dave111223

In all property purchases i've made in Thailand 10-20K was enough for a deposit.

IMHO tell them where to stick the 800K; no doubt if he thinks you're a sucker now he'll likely try to milk you a bit more for taxes/fees on the day of the transfer at the land dept.

This thread has got to be me a wind up.

The shipping time for EMS is 3-5 buiness days (not 7-10, so i'm not sure why you were given this info?)

If the package has not arrived in the UK within the 5 business days they will refund the shipping cost (note this doesn't mean arrived at the destination, just must have arrived into the UK mail system within 5 days)

Next step is to call the post office service center. They will have you fax them a copy of the shipping form/receipt and they will track the package down. If they can't find the package they will refund the shipping + insurance (i think insurance maxes out at around 5000baht)

Duplicate post

I think a lot also depends on the agency you plan to use.

When I bought our condo the sellers agent was absolutely crap; after making an offer and having it accepted we had to call the agent back 3 or 4 times over the next 3 weeks just to try and get the ball moving on the sale.

They seemed to have absolutely no interest in selling the property. I can only imagine how pissed i'd be to pay someone like that 3% to sell my property.

However i was later in the market for a townhouse and we looked at one which was listed through ERA agency. The agent was extremely helpful (we called and had a viewing later that day). The guy said they would also help to get bank financing for us (which i can imagine would be very useful considering what a pain it was getting a loan on our own).

We didn't buy the property but he definitely had us close to buying an otherwise crap townhouse. He'd be well worth 3%.

I doubt you'd find a "Very good" house for 1 million baht...?

Yes, some networks have better coverages in some areas. In other words, their mast may be closer to your home than others. Perhaps something to do with wanting to preserve the countryside.

So yes it is prudent to check for coverage in your area before deciding on a network.

Perhaps problems on a shared mast.

Next time, I suggest you complete you due diligence. Site Finder

This only seem to reinforce the argument that overall cell signal coverage in the UK is poor. I would consider "Good Coverage" in a country to be where i can just stick any sim card it my phone it gets full bars everywhere and just works.

I would consider "Poor Coverage" to be where you have to do "due diligence" and trace your travel routes though a cell tower map and buy a series of sim cards in order to suit the various locations that you may be in.

And i don't see how you can make both arguments of:

- In the UK we like to preserve the countryside by limiting cell towers.

AND

- In UK there is a good cell coverage

Which is it? Limited cell towers and lower coverage, or great coverage and lots of towers? Please make up your mind you seem to be claiming both?

Again another generalised and inaccurate statement. In Thailand too you will have places where you will get a low to no signal.

I'm sure there are places in Thailand that do get low coverage, but in my experience there are far more places in the UK that get low coverage than in Thailand (getting back to my original post).

For example i was not able to get signal in places such as:

- Parts of Fleet, Hants. (as previous mentioned)

- Many semi-rural stretches along the Basingstoke to London rail line

- Many rural/semi-rural stretches along the Basingstoke to Manchester rail line

- Large portions of the M4 and M5 towards Exeter

But i cannot think of any places off the top of my head where i have not had coverage in Thailand (except "tunnels" obviously as you previously mentioned); maybe you can list a larger area of non-coverage areas in Thailand, but i would doubt it?

My original point is that in Thailand there is poor 3G and this gets pointed out and ragged on every day. Meanwhile the general cell coverage in the UK is poor and yet seems to exempt from review. I think people have a habit of moving to Thailand and fondly remembering their homeland as some kind of perfect higher place where everything works properly.

Perhaps because you were using 3. There are only good for 3G.

I'm not going to argue with your experiences. I simply have not experienced them....which is perhaps why the 'UK people' don't complain. People purchase the network apt for their location.

"purchase the network apt for their location"... meaning each network has outages in certain areas? Which in itself seems to support the argument that there is overall poor coverage if a certain sim card is only valid within certain areas in the country.

Let assume that 3 is just a poor service (it might be i don't know). How would you explain the Vodafone outages at the same time on my friends phone?

When i say that people in the UK don't seem to complain I don't mean that they don't experience coverage problems. I mean that the friends i talked with seemed to have signal issues but didn't think it odd or unacceptable, they just seemed to accept it as the norm.

Whereas in Thailand in a remote location it doesn't matter if you have a DTAC or AIS etc...sim card you're still going get coverage. You just pop in any sim card and you're good to go.

Going through a tunnel? Seriously, you appear apt to make rather sweeping statements.

So your claim is based on sitting on a train in an undisclosed location??

I live in the UK and other than dropouts travelling on trains, simply have not experienced what you have described.

I spent most of my stay in Fleet, Hampshire; and at house i was staying i received no signal at all (the house is not in a tunnel in case you were wondering).

I traveled quite a lot, including up to Manchester and down to Cornwall; and outside of major urban centers the signal ranged from no signal to 1 or 2 bars...

Obviously in central London you get a full signal, but in most cases if you couldn't see a building, you couldn't make a phone call...pretty sad in my book. Specially considering that you could go somewhere like Koh Ngai in the middle of no where and still get a full signal.

If the 2 credit card charges are for the exact same amount on the same date to the same company, the card company will not think twice about canceling one of them.

I've had the problem before where something got charged twice (such as an idiot cashier running the card through the machine twice) and the card company removed the charge from my account within a couple of minutes.

haha....nonsense. Which network were you using?

"3"

However i also discussed the topic with one of my friends while there and he said he had similar trouble with Vodafone (we were on the train together, whenever i had no signal he also had no signal).

Sin sod is just a way for an otherwise undesirable guy to get a wife. Why else would you pay knowing full well that sin sod should normally be returned (original way)

Hansum man you no need pay dowry

I think Thailand is overly criticized over the lack of 3G coverage.

I just got back from the UK and the cellphone coverage there is shockingly bad. In Thailand you get a good phone signal pretty much everywhere (even on remote islands).

Yet in the UK the signal was constantly low and often no signal; Ok i was able to get 3G when i had a signal, about 50% of the time i was out of any of kind of coverage. People in the UK seem to have just accepted this silliness?

While on the train most conversations i overheard consisted of "hello,hello?" and "are you still there".

I've always had the understanding this was exactly what the sinsod is for - a kind of replacement for the alimony wives would get in the west that they don't get here - so of course it won't be returned.

Exactly. It's so that if the man does a runner the wife isn't left homeless and broke.

Maybe if there was infidelity on the wife's part you might have an argument (although the Sinsod would probably still never be returned), but this doesn't seem to be the case here anyway.

Why would you start with a Joomla 1.5 website when Joomla 1.6 has already been released?

For the amount of shipping and tax you'll pay it must be a pretty valuable computer?

I would think shipping will be a few hundred $$USD, and then maybe another few hundred more for the import tax...

And that's just the cost, not taking into consideration that it might get broken on the way.

Maybe you should consider sticking some cotton wool balls on the end of this:

Patpong

How do you post a letter or send an E mail with out any money.

He can't come up with 10baht to stick into a computer to send some email..? Please...I'm sure i could find 10baht in a few hours if i had to just by looking around for coins on the floor on in phone booths, or vending machines...

Normally 10% (5% paid by employee), so cost to the employer would be 5% (260 per month).

However there was a recently a tax break i can't remember if it's still on where it was reduced to i think 6% (so only 3% paid by employer), but that may have already expired.

You ask:

is the problem based on personality issues, or behavioral ones?

I find it difficult to separate one from the other.

I explain:

All the evidence suggests that his motive for being a committee is to talk -endlessly about himself.

He ignores the requests from me (chair) and all to other members to keep his remarks on track .

He contributes nothing in terms of ideas

Typically at voting time he will abstain -which can put pressure on me to cast a deciding vote.

In other he words he impedes the process.My 'quiet private words' to him have changed nothing.

So he needs to go -that is the opinion from the rest of the committee

The question is how can be persuaded to go

In truth I suspect that he will just go of his own accord-Even he will eventually be overwhelmed with boredom

So in truth my request for help was probably just academic

You can't remove people from the committee just because you don't like them, or think they have an overinflated ego.

Such actions should be reserved for committee members who are truly problematic (ie involved in illegal activities, stealing for the building, threatening people etc...) "He talks about himself a lot" would certainly not make that list.

Surely him choosing not to vote on issues is a benefit to you; if i was him i'd start using my vote to do the exact opposite of your vote every time just to wind you up further.

Just as an experiment, you go on to Fakebook and post on your 'wall' your being in desperate straits and can anyone of your 3000 odd 'friends' help out ... and wait for the deafening silence.

My point is that if you said to the destitute block in the OP "why not email some people", his answer is almost guaranteed to be "I don't know anyone's email address"

But in this day and age with the likes of Facebook, whitepage etc.. it's so easy to find people that not having an address book on hand is not really a valid excuse to not being able to contact anyone.

And given that it's so easy to find people, saying "I'm not able to contact anyone who can help me" is in reality saying "There is no one in the world that is willing to help me".

Surely one could get online (10 baht an hour at local internet cafe) and email family members or friends; even if you don't have their email addresses it's not hard to find them.

Ok let's assume that you are Oliver Twist and have absolutely zero family. Why not get on facebook and start looking up your old school friends (or Orphanage friends) and asking them if they can buy you a one way ticket back to UK which you will pay back when you return.

If a person cannot even find one old friend or family member in this world that is willing to lend you a few hundred quid to save your life...I can only imagine the kind of person you'd have to be. Pretty much scrum of the earth and no one wants anything to do with you; in which case why would this person be worthy of charity from complete strangers?

Wait for the next committee election, and either make sure they get no votes, or read the condo bylaws and there may be conditions that their application doesn't meet (ie must have no criminal record, and the person does, so their application is rejected).

Getting rid of them before the end of their term would be very difficult i can imagine.

HOWEVER, there is nothing in the contract stating that it is, or is not refundable!

Why would you assume that a deposit would be refundable?

If you wanted it make sure it would be refundable why did you not ask to have this specifically noted in the contract?

I bet the contract doesn't say "We won't buy you a pony" either, so I figure they owe you a pony too!