Liverpool Lou

What if the underaged were doing it voluntarily, does that make profiting from child pornography ok?

Thank you for your input. It is truly appreciated. Consider me enlightened. I'm glad that I'm appreciated.

Maybe but my wife checks things before paying and if they won't let her check it she says to the delivery guy you can have the hassle of taking it back then. Your wife displays an odd, arrogant attitude, then, putting the delivery driver, who has nothing to do with the implementation of the "pay for COD first" policy and is required to collect payment upfront, in a difficult, possibly job-threatening position.

It's not his to check until he's paid for it.

Unbelievable that the OP, apparently, hasn't thought of that.

It's hypothetical. Ah, so a completely pointless, made-up situation, albeit with oddly specific imaginary details, then.

were you there? Obviously, not, were you? No one needs to have been there to know that the story is patently false. Passengers do not become financially responsible for the actions of the driver or the vehicle (unless they actively contribute to the circumstances). Perhaps the passenger voluntarily contributed in the absence of the driver but that is not the way that you told your tale. Unless you have something to back up such a bizarre assertion and Thai-bash, your story smacks of being completely false.

Don't know who the "Joe" is that you're referring to but this thread is about Joe Biden, the current US president; "he and his TEAM" have done nothing whatsoever for America, he is unproductive and is not getting anything worthwhile done. You're right about the "old duffer" bit, though.

.

Why Samsung, in particular? Is there any brand of smart phone at that price that doesn't work well?

Which banks do you claim expect customers to wear a mask and provide a level of service depending on a customer's compliance or ask customers to leave for non-compliance? Bangkok Bank doesn't, Kasikorn doesn't, Krungsri doesn't as at last week.

It's not a case of her being stupid or not stupid, she wears a mask because her manager tells her, and the rest of the staff in contact with the public, to do so.

"Small print" is an idiom. Not sure why you have your panties in such a twist over this. It can be but most posters do not use it as an idiom, they are so ignorant about insurance policies and insurers and the standards that regulators impose on them that they use the word literally in their lame attempts to label all insurers as fraudsters relying on "small print". That's why.

I appreciate your acknowledgement that, at least, she was arrested, though, albeit the location may have been misquoted by sources and I don't believe the source I quoted has any less credibilty than yours. By the way in order to be extradited the subject has to be detained and detainment is arrest.

No need for you to worry about anyone else's <deleted> not being together. "The 57-year-old woman was arrested last week by the Royal Thai Police in Chonburi and appeared at a press conference beside Deputy National Police Commissioner Surachate Hakparn who told reporters that she was now in contact with US officials and would be extradited". https://aseannow.com/topic/1286917-thai-woman-faces-federal-charges-for-fleeing-the-united-states-after-michigan-hit-and-run-death/

Yawn... You're right, your going on about non-existent insurance policy "small print" is getting tediously yawn-inducing.

They are both illnesses, correct, and corruption is corruption. Perhaps in "Chuckles" world there is such a thing as "a bit pregnant"?

You should not pretend to be privy to others' experiences. Others claimed "experiences" that are clearly inaccurate when applied to the country as a whole should not be generalised as facts.

I was referring to the nested comment that they always find a way to avoid paying out. Ah, that glaringly incorrect statement.

Call 1333 and ask them.

Yet another poster who knows nothing at all about the successful claims' records of UK insurers. In USofA we call that 'hyperbole' but in UK, I have now learned, it can just be referred to as "I reckon". What, specifically, in my comment are you saying can only be referred to as "I reckon"?

It becomes a matter of degree doesn't it? No, a system is corrupt or it isn't.

You're misinterpreting this somehow: No, I am not misinterpreting the Santander information. Nowhere does it state that it will not close non-UK resident's accounts.

"...there is no limit nor bounds to this country's ignorance, greed, xenophobic loathing, insulting & fleecing when it comes to foreigners". You should have prefaced that comment with "if true" also.

And if they didn't pay as many claims a Thaivisa posters (wrongly) assert they wouldn't make any profit at all because no one would buy the policies and, consequently, there would not be an insurance industry.