richard_smith237

Seems we've been talking 'cross purposes'... I've been referring to health insurance.... which automatically rolls over (renews) upon payment. You've been referring to travel insurance, which is something quite different. With Health insurance - we can have elective treatment here and the contract rolls over. But, with your Travel insurance, any 'elective treatment' will need to be carried out in your home country... it basically covers you for emergency cases.

Well done !! You’ve got it !!! & you’re still relying !!! …

Not really, not at all…. Because it is my understanding that ‘if’s have a hip issue this year while covered, and continuing (rolling over) the same cover to next year, I’ll still be covered for further ‘hip issues’…. (Hip issues wouldn’t suddenly become an exclusion). Perhaps we need an expert on this @Sheryl to clarity….

The only thing I can think of is 'head on swivel'..... ... even when walking, crossing the street... we need 360 vision all the time... Poor old fell was taking it easy and got squashed by someone paying no attention.... Thai roads, and the drivers of many heavy vehicles simply behave in a manner with the expectation that everyone gets out of their way. RIP to the fella... hope it was quick and painless.

I would really like to see stats on this... a) how many cyclcists die on Thailands roads each year. b) how many 'tourists' cyclcists die on Thailands roads each year. There have been numerous stories in the past whereby 'round the world cyclists' have met their end in Thailand. I don't know if its confirmation bias, because I have no frame of reference, but it seems a lot. Thus: how many die in Thailand, compared to somewhere like Brazil, Ecuador, Mexico, Vietnam, Cambodia etc...

IF people want to contribute - its purely up to them, there is no obligation. Its the same as paying for Charities etc... its a personal choice. I feel for the guy, but also question the costs.... where did you get £3000 per day (130,000 baht per day) from ?? - that seems outrageously excessive - even for ICU ventilator etc.

I think you've misunderstood the concept of 'renewing an existing policy'.... (either that, or I have)... I agree about listing pre-existing conditions.... but not your other comment. IF something happens while covered (i.e. I have heart attack)... i.e. after taking the insurance, it cannot then be counted as an exclusion in the the following years cover (i.e. after next years renewal).

Thank you... And it was for stories such as this that I avoided Pacific Cross even though their premiums were better, their coverage appeared decent... ... I knew from enough mentions on this forum that they were a company I could not truly rely upon. Thus: I thank all those for their honesty when discussion their claims and experiences on forums such as this.

Yet there you are re-igniting comments from yesterday in an attempt to re-trigger another argument. The point I wanted to make is that despite your nastiness and abhorrent comments on this forum suggesting a woman is deserving of losing both hands, and the pain and horrific future that would entail... all from the brave positioning of hiding behind your keyboard.... in person you might actually be quite normal, because you can't get away with such nastiness in person without getting called out to your face for your abhorrent attitudes.... In fact I suspect your nastiness may be an online bravado act of idiocy.... YOU would certainly make an interesting sociological study - the real you vs the online delusional you.... why hiding behind a keyboard turns what 'might be' an normal person into a grade A1 nasty preeik !!! Now... as insignificant as I am to you... there will be no need to reply to me again, will there? - after all, I'm insignificant... Yet you still can't help yourself from trying to shoe-horn your stupidity into another argument. For now... you can accept that you are just one bitter nasty character who's been called out for suggesting a tourist 'deserved' to lose both hands.... .... And no Boomer, you're quite a lot older than I !!!... But, you seem to think age scores some points in some weird way.... another example of your flawed and broken logic. Now again... I'm insignificant, so no need to reply like a child is there.

Foreigners are a target for taxi rogues True.... I've even had taxi drivers say 'No' as soon as I ask them in Thai.... its seemed clear to me that they only want Foreigners (Tourists) who do not speak Thai (i.e. who do not know what the real prices are or what the real deal is so they can take advantage of them).... .... That was a few years ago.... Now, in area's such as Sukhumivit Soi 11 after 10pm they are so brazen its just 300 baht flat fare... they don't care.... ... It would be so easy for the BiB to run repeated 'stings' weekly all year round and clean all of this up.... ----- OK... so its only 300 baht.... and at that time of night, for my 80 baht journey I'd likely give an honest taxi driver 200 baht for his 'honesty' anyway.... BUT, the starting rip off always leaves bad taste. ----- Another facet to such media publicity is that the more famous these rip offs become and the less the police do about them, the more the taxi drivers feel a sense of entitlement that this behavior is perfectly acceptable - the ineffectiveness of the police actively enables such behavior.

Wrong - there is only flawed logic in your logic... We [the customer] are not only paying for the 'value of the vehicle' we are paying for the value of someones time. A Motorcycle Taxi riders time is not worth 27x less than a Taxi Drivers Time, theoretically, there time is worth the same as each other. With your logic a 100 baht taxi ride would cost 3.7 baht.... there would be no motorcycle taxis at all.

Yep... fully understood that.... No proof reading.... 100 baht equivalent to 135 baht ! Unfortunately, every article we read now, even when human written and 100% factual is taken with cynicism because with the onset of AI no reports at all can be trusted - all we end up with is arguments on forums such as this about statements (I refused to use the word facts) which make no sense.

@black tabby12345 Be smarter.... !!! Actual figures show these numbers reflect annual visits, with only about 83-84 Israeli tourists staying in Pai daily.

This is just typical media pile on... then the fools who buy into this rubbish add to their confirmation bias... I too saw signs in Samui decades ago... "No Israeli tourists" which I considered to be rather antisemitic, but understood that the owners of the property to be Muslim rather than this being related to anything about the behavior of Israeli tourists. I've been here a long time and witnessed negative behavior from all tourists - whenever tourists travel anywhere en masse there will be a number of them who behave poorly and draw a 'reputation' which some get hold of and start making generalisations - they are unable to get over these generalisations because they lack the intelligence to do so. Its the same with the social medial pile on against Chinese tourists, its recently been the same with French Arabs.... Brit's have their time in the spotlight as have the Swiss and Aussies... This is simply the 'media' finding the next 'buzz topic' and they fools on forums such as this add to the bias with flawed concepts and bigotry. Like people anywhere, expecially the young, some will make grade A1 t!ts of themselves and draw attention.... some of my 'younger' family were recently in Pai and had a great time... I forgot what it was called, but advertised as 'booze-tubing' or something like that where everyone gets pished up, then floats down the river on inflatable tubes.... It sounds like great laugh for those young and free and want to enjoy themselves.... .... And this is exactly who Thailand is marketing itself towards... they have no right to complain when there success starts to breed an element of contempt.... Daft politicians feeding the media, feeding the public, feeding the media frenzy, feeding the politicians.... a cycle of stupidity and a much ado about nothing - Just a lot of tourists doing what tourists do, spending money - exactly what Thailand wanted.... the faux 'puritanical nature' strikes again.... Thailand is still cheap back-packers destination, exactly what it wants, regardless of all the 'high end tourism' announcements.

If could be bothered, I could post daily videos of outrageously stupid driving / riding. Yesterday it was a 'Western idiot' on his bicycle, that overtook me as I was turning left, then cut across me to the inside.... inches away from hitting him I had to slam the anchors on... Mere moments before I had to swerve slightly to the right, to allow for the the oncomming motorcyclist (looked Thai) who had just dismounted the pavement onto the road riding straight towards me, had I not swerved, we'd have met head on (him colliding with my left / nearside headlight). Moments before that, I had to emergency brake on a narrow soi with two way traffic, as an on coming motorcyclist miss-timed his overtake and tried to 'nip in' before the cars passed, he was never going to make it without me braking hard. ---- I will of course feel great sympathy for anyone who gets hurt in these situations. But I will not feel or accept any responsibility for idiots who place their safety at risk like this. I will also feel great annoyance as their stupidity inconveniences my family while we are left without a car while its repaired... most likely on our own insurance as the other rider is likely both uninsured and unlicensed. Then of course is the helmet issue, as the fool who over takes in an impossible gap and hits my car smashed their head of the ground, either dies or is brain damaged - and then their family want to claim 'compensation' from me (or my Wife) who were simply driving safely down the road... they will not get any of course and I'll be happy to take dash-cam footage to court (though never expect any such issue to reach that far).

A step in the right direction - but hasn't this been announced numerous times already ??? - Targeting rental companies renting out to tourists without licenses ??? Then, how many Thai's are also riding around without licenses ??? The Thailand police should be targetting and cracking down on ALL road users driving and riding recklessly.... and they should be doing so without any prejudice whatsoever.... If the bike is rented to a foreigner without a license, penalise the rental company too. On the roads, crack down on the road behavior of Foreigners & Thai's, anyone without a license, driving poorly or recklessly, issue the same level of tickets and fines... Execute police work with consistency and effectiveness that is equal across all road users whether a high-so in an S-Class Merc, a delivery driver in a Box-Truck, a Tourist in a Yaris, a Grab Rider on a Honda click, a Foreigner on a CBR 1000 or a family man Honda or in his fortuna etc... Police work and controls are only effective when they are executed without prejudice, openly, cleanly, consistently with consistent penalties.

Yup... usually at night time... I'm charged 200 or 300 baht for what would usually be an 80 baht journey. I think the drivers deserve a little more... and do understand their requests for higher flag-fall rates. BUT... I don't believe for a second that this would prevent them from continuing to rip off passengers, for most of the drivers, its in their 'blood'... the entitlement to 'demand more' is already ingrained... I just wish GRAB and BOLT were more reliable... these services too have allowed Thainess to slip in. I recently waited 15 mins for a BOLT or GRAB (can't remember), who was 1m away (according to the Map)... when he arrived I asked him why it took so long. .... the driver admitted to 'eating' when he accepted the ride.... a perfectly polite and nice guy, but this was just one example of 'Thainess' that I see slipping in... .... Another facet of this 'Thainess' is that once they accept the ride, only then do they find out the destination.... If they don't want it, they don't move and just play a waiting game for the customer to cancel the journey (if they driver cancels themselves so many times they get penalised). The only other country where I witness such behaviour is Turkey - and we all (many of us) know what bunch of lying cheat the the taxi drivers are there - Thailand seems to be vying for a close second !!!.... but then pulls it out of the bag when we do get a really nice driver !!!

Good call.... the greater the exposure these taxi scammers receive, the better the services will be. These people are doing the jobs police 'should' be doing... it would be such an easy clampdown for the police to execute with regular and consistent stops, with real penalties... These 'things' are only ever an issue when the go viral in social media. And, yes, being a taxi driver is ropey job, especially at night with drunk and / or impolite passengers etc... But, that was their choice to be a taxi driver and in doing so they agreed a 'code of conduct'. Taking a taxi in Bangkok, especially at night can be anything from a regular non-eventful journey, to a pleasant chat with a driver to a rip-off followed tirade of expletive riddled erratic driving. Most drivers are decent, but take a taxi after 9pm from any area of higher tourist footfall from Ekammai up to Siam and across to Silom and expect it to be impossible for them to use the meter. This has been an issue for decades - nothing has been done about this at all. Other cities are far worse, so Bangkokians can consider themselves lucky that we only get 'partially' ripped off half the time. ------- Now cue the 'day timers' quoting: I've never had an issue... or the obvious golden droplets of grade A1 genius... "just take the sky-train" !!!...

To be clear... I'd like to be sure you understand what the word 'renewal' means. - Renewal is not the initial application - its the renewal of a pre-existing contract. - Your comments seem to refer to 'primary or initial application'. This, you've responded to my question with a response that has not accommodated the question correctly. This is not true (as far as I am aware)... Any 'pre-existing' conditions known before the initial application will likely be excluded - but the cannot be excluded from renewal of existing coverage. BUT, IF something were to happen in that first year of coverage (i.e. I used the example of a heart attack) it does not mean that the Insurance Provider will excluded that from continued membership the following year (i.e continuing yearly renewals) as they are already locked into the original statement. You've muddied the waters between 'original application' and renewal of existing cover. Example: I used. IF took out cover with no pre-existing conditions and in that year of cover I had a heart attack, any renewal of cover will not exclude heart conditions - renewal is not a reapplication, its simply paying for another year of the existing cover under the original conditions and agreements.

Will it ???... It seems you suggest that if I have a heart attack this year.... and wish to renew with the same insurance provider next year, they will only continue with an exclusion.... ... I'm not so sure this is true with 'continuing' the policy.... (its certainly not true of international health policies)... i.e. it means that someone who is diagnosed with cancer in their 10th month of cover, only can get 2 months of treatment before they can never be covered again.... I just don't see this as plausible.... as I understood it, renewals are based on the 'original' contract and conditions of first application and that only exclusions based 'age limits' can be brought in at upper levels depending on insurer.

Agreed... but I'd hardly call this 'TikTok-esque' attention seeking... seems she just saw an opportunity for a photo.... Its very unlikely she had the knowledge to recongise the danger she was in.... hence 'naievety'... (*which others have argued against suggesting her injuries were deserved'). I've been on the side of very steep snowy mountains, only one way down... one wrong move could be catastrophic - if I were to fall and get injured is that 'deserving' ?? I don't think so.... In much the same way a heavily drunk grumpy old bar-stool boomer doesn't deserve to get hit by car when crossing the road. 'people' don't deserve these things - its not as if they have killed a child and these are their consequences and the deserve the 'injuries' the received... Some on this forum are so quick to pass such vicious judgements against people who've made naive mistakes.

No, you wouldn´t Oh I would... call it sick curiosity.... you are probably quite a normal person, but come across as a bitter twisted grumpy sanctimonious old fart on this forum which is unlikely to be a true representation of yourself.... but if you want to argue that I am wrong... then fill your boots.

No, she didn't 'deserve it' no matter her actions.... Someone stealing shark eggs, mutuliating sharks etc... then there could be an argument that there is some form of 'natural justice' and deserving.... But in this case... no, she did not deserve to lose both hands, not at all. I think anyone who believes this woman is somehow deserving of losing both her hands needs to take a long hard look at themselves.

If you believe that someone 'deserves' to get both hands bitten off... because they wanted to take a photo.... and that its a debate for sanely balanced minds, then you too are a wrong'un.... No one 'deserves' to lose both hands in such a manner... I'd reserve the burden of such horrific injuries to the worst of criminals, not innocent beach-goers who've made a naive mistake. And you are correct - in MY mind, she did not deserve it. Are you then suggesting that in YOUR mind someone taking a photo of a shark DID deserve to have both her hands chewed off ???? I agree with your point on 'debatability' if regarding the actions of people doing daft or dumb things has consequences.... ... but deserving is something different... She did not 'deserve to lose both hands'... its a rather firm punishment for someone naively taking a photo.... I stand by my comments - No one but the most extreme of criminals is actually 'deserving' of such horrific injuries. I would also argue that those suggesting otherwise have lost a sense of humanity and forgetting that they themselves at times in their lives have made silly and often dangerous mistakes... but they would not be 'deserving' of such horrific consequences.

Agreed... its a delicate 'game'... But the 'long termers' are not here for medical treatment, though, it might attract those who are otherwise detracted due to their medical conditions. I think 'long termers' and 'tourists' could be treated differently from a medical insurance perspective - where tourists are required to show 'travel insurance'... and anyone with a visa has already paid into the national system and receives an insurance card. I believe this would be a workable solution - medically elective treatment to be held at the government hospital closest to your home - this would mean the 'elderly expats' have some cover. Emergency treatment at 'any hospital' (as per law - for at least 72 hours) - this avoids hospitals kicking out people through no cover etc. As they should... I believe medical health care to be a basic human right. But, of course, it must be paid for - I don't see anything wrong in contributing to the national system ( a fair amount ) in much the same way, foreign nationals have to pay the NHS surcharge.