Jump to content

Excel

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    6,099
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Excel

  1. Just now, AhFarangJa said:

    Agreed it does say that, (though not in such large font). However, it does also say that the seller is a Thai national, i.e. the daughter of the seller. However, we could banter the symantics around all day, but it does nothing to answer the question. As someone else has pointed out, a Thai lawyer is involved which would put doubt in my mind. My Wife and I recently sold one of our houses and land. Even though I signed a power of attorney I still had to go to the land office because there was a userfruct on the land in my name, which was not covered by power of attorney. I guess at the end of the day if they come out with a new name on the Chanote, and a receipt for transfer tax etc, that would hold up in a court. on the other hand, this being Thailand and the propensity for reams, and reams of paper for the slightest transaction anything could happen.

    The land department in my experience will insist that the actual owner listed on the Chanote is present to sign ( unless deceased in which a case a further process is required to establish ownership). Now who knows what will happen if dodgy lawyers get involved.

    • Confused 1
  2. 7 minutes ago, Burma Bill said:

    I wonder if this joint military exercise will be affected by adverse weather?????

    (from today's Yahoo News 13 August 2022):

     

    "The Chinese air force is sending fighter jets and bombers to Thailand for a joint exercise with the Thai military on Sunday. The training will include air support, strikes on ground targets and small and large-scale troop deployment ..........................................The Falcon Strike exercise will be held at the Udorn Royal Thai Air Force Base in northern Thailand near the border with Laos. Thai fighter jets and airborne early warning aircraft from both countries will also take part"

     

    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/china-sending-fighter-jets-thailand-041808182.html

     

    Don't know about the exercise but some flew in yesterday evening

    • Thanks 1
  3. 2 minutes ago, starky said:

    No excuse for not having insurance if you are frequently overseas the onus is on you not the hospital. Foreigners on here are perpetually lambasted for exactly the same thing hundreds of threads on it.

     

    Where did I suggest it was an excuse ? No where   !!!!! you just choose to rant about something else. Read my post again, I was clarifying , from previous reports, that indicated she was not permanently in Thailand for 4 years.

    • Like 1
  4. 1 minute ago, starky said:

    Stick to the facts. She wasn't left to "Die in a carpark" she wasn't refused treatment. What did happen was when the bill got up over 600k baht and she could no longer afford the bill nor had the insurance to cover it she was required to move. 

     You understand private hospitals right? She had lived here over 4 years maybe she should have considered health insurance.

    The original article stated that whilst she had been here 4 years "she would come and go to Thailand". That indicates she did not live here permanently all that time. Unless she obtained a visa she would, as a Vietnamese,  be entitled to 30 day visa free. Not that it affects her treatment here or lack of it which the thread is about, just stating facts for good order

×
×
  • Create New...
""