Objecting to the minutes of AGM. Possible?

[thairookie]

I understand from cursory reading of the Thailand Condominium Act that the Juristic Office has 30 days to submit the minutes of the AGM to the Land Department.

 

What if the minutes do not give an accurate account of the proceedings during the AGM?

 

Is there a time frame that co-owners must adhere when objecting to the minutes at the Land Department?  Or does the machinery of objecting to the minutes exist officially in the first place?

 

 

Edited July 17, 2017 by thairookie

[KittenKong]

Co-owners certainly have the opportunity to discuss and potentially reject the minutes of the previous meeting at the next GM as approving them should be one of the early items on the agenda.

 

I dont know what happens if there is significant disagreement earlier than that though.

[inThailand]

I agree, it's usually a standard resolution in next general meeting to approve the prior meeting minutes.

 

From my experience, the minutes rarely reflect the meeting. Its a washed down nice version of the meeting.

With that said; the only really important part of the minutes is the quorum and the voting outcome of the resolutions.

[scorecard]

11 hours ago, KittenKong said:

Co-owners certainly have the opportunity to discuss and potentially reject the minutes of the previous meeting at the next GM as approving them should be one of the early items on the agenda.

 

I dont know what happens if there is significant disagreement earlier than that though.

 

This happened about 10 years back in my old condo building in Bkk. 

 

The problem was that years earlier the owners committee employed an outside 'management company' who had progressively taken over everything and acted as the 'police', regularly abused owners and more. At any owners meetings the 'management company' staff 'managed' the meeting and ensured that owners did not get heard. Further, the monthly meetings had been taken over as a 'management company' meeting only with owners banned from attending.

 

A new buyer (a high level cop, who had bought his condo one year earlier) had realized the outside 'management company' had seriously overstepped the mark. Before the next general meeting he visited the majority of the owners and explained (in detail) that he was going to make serious objections at the upcoming gm and why.

 

The gm started and the 'management company'  staff asked for a show of hands to approve the minutes of the previous meeting, but nobody had been given a copy of the minutes.

 

Now the big cop stepped in and demanded that all the meeting attendees get a printed  copy of the minuted and he demanded answers as to why the minutes had not been distributed. The 'management company' refused, so the big cop grabbed the copy held by one of the 'management company' and told his wife to go a copy shop just 5 minutes away and get 50 copies. It came back and the owners all read the document and instantly lots of comments that the document was not correct on several points.

 

To cut it short, the cop continued to object and eventually he asked for a show of hands to indicate if the outside 'management company' should be dismissed immediately. The same vote includes words to the effect that the 'management company' could not re-enter the office area and cannot remove any documents from the building.

 

The vote passed with every owner supporting the cops' motion. The meeting continued for several more hours to appoint a new committee and to make polices about the future direction of the community etc.

 

The cop got a police agency to investigate the 'management company', and it was discovered they were a mafia / moonlighting gang from a government agency, never attending their paid jobs but collecting the salaries.

 

They ended up in Jail, all of them serving 18 months.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 18, 2017 by scorecard

[jippytum]

Although the minutes have to be presented to the land office within 30 days the land office have a 90 day maximum period to endorse or object to the AGM resolutions. The minutes of the AGM must be signed by the chairman and at least the JP manager as an accurate record of proceedings. The minutes are a matter of public record and should be displayed in the common reception area after the meeting .Any co owner then has the right to object to incorrect information contained in the minutes .

If the Chairman and the JP manager do not agree to amend and correct the proven incorrect information the co owner can lodge his objection personally to the competent person at the land office .

[thairookie]

55 minutes ago, jippytum said:

Although the minutes have to be presented to the land office within 30 days the land office have a 90 day maximum period to endorse or object to the AGM resolutions. The minutes of the AGM must be signed by the chairman and at least the JP manager as an accurate record of proceedings. The minutes are a matter of public record and should be displayed in the common reception area after the meeting .Any co owner then has the right to object to incorrect information contained in the minutes .

If the Chairman and the JP manager do not agree to amend and correct the proven incorrect information the co owner can lodge his objection personally to the competent person at the land office .

Is there a legislation that I can refer to ?

[KittenKong]

7 hours ago, jippytum said:

The minutes of the AGM must be signed by the chairman and at least the JP manager as an accurate record of proceedings. The minutes are a matter of public record and should be displayed in the common reception area after the meeting .Any co owner then has the right to object to incorrect information contained in the minutes .

 

In my building the minutes of the GM are just a sanitised and doctored version of what really happened. As the committee and JPM and management company are all in bed together there is never any mention of the errors and omissions.

 

Rights are great if those charged to uphold them actually do so. If they just have their snouts in the trough then rights become somewhat pointless.