Etaoin Shrdlu

11 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

Dream on.These are as rare as dragons teeth these days and certainly not available to Thai expatriates  who deign to return unless they have some highly marketable skills.Most end up working for the family firm.

 

I have interviewed quite a few of these people in my time.A key impression was how dreadful (not personally but in terms of being employable) were the alumni from second rate American universities.The best of them with advanced critical thinking faculties wrote their own ticket.

 

The main problem even high flying Thai expatriates experience on return to Thailand is the lack of a personal network.Obviously this will vary depending on the length of absence.

 

 

 

 

Yes, generous expat packages are becoming quite rare these days and are often limited to very senior positions. I doubt whether any of my children will return to work in Thailand. It would not make financial sense in most instances.

9 minutes ago, lopburi3 said:

Would not expect the amount of FoodPanda charge to key that requirement - but maybe expensive eats or multi payments on same day.

Yes, small charges should go through unless the Chase fraud department also blocks non-US charges. Difficult to know what triggers Chase's fraud algorithms.

I have had transactions blocked when using my Chase Visa debit card. When this happens, I receive a message on the Chase app on my phone asking if the transaction is genuine. After confirming that it is, I re-submit it and it goes through.

18 minutes ago, Grin Grasser said:

Thanks for your reply.

 

Which WiTopia service do you have?  vpn-only, cloakbox, cloakbox pro, or other?

The PersonalVPN service. 

As others have mentioned, you may need to clear cookies and cache of anything that Tracphone may have placed in your browser when you tried earlier to reach their website.

9 hours ago, Pumpuynarak said:

I tried Cigna, they would'nt insure my Thai wifey. So i then tried AXA 4 weeks ago and i'm still waiting for a reply.

Some offshore insurers won't insure Thai nationals but will insure foreigners. I'm not sure of the reasons behind this. Could be concerns for regulatory issues, could be concern for something else.

I seem to be able to reach their website using Witopia vpn.

I had a prostate biopsy a few months ago. Not very painful, but a bit unpleasant.

Best to have one done just in case you have cancer and it is the aggressive type. Catch it before it spreads beyond the prostate itself and the prognosis is much better.

3 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

Paid capital doesn’t mean what you might think in the UK.

 

There is no need to ever produce the money, what it does mean is, if the company goes bust, you have to account for where the 1 million capital went, and if it has debts that would account for it nicely.

 

Yes, and this would mean that even less of the paid capital may be available to pay upcoming claims. But without a full balance sheet to examine, it is difficult to tell the financial security of the firm. The UK company is not set up as a UK insurance company, so statutory accounting rules regarding claim reserves and other insurance-specific accounting practices might not be disclosed. I have no idea as to what accounting practices the Nevis regulator may require. Usually such off-shore regulators have a light touch.

2 hours ago, villageidiotY2K said:

3 year continuius/tax payment. This meaning it doesnt have to be in the same company and as long as i can show Kor91? for income tax payment for 3 continuous year?

 

*Do u currently hold thai PR?

I am not sure whether it needs to be with the same company, but I understand that one needs to be on a non-immigant B visa continuously for the three year period. I don't know if that is possible if one switches jobs.

Yes, I have PR since the 1990s.

It appears that WRLife is incorporated in the UK with GBP1,000,000 in paid capital and is licensed and regulated by the Financial Services Commission on the island of Nevis in the Caribbean.

This seems to be a legal and capital-efficient way to set up an insurance company from the standpoint of the owners. I'm not sure how well this would serve the policyholder in terms of regulatory assistance in the event of a dispute or provide comfort in terms of financial security of the insurer.

But everyone has their own risk tolerance, so this may be fine for some. I do hope that WRLife is successful and that its policyholders get their valid claims paid promptly and in full.

16 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

If taking court action, where would that be? England?

My guess is that it would, since that's the place of incorporation and where the company's assets presumably are. 

I don't think immigration will accept an application from someone who isn't employed at the time of application. 

Thai spouse category does allow one to apply on that basis, but does not remove the minimum 3-year continuous employment and tax payment requirement.

@scubascuba3Here's a link to what looks like WRLife's UK certificate of incorporation in the UK: https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-live.ch.gov.uk/docs/k0WlFyhENknlQ5xfmD_o3_XPPCLNa5ntbUtBK4oS-ag/application-pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=ASIAWRGBDBV3JAHCBV4C%2F20230930%2Feu-west-2%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20230930T011524Z&X-Amz-Expires=60&X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjEMv%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FwEaCWV1LXdlc3QtMiJIMEYCIQD67lKVsaun5XHFaVEEc0%2FoQv3o7xuOiHZb9O%2B8wInahgIhAIpFND3tgEc%2FODDHfolcCfsmAapcp4%2BTlxRpchl8sk%2B2KsQFCMT%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FwEQBBoMNDQ5MjI5MDMyODIyIgxwMgKVBcbWf4%2BQdyAqmAVJC54HvzZ3A41SMcsmGmL8HhhokPlfYQ3OsRJNV8YLCp%2FMzs%2FFNDiBTgkWlVKrgTG5kUia3TL0EkQSbc0sXq4JLgT74ota5dzwVRusGJlC6QpzGh5be5kCIFRnjQBwL%2BU9do%2FfGz6ecKeh65a99mogkL21R7%2FetwX0Lgbd9k0bchsiOJddqRAais5sULfleYjvMuPc3u0z44hh1Qw5BX0mLnNLr8ooQHXC%2BeGn3MWANFw3tuuH9oqnRa8ZtxZ4DaH1boF%2BFMafqy%2FdMLMcCyUvowI5VlmpYaobA2RK91aoZ6qwrNuov8FipirFy1IsLIYHFaT3gPNFThhV9tXXy%2BY4MUuKRTRJItA%2FlcVEi%2Foel6Y5g5o1nYK%2BpTBEuveWX3gtQMahkS16mQu50CRas2VeBqthzeXSUAGgXpyqYY6iDzXS%2FT8I5jmJv%2BXwgk3zs%2BoyfuB76KyM4A32EACy%2F437B%2BuYaahLV0n5kuguv%2FXarJOpaGqQkMMZ9uJ62pXAfPcoRrIlihD18mFzHUmyLc7MPkO3sOg0v6Pw1U84NpR2TEcvzOSWRz5XExs19QkXjfFFToecJF37IZjrIAFKXgJysRCTJpI1vGFr%2BcoR0mbIijAs3mxC3Q%2FSx%2B3sTARV4%2FdJXBi6LZzQshn5RNFGtbQ%2BjmPuYilCI%2BbaF2Wi66gQ5Pj5BPqY2xNHSqs6SfZbHc6CcXTfXgxwrvhC%2Bod3HMUVtigz3W20J5IhaKcnbPHLWaopeGvqoL6JLNYJSgrc8pVg%2FzN2XvOyoImkCOQl1afrD0Iu0%2F6iVWBAIXJuFZ9%2FV7vSx1INmHpJzA%2FpvvqN6RSLCR6FH5EGWpYWCA3V%2FhrCzPaOYKyPzFYOgZh3KxADOlSgac%2FA%2F3X8MO%2FB3KgGOrAB%2FQ4TYo90%2B7RvvSiMUI4Bg0RaZ68CygcIc%2BwcGJQ7y2XHT1dFuxU0KmnTRfPbwoaZZxxenl%2FfRpqnkLtKqjEAL2NETbFI1HQyvkuWjSTJXwUY2nrSgeHHecZB85z3aQgPC3L7RxnLsbmelcyGFpvwKlHGJZX1tJvhTlfEG7D7ilrSFAAB2uaqyq9qVy%2FsKzlK4OGGUGZ8qauCYote8zCfDE1hU6mFWd8hnfFnz8aEVWg%3D&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&response-content-disposition=inline%3Bfilename%3D"14167438_newinc_2022-06-13.pdf"&X-Amz-Signature=e0f74b47466af657fa852cae8be42f2dd12764326fada19aa664127642908af9

This document states the company's capital as GBP1,000,000.

Here's a link to the Nevis financial regulator's website showing WRLife's registration as a foreign insurance company: https://www.nevisfsrc.com/regulated-entities/#general-insurance-companies

I can't find evidence that WRLife is registered with the PRA or FRA in the UK, so I don't think it is regulated as an insurer there. It would appear that if one wanted the assistance of a regulator, one would have to contact the Financial Services Regulatory Commission on Nevis.

I think there is another interesting twist to this issue: Does the second amendment allow the prohibition of ownership or possession of firearms simply due to a person's actions or activities for which he/she has not been convicted in a court of law? 

If the second amendment prevails, the question about drug use is unconstitutional and it becomes irrelevant how Hunter Biden answered it. This may go to the Supreme Court and put the gun-loving conservatives in a bind.

1 hour ago, KannikaP said:

How do 'real' insurance companies do it?

Yes, they invest the money coming in, to pay out claims, which hopefully are less than the premiums invested.

 

Real insurance companies have substantial paid-up capital and also loss reserves which have been built up over time. It isn't a sustainable business model to pay yesterday's claims from today's premium.

38 minutes ago, kidneyw said:

I was not present when my kids got their Thai passports.

I have also heard of such if it is a Thai parent accompanying, but I wouldn't count on that happening with a foreign parent. 

Technically a Thai parent would also need a notarized letter from the absent parent as it is an international convention, to which Thailand is a signatory, that requires this.

My presence was always required when we obtained and renewed our children's Thai passports, but this was in Bangkok.

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

As Por-Ror-Bor would cover pedestrians, occupants of other vehicles etc I think it simply covers 'everything'...  (but could be wrong).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, Por Ror Bor would not be invalidated by providing taxi services without authorizations.

Por Ror Bor isn't so much a typical motor insurance cover as a scheme to reimburse hospitals for providing medical services for those injured by vehicles.

12 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

In which case the female (non) taxi driver has the same insurance....  

Yes, all cars legally registered must have this.

It is also not necessary to establish which vehicle was involved in or caused the injury. It is sufficient to allege that the injury was caused by a vehicle. This is to allow cover to apply to hit-and-run accidents.

19 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

 

Now..  playing along and assuming a taxi does have insurance...  What level of cover and compensation is offered to a fare paying passenger if injured in an accident ????

 

Is it worth anything at all ????...       We could be arguing about 5000 baht towards medical bills and thats it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the taxi does not subscribe to voluntary insurance, it would likely at least have the mandatory Por Ror Bor cover which provides baht 80,000 in medical expenses and baht 500,000 for death or permanent disability. It is not necessary to establish fault for this cover to apply and would apply to passengers.

1 hour ago, brianthainess said:

   

You beat me to it.