Ms.Skewed wrote:Hmmm, that's interesting, Guess. I thought they wanted to eliminate all those buildings that are built on the beach piers....
Isn't there a squatter's law in Thailand that allows people that have occupied a property for many years to keep it, or at least to stay there?
My understanding regading the piers was that if they had been built originally for the purpose of docking fishing boats then they were legal and could be used for other purposes when no longer required for boats. This was certainly the case in Pattaya. It would be interesting to know what happens to the disused pier at the begining of walking street that I understand has now been completely superceded by the new pier at the south end of the town.
As for squatters law, one does exist in fact one of the many reasons for the delay in th opening of the new airport in Bangkok was of a squatter who had built a nightclub on SRT property many years ago. Even though the night club had been empty for many years the owner still had some rights due to the length of time he had been there. The authorities got him out eventually but a believe a fairly large some of cash changed hands after the settlement was carried out in court.
However this sort of case is dealt with at Municipality or Provicial level so anything that happens in Bangkok or Pattaya may not be relevant. Many disputes of this nature seem to be dealt with differently here. This maybe because it the the King's town but also because Prachuap is one of the only provinces in Thailand with a split party government.
I think that we will all have to wait and see. I remember a few years ago Big C being refused permission to build a superstore about six kilometres south of the town centre. In five days we will have the opening of Tesco less than two kilometres south of the town centre.