Liverpool Lou

And who looks after the dementia patient once he's on the plane? Not the cabin crew, that's for sure. And who is going to be responsible for him and/or assist him in the event of an emergency evacuation in which he may have no idea about what is going on or what to do? Those are the reasons for his probably being denied boarding if the airline staff are nade aware of his condition, as they should be.

Nothing but Gillette products on that link.

Probably to force an introduction to social services.

They will not accept them unaccompanied, cabin crew are not nursemaids and cannot take responsibility for him in addition to the safety risk in the event of an emergency if he does not know what is going on.

This is not correct. You can book an accompanied flight for elderly or disabled people. Airline staff will look after him from check-in to arrival. They look after everything but he will need a fit-to-fly certificate You didn't read my post, did you? It is accurate and I specifically referred to his being alone - you know, no one to take care of him on the flight. The OP made no mention of an accompanied flight being arranged.

he's supposed to leave early March and his passport expires 15 March What's the relevance of that to my comment regarding refusal of boarding?

Do you have proof of this, like tangible proof that you can actually show us. Or is this the personal observation of your seeing eye dog? Of course I do not have tangible proof anymore than the poster to whom I responded has tangible proof of his claim! You cannot, though, really be suggesting, illogically, that Thais do not get ticketed or fined in a country where 99% of the population is Thai, can you, and you're asking for evidence of that? You're also disputing that many foreigners are not stopped and fined? Do you have tangible proof that you can actually show us, or is this the personal observation of your 'seeing eye dog' (whatever that is) ?

Does not need to. UK pp ID page will be sufficient. Why did you misquote what I posted? I simply asked a question, indicated by the question mark, that you omitted to include when you quoted my comment. This was my actual comment... "Do you think that he can safely rely on his out-of-date licence to be acceptable as his only proof of address?"

It means "minor wife" and it is very common for Thai wives to object strongly to mia nois.

So overstating the issue. It will be acceptable. I wasn't "overstating" anything, I was asking a question that may have been relevant based on the circumstances the OP laid out.

As soon as the airline staff see his condition he will likely be refused boarding if he has no one to take care of him during the flight. The cabin crew, even if they wanted to, are not permitted to take on that responsibility.

But his licence does not show his address. It is illegal to use a licence with an incorrect address in the UK and, at the very least, will be seen as not up-to-date and may be considered invalid. Do you think that he can safely rely on his out-of-date licence to be acceptable as his only proof of address?

No, it doesn't... "...ares till eligible...". "...are still eligible...". Not "legible"!

"Wild assertions not backed up with evidence and facts, or simply naming which program in which department" And your post is nothing more than "wild assertion not backed up with evidence and facts".

Absolutely agree with that.

What? Many Thais, every day, do get fined and many foreigners are not fined every time.

Fair treatment is fair interpretation of the law and its penalties. Most crimes, that may involve foreigners, have a range of penalties and officers are given discretion as to which to impose. That is fair, as directed by the law.

"This is definitely a weird story". Yours is definitely a weird post. Where was it reported that "no one noticed" that they were missing? It has been reported that the family was reported missing.

Where was evidence of suffocation from "smoke from the running engine" mentioned?

Where was it reported that a bullet hole was found in the vehicle?

You're deluded if you don't think that Putin will try his luck at invading other ex-Soviet countries if he's allowed to get away with Ukraine. Ditto Xi with Taiwan. Giving into and appeasing dictators is shameful - but then Trump is close to one himself! So where is the link that backs your assertion that "Trump gave the green light for Putin to act as dictators do" that you said you have and that "is backed up by hundreds of Google results"? Your opinion of my 'delusions' (that I expressed no view about) is irrelevant to your initial claim and my request for my edification. "Giving into and appeasing dictators is shameful - but then Trump is close to one himself!" How is Trump anywhere "close to being a dictator"? And "Google is your friend" is not an answer, I'm asking you, my friend.

Google is your friend. Plus check out Hegseth's comments. There are hundreds of links but this one covers both: https://apnews.com/article/nato-ukraine-us-hegseth-trump-russia-a3ca747b102cae6737436596444a32d0 Nothing in that link refers to Putin having been given the green light to do what he wants as a dictator...perhaps you posted the wrong link and you have another? Don't tell me to google it, if you have the information that confirms your claim, let's see it.

BS, Bolt is usually 100 to 120 Baht. A Bolt ride is not a Pattaya taxi ride.

They didn't have to accept the ride, they chose to, so, excessive or not is irrelevant to the OP.

THAT is the scam! 800 baht for a taxi is nonsense. It was an offer from Bolt, they did not have to accept the ride. It may be expensive but it is not a scam when all parties know exactly what service they get for a fixed agreed price.