Liverpool Lou

I'm sure that most posters know what "electrocute" means literally, and I'm sure that they also know that this was a translation from a Thai report into English and allowances for that should be made... but, being AN posters, they won't make those allowances as they unreasonably bash out their angry definitions. So sad.

"It appears he got a cut to his little finger. Boo who... time to go crying to mummy. FFS" Or, what actually was reported, "FFS"... "When he went to the hospital for treatment, the doctor performed surgery and found that the tendons in his finger were not severed, but some nerves were damaged. He will need treatment and recovery for observation for 1 month".

So, it was you in the OP?

Well said. And the lock was changed in the interest of the tenant to prevent the, apparently, dodgy agent having access.

1. The lock was changed, presumably in the interests of the tenant, and with no detriment to the tenant so the lease conditions really don't matter in a situation such as this. 2. It is absolutely normal to pay rent to the agent if an agent was involved in the original leasing of the property.

Both.

How and why would this accident caused by the tech do that?

He has no authority to sell her belongings despite her owing him rent and restitution unless she has agreed to it. Even so, I doubt that she would sue over the dirty junk she left behind. "Payungsak contacted the tenant asking her to remove her belongings".

"The ruling on Wednesday terminates all positions in the cabinet, but ministers will stay on in a caretaker capacity".

"Deputy Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai will serve as acting prime minister. Mr Srettha told reporters at Government House... “I don’t have any authority left,” he said. “The authority is now with the caretaker prime minister.”

Thai!

But why bother with the photo if it's irrelevant? Surely the text is adequate, we can all read. So why bother whinging about it when it's been happening for so long, is unlikely to change and does not affect anyone? Don't linger on the photo, that's the answer. And you'd be surprised at the number of posters who cannot read!

Agreed, it seems to be a recent thing, very annoying. It's been that way since before the new owners took over.

Makes me wonder why? Ours is not to reason why. But it really doesn't matter as we know that it will happen every time.

But, as usual, there is a disclaimer for those who find it too hard to comprehend, even after months of the practice.

"Actually, current Russian laws allow citizens who have completed their compulsory service, without any further commitment, to be mobilized up to the age of 40, 50 or 55" So, "actually", that doesn't apply to a 56-year old. "Russia also maintains a "mobilized reserve" of men who have signed up to receive periodic military training: those from this reserve with the highest ranks can now be called back into service up to the age of 70, other senior ranks up to 65, junior officers up to 60". If he's signed up voluntarily (unlikely if he's been here for 5 years) it would be no issue to him, as a volunteer; if he hasn't signed up it wont apply to him.

As there is nothing online to support your claim, why don't you elucidate for us?

Read it again, properly, and you'll also read this... "Full story: HUA HIN TODAY"

Covered in full detail if you just bothered to read the full story that is linked. Quite typical. though, of AN posters

At 56, it sure isn't.

He's 56, enjoy your delusion.

You think that 56-year olds are subject to conscription? There's a good chance that he did his mandatory 12-months military service many years ago.

No, it is being "implied"; you are the one doing the "inferring"!

I was unaware you have been appointed or authorized to speak for the entire forum and the people at the motor vehicles department. He wasn't claiming that he had been appointed, he was expressing his opinion, an opinion that he is not the only one to hold!

Which section of the Civil and Commercial Code or the Thai Criminal Code states that to be the case?