sambum

I think that "back then", in the days before the internet and "hand held computers", most pensioners would probably get their information "passed down" by the guy sitting at the next seat in the bar/working mans club! I can just see John Smith getting an envelope full of what he would consider "gobbledegook", showing it to a mate, and asking "What do you think this lot means?" And his mate replying, "Oh, nowt to worry about - it's just them telling you when your pension starts - everybody gets one of them!"

In some parts, bikes have got to be parked closely together otherwise you wouldn't be able to get parked in the same town that you were visiting!

"You could be making a turn, be delayed in clearing the opposite lane,....." If you were delayed in clearing the opposite lane, surely you shouldn't be turning anyway? The car is at fault for not indicating his intention to turn. If he had indicated, the motor bike rider may have slowed down, or at the least, have been aware of the car drivers intentions.

Luxury car - no signal to indicate that he was turning. Motorbike appeared to be going fast, but the rider wasn't thrown very far, and didn't appear to be seriously injured. However, the thing that is apparent from the clip is that the couple seemed more concerned about their car than the motorcyclist! Didn't even give him a glance!

I'm not saying that at all, (I did say it was a conspiracy theory!) but IF (and I stress the word IF) she was a bar girl who was bought out of a bar, the surely sexual favors were part of the deal, and if suddenly she reneged on the deal (possibly after she'd been paid, because some of these girls ask for money up front) then maybe the "punter" got aggrieved and wanted to get what he'd paid for? And "rape AND sexually assault"? She didn't claim rape - just sexual assault, which could mean a myriad of things), but to be honest, the reason why the police took the case so seriously, was because she mentioned there were firearms involved, and as it turns out they were correct. But let's test another conspiracy theory. As I said in one of my previous posts, if she was indeed his girlfriend, and he decided to call it a day, then as it says in the proverb, 'hell hath no fury like a woman scorned", so she decided to inflict some kind of revenge on him? However, there is also the strong possibility that he was guy who like bossing his girlfriend around - he had guns, a luxury BMW sedan, a Ducati motorcycle, and a pickup truck, so maybe she thought that she was entitled to a bit more than he was paying her, and he refused to pay any more? All of the above is pure conjecture, and it is only her word against his regarding the sexual assault, and if they were in a long term realtionship (boyfriend/girlfriend scenario) I tend to think that sex was part of the arrangement, but GUNS? Because he LIKES them? As well as a luxury car and luxury motor cycle and truck? A lethal combination in my opinion, and I am pleased that he has been caught, "grassed on" - whatever you care to call it, another piece of Russian garbage bites the dust, and the world is a better place for it!

No,of course I don't, and if you agree with me you would realise that that's what I've been saying all along!

Ridiculous! And worse so - the scenarios happening at the Niagara Falls!

Of course! It's just a shame that people have to go down to their level, and lie and cheat to get what is rightfully theirs.

In a "caring society", which the UK seems to be judging on the number of immigrants it opens its doors to, one would expect it to treat all of its own citizens and pensioners fairly, and in the same way. Obviously they are NOT, and we can be forgiven for not wanting to live in a country that puts the lives and wellbeing of immigrants above that of its own citizens. And quite possibly (and I know the facts should have been checked beforehand) a lot of the expats hit by this anomaly didn't know about it. After all, one would expect if you'd paid youur dues all your working life, it would be reasonable to expect that any benefits due to you in old age would be paid to you wherever you choose to live - would you not? I get a company pension in addition to my State pension, and that is increased every year in line with inflation, (minimum) and they don't specify where I have to live in order to get the increases, so why should the Government? And to the people who say "Ah, but you're not paying Income Tax in the UK (which was one of the reasons for the "knockback" a few years ago when the case was taken to the European Court of Human Rights ((I believe), I DO pay tax in the UK as my gross income from the 2 pensions is more than the Personal Allowances threshold, so my company pension is taxed!!!

It is - I have posted details from the British Government website

Yes, ridiculous isn't it when you can live on one side of the Niagara Falls and get the increments, and live on the other side and not get them! It's almost criminal

Well said!

From the British Government website:- Your State Pension will only increase each year if you live in: the European Economic Area (EEA) Gibraltar Switzerland countries that have a social security agreement with the UK (but you cannot get increases in Canada or New Zealand)

So in order to get a "fair deal" from the Government you have to lie and cheat to get it? Strange old world isn't it?

You mean tell lies like the Politicians do? A couple I know didn't tell the DWP they were living in Thailand, and were getting the annual increments for years. Unfortunately they got found out/were "grassed up", and had to attend a tribunal in the UK to determine if they had to pay the increments back. They were assured that was usually the case for people in their position. However, the male in the couple was ex RAF, and it just so happened that the the magistrate/man in charge of the tribunal was ex RAF too, so after a brief discussion, all "charges were dropped". Isn't nepotism a wonderful thing?

I think you'll find that we've been "whingeing" about this grossly unfair burden ever since it first started! When I came to Thailand originally, the Exchange Rate was 73 baht to the British £ - now it's 46. So in effect, you could say that we've been hit with a "double whammy!"

Spot on, Geordie lad!

From the OP above:- "The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), despite mounting criticism, stands by this policy, asserting that it has been in place for over 70 years."

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), despite mounting criticism, stands by this policy, asserting that "it has been in place for over 70 years." I was at a Managment Training Course a few years ago, and the instructor said that one of the biggest hurdles to progress in the workplace was "But, we've always done it this way!" Remarkably similar standpoint from the DWP! Just because the system has been in place for over 70 years doesn't necessarily mean that it is right or fair.

Firstly, “How do you work that one out Kwilco that the Brits get longer visas?” was not from me, so address your reply to the correct person, please. Secondly, you highlight a point about visas and then prattle on about the ex military and firearms, as if that somehow makes a "gun culture", while completely ignoring my comments about the strict firearms laws in the UK. Thirdly, in Thailand, from what I have heard over the years (19 coming on 20, by the way), MANY Thai families have unlicensed firearms, and many people are getting shot because of "loss of face (e.g.somebody honks a car horn at them!) Now, THAT is a gun culture! Similarly, I feel that any further discourse with you on this subject is pointless, so don't waste your time by concocting a reply which would no doubt be of the "baiting" type, but if you really NEED to have the last word - go ahead - be my guest!

"We want quality tourists from now on." Too late - visa free entry for Russians and Chinese etc. has already taken its toll. Did somebody not tell TAT that it's quality you want not quantity? - that's all they're interested in, but now you've got the quantity, you want the quality? (Again?) And "Chris Flynn, CEO of the World Tourism Association, suggested that Thai officials appear to have not foreseen the toll the influx could take." No kidding? And the picture accompanying the article will certainly not attract the type of "quality tourist" that is hoped for - more likely tourists like the the gunloving Russian who has just been arrested:-

First you want them - then you don't? Make your mind(s) up! 🙂

OK - back on topic! You probably don't realise that the UK has far stricter gun laws than the US, yet you "tar us with the same brush". The UK does NOT have a culture of carrying or possessing firearms! Did you know (of course you'll say "Yes"!) that in the UK only specially trained police are allowed to carry firearms, and they have to sign them out when they are needed, and hand them back in again after the "incident". Not so in the US where ALL police are armed, and it would appear that the same applies to Thailand - hence the rogue policemen losing it and going out of control.

Even though she has been sexually assaulted and threatened with a firearm, SHE is the one who reported him - therefore a "grass" - granted not a nice description but :- "Definition. a person who informs, usually on criminals. (British, slang)" (In this particular case, it would appear that "victim" could be substituted for "person", but let's test a conspiracy theory:- Girlfriend has been "bought" from a bar, and falls out with the boyfriend over money, so says she has been sexually assaulted. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but are sexual favors not what bar girls provide? The fact that he has firearms all over the place gives her an "edge" so she "grasses" him up? Personally, I'm glad they caught him, the only Russians (or any other foreigner) that have firearms shouldn't be here - their country is at war, and if he has such a liking for firearms I am sure that nice Mr Putin could find him a job?