KhaoYai

If the hotels listed can't provide what they are listed for, it should be reported to the authorities. I would not expect a reply from any Thai hotels for a while, if at all. Believe it or not, they still uses faxes. You can also search for their LINE of Facebook messengers - they seem to answer them faster. The hotel I used for Day 1 in Bangkok took 5 days to reply to an e-mail. I then got hold of their LINE ID and they replied within minutes.

Go to the Thailand Pass site, select Test and Go and its in the rules box that you have to agree to to continue. Section 4. sub sections 4.1 & 4.2.

Tourist Police publicity stunt? In 20 years I've only had to call the tourist police once - nobody on the other end of the phone spoke English, I kid you not.

I wouldn't risk that, knowing my luck they'd probably only stamp me in up to Day 5 ????.

Actually they can be either SHA Plus + or AQ.

Yes, I've just had that confirmed by the TAT.

What is it with you and this AQ stuff. If you're applying for Test & Go you can either choose SHA+ or AQ. Both will be approved. Have you ever actually applied for a Thailand Pass?

1, You go wherever you want. 2. From a list that you have to find by yourself (at least I did). Cost in Pak Chong - 1200 baht. Poor service though.

No its not. Its the website that comes up if you click on this: Booking on approved SHA Extra+ or AQ hotel for 2 days (Day 1 and Day 5) Approved List: SHA Extra+ AQ Hotel Go to the Thailand Pass registration site and check it out. Click on it from this page under Test & Go https://tp.consular.go.th/en/plan You might note that the hotels that come up all have the SHA+ logo - so that means they're not SHA+ ???

I'm not interpreting them in any way, I'm simply pointing out what it says on the website. They've had almost 4 months to get this right! I know very well that 2 nights must be booked - unless you're staying 5 days or less.

Check the updated list. I thought the same but they are all over the country now. https://web.thailandsha.com/shaextraplus As he's asking about Day 1 and Day 5, that's Test & Go so SHA+ . Also, according to the Thailand Pass registration site, for Test & Go, a hotel can be SHA+ or AQ. Booking on approved SHA Extra+ or AQ hotel for 2 days (Day 1 and Day 5) Approved List: SHA Extra+ AQ Hotel https://tp.consular.go.th/en/plan

That's precisely what I'm trying to find out. I think the only way to find out is to do a dummy Thailand Pass registration. I'm going to have a go when I have more time.

Why can they never get anything right? Its February and they've had since November to get this sorted. I doubt that anyone would get away with this but - going through the Thailand Pass registration system, you are required to tick a box that says you will comply with the conditions. The conditions for Test & Go don't seem to have been updated and are: 4. For the Test & Go scheme: 4.1 I shall be quarantine for one day. 4.2 After a negative (not detected) RT-PCR test result, I am permitted to travel without restrictions in Thailand. So according to that, there is no need to go to a hotel and have a Day 5 test - permitted to travel WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS. Further, they claim these measure are aimed at helping the decimated Thai tourist industry to recover. The TAT will no doubt have had a hand in this and you'd think they'd know their market. Most of us here have some kind of connection to Thailand but take of that hat for a moment and put yourself in the position of a real tourist. For many, a trip to Asia is the holiday of a lifetime. Its planned in advance and saved for for months, if not years. We may book on the spur of the moment or know the best time to get the cheapest flights but for such a big trip, I believe most 'tourists' book well ahead. So why then, is the Thailand Pass website, not accepting registrations beyond 3 April?

I have a Swann DVR security system. There are 8 channels and the cameras are hard wired using BCN cables. There is no in-built provision for a Wifi camera. At the moment I have some spare channels and a need for a camera in a hard to get to location. The standard cables are 18m and not quite long enough to reach where I want the additional camera - I can probably extend the cables but I wondered if there is another option? This is a long shot but does anyone know of any sort of receiver that I could plug into one of the spare channels that would pick up the signal from a Wifi camera?

I think that's just poor reporting.

Well, I'm presuming that madness is allowed. Has anyone tried booking yet? Can the Day 1 and Day 2 hotels be different?

No, she skipped the bail she was granted between conviction and sentencing.

With 16 million, I'd have got the hell out of dodge!

Not quite - almost correct: A. There is no requirement for travellers to be 'well heeled' B. Its not a couple of nights, its 1 night on both occasions.

I think you'll find that the majority of those who arrived during T&G Mk1 were not actually tourists in the normal sense of the word. They were people who hadn't seen their wives and families for almost 2 years or had other existing connections to Thailand. They weigh the risk of testing positive against the need to spend time with their wives and children! I complain about these new measures but I visited in Dec/Jan and will be visiting again in Mar/Apr - why? Because I have things to attend to that I simply can't do 10,000km away.

On a positive note, the list of SHA+ hotels now includes many more provinces. On the negative side, to show the absurdity of these rules for people who have a home in Thailand: I arrive in Bangkok, have a test and wait at my SHA+ hotel for the result. Once a negative result is received I am free to travel home, meet my friends, go to shops, bars, restaurants etc. If I am carrying the virus but it was not detected on the first test, I will be spreading it around. Conversely, I am just as much at risk of picking up the virus whilst I'm going about my daily business as anyone else. Then, on day 5, despite having a house less than 15km away, I have to stay at a local SHA+ hotel, have a test and wait for the result again - madness!! I spoke to a representative from the TAT about this and asked where the sense was in this policy. He told me that the reasoning is that on the original Test & Go, several people left their Day 1 hotel without waiting for their test results and could not be traced. I have no idea how much truth there is in that but I don't see how these new measures will stop that. People can still do the same thing or may have their first test and fail to show up for their Day 5 booking. My experience is that there is no policing of these measures. On my first trip back in Dec/Jan, the Morchana App on my phone didn't work, making my location available was optional and the notifications I was supposed to have received, were not there when I went to the relevant page. One of those notifications (it later turned out) was the request to upload my Day 7 test result. That was not done until I returned to the UK so who was checking on this? Nobody it seems - I expected to be questioned at immigration on my way out - nothing. 200,000 arrivals per month? That's a very low figure compared to pre-covid figures but I would say that's hugely optimistic. Any genuine tourists considering Thailand will take a look at these rules and go elsewhere.

Buriram - the circuit complies but the location is not really suitable. Buriram is 5 to 6 hours from Bangkok by car - and further from many other major population centres, most fans would need to stay overnight and there are simply not enough hotels/resorts to accommodate them. Yes it has an airport but most fans would travel by car. It is also popular for F1 fans to book a 3 or 4 day package - the whole hog. Whilst Buriram may be up and coming, it can't change its location and I just can't see it ever being on the F1 calendar. I believe the bike races are well attended but that's a different crowd. Many bikers are happy to camp out. You are probably correct about the money - the Thai government probably think F1 should pay them ????. The guy I talked to in Abu Dhabi said negotiations were going on as we spoke (2017) but not so long after that, a new venue was announced - Vietnam so I kind of get the feeling that Thailand's negotiations bit the dust. F1 is clearly wanting to increase its presence in Asia but there are a finite number of races per year. A figure of 25 has been mentioned but I don't know if the drivers would agree with that. However, if Vietnam ever gets off the ground, I can't see Thailand being added. All may not be lost though, Covid was not the only reason that the Hanoi races were cancelled, there has been talk of corruption involving some politician or other - obviously that wouldn't happen in Thailand ????.

Apparently a deal was close in 2017 - what's happened since? Who knows? I was at the Abu Dhabi grand prix that year and spoke to one of Lewis Hamilton's assistants in the airport who told me there were intense negotiations going on at the time. Buriram circuit is up to standard apparently but I doubt the local hotel infrastructure would be sufficient for the F1 crowd. A Bangkok street circuit had been discussed but where? Given the height of the kerbs and all the roadside clutter, some major changes would have to take place - and what about the food stalls and market traders, would they agree? ????

Compliance depends on what the company does. I am not saying that a company that doesn't trade or have any reason to own land can comply - I have always said exactly the opposite. Yes, people do it but considering the sums involved, I wouldn't take the risk. I can't remember the clause number but one of the clauses in the Thai land law states that any attempt to circumvent the Thai land laws can lead (I think) to forfeiture. Forming a company that does not in fact do any trading and pays tax each year based on fictitious 'income', simply for the purpose of owning land is quite clearly, circumvention. It would be quite easy to prove that in court. There will be, I have no doubt, no receipts, no bills and probably no bank account. Why does is go on? Who knows, maybe because a whole industry has grown around such 'company formations' and therefore, money is being made. The powers that be have 2 arms, 2 eyes and 2 legs just as we do, so to think they are not aware of such 'company formations' would be asking rather too much - the internet is full of Thai legal specialists, lawyers etc. offering such services. But, I doubt any one of those outfits would, if asked, give a cast iron guarantee, in writing, that the holding is 100% secure. I can only think that the authorities, bouyed by the fact that these 'companies' do not actually own any precious Thai land, simply leave their cronies to make money out of the situation - no harm done and everything to gain - so to speak. A good friend, now sadly deceased, made me aware of a case in Pattaya around 8 to 10 years ago where a foreign guy had 'bought' a house, as thousands have, through the formation of a Thai Ltd company. Said owner was caught playing the field by his wife who then filed for divorce. She was aware of how the house was held and her father was a police captain - long story short, the foreigner lost the house. In court it was shown that the company did not in fact trade. All that happened was that his lawyer, who was also the company book-keeper, filed a tax return each year so the company paid a little tax. The company was not set up as an investment holding with a portfolio of properties. You ask then, how can it be done legally - because I stated that its not that difficult to comply. Well, there are several options and I'll leave it to you to explore others, of which there are several but consider this: Mr. A sells his house in Farangland, forms a Thai Ltd Co, for the purpose of property investment (of course taking all the necessary steps to ensure he controls the company and that the company complies with company law). He invests the proceeds of his house sale in the Thai company which then buys several houses and rents them out - one to himself. There is nothing I know of in Thai law that prevents a director from renting a house from his own company which Mr. A does. He has a proper lease and pays rent each month. I believe that is fully legal. The company has been set up to invest in property, it is trading, making a return on the investment and pays tax on real accounts. As such it can be shown to exist as a real company, set up as any other, with the intention of making money. If enough houses are owned, the company would surely need staff for maintenance etc. - further proof of its genuine existence. A property investement company clearly needs to have something to invest in and so has a reason to own land. A guy owning a sweet shop can only show a need to own that shop - not a 5 bedroom house with a swimming pool. I know of 2 guys in Hua Hin that each own a property through a Ltd company but each lives in the house owned by the other's company and rents it from him. A little more difficult to show realism but providing the i's are dotted and the t's crossed, I see no reason why that would not be legal. I ran that past a Thai barrister a couple of years ago and she said it was legal - there are no set minimum incomes for a Thai company. As I say, there are several ways but the bases need to be covered. If I was involved in any such scheme, I would not simply pay a Thai lawyer to concoct fake accounts each year and file tax returns. The test on any such 'ownership' is whether the prosecution could prove circumvention if it went to court. With most of the 'companies' I've seen, that would be easy. It is not illegal for a foreigner to be a director of a Thai company nor is it illegal for that company to own land. But if it can be shown that the company was simply 'created' to facilitate land ownership by a foreigner and nothing else, I'm pretty sure the foreigner would lose - its clear circumvention.

Eh? I have not referred to any greed - you've got the wrong person buddy. I am very much aware of the suffering being ecountered by much of the Thai population at the moment. I merely said that Prayuth and his buddies don't care. They are not poor or starving.