Liverpool Lou

In that situation you're probably describing a non-UK resident who doesn't have any address in the UK so giving someone else's address would be giving a false address. The bank, in most cases, would not be happy providing facilities for a non-UK resident. The answer, of course, is for that person to tell the bank that he's not a UK resident and doesn't have any UK address except a family member's for when he visits the UK. See how it reacts.

"So I asked him...". If you had no idea where you were going, maybe you should have asked yourself, "Why didn't I just get a taxi that would use the meter?"

Not fraud, both parties would have known exactly what the fare was and what had to be paid...that is not fraud. Illegal, but not fraud. "would you say the same about attempted murder? no murder was committed so no harm done?" Obviously, not, because that would be a particularly inane suggestion. Think before you type, Smith.

I guess you like paying twice the price. "Twice the price"? I guess that you know from where the proposed trip was to start and how much it would be on the meter, then?

No, he did not get into the taxi.

Yes. Wouldn't be surprised if the driver was in on it!

No, they're not, some taxis drivers are Grab drivers also but there are no plans for hailed taxis to be replaced.

wrong. The vast majority are decent, in general, a small minority try the 'no meter' trick in certain areas.

It isn't that <deleted>, if it were there wouldn't be tens of thousands registered!

And they always drop the flag? More often than not in Bangkok, as long as you don't consent to have a discussion with the driver if he just drops the passenger window.

That's right, and never have anything to do with any driver who opens the front passenger window to have a discussion, just wave him on and get the next one.

But it wasn't a scam...illegal, officially, but not a scam. He didn't take the trip and didn't pay anything and if he had accepted the driver's offer he would have known exactly how much he was going to pay. That is not a scam.

Most drivers rent the taxi, pay the daily charge to the cooperative and all the takings are theirs...unless they own the taxi in which case everything they take is theirs.

Well said.

Quite right. The TwitTokker didn't use the taxi and didn't pay anything.

What the taxi driver did is illegal. Full stop. So what? Full stop. There was no journey, no payment, no fraud. Full stop.

Hear, hear! There's something like 60,000 taxis to choose from.

Yes, but the money he earns is all his to put straight into his pocket, anyway! He just has to pay the daily rental fee to the cooperative if the taxi is not his own.

Yes No.

Kid?

The majority of them do use the meters, that's why.

Gifts of considerable value (gifted housing) given by a taxi industry businessman who's industry comes under regulation by the Thai police? Gifted rent. No, he has no obligation to make that information publicly available. Since when has the taxi industry been "regulated by the RTP" and not the LTD? Is that a new shift of regulatory authority?

I have no indication the arrangement was publicly declared or disclosed -- There's no reason, whatsoever, for his rental arrangements to be "publicly declared or disclosed"!

Big joke himself confirmed he was paying 50,000 baht per month to rent two units, one for him and one for his father. So who is telling the truth? I'll submit that the truth and any member of the RTP, are not synonymous. The same article reported that rent was not being collected from him.

Some may, but so what, has he tried to hide it?