MangoKorat

One other point I forgot.  Does the shop the head's gone to do crack detection? Unless it was clear where ther head was leaking (often is), the problem with a lot of diesel cylinder heads is cracking which is usually invisible to the naked eye or is up inside where it can't be seen.  Nothing worse than paying for the skim and labour and finding the original problem is still there.

In my experience, I'd say 20% of the diesel cylinder head problems that came in my shop were cracks.

A good reconditioner will have crack detection equipment - mine used to crack test every one before skimming.

2 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

Diesel it is, hopefully all works out, I was just looking at a rough gauge in price so as to know what expect, just on the shaving/skimming of the cylinder head as I already know what a new one costs.

Hope all goes well for you - the mechanic should know that whatever is skimmed off the head, should be replaced by way of a thicker gasket. As per my other posts - this can be serious with a diesel where the clearances are so tight + the problems with knock.  However, not all engines are like that and hopefully your mechanic knows what's possible with that engine.

1 hour ago, Felton Jarvis said:

Thailand’s defamation law is like none in the rest of the world. When truth is no defense, all you really have is a legal mechanism to protect wealthy elites.

Spot on - sorry I didn't see your post before posting myself We agree on that one 100%.

The biggest problem with Thai defamation laws is the item that states, the truth is no defence.

So even if what you say is true, say something nasty about someone and you could be looking at a defamation charge.

I'm not saying there aren't others but Thailand is the only place I know where that caveat exists.  Its clearly there to protect the 'elite'.  They may well, be a cheating corrupt bstard,they may have been succesfully prosecuted in court for it.  But state it publicly and you could be in a lot of trouble.

Remember the case of Jonathan Head of the BBC and the Thai lawyer who had been convicted of being involved in a property fraud?

9 hours ago, webfact said:

For a nation that seeks to strengthen its democratic foundations

The nation may seek that - the government have other ideas.  The last election showed just how much 'democracy' exists in Thailand.

OP, can't help you with the price or who can do it but check out the tolerances with the manufacturer first.  Then have the surface measured to see what degree of warp there is.  Its not quite as simple as just having a head skimmed - especially if its a diesel.  There are tolerances and clearances to deal with some diesels run with valves so close to the pistons that just a few thou off can cause them to meet.  Again, with diesels you can cause 'knock' if you raise the compression too high (skimming raises compression).  Some manufacturers offer different thicknesses of gasket so as to be able to compensate.

Its not quite as easy as it sounds - a good engine reconditioner will know the tolerances and what's possible.  Never had the need to even try to locate an engine reconditioner in Thailand so can't help you with that either. Best I can suggest is ask a decent local garage - although I suspect most don't bother with recons - 100:1 they buy a s/h motor from a breakers.

1 hour ago, kickstart said:

but I have never heard of having a cylinder head skimmed.

Really? When I was in the business we'd have at least 2 heads a month skimmed.

3 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

Why do you want the Cylynder head skimmed ? Have you checked the Cylynder head Gasket? If your conviced the head is damaged you will need the Barrel skimmed too.

????  If the OP is talking about a car engine, he would have a hard time finding someone in Thailand that can skim a cylinder block.  In 25 years of being a mechanic, I've never heard of anyone having a block skimmed.  Besides, it would be virtually impossible to skim a lot of modern blocks as they are linered.

4 hours ago, paul1804 said:

He should be punished but I wonder if the same punishment will apply to the thousands of Thais who illegally own firearms! 

Yep, open any Thai's car glove box.

14 hours ago, webfact said:

and a young Thai man named Joshua Velasco.

Yeah, loads of Velasco's in Thailand, lots of Joshua's too. Almost as common as Somchai.

9 hours ago, bigt3116 said:

You can't be sent out of a country you never entered !!

 

Clueless

Listen, we have enough keyboard warriors on here, its not big and its not clever, you simply make yourself look like an A Hole. Don't call people names you wouldn't dare call them to their face.

As I told you before - that's just semantics. Obviously you don't understand what that means - Google it.

Technically you haven't entered but the reality is that you are there. And, also in reality land, where most of us live, you can be sent out. Stop splitting hairs in a pathetic attempt to look clever.  The reality in terms of what happens to you is exactly the same!

1 hour ago, hotandsticky said:

You don't swap anything.

 

The visa remains valid in the old cancelled passport and is carried to evidence visa status.

 

The new passport will receive immigration stamps for entry/exit.

Good to know thanks.

A friend is in Thailand on a Multi Non O. His British Passport is completely full and he has obtained a new one - the visa is in his old one.  He will be making a border bounce to Cambodia next month and has been told that Thai Immigration at the Cambodian Border will swap his visa into his new passport.

I have a feeling that is not correct and he will have to visit his local Immigration Office and get the visa swapped before he leaves the country.

Anyone know what's correct?

28 minutes ago, Tod Daniels said:

It's the sitting at the airport lockup for three business days that put people off of filing an appeal on a denial of entry.

Yes, I'd mentioned the same earlier.  I've also myself and heard of a few people who have argued their case at immigration and the I.O. has backed down.

This is why I always carry the required 20,000 baht or equivalent. If they want to deny you entry and you don't have that, you have a problem. They will simply use the lack of 20k and it matters not if their original reasons were invalid. they have you on a clear rule of entry.

I would guess that the vast majority of people don't carry 20k with them and there's rarely a problem.  However, its likely to cost a lot more than 20k to pay for a ticket out + the other things you may have lost through denied entry. I don't care what others say/do. Its not a problem to carry 20k.

8 hours ago, Grecian said:

Oh dear. If ever a post gave away a poster being a bit of a knob this is it.

Only a bit of a knob?

6 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

All nonsense.

You would not be stamped in for 7 days.

You are not deported.

You can be refused entry.

As pointed out already, you are kept in Detention holding rooms.

Pictures of that already posted

And you know that how? I would suggest that immigration can do whatever they like but really, I don't understand the point of your argument, the end result is the same.

I talked to someone around 10 years ago who was told he was not going to be allowed in as it was deemed he should have been entering on a visa.  He called his lawyer who spoke to immigration.  He was then taken somewhere - I presume the holding cells you mention whilst his lawyer spoke to someone else in immigration.  After which he was stamped in for 2 weeks whilst his lawyer argued his case.  I presume that meant some form of appeal.

I know this because I spoke to this guy outside the airport at what was then a smoking area. He had arrived in Thailand to get divorced and was told that as he was technically visiting his wife, he should have had a visa. At that time I had just been told that I was only being allowed in as an exception because I should also have obtained a visa. from his description, I think we both went to the same booth and were questioned by the same female I.O.

I was married at the time and had entered visa exempt because my Non O had expired. I visited every 8 weeks and stayed for 2 weeks.  I didn't see the point of obtaining another Non O as I only stayed for 2 weeks.  I had entered around 3 times visa exempt after my visa expired. I was given a hard time but after speaking to my wife on the phone, the I.O. told me I was being allowed in but that would be the last time without a visa. 

I had no reason to doubt what this guy told me and I believe that I.O.'s can virtually do as they please. They often ignore the rules and do as they wish on other matters but sometimes end up with egg on their face when faced with a lawyer.  Korat immigration have for example, lost 2 cases in court where they have made up their own version of the rules.

5 hours ago, bigt3116 said:

You can not be deported if denied entry! You clearly do not understand deportation and denied entry are totally different.

I understand the difference very well - what I don't understand is what you are arguing about. The point is that someone denied entry can appeal. If they appeal they will be detained until their appeal is heard.  If they lose the appeal they will be sent out of the country, either back to where they came from or to their home country.  Either way they will not be staying in Thailand - whether or not you choose to call that deportation or denied entry makes no difference, they will be leaving.  Your semantics are pointless.

11 minutes ago, bigt3116 said:

If you are denied entry you will not go to IDC, because as you well know, that is inside the country! You will spend your time in the holding cells at the airport.

Possibly, I can only go by what was commented on at the time.  It would be quite easy for immigration to stamp you in for say 7 days but to detain you.  An entry stamp does not prevent arrest and it can be cancelled at any time.  The Thai authorities have the absolute right to deport you if ultimately, you are found to have failed to meet Thailand's conditions of entry.  Those conditions can be anything they want them to be - you would hardly be in a position to argue.

Whatever, IDC or airport, you would still be incarcerated in pretty bad conditions and that in itself may deter some, if not most, from appealing.

15 minutes ago, bluejets said:

Those things are rubbish, for several reasons.

They made them compulsory install here for a couple of years about 10 years ago, and were removed within 2 to 3 years at considerable cost I might add.

Been removed all over, replaced with the age old storage units.

Claims they make were at best, wildly over rated.

 

 

 

 

As the owner of one, I can state quite clearly that you are wrong in geographical terms.  They are a highly efficient energy converter. The only problem I have with an air source heat pump such as the one I have, is that I made the wrong choice for my situation. To make a heat pump efficient in terms of heating water, you need to have a high demand for hot water - I don't.

I could take you to a restaurant just outside Pattaya that has had the exact same model of pump that I have for many years.  They use a lot more hot water than I do and the owner will clearly tell you that his bill for heating water has been cut by more than half.

I don't know which country you are referring to when you say they were installed compulsorily but if its a cold country, I can understand why you don't think highly of them.  Despite the claims of manufacturers they don't seem to work well at all in cold countries.  We are having all sorts of problems with them in the UK.

I can however tell you, that in a hot country such as Thailand, they work very well.

2 hours ago, Sheryl said:

People are reading into this new regulation all manner of things not there. It does one thing and one thing only, which is to remove a prior provision that assessable income earned abroad while a resident of Thailand and remitted in a following year (not the year in which it was earned) is no longer exempt. Nothing else.

People may well be reading things into the new rules which are not there Sheryl - however, for many it raises the prospect that income that they previously thought was not taxable - and indeed that they have been receiving into Thailand for many years thinking that they did not have to report it, at least to the RD, may well be taxable.

My understanding so far is that, using the example of, for example, a UK pensioner receiving only the basic state pension and no other income, that pension may now be taxable (in Thailand). I believe that the DTA between the UK and Thailand does not cover income that is not taxable in the UK (below the UK tax threshold)

The UK income threshold for taxation in £12570 per year. As the basic state pension is £10,200 per year there is no tax payable in the UK.  Although there are other allowances for spouses, life insurance, children etc, the basic Thai tax threshold is 150,000 baht or around £3410 at today's exchange rate.

I have not seen anything that states that if no tax is payable in the country in which the income is derived, there will also not be any tax payable in Thailand. So reading what I have read so far, which I accept may well be wrong, on the face of it a UK basic state pension which is not taxable in the UK (provided no other income takes the total over £12,570), will indeed now be taxed.

At today's exchange rate the basic UK state pension will = almost 450,000 so the taxable amount will be 300,000 less any other allowances that the taxpayer is entitled to but on the face of it - @ 10% tax (the rate for incomes between 300,000 and 500,00) the recipient could face a tax bill of 30,000 baht.  Not a fortune I accept but its 30,000 that would not be payable in the recipients home country.

If the above is correct, those affected the most will be single people.  There are other allowances such as the spouse allowance and children's allowances that may substantially reduce the tax payable.

On 10/2/2023 at 9:30 AM, FritsSikkink said:

Because when you are a tax resident, you need to declare income, doesn't matter where you keep the money.

Nope, only income brought into Thailand is taxable.

13 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Perhaps this has already been mentioned.,.regarding initial steps.

The airline OR immigration press you to sign "form" 

Vaguely recall that's like signing an agreement to depart and you pay for flight..

 

Yes, now you mention it, that's somewhere in my memory too.

23 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

I have read couple of posts from ubonjoe regarding this.

 

I have never read a post of someone doing that.

Naturally most of us mugs are not familiar with what ubonjoe outlined. 

I've never read of anyone actually doing it - only that it is available. I seem to remember though, although its a long time back, that someone posted that when he decided to appeal, immigration changed their mind and let him in.  That is possibly understandable if you think you have good grounds such as when they just don't like your entry and so use the 20k ruse. Many could probably show that they have 20k available but its in a bank account.

However, as I understand it, if you appeal you are held at IDC until the appeal is decided, thai in itself may put some off appealing.

10 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Try this one....

https://aseannow.com/topic/992077-entry-denied-bangkok-airport/

Thanks, that was exactly the info I was looking for - re: an appeal.

On 10/8/2023 at 3:10 AM, DrJack54 said:

https://aseannow.com/topic/1301847-denied-entry/ 

 

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1295315-what-happens-if-thailand-denied-me-to-entry-to-the-country/ 

 

Interesting post from ubonjoe in this thread....

 

 

I can't see any reply from ubonjoe in that thread.