Liverpool Lou

Yeah, that is what I said No you posted that it was a "straw man's argument", it was a straw man argument!

Obviously, they did last and they were not executed as the pilot has reported on what happened, after they were located.

Indeed. It was covered in one comment.

He's not a straw man, although he used a "straw man argument".

Why would anyone who has read the thread, in which the pilot confirms that it ran out of fuel, think that?

It is covered in the thread by the Reuters report.

I know, hence my post!

That report makes no mention of his falling overboard.

Devon Lancashire does not agree.

Dead people don't need feeding.

Perhaps the tourist wasn't taking enough care of himself.

.

"...who know". The pilot who survived knows.

It wasn't a Falcon 10X, it was a Falcon 10.

Some readers here need to get a life worrying about "confused and sad" emojis.

Nonsense. 13,000kms?

All I know is that I was told by UOB that the only requirement to release funds upon death to a named beneficiary on a UOB account is that the beneficiary needs to present a copy of their Thai ID card and the death certificate. You may want to check with UOB directly for further clarification if you doubt this to be correct. I don't need to check with UOB, unless your account is a joint account the information they have given you is incorrect, UOB (as do you) may want to check the Thai administration/'probate' law, then your beneficiary doesn't risk disappointment after your demise. Banks are not permitted to circumvent 'probate' law as far as sole accounts are concerned.

I haven't advised anyone to do anything specific, either, I have just pointed out the law. I don't think that is unacceptable, if it is, report me.

Hear, hear!

You really don't see that hypocrisy? Some bar customers and owners are just as "self entitled", they don't own any of the road.

The space on the road outside the beer bar does not belong to, nor is generally allocated to the bar. Any road user can use the road just the same as a bar's equally "bxastard" customer.

"...a beneficiary named on an account prevents the need for any probate..." That is incorrect unless the account is a joint account, i.e. an account designated in two or more specific names. All assets of deceased persons, including cash in sole accounts, are subject to administration/'probate' then the bank can legally pay out the funds.

But that form does not negate the requirement for administration 'probate'. Banks are not courts.

Where has this "eight months" time scale come from?!

Not if the creditors were aware that the estate was undergoing the probate process, the completion of which would settle the outstanding debts.