minutes ago, sharecropper said:

Reading Cruncher's copied letter above I just cannot understand why the developer didn't strictly comply with its then-planning permits. Why overbuild etc?

 

Surely no great mystery: to be able to build and sell more units.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎7‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 7:25 PM, YetAnother said:

kidding right ? project this size and they didnt do due diligence ?

Perhaps they thought a few envelopes would be sufficient. No doubt that's how it was done in the past.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, sharecropper said:

Does anyone know how long the building can remain in its unfinished state before seriously expensive remedial work would be required to complete it? And if it does become necessary, do all the current buyers have to pay for those works?

Reading Cruncher's copied letter above I just cannot understand why the developer didn't strictly comply with its then-planning permits. Why overbuild etc?

LOL. There is a much larger and older ghost building beside the river in Bangkok that will probably never be "fixed".

 

If they were able to proceed, I'm sure the current buyers would be asked to pay ( again ), for remedial work. Such is the property market in LOS. Of course they could always take the developers to court .

 

However, newbies should always take the word of property developers- after all, what could possible go wrong with buying property in LOS?

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, johng said:

Maybe..
but If the south Pattaya
"Boutique hotel"
demolition team are employed it could take 30 + years !

IMO it wouldn't be demolished. Just left to eventually fall down, like the big ghost building beside the river in Bkk.

[johng]

There was a tall build in North Pattaya that was left open to the weather since the 1997 crash that did get completed eventually ,also one in Jomtien that was finished but not fitted out,at night there was a single light on in one quite high floor room...maybe the caretaker lived there....now its a swanky hotel...there is also in Jomtien a big failed (1997) 4-5 storey condo complex which is excruciatingly slowly being done up....looks like short term apartments...the squatters and decay still continues in the un renovated section.

The leaning Bangkok riverside tower hasnt fallen down yet it could maybe be "revived"

[newnative]

18 hours ago, Oink said:

This project will never progress as the Thai authorities (who are normally asleep or at lunch) have finally woken up to the fact that a foreign (falang) construction company has taken them for a bunch of idiots.

Being stupid is not an offence in Thailand. But don't tell anyone that they are stupid. That is an offence!

My personal take on this situation does not revolve around the relationship between the developer and authorities, but how the hell did they think they could get away with it?

The whole project is bullshit from start to finish, for more reasons I can even begin to address here!

      You ask how the hell did they (the developers) think they could get away with it?  Assuming they did anything wrong in the first place?  Maybe because they saw other projects 'getting away' with questionable practices.  I can tell you of a new project recently finished that covered over part of their swimming pool and the concrete around the pool with a cover of fake grass when the authorities came to measure the 'green space' on the finished project.  They were short on the green space that had been required for construction approval so that was their solution.  Once the measuring was done and the officials had left, the plan was to remove the cover.   But, the residents are still left with less green space than the EIA had required.  Another condo has put some trees and grass on the condo's roof to meet  its 'green space' requirements--even though the residents aren't normally allowed on the roof.   Several projects have possibly  been built too close to the ocean if you do a strict interpretation of the rules  but the developers apparently had the muscle to get the projects approved.   Likely there are other questionable practices that have been done regarding things like parking space requirements.  TIT.

[chickenslegs]

2 hours ago, johng said:

The leaning Bangkok riverside tower hasnt fallen down yet it could maybe be "revived"

If it's leaning in the direction of the river it may eventually become a bridge.

[sharecropper]

14 hours ago, KittenKong said:

 

Surely no great mystery: to be able to build and sell more units.

 

Victorian detective discovers lack of fecal matter.

 

My point was, WHY would they bother chiseling a few more condos in if the massive downside was (clearly, even at the time) likely to be so commercially severe.

[janclaes47]

5 hours ago, newnative said:

      You ask how the hell did they (the developers) think they could get away with it?  Assuming they did anything wrong in the first place?  Maybe because they saw other projects 'getting away' with questionable practices.  I can tell you of a new project recently finished that covered over part of their swimming pool and the concrete around the pool with a cover of fake grass when the authorities came to measure the 'green space' on the finished project.  They were short on the green space that had been required for construction approval so that was their solution.  Once the measuring was done and the officials had left, the plan was to remove the cover.   But, the residents are still left with less green space than the EIA had required.  Another condo has put some trees and grass on the condo's roof to meet  its 'green space' requirements--even though the residents aren't normally allowed on the roof.   Several projects have possibly  been built too close to the ocean if you do a strict interpretation of the rules  but the developers apparently had the muscle to get the projects approved.   Likely there are other questionable practices that have been done regarding things like parking space requirements.  TIT.

 

Likely there are other questionable practices that have been done regarding things like parking space requirements.

 

Like cut down on construction materials and requirements. and that is the reason why I will never buy a condo here.

[newnative]

8 hours ago, janclaes47 said:

 

Likely there are other questionable practices that have been done regarding things like parking space requirements.

 

Like cut down on construction materials and requirements. and that is the reason why I will never buy a condo here.

I was speaking more of fudging the parking space numbers rather than build quality.  But, always good to do your due diligence before you buy, if you buy.  For some, renting is best but not for me.  Let's also remember that it's San Francisco, not Pattaya, where there is a super luxury highrise condo that is both tilting and sinking. I think last check it has tilted 16 inches and sunk by a foot or so.  And, it's London that has hundreds of highrise rental apartments that have been clad in flammable material that makes them potentially huge, deadly torches.  It's also London where the recent highrise apartment that burned was not fitted with sprinklers when it was renovated last year.  Unsafe dwellings, whether rentals or owned, can be anywhere.  You can move from one rental to the next but there is no guarantee the next building will be any safer.  The most you can do with rentals or buys is do as much checking as you can and possibly select a rental or buy that was built by a quality builder with a good reputation and a good track record. 

[morrobay]

On 7/10/2017 at 9:11 AM, sharecropper said:

Does anyone know how long the building can remain in its unfinished state before seriously expensive remedial work would be required to complete it? And if it does become necessary, do all the current buyers have to pay for those works?

Reading Cruncher's copied letter above I just cannot understand why the developer didn't strictly comply with its then-planning permits. Why overbuild etc?

I asked this question here ; https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-long-until-materials-in-this-project-become-degraded.871821/

[balo]

Just demolish it now , its ugly .  

The buyers just have to earn more money and buy something else.