Douggie Style

Many years ago, when looking at a condo in Oz, the real estate agent said you don't want one in that building, I said 'why' he said a guy, with a portfolio of about 800 units, buys 51% of a run down block, giving him control of the body corporate then votes in a lot of special levies to improve the property. Effectively getting the other 49% to subside his renovations then sells out. .

However in Oz you can get legal redress where the body corporate powers are significantly abused, the overriding duty is to act in good faith for the body corporate interests.

So i suspect here your only real redress is in seeking a good lawyer or think of how to control the body corporate votes.

good luck, a tough bind

“She is presuming guilt without due process of law. If guilty, I sincerely hope that he is served with the maximum sentence, and I hope that the child recovers. However, until found guilty, I cannot stand by a presume he is guilty.”

Two problems with this

Firstly pattaya_girl made no such presumption.

Secondly it’s a misapplication of the principle to imply he is innocent until found guilty.

Tthe principle is simply saying he should be treated as innocent, as a legal principle, in order to get a fair trial, not that he actually is.

To imply he is innocent based on a principle is extending a dogma and perhaps a bit naïve.

One should look at the facts in each case and make ones own decision, which I think most of us do anyway.

Very good advice EmptyBasementBin, thanks for the posting.

(Endure you beat me to it)

Just a thought..

If the pro/anti gun debate is driven mostly by the need to feel secure, especially in your own home...perhaps the examples you see in your country have a over strong influence on your view..

For example in Oz & Britain guns are really not around that much anymore so if you grow up there and adapt to that environment you might be more likely to be anti gun...it doesn't seem having a gun can really add much more to your security ..

In the US and other countries, that have always had a gun culture, you are used to guns, become more comfortable around them, perhaps actually need a gun in the home to feel secure...

I can imgaine sitting in your home with kids and all sorts of crime going on around your neighbourhood...in that context the pro/anti gun debate might then seem a bit different..

This is a lot of assumption, but I feel this might be why opinions become so polarised and passionate...it is as much trying to change a lifestyle than an intellectual argument

PS: And the reason I posted.....someone earlier mentioned most intruders enter via roof...so how do you secure the roof from intruders?..and are you allowed/is it a good idea to lay down a reinforced concrete style ceiling ...?

Sorry don't have time to read the whole thread, so this might have been answered before..

The older brother was holding the land in trust, as a trustee, not as an owner.

So he never had title and couldn't loan against it. A trustee can't use trust property personally.

I am not sure how Thai law goes on equity but feel this will be the case and the courts will rectify this.

I feel the chanote issues probably follow this point not precede it.

But first you may need to get a court to declare there was a trust (via your lawyer), then if so the rest of the problems will probably fall away. If it goes that way you would want to request new trustees (all the family or a third party) and get the chanote issue sorted. You would also ask for all contracts, based on the breach of ubermai fidei to be voided.

Of course TIT but a lot of their commercial law is similar to west...

Thailand does not have trusts....they are ilegal

Wow thanks Harry...just had a read and googled it...seems you are right..also explains a lot..lol....appreciate the correction...a useful thing to know as well...cheers

Sorry don't have time to read the whole thread, so this might have been answered before..

The older brother was holding the land in trust, as a trustee, not as an owner.

So he never had title and couldn't loan against it. A trustee can't use trust property personally.

I am not sure how Thai law goes on equity but feel this will be the case and the courts will rectify this.

I feel the chanote issues probably follow this point not precede it.

But first you may need to get a court to declare there was a trust (via your lawyer), then if so the rest of the problems will probably fall away. If it goes that way you would want to request new trustees (all the family or a third party) and get the chanote issue sorted. You would also ask for all contracts, based on the breach of ubermai fidei to be voided.

Of course TIT but a lot of their commercial law is similar to west...

Case is finished, summary judgement, the judge said he will announce the damages on March 8th, our lawyer also confirmed this.

Well good on you for seeing it through..will be interesting to see the amount of damages pls let us know..btw was it a summary or default judgement? just curious about the Thai system and if a default judgement any chance he can still request a set aside...

Hi Samran,

I can see your point however...my answer was to a different question being;

"some (not all) positions that require national security clearance exclude dual nationals - in Australia and USA for example"

I don't think the examples you cite were excluded on grounds of dual nationality.

There is a security vetting process which covers practical matters including conflicts of interest not to be confused with being excluded per se on the basis of dual nationality.

For example from the same rules you cite;

Dual citizenship may, however, cause other employment-related issues to arise, for example, if the person is required to obtain a security clearance or to work in an area where their dual citizenship could be seen as giving rise to a conflict of interest.

They are speaking of ‘employment-related issues‘ such as a ‘a conflict of interest.' not broad exclusions based on dual nationality.

In the embassy example, employees cannot hold Thai citizenship on the basis of an actual conflict of interest..for example how could you decided impartially on a visa for a fellow Thai citizen eg no different to a registered tax agent being excluded from the tax office or a migration agent from the immigration department...on the practical basis of a conflict of interest not any broad security clearance issues with dual citizens

"some (not all) positions that require national security clearance exclude dual nationals - in Australia and USA for example"

Sorry gents..thats just plainly incorrect...at least for Australia....

you might be confusing the security vetting process where they obviously consider many factors but there isn't any formal exclusion...

Try this mob out of Sydney.

http://first247.com/en/

Have no fees and give a pretty good rate.

For example i sent AUD today and got 31.55 as the exchange rate.

If you are in Sydney, they are near central station in the city.

Yes, they are good, the owner is a straight up honest guy.

my 2 cents, probably wrong lol... not intended to be any kind of advice

key point was, ' ..he had proof the relationship had gone back 3-4 years.'

so 12 mths can be satisfied,

separation is not fatal to case, from memory case law exists where people were apart for strong reasons, also cases on arranged marriages would be interesting ...

secondly there is some wiggle room in waiving the 12 mths with the 'compassionate and compelling' waiver

So on my reading it is possible

Practically it is a different matter and much harder to prove, many cases rejected under or just over 12 months rule or with much separation...

decision makers are time pressed/poorly trained/lazy and practically look to make their job easy

they look to the spouse regs considerations as listed previously plus length of time for defacto, and often read these rules very strictly without allowing for the exception (where permitted)....

MIGRATION REGULATIONS 1994 - REG 2.03A

Criteria applicable to de facto partners

(1) In addition to the criteria prescribed by regulation 2.03 , if a person claims to be in a de facto relationship for the purposes of a visa application, the criteria in subregulations (2) and (3) are prescribed.

(2) If a person mentioned in subregulation (1) applies for a visa:

(a) the applicant is at least 18; and

( the person with whom the applicant claims to be in a de facto relationship is at least 18.

(3) Subject to subregulations (4) and (5), if:

(a) a person mentioned in subregulation (1) applies for:

(i) a permanent visa; or

(ii) a Business Skills (Provisional) (Class UR) visa; or

(iii) a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa; or

(iv) a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa; or

(v) a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa; or

(vi) a General Skilled Migration visa; and

( the applicant cannot establish compelling and compassionate circumstances for the grant of the visa;

the Minister must be satisfied that the applicant has been in the de facto relationship for at least the period of 12 months ending immediately before the date of the application.

establishing sponsorship for a spouse type visa never used to be that difficult ... 'to the extent necessary, financially and in relation to accommodation:' years ago it just used to be an extra form

Hi Sirchai,

sorry to hear of your troubles.

I feel there are a few issues you need to separate

- the insurance on your car

- your personal injuries

- medical costs

IMHO the offer on your car is based on book value, you might love your car and keep it well maintained but you are always only going to get a standard type of value. Once they pay you out, they own the car. This is also how insurance works in my country. I cannot see how you will get much more with a lawyer.

Your personal injuries, I don't know the law in Thailand on that but this is where you might be able to sue for a payout. You need to establish guilt as much as possible, CCTV, witness statements, copy of the police report. Open a file and get everything now while fresh and before people become 'forgetful' . For this a lawyer will probably add value

Medical costs > as above. Open a file, check your insurances, see lawyer if not happy with offer. Think of long term treatments.

good luck

I am surprised his lawyers have not tried to get the US to charge him and get him extradited there ... but not sure even with the victim being a serviceman that the US could hold any jurisdiction.

I thought the fact he allegedly murdered a US citizen gives them jurisdiction worldwide

Hi Mate,

tried to send a private message but forget how...keep it simple...step by step..u have multiple issues

First I suggest get her an Aust passport then simply leave. You mentioned you are listed as a parent on the birth certificate.

This will have to be done in utmost secrecy, if they get wind of this problems might arise.

Can't remember the rules on this but the following seems to be what I thought was the case

http://www.citizenship.gov.au/applying/how_to_apply/born_overseas/

Australian citizen by birth

Whether you are an Australian citizen by birth depends on the date of your birth.

Most children born in Australia before 20 August 1986 are Australian citizens by birth unless one parent was entitled to diplomatic privileges or was a consular officer of another country.

Children born after that date are only Australian citizens if at least one parent was an Australian citizen or permanent resident at the time of their birth.

Children born in Australia to parents who are not Australian citizens or permanent residents, automatically acquire Australian citizenship on their 10th birthday if they have lived most of their life in Australia.

and

Child born overseas to an Australian citizen

Main content

Commonly, if you were born overseas after 26 January 1949 to an Australian citizen parent, you may be eligible to apply for Australian citizenship by descent.

If your responsible parent became an Australian citizen by descent, he or she must have been present in Australia for periods totalling two years at some time in their life.

If you were born outside Australia or New Guinea before 26 January 1949 you may also be eligible for Australian citizenship by descent if at least one of your responsible parents became an Australian citizen on 26 January 1949.

Your Australian citizenship options

Children born overseas to an Australian citizen parent apply for Australian citizenship using Form 118 Application for Australian citizenship by descent.

The missus finally agreed to have a sleep apnea study (at my urging lol) via this hospital.

She dutifully went to the hospital and had all these sticky sensors carefully placed all over her body by these 2 technicians with those white lab coats, with a cradle of wires feeding back into a computer.

The technicians stayed with her and monitored the data all night.

The next day she excitedly asked about the results and was told there was no data...they forgot to plug the cradle in to the computer..

She is Thai....i think u need to be a good judge of character here and do some research on the person, in the west the standards aim to bring all practitioners up to a certain minimum standard...but here it is really up to the individual character

Hi Mike,

some very good advice above..

One further point is that reading you posts you seem to emphasis the relationship...

you have to understand that if you are going to apply for a tourist visa your application will be tested against the tourist visa criteria

however if you are applying for a spouse/finance type visa then that is the criteria that will be applied

there is a tension between the two ie a visitor who is also in a relationship may introduce doubt in the decision maker's mind as to her genuineness to return, which is something they must consider under the tourist criteria

this can lead to ludicrous outcomes at times and confusion in both the decision maker and the applicant ...ie do you stress the relationship or not

further the DM may place a restrictive condition (it used to be 8503 but not sure now) barring any further onshore applications to cover their ass

i think you need to provide as much evidence as possible of your plans and reasons to return, they do look at the employment, study, family (does she care for anyone?), assets (does she have a business that needs her personal attention), aspects .....

IMHO the letter from the employer does not establish her genuineness to return and is actually counter productive being open ended (however that is for the DM's discretion)

At the same time as above be totally honest with your plans and back them up with evidence, You might even think about the alternatives to a tourist visa

must go

cheers DS

My friend had a similar thing happen a few weeks back in Silom road...her and a few thai staff went to an after work 'show

the bill came back hugely padded as somehow telepathically she had bought drinks for the whole bar....

she queried the bill and the guy gave her the whole mafia bit...she just looked at the guy and in her best dirty harry voice said 'i don't think so, do you want a problem' ..I can imagine their eyes locking for a second then the guy apologised profusely (she has a very steely take no prisoners gaze)

She is thai and well dressed...clearly it doesn't matter one iota......she thinks it could have gone either way..they will try it on anyone until challenged

Also it is pretty usual for business people to take out the foreign models, celebs...who ever they will be working with...would actually be considered poor form not to....

Thai govt accuses foreigners of arson

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/1055785/t...igners-of-arson

Thailand's government said on Saturday that two foreigners were involved in arson attacks on major buildings....

"A white Westerner was involved in the arson attack on Central World, convincing them to set fire to it. And an Asian was also involved in the arson attacks on the banks," said government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn.

Panitan did not give any names, but a video of a British man urging the burning and looting of the shopping mall, taken several days before it was set on fire, has been circulating on the YouTube video sharing website.

The man was identified by the British media as Jeff Savage, a resident of the seaside resort of Pattaya, east of Bangkok. In interviews he reportedly defended his conduct, but said he did not take part in the arson attack.

Mercs: the lot of them, s class bought from neighboring countries on the gray /grey market. No warranty apparently

Precisely......

'BTW, I think most people have had enough political discussion. I miss the "good ol' days" when the "general" forum was not overrun by political crap.'

Well its not really a political discussion, as no political views have been put forth....people draw their own conclusion from the info put out....I think people do want to know this..and if they don't it is obvious from the topic forum..

It is a good question and one I asked...the answer was that the police do not want to be involved in clearing protesters...they do not want to be politicised..it cause too many problems for them down the track..so the army gets called in for any serious stuff

Hi there was a previous post on this topic which was closed as being too political...fair enough...it is a time for some caution.....however I think it very important the truth come out and reiterate the first poster was from my sources absolutely correct....

I do not think this discussion breaches policy...

Let's see if I can win this game.

It is terrible that all men in the world act like this and that especially Thai men and the Thai police only laugh and giggle and tell women to shut up every time that this happens...always. All men should be castrated. I am going to volunteer to castrate myself first because I am a man and will eventually rape someone. The entire world needs to realize that this is the worst crime ever possible. Women and children and one-legged puppies are mistreated everywhere in the world and no one ever does anything about it...especially Thailand. Something, something, something, culture, fairness, terrible, corruption, red shirts. What if it was your mother/sister/grandmother/aunt/best friend's mother?

I really hope that she recovers soon.

There. Beat that for being the most politically correct sensitive compassionate caring man in the world.

When you say all men, that includes you, right? You should be mentally castrated for such a post. You must be very sick in your brain, making such a statement. Go ahead and do your job, you shouldn't be able to reproduce..........sickhead.

Wow. It is nice to see that you cannot follow sarcasm any better than you can formulate a thought more mature or rational than, "Would love to see him dying very slowly. Really slowly." Yours is precisely the type of post that I was attempting to mock. Every time there is a story of this nature the posts seem to follow one of two paths: 1. the super macho "Put me in the same room with that guy;" 2. the super sensitive "women are constantly victimized and I am going to point out that I am the kind of guy that understands." It is boring. Bring more to the table than that or don't bother. Some people have 852 posts with 5 per day and they are generally trivial, trite, poorly reasoned and don't add anything to the debate or topic at hand. They are just juvenile platitudes bloating the pages so that no valuable debate or discussion is possible. How do you feel that your original post--or the subsequent one to me for that matter--added anything? Here is where you try to defend yourself by stating that hundreds of people with no creative opinions or thoughts (face it, I want to hit him with a pipe or watch him die slowly are not at all creative or original) blurting out one line posts is somehow the point of modern technology and forums. I, for one, will stick to the opinion that a forum should hopefully be a place for original, creative, useful or well reasoned discussion. I apologize that my sarcasm was not blatant enough for you, but I do hope that you were able to follow this post.

You forgot the third type the immature smart arse...

Thanks Mario2008... clearer now on 3. and 2. but still in the dark re: 1

Like I said, I realize it will be void... but does anyone know what actually happens and HOW is it automatically cancelled... do the Amphur stamp something in my passport? Or is the onus on me to leave/and or seek another "type" of visa or permission to stay... or are you really saying don't worry about it?

Hi Equinox...Not sure if the same in Thailand...but in Australia in a similar situation if would take some administrative 'effort' to give practical effect to the cancellation...ie if the grounds for the visa no longer existed and the law states if is automatically cancelled (assume no review rights etc) well it may be cancelled in the law but this would be given practical effect when it came to the attention of the immigration authorities eg when leaving the country, when visiting a immigration office, random search, some type of alert program on their computers or otherwise came to their attention...i suspect this is similar in most places although the visa may cease in law practically it would have to come on the radar....this is only the general proposition

i think you mean '5 hedonistic things a woman should do alone'

my bet is it is an unlawful arrest/detention and she will get compensation once the lawyers make a fuss