Just Weird

4 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Those names are not similar.

Perhaps they are similar when written in Thai.

4 hours ago, mommysboy said:

Of course it is the bank's fault!

 

They sent it to an account holder with a different name.

 

If the teller felt there was insufficient information, she could have declined the transaction; she really should have done this imo, since there was no account number given.

If the depositor signed the deposit slip why should the cashier have to query it?

5 hours ago, ezzra said:

You be surprised how little information the tellers and the bank staff

for that matter has on their screens when it comes to where your monies

go, apart from name and account  number they have nothing showing,

and if you want more info on a customer like address, ID number or

god forbid a picture, you're up a stone wall faces... 

"...if you want more info on a customer like address, ID number or

god forbid a picture, you're up a stone wall faces..." 

You mean the sort of information that you are not entitled to have?

5 hours ago, jaltsc said:

"Thai bank Krung Sri Ayudhya mistakenly put more than half a million baht in the wrong account because the first name was the same and the surname similar."

 

The reason wasn't that the surname was similar. The reason was that the employee of the bank screwed up and didn't know how to perform his required duties. It's always someone or something else's fault, No one knows how to take responsibility and then rectify the error by improving the system. 

Perhaps another reason may be that the depositor didn't know the account number of the account to be credited and when he signed the deposit slip confirming the transaction didn't notice the incorrect name.

6 hours ago, SABloke said:

So your name is more relevant than your bank account number in the Thai banking system?  

Obviously not.

2 hours ago, rdhowell said:

 

And of course, everyone is not doing it, but if they are, and it's wrong/immoral/illegal - so what? This is about you, not them. 

 

The outcome is still uncertain - because each officer/court/judge may or may not follow the written law. There are bribes. There is corruption. 

"There are bribes. There is corruption".

There's no need to point that out yet again, she knows it only too well, she was part of it even though she didn't have to be.

2 hours ago, rdhowell said:

Actually, every crime is made-up, by DEFINITION.

A "crime" is something that is illegal, and "illegal" is established by a person/court/country, etc.

Legality, and thus criminality, are in the eye of the beholder.

In this important sense: a "crime" has no necessary connection to Right vs Wrong; Ethics; Morals.

 

Most people here taking issue with the woman and her son are doing so because of an Implicit assumption, which they do not state openly: a crime means that it is Wrong, morally. This is what really urks them (and perhaps you) underneath, but few will admit this.

However, nothing could be farther from the truth.

A crime is man-made. There is no crime unless a law is created by man. But whether that law reflects the reality of it being morally wrong - that is an entirely separate issue.

 

Jesus, what a load of garbage.

"Legality, and thus criminality, are in the eye of the beholder".

No, legality, as you stated yourself, is established by law, it is not up to any individual to decide what is legal or otherwise unless you believe, for example, that murder is only illegal in the eyes of the individual!

3 hours ago, rdhowell said:

Wow, blame the mom for the corruption of the officials!!!!

Hahaha. No need to waste time pointing out the flaw there.

 

Yes. Sorry, but it was ignorance. Deal.

No, I didn't blame her for the corruption; what I did was comment that she had made a derogatory comment about corrupt practices after contributing to them by voluntarily paying bribes to Thai authorities in order to get her son's case fast-tracked.  That is called hypocrisy.

And any ignorance is not mine!

8 hours ago, natway09 said:

Think yourself lucky. My mate was charged 500 Bht for a 90 minute overstay (when the plane left ,,, not when he was stamped out)

So your mate was not stamped out until the moment that the plane left?  Really? 

14 minutes ago, Fish Head Soup said:

If you are detained or barred from leaving the country due to litigation or court proceedings then you still need to arrange and pay for an extension of stay. This can be applied for under section 2.26 of police order 777/2551.

 

2.26 In the case of litigation or court proceedings: Each permission shall be granted for no more than 90 days.

(1) There must be evidence confirming that the applicant is involved in a litigation or court proceedings as accuser, injured person, accused, plaintiff, defendant, or witness.

 

http://asean.org/storage/2016/08/Thailand172.pdf

Your link gives the requirements for someone who is not detained.  My comments all along relate to those who have been arrested and are detained and have no access to their passport.  Those in that situation do not have to apply for and pay for an extension, how could they, they're detained!  There is a process that accommodates them, obviously.

2 hours ago, LomSak27 said:

Ah, the self appointed Thai Government Mouthpiece on ThaiVisa has a platform to preach, and what fun!. As it is Sunday morning, I'll just see if Jimmy Swaggert is on cable to get the same level of self riotous hypocrisy here.

*Remember TrollTeamers, hunt in a pack or don't attack

Point out my hypocrisy then, specifically.

2 hours ago, rdhowell said:

Haha.....yet another.

 

More useful: let your voice be heard about the injustice of the made-up "crime" and the time attached to it.

There was no "made-up" crime in this case.

2 hours ago, rdhowell said:

Haha...."self-righteously complain about corruption"? Corruption is corruption. Nothing self-righteous about pointing out the fact.

For you, this is called ignorance.

"Nothing self-righteous about pointing out the fact".

There is when she was contributing to the corruption by paying bribes to get her son fast-tracked through the court!

Ignorance?  Don't think so.

9 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

Unless you happen to live next door to a pumping station that has its own power supply which in turn is located next door to the reservoir, you have experienced water cuts, albeit you may not have realised it, especíally during a 24 year period. It is very common in all parts of Thailand for the water companies to suspend the supply of water for several hours or days per week, especially during a drought, the problem is, of course, more acute in some area than in others - it is also not unommon for pumping station pumps to fail from time. Here in Mae Rim we frequently see water supply suspended during a dry season, for four or five hours a day in the afternoon - in Phuket it was often suspended for days at a time - in Sukhothai often for weeks at a time and bowser trucks used instead during periods of drought.

Nonsense, if I had experienced a water cut I'd know about it, obviously, how could I not know about it? I do not live next to a pumping station next to a reservoir, there's not too many reservoirs in Bangkok.

9 hours ago, Acemaker said:

Why do you keep contradicting the Guy, he has nothing to gain by Lying, he has just been thru the process with his Son, he is simply trying to educate and inform and warn others as to the CURRENT CONSEQUENCES and the corrupt Judicial system, why dont you accept that instead of trying to show us all what a Smart Ass you are, your Pathetic.

Why?  Because what I am saying is correct, that's why, if you think that makes me a smart arse, that's fine, your opinion of me is inconsequential.

Let me explain where you are wrong also; "he" has not been through anything with "his" son, it is the son's mother that is making the claim based on nothing but hearsay.  The son did not get into an overstay situation!

1 hour ago, simoh1490 said:

Keep the tank, they are important for when you experience water cuts and that will be often - secondary purpose is pressure, third purpose is heated water for showers.

Frequent water cuts?  Where and for what reason?  I've been here for 24 years and not had the water cut off yet.

Possum1931, so sad and confused by this thread!

8 minutes ago, jenny2017 said:

I guess she just meant military rule.

I guess so also but she didn't say that.   And guessing what posters say on here usually brings a barrage of attacks.   

1 hour ago, Mickmouse1 said:

I think the authority should grant  exceptional visas for such cases.The accused has no means to go and extend their visas.

They do!

17 hours ago, Mum2 said:

Apologies I actually meant military law which replaced martial law and is seen to be more stringent than previous administrations

Military law did not replace martial law when the latter was lifted in Thailand!  Military law applies to those in the military.

1 minute ago, Mum2 said:

Believe all you want - but reality is  yes they do have to pay, and without it he would have been charged for an overstay. Things have altered significantly in the last 18 month a or so since martial law took hold. 

 

It has been a significant life lesson and he is one of the lucky ones who could pay to get it completed more quickly

He may have been told that by others but, no, the reality is that they would not be charged for overstay if they were detained by authorities.  Martial law was lifted in Thailand in April 2015.