The owner of the beleaguered Ashton Asoke condominium project, which has been tangled in legal uncertainties for over a year, might now have an unexpected opportunity to re-apply retroactively for a construction permit with the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA), per guidance from the Council of State. This new legal interpretation could be the breakthrough tenants and the upscale condo have anxiously awaited, as it potentially averts the threat of partial demolition. The council’s opinion was relayed by Bangkok Deputy Governor Wisanu Subsompon this Monday.
The root of the problem dates back to a Supreme Administrative Court order from last year, mandating the revocation of the condo’s construction permit due to a non-compliant main entrance width. Caught in the aftermath, the BMA sought legal advice from the Council of State on how best to adhere to the court’s order while mitigating the fallout for the condo’s residents and owners.
In response, Mr. Wisanu conveyed that the council clarified a crucial distinction: the court’s order nullified the permit but didn’t erase its existence entirely. As a result, Ashton Asoke found itself in a peculiar state of being both sanctioned and permit-less, tethering its fate to legal interpretation. The council asserted that the BMA is legally obligated to instruct the condo owner to re-apply for the construction permit without demolishing any part of the building. Essentially, the council’s interpretation implies that the towering structure situated at the bustling juncture of Sukhumvit and Asoke Montri roads, although previously considered illegally built, now has a legal lifeline.
Previously, the BMA had announced that the project’s developer, Ananda MF Asia Asoke Co., could re-apply for the necessary permits within a specified period. Understandably, condo unit owners and tenants, left in a state of limbo, have been contemplating legal actions to claim damages from the company for the disruptions they’ve endured.
A further layer of complexity is added by the council’s stance on tenant access during the regulatory roller-coaster. Mr. Wisanu highlighted that the Buildings Control Act might not necessarily preclude tenants from inhabiting the condo while the permit issue is being resolved. This means residents wouldn’t have to pack their bags and search for temporary accommodation amid the legal rigmarole, offering them a semblance of stability in otherwise shaky circumstances.
For the tenants and homeowners of Ashton Asoke, this development is a ray of light in an otherwise cloudy ordeal. An often-overlooked fact is that many of these stakeholders have invested significant emotional and financial capital into these luxury units, expecting them to be safe sanctuaries amidst Bangkok’s bustling metropolis. The Council of State’s interpretation could finally provide a path forward, albeit a winding and complex one.
As the dust begins to settle, all eyes will likely be on how smoothly the re-application process unfolds. There’s a sense of cautious optimism in the air as tenants, developers, and legal pundits alike await the next steps. And while this legal saga is far from over, the latest development injects a breath of fresh air and lends hope to a resolution that benefits all parties involved and preserves the luxury high-rise’s standing in one of Bangkok’s most coveted locales.
This retroactive permit application seems like a classic case of bending the rules for the rich. What’s next? Letting developers build wherever and whenever they want just because they have money?
You do realize that everyone in those condos saved years to afford them, right? The situation is more complex than just ‘rich people problems.’
Exactly, Mark! People invested their life savings. It’s unfair to expect them to bear the fallout of bureaucratic mistakes.
I get that, but bending legal principles sets a dangerous precedent. What’s stopping other developers from ignoring regulations now?
This whole issue just shows how messy urban planning is in Bangkok. This shouldn’t have happened in the first place if rules were followed closely.
Totally agree. It’s a failure of administration at best, corruption at worst.
Or it could be both. Someone should look into how this permit was issued originally.
It’s good news and all, but what will the new re-application mean for the timeline of resolution? More waiting, I guess.
Probably another year of back-and-forth with more red tape. Typical government procedure, ya know.
Hopefully, they fast-track it this time, given how long people have been waiting already.
The tenants should sue the developer! This situation is just absurd.
Many are contemplating legal action. They should just go ahead and hold the developers accountable.
But wouldn’t that drag the process even longer? Some residents just want to move on with their lives.
I think this ruling is a fair compromise. No one wins if the building gets demolished. It’s better for everyone to find a middle ground.
Fair or not, rules were broken. There should be consequences.
I agree there should be accountability, but not at the expense of innocent homeowners.
I feel for the tenants. Imagine living every day wondering if your home will be destroyed.
Retroactive permits sound like a bad idea. It’s like building the rules backward to fit the situation.
It’s not perfect, but what’s the alternative? Demolishing a completed building?
Sometimes you do what you have to do to fix mistakes. Life’s not black and white.
I’m cautiously optimistic, but worried about what precedent this sets for future projects.
This is just another example of government incompetence. How do you mess up a building permit this badly?
I wonder if the tenants will actually feel any more secure after this or just remain skeptical about the building’s future.
Seems like they are just kicking the can down the road. The fundamental issues haven’t been addressed.
True, the root causes should be addressed to avoid such messes in future projects.
I’d be more worried about the structural integrity of the building if rules were bent to construct it.
Developers always seem to get a free pass. When will they face real consequences?
As a real estate agent, I’ve seen these types of issues before. It’s ultimately the residents who suffer the most.