Jump to content
BANGKOK 25 April 2019 20:45
bayport22

Condo Committee Rules/Regulations

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, KittenKong said:

 

☹️

 

I think it's supposed to be 15 days, but that's a minor issue. Yes, no particular quorum is required.

 

 

This isnt very clear. Who actually owns the unit?

 

 

It should indeed be 25% of the total vote, not just those present, and including proxies. In theory if you cant meet that 25% then the committee should appoint one of their own to be JPM until such time as a valid vote can be held.
So one solution in your case would be for your wife to be on the committee and for the committee to appoint her as JPM. Problem solved.
Another option is that a committee member (you?) can be appointed by the committee as JPM and that member (you?) can then delegate his job as JPM to someone else (your wife?). Solved.

 

In practice if you cant get to 25% of the total vote I would be inclined to have the vote anyway and adopt the majority decision of those present, as being the safest course. Unless the majority decision is complete erroneous or twisted, of course.
In my book those who cant be a*sed to turn up or to send a proxy, or who dont pay their common fees, have forfeited their right to be heard anyway. Nuts to them.

 

Thanks a lot for above clarifications

1/ our unit is in the name of my Thai wife only  

2/ the option that I may be elected first as Committee member and then be appointed by the same Committee as JPM and then I delegate this job to my wife..... : it seems if Manager is a foreigner he must have a work permit ….and I am retired and staying in Thailand on this basis since 10 years.

3/ the reason my wife wanted me to be a Committee member if she can become Manager was only block seats on the Committee away from a few idiots who have done already 5 times 2 years because lack of candidates. So she will have to combine "Committee member" with "JPM"

Edited by fvw53
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, fvw53 said:

Thanks a lot for above clarifications

1/ our unit is in the name of my Thai wife only

2/ the option that I may be elected first as Committee member and then be appointed by the same Committee as JPM and then I delegate this job to my wife..... : it seems if Manager is a foreigner he must have a work permit ….and I am retired and staying in Thailand on this basis since 10 years.

If the unit is in your wife's name then, as her spouse, you can be on the committee.

 

As you point out, in theory you cant be JPM because that job (unlike being a committee member) requires a work permit.

 

So you being selected JPM by the committee and then delegating the job to your wife seems like a valid option. Ideally you should ask your Land Office in advance about it as they are ones who are supposed to police this sort of thing.

I also wonder if it would be possible for your wife to stand for the committee, then be selected as JPM by the rest of the committee, and then have you act as her proxy on the committee? The Condo Act doesnt seem to cover this arrangement at all but I cant see much wrong with it.

 

Of course, all the above assumes that most other committee members agree with you. If they are opposed to you then it could become quite a minefield.

 

And either way I would be inclined to have a proper vote for JPM at the meeting, even if you dont have enough votes present to make it legal. That way you can always say that you tried to do what the majority of co-owners present wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2018 at 12:13 PM, KittenKong said:

So you being selected JPM by the committee and then delegating the job to your wife seems like a valid option. Ideally you should ask your Land Office in advance about it as they are ones who are supposed to police this sort of thing.

The Land Office should accept a foreigner as JPM, as they are not tasked with enforcing the labour laws. I say this as a foreigner who has served as a JPM (registered with the Land Office in Chiang Mai).

 

But if you ask the Labour Department they will say it requires a work permit (at least the one in CM). That you delegate the duties doesn’t matter to them, and the “duties” of the JPM are more about responsibilities (and signing documents), i.e. who should the co-owners sue if e.g. financial statements are not made available, in such case, saying they delegated the task is unlikely to hold up in court, unless a resolution about this was passed at the AGM (the Condo Act does allow for some delegation, but it has to be an AGM resolution).

 

On 11/17/2018 at 12:13 PM, KittenKong said:

 I also wonder if it would be possible for your wife to stand for the committee, then be selected as JPM by the rest of the committee, and then have you act as her proxy on the committee? The Condo Act doesnt seem to cover this arrangement at all but I cant see much wrong with it.

I have been told that the Chiang Mai Land Office has been asked about people serving by proxy at committee meetings, and they do *not* allow this.

 

Their conclusion may be based on what the Thai Business Act says about serving on a board, as the Business Act is the fallback act for issues not covered by the Thai Condo Act.

 

But I have not checked the relevant act myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lkn said:

have been told that the Chiang Mai Land Office has been asked about people serving by proxy at committee meetings, and they do *not* allow this.

As is often the case in Thailand, any two government offices may interpret the same rule in two completely different ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, KittenKong said:

As is often the case in Thailand, any two government offices may interpret the same rule in two completely different ways.

What are you referring to here? Other than the general concept of power of attorney, I am not aware of a law that would allow committee members to serve by proxy.

 

As for “two government officials”, in this case, I got my interpretation from the Chiang Mai Land Office, which referred to a previous interpretation. So this seems to be the generally accepted interpretation in Chiang Mai, and you can’t just ask another person at the Land Office here to get another interpretation.

 

Maybe in Bangkok or Phuket they have another interpretation, that is not atypical with law; until there is a court ruling, different local authorities may have different interpretations. What may be atypical is that so many of the laws here lean themselves to different interpretations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, lkn said:

As for “two government officials”, in this case, I got my interpretation from the Chiang Mai Land Office, which referred to a previous interpretation. So this seems to be the generally accepted interpretation in Chiang Mai, and you can’t just ask another person at the Land Office here to get another interpretation. 

I wrote "offices" not "officials". Everyone knows that national rules are often applied completely differently from one office to another here. Just look at Immigration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, KittenKong said:

I wrote "offices" not "officials". Everyone knows that national rules are often applied completely differently from one office to another here. Just look at Immigration.

It is well known that Committee Members cannot give proxies to other owners to attend and vote on their behalf. It was clarified years ago by the Lands department online that Committee members are voted as individuals by the ownership directly, and therefore as they are voted as individuals they cannot proxy to someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, smutcakes said:

It is well known that Committee Members cannot give proxies to other owners to attend and vote on their behalf. It was clarified years ago by the Lands department online that Committee members are voted as individuals by the ownership directly, and therefore as they are voted as individuals they cannot proxy to someone else.

Correct. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, smutcakes said:

It is well known.....

Never heard of it, so apparently not so well known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, smutcakes said:

It is well known that Committee Members cannot give proxies to other owners to attend and vote on their behalf. It was clarified years ago by the Lands department online that Committee members are voted as individuals by the ownership directly, and therefore as they are voted as individuals they cannot proxy to someone else.

 The condo act states that committee members and others cannot receive proxies.

It says nothing about the giving of proxies by commitee members.

47   PROXY RULES.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, a committee member may give a proxy to someone else to carry his vote , but he would only want to do that if he was not attending the meeting etc. If he is present at the meeting, then he uses his own vote. So there is no advantage or problem etc etc


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Delight said:

The condo act states that committee members and others cannot receive proxies.

It says nothing about the giving of proxies by commitee members.

Indeed. That part of the condo act is very clear and very widely known. But as you point out it is the exact opposite of what was being discussed as a possible solution for the OP which, as far as I know, is not prohibited at all.

 

Though it does seem to me that the OP's best option is for him to be on the committee (as spouse of a co-owner) and his wife to be JPM, as that covers all the requirements and doesnt appear to be contrary to any rule or law at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, anfh said:

Agreed, a committee member may give a proxy to someone else to carry his vote , but he would only want to do that if he was not attending the meeting etc. If he is present at the meeting, then he uses his own vote.

That was exactly the situation being discussed, hence my comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if i missed the point if the conversation. My point was that Committee members cannot give a proxy to other co owners to join committee meetings and vote on their behalf.

 

A number of years ago when the Act came into force this was a bit if a hot topic. The LD clarified on the website they use in Thai for clarifications that because Committee members were voted in as individuals by the Co-owners, the committee members were therefore prohibited from further giving a proxy to attend amd vote in Committee meetings on their behalf.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, smutcakes said:

A number of years ago when the Act came into force this was a bit if a hot topic. The LD clarified on the website they use in Thai for clarifications that because Committee members were voted in as individuals by the Co-owners, the committee members were therefore prohibited from further giving a proxy to attend amd vote in Committee meetings on their behalf.

I would like to see that written somewhere.

 

The JPM is also selected by name and yet his task can be delegated, so why not committee members too?

 

Also when you say "the LD", which one do you mean? Each office seems to have its own way of applying rules, as was previously discussed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...