KhaoYai

Silly me, I thought we used English here..........I'll have to CHECK on that.

Whilst none of us know the facts, I very much doubt this woman actually held a proper bike licence - simply because its pretty rare for a girl. However, you can ride a 50cc scooter (or other 2 wheeler up to 15kw) on a car licence in the UK and there's quite a few of them in Thailand. My travel insurance covers me for up to £15 million for medical insurance and the clause on bikes simply says that I must hold a UK licence to ride a bike abroad and must be using it in accordance with the laws of the country I'm riding in - it does not say that I have to have passed my test. In Thailand the woman would not need to use 'L' plates, so she may well have been complying with the law and the requirements of her travel insurance but never ridden a bike before. I'm pretty sure that a UK car licence will act as a provisional (at least) for a bike with a power output of up to 15kw. I hold a full bike/car licence so my licence doesn't tell me what it acts as a provisional for. So, whilst you are right, we don't know the facts, it is quite possible that this woman has never ridden a bike before - much the same as the majority of scooter/bike riding tourists.

Note to anyone thinking of buying a property through the 'company route'. Whilst this is possible and legal - subject to conditions, if the company is set up solely for the purpose of owning land by a foreigner, that is completely illegal. It is circumvention of the Thai Land Law. Circumvention is specifically dealt with in that law and is stated as illegal. There are probably 100's of you out there that 'own' a property that way - some will have for many years but if your company isn't trading and has no reason to own land, its illegal. You may never have a problem or you could have one tomorrow. Given the amounts involved and that the penalty is forfeiture - its not something I'd consider as way of obtaining security. I would also point out that the Thai courts are not stupid - paying a little income tax each year does not constitute trading, no matter what your 'Thai Lawyer' tells you. Thailand does not operate in the same way as most western countries do - there is rarely any comeback on lawyers for giving bad advice and even less chance of them being 'struck off'. I know of one Thai lawyer who was involved in a serious property fraud where a foreiegner lost a very large amount and to the best of my knowledge, he's still practising. A fully operating Thai limited company with foreign shareholding that has a reason to own land can do so legally. On thing that I believe is legal is where a property development company owns several properties for either sale or rent. I don't think it would be illegal for such a company to rent a property to a director but again, you have to consider if a Thai court would view it that way. It would probably be better if the lease was not in the director's name. You would also have to make sure that the 'rent' is clearly visible as income for the company. Some areas will allow foreigners to hold 49% of the shares of a company that owns land - others reduce that considerably. I am told however that if there are no foreign directors when the company buys land - there is no restriction later, subject of course to the maximum 49%. My lawyer also advises me that for the moment, no matter what the foreign shareholding is, it is possible to remove voting rights etc. from all the other directors which would in effect mean that the foreigner has complete control of the company. So in essence, although it is possible for a foreigner to 'own' land in Thailand, it can be very complicated. This possibility is actually 'control' over that land but given the changes aimed at circumvention over the last few years (rules banning nominee shareholders etc.), those routes may not last forever. There is still very strong feeling against foreigners owning land in Thailand - as illustrated by the decision to shelve plans to allow limited ownership last year. I can't see that changing any time soon. I'm perfectly happy with my Usufruct but I don't have a wife to complicate matters. Even if I was to re-marry, the property would be protected because: a). I as a foreigner don't 'own' it. b). In any case, the 'asset' was held before marriage and as such does not form part of the marital property in the case of a divorce. The 'owner' is a trusted friend of many years. I also have one other document that in my and my lawyer's opinion, secures my investment but as my lawyer pointed out - "this is Thailand and everything is subject to interpretation". I'm not going to go into what that document is but I'm happy that I'm safe. I've 'owned' my house for almost 9 years and at the very least I'm guaranteed occupancy until I die.

With a lease maybe but not with a properly constructed Usufruct that is duly registered on the deeds. Firstly, the Usufruct forbids sale without the holder's consent and secondly, if someone wanted to buy the land to either use or develop/sell, the Usufruct would prevent them from doing that. Would you buy a property that you couldn't do anything with? If though, that person was in it for the long run and was prepared to accept they were buying land that has a protected 'tenant' (for want of a better word) on it, then the 'tenant' can and may well agree to such a transfer. The transfer, unless it forms an inheritance, cannot take place without the 'tenant's' consent. It is very important that a Usfruct is constructed by a lawyer who understands them - any clauses that don't strictly follow the law can invalidate the whole agreement. Its very hard to 'get your head around' exactly what a Usufruct is - the only way I can describe it is that its as near as you can get to ownership without actually owning it. The Usfruct has a price, agreed between the owner and the holder and not a rental. Basically you are buying the rights to hold and use the land and those rights are only for the benefit of the original holder. A lease however (rarely with a domestic property) may be transferable and thus have a value. However, it is highly likley to contain restrictive clauses and is certainly not as secure as a Usfruct. Anyone who is thinking of a Usufruct to give them a level of protection in case of a break-up - i.e. providing the funds to build a house that is ultimately in a wife's/husband's name should consider this................ It is quite common for such properties to be built on family land - possibly surrounded by other family houses. In the event of a breakdown of a marriage/relationship, it is highly likely that the family will become hostile. Would you really want to stay in those circumstances? Personally, I'd never build/buy a house anywhere near Thai family.

Note, as far as I know - a Usufruct does not have a term. A Usufruct is in force for the life of the holder and it dies with him/her. I am not saying the a Usufruct cannot have a term - I don't know on that point but it is not normal for there to be a fixed term. If the regsitered land owner dies, the Usufruct and all its terms and conditions passes on to whoever the land is left to. To have any legal authority, a Usufruct must be registered and noted on the title deeds of the land at the Land Office - preferably Chanotte title. When registering a Usufruct, the holder should make sure that their name is on the entry and that the entry on the deeds is duly stamped and dated. My Usfufruct is constructed that way and I've never heard of one having a fixed term. My lawyer suggested that if I wanted to leave something of value to my family after I died, I could form a new Usufruct that also included my son's name and thus would last for his lifetime. Again, as far as I know, a Usfruct is not covered by the 30 year limit on leases - in essence because it is not a lease. I know that its difficult to understand what it is, if its not a lease but its not and is not defined as such under the law. That is of course, until the Thai courts come across a dispute at which time that could change. In general, a Usfruct is far stronger than a lease. It gives the holder the right to fully enjoy the property and even make money from it through letting it out. It gives security to the holder in that the registered land owner cannot sell the property or raise a secured loan against it without the holder's permission.

We have a saying in the UK and this guy is the epitome of it..........'One born every minute'

Its time someone had the courage to record such conversations with bent cops like that and send the recording to a TV station.

That's pretty good - UKPA are quoting 10 weeks for people who live in the UK.

Having been knocked off a motorbike taxi in Bangkok 12 years ago, hospitalised with injuries that necessitated 6 weeks off work, I am very aware of the dangers on Thai roads. In my case it was a taxi pulling out of a side road, not running lights but its the same - total disregard for both the law and any form of sensible driving. I've listened to 21 years of announcements, promises of increased penalties and all the other <deleted> that comes out of the Thai authorities each time a serious incident happens and come to the conclusion that nothing will ever change. Life doesn't seem to matter. There's a set of lights near my home in Thailand where accidents used to be a regularly occurrence because of traffic on a major road running red lights at high speed. The authorities answer has been to remove the traffic lights and install a u-turn! The junction is a T where a minor but busy road meets a main road. Most traffic coming out of the minor road was turning right towqrds a nearby town - now we have to turn left and u-turn. Traffic wishing to enter the minor road also have to go past and u-turn. So a set of 'dangerous' lights has been replaced by 2 u-turns - which of course are totally safe.........not!! Yes, I've seen drivers run red lights in the UK but I can honestly say I've never seen anyone run them 10 - 20 seconds after they've changed. Just get off your fat ars*&%s, catch the offenders and punish them - punish them properly. Far too much work for the Thai police - especially after 5pm! Nothing will ever change. Nothing will ever change, no matter how many people die.

The only thing that is annoying Prayuth is that this has become public. He'll skrike on for a while, make a few statements. This may heat up a bit, some officers will be moved to a different role/area - some might even enter a prison by the front door if public anger swells but they will no doubt leave shortly afterwards by the back door. Those offering these VIP services will be told to cool it for a while and then it will be business as usual. Love the country (itself), love the people (ordinary folk) but hate the current regime - although previous ones weren't much better. Sorry to repeat a statement I've made in other topics but what do we expect from a country who's police chiefs publicly state that they couldn't find any sex for sale in Pattaya? Not that I have anything against the availiblity of such services but what sort of a person can make such statements publicly? Only one that doesn't care what rubbish they spout and has no cares about insulting the intelligence of the people. Why would they care? they are the big pigs that eat at the big trough. Corruption is a major factor and stifles development but its endemic in Thai society at all levels . Given the way the hierarchy of the country is arranged, I can't see anything changing anytime soon. Prayuth wants those responsible to be punished? Wants? Isn't he supposed to be running the country - why not order their punishment?

Oh yes, of course drivers will stop now and of course, those that don't will be fined. The latter is distinct possibility - no receipt of course but the former? Change the habits of a lifetime? Persuade Thai drivers that their selfish ways are wrong? Not a hope in hell. To make even a small dent in the attitude of Thai's when they get behind the wheel requires serious enforcement, serious fines and licence removal for repeat offenders. However, how do you deduct points or remove the licence of someone who doesn't have one? You don't need a licence in Thailand, you just pay the usual 200 baht 'fine' and carry on. Nobody ever checks if you actually have a licence or not. I hope I'm wrong but this announcement is most likely to be just another of the plethora of new road safety measures that are announced each year and never acted upon. Just go to the crossing at Nana on Sukhumvit Road and watch all the drivers turn left from Soi 3 onto Sukhumvit, totally ignoring the 'green man' and driving though pedestrians right in front of a manned police box.

Kasikorn are already moving some services to their App.

Reasons to return has always been a thorny issue with much disagreement on what will convince an ECO. My personal view is that 'insufficient reasons to return' is sometimes used by an ECO when they are just not happy with something on an application but their reasons are not part of the guidance they are given. Some people think that owning land or having children are good reasons to return - I don't agree. It is perfectly possible to own land in one country and live in another and in the case of children - it is quite common for parents to live separately from their kids in Thailand. The essence of a genuine concern over reasons to return is to show a settled and stable life in an applicant's home country. Close family ties, a regular job are normally accepted as evidence of the above. However, in my opinion, on too many occasions 'reasons to return' is a lottery. I've seen people with plenty of evidence refused and people with very little evidence accepted. For evidence of my 'lottery' suspicison - see Roo860's earlier post. Conversely, I've also seen people claim that plenty of reasons have been given but when the application and refusal notice are examined, you can see why. Quite often an application falls down because the evidence provided doesn't stack up when checked. For example, quite a lot of people in Thailand work on a basis that to Western thinking is causal. They give an employer's details but when the ECO tries contact them, nobody answers. To give an opinion on why an application has failed, the evidence provided would and the decision notice would need to be examined. Even then, what is acceptable to one ECO is not to another. I have found though, that if the reasons for refusal are dealt with properly on re-submission, the application is granted. However, remember this, ECO's have a set amount of time allowed to deal with an application - make sure the evidence is clear and easily accessible. It is not unheard of for an ECO to miss vital evidence - I've seen some people state that bank statements have been sent, for example but the ECO states that the sponsor has failed to provide financial evidence. It used to be that indexed 'Evidence Folders' were the way to go but I'm told that these are now taken apart by VFS.

Well yes but from an applicant's point of view, the whole process is handled by VFS. There may on some occasions, be contact with an ECO if there is a problem or they want additional information and/or they do sometimes contact an employer to check the applicant's employment status etc.

I was simply using examples - I'm in touch with several business people in Thailand - in very different fields and in widespread locations. Everyone I talk to says things are not good at the moment which in other countries would affect the value of the currency.

Yes you can do it. The process is now handled by an ousourced private company by their Bangkok office as stated above. I've done it plenty of times so god knows why I'm a bit wooly on it now. However, its not difficult but a bit long winded. Your sister in law will need an e-mail address - I opened one for my ex and conducted everything on that before handing over to my ex. The process involves a visit to a VFS office once the application is complete - its all online and not too difficult to follow. As usual, make sure she has 'reasons to return' - convince the authorities that she will return to Thailand at the end of the visit. As I say, I'm a bit wooly on the specifics but if you run into problems - come back for help, there are plenty of people here that can help you.

Its not what I believe, its what's happening in the real world so don't be flippant.

My bike clutch was just a personal example. My ex brother in law had his business closed down by law for 18 months. Thousands were not working. Export numbers from Thailand? May I remind you that this is the country who's chief police officers couldn't find any sex for sale in Pattaya! There's more truth in a kid's fiction book than what comes out from the Thai gov.

A lot of forward planning? Enter visa exempt (45days), book your appointment at Ho Chi Minh, go at the appointed time. Not suitable for some I guess but entirely do-able for most.

I have read your thread. However, I rely on real world facts and things I'm told by people I know. Thousands of businesses did not continue to export or exported far less than they had done previously. Others were closed for a very long time. Taking just one industry that I have knowledge of - automotive parts. Thailand produces millions of autoparts each year - some for the O.E. market, direct to car manufacturers and some for the aftermarket. Things are easing now but many products were simply not available here in the West. Some UK car plants had to cease production regularly because they couldn't get supplies of parts. With the O.E. market prioritised, the aftermerket suffered the worst. It took me 6 weeks to get a clutch for my bike!!! I think I can say with some certainty that Thailand's exports were well down during Covid. If the factories weren't closed, they had staffing problems with so many off work with Covid. Then there's the tourism sector and its supply chain - decimated, no tourism at all. I simply cannot understand how the baht remained so strong. The country's GDP must have been well down.

I've read stories about the Thai gov 'propping up' the baht - I have no idea if there is any truth in it or not. However, its very strange that the currency of a country that has been through several crises in recent times, manages to remain relatively stable. Taking the most recent crisis - Covid. Covid in a country that's economy probably relies more on tourism that it admits or knows. How the hell has the baht remained so strong when the country was 'closed' for so long? I talk regularly to several business people in Thailand - some foreign, some Thai. None of them report serious financial recovery following Covid, some say things are pretty bad. Again, how does the baht retain its strength?

Nothing new, I had to book an appointment in 2020.

Well let's see, I've seen quite a few posts on here that forecast the pound will dive, it hasn't. Yes, it dropped within hours of the Brexit vote and that's when the 'experts' on here said it would continue downward and settle around 23-25. I thought that was nonsense then and it was. Likewise, if the pound falls to 30 baht within 12 months, I'll do some serious hat eating. The UK economy is not doing as badly as was forecast and it now seems that inflation will be brought under control earlier than expected. Busineses are still struggling to find staff meaning they have decent order books. I talked to my estate agent on Tuesday morning as I'm planning to sell a property this summer and she told me that house sales are stronger than this time last year, prices in this area haven't dropped and mortgages are freely available. What we see on the news appears to be at odds with the real world. I've been seeing all these doom and gloom forecasts for years - none of them come true. Let's see.

I'd guess that for many, Savannakhet is not an easy location to get to. I found it much easier to fly to Ho Chi Minh and had the bonus of visiting a new country - one which I will definitely return to.

Last time I was there - March 2020, you did indeed apply one day and collect your visa in the afternoon of the following day - except for Fridays of course.