MangoKorat

For general information, very few rental companies make money on car rental itself. If you live in Europe, you may notice that most rental cars only have a few thousand miles on them. You may also notice the proliferation of 'nearly new' cars for sale at dedicated outlets that only stock cars around 1 year old or less and all have an equally low mileage. Ever wondered where they get all these low mileage cars that are often just a few months old from? Car rental companies have massive buying power - far more than even the largest dealerships and as such can command huge discounts from car manufacturers, from whom they buy direct. However, the agreements with the manuafacturers are that such cars are only for rental purposes - to protect both the manufacturer's dealers and their retail prices. The rental companies real reason for existence has, in many cases, become secondhand sales from which they make far more money than they do from renting cars. They simply keep them on the rental fleet for a number of months or a particular mileage, then ship them out to their sales outlets. These sales outlets are often in a different name and through 'double selling' may appear to have nothing to do with the rental companies at all. Equally, should you buy a used car from one of these outlets, it is highly unlikely that the registration documents will be in the name of Hertz etc. - they normally use the name of some form of holding company to act as the registered keepers. That way, the buyers are unaware that they are buying an ex rental car (not there is anything wrong with that) and the sellers have anonymity. The manufacturers don't baulk at the trade as there are huge volumes involved and the sellers make much more profit than they would from simply renting. I've been told of discounts as high as 40% off the manufacturers list price but I have no way of verifying that - when I worked for a dealership, our discount was 18% + maybe 2.5% for hitting volume targets.

In the UK these are known as 'modular homes'. One major thing to consider with modular homes is future repairs. If for any reason a panel gets damaged or you have to remove one to get to something inside - resulting in a panel being destroyed, will you be able to obtain a new panel in the future? There are other aspects where non-standard materials and/or construction is employed - consider these and how any future repair can be carried out. Where a problem occurs on something inside the frame of the house, it may be very difficult to get to the problem or cause a lot of damage getting to the item. Modular homes are usually 'plug and play' - all the wiring and pipework is fitted during the offsite construction process. Consider how you will access damaged wiring or pipework. I used to build modular homes in the UK and I often thought - these things will be a nightmare when it comes to the 25 year re-wire. I am yet to see a modular home where consideration has been given to future access to anything within the framework. I wouldn't touch one with a barge pole.

How long is this crazy scenario going to go on? New reports almost every week. He'll be free soon anyway!! The Thai people have already been shafted - just leave it be.

That's a very old view and would also very much depend on where you live/hang out. I haven't come across anything like that for many years. In rural Thailand however, there can be a suspicion that the girl must have 'worked bar' in order to meet a foreigner. A few older people in the village where my current girlfriend lives are totally baffled, she works for the local Amphur and has barely set foot outside the village for years - how can she have met a foreigner? In general though, I haven't come across that kind of attitude for many years. I can't speak for others but I can tell you 100% that in my case, things changed massively once I made the effort to learn some Thai.

Not in legal terms but a 'common law wife' may not be totally excluded from a financial claim in any break up. If for example, she can show that she has contributed to paying the mortgage, she may well have a claim over the house - and rightly so I'd say (in most cases). Where 'common law wives' really lose out is when their partner dies without a will and has not diovorced a previous lawful wife. That happened with a friend of mine to, his (total bitch) 'wife' who he had broken up with 2 or 3 years previously, stepped in when he died intestate, kicked his girlfriend out of the house, took possession and eventually sold it. His girlfriend got nothing.

The above is broadly true in the UK. Where there are no kids involved, there is also a widely held belief that the wife gets 50% which is not true. There are various factors that are taken into account when considering the amount a spouse is due. Perhaps the most interesting one will be of interest to some members here - obviously this can work both ways but it is often the case that men in the UK marry a much younger woman from Thailand who then moves to the UK to be with her husband. When calculating any share out, the financial impact and the time available to recover from that impact is taken into consideration. In layman's terms, if a man is say 55 years old he has 12 years left to retirement age (67 now I believe). If his wife is 35, she has 32 years left until retirement and therefore has much longer in which to earn a salary and therefore much longer to recover from any financial impact caused by the divorce. The duration of the marriage will also weigh heavily on the financial settlement granted by a UK divorce court. Those married for a short time are very unlikely to get much at all in any settlement, especially if they hadn't put much in at the start. Personally I would have no problem with that if I had kids and got divorced. My main consideration would be my kids and it must be remembered that in a lot of cases, the wife does the vast majority of child rearing.

Is there any point in continuing this discussion? Your attitude towards Thai women is quite clear and extremely common. Its easy to recognise as I also held the same views at one time. If all you are looking for is a quick jump, then sites like Tinder and Thai Friendly will suit you fine. Things changed for me when my priorities in life changed. The girls I've met recently have been in local clubs and bars and at social events. The language barrier, in my experience, plays large in such circumstances but once it becomes clear that you can speak enough Thai to get by, things change and girls become far more amenable. I wouldn't say that any of the girls that I've met recently were particularly 'interested in meeting, and bonking a farang' as you state - more that they were interested in meeting a man. These days when I go out, I simply go out socially - I don't go out 'on the hunt' but if the opportunity arises, I'm still game. I am however, quite happy to come home alone.

Change your name, your citizenship, even your appearance - if you've had your biometrics done and the system is working, that will identify you. I believe they can also use a more rudimentary method - name, date of birth, place of birth. If you even get the chance turn around and take a glance at the screen the I.O. is looking at for entrants behind you - all your previous entries and passports (since biometrics started) are there on the screen. I was actually shown mine once. I thank god for biometrics - I kid you not, there's a guy in my home town in the UK that not only has the same name as me, his date of birth is the same too - albeit 1 year different. We also both worked in the same trade at one time! That guy was a regular visitor at the local police station and similarities in our ID have caused me several problems over the years. Thankfully we weren't born in the same town.

Nothing to do with it being a Mercedes then?

Always better to go the 'whole hog' with Korat, they say different things on different days.

I can't remember that far back but I doubt I did either. However, the world has changed - mainly I'd suggest due to the internet. Very young kids in many countries, including Thailand are sharing sexual images, porn and other such stuff on their phones on a daily basis. I was telling my girlfriend about a recent case at a UK school where this image sharing, coupled with requests that fellow pupils send naked or sexual photos of themselves + all sorts of other requests and demands was discovered. Her reply was that much the same is going on at her daughter's school in Thailand! I think kids today, thanks to the internet, know exactly what sex is but I doubt they are actually able to understand it. Thailand has made some feeble efforts to block some International porn sites but apparently there are thousands of 'home grown' ones available. One, and I have no idea if this one is still going was Camfrog where I believe young Thai (mainly females) people were offering sexual video performances for a fee. Its rife I'm afraid and whilst criminals are able to make money from the virtually unregulated platform of the internet, things are likely to get worse. The kids don't set these websites up themselves. Some parents try to monitor what their kids are up to and block sites containing dangerous material + some of the 'sexting' groups that exist but kids soon find ways around that. My grandson (13) was banned from talking to kids on a whatsapp group that he'd fallen in with previously (nothing sexual but not good stuff). I walked in on him a couple of weeks after the ban and caught him video chatting to members of that group on a chat facility that was available within a game on a gaming website. His mother's monitoring simply showed that he'd been on the gaming site. My 8 year old grandaughter has a smart phone but she wouldn't if I had any say in it. I can't think of any reason whatsoever why kids so young need to have a phone.

Not only my world it seems: noun angry fury; violent anger (sometimes used in combination): a speech full of rage;incidents of road rage. a fit of violent anger: Her rages usually don't last too long. fury or violence of wind, waves, fire, disease, etc. violence of feeling, desire, or appetite: the rage of thirst. a violent desire or passion. ardor; fervor; enthusiasm: poetic rage. the object of widespread enthusiasm, as for being popular or fashionable: Raccoon coats were the rage on campus. Archaic. insanity. verb (used without object),raged, rag·ing. to act or speak with fury; show or feel violent anger; fulminate. to move, rush, dash, or surge furiously. www.dictionary.com/browse/rage rage /reɪdʒ/ noun noun: rage; plural noun: rages 1. violent uncontrollable anger. "her face was distorted with rage" Oxford Languages Dictionary

Rage? Do you have a camera on me? Hardly a rage - just a firm reply.

Maybe - until they start checking on that too. Remember a photocopy of your passport is taken when you exchange cash at Super Rich and just about all other exchanges.

I thought that was the best option and understand your suggestion to enter on an SETV. I wouldn't consider using an agent so I guess I would have to bring the funds in. I've looked into obtaining a 12 month retirement based Non O-A whilst still in the UK which would mean I could leave my funds in the UK but the financial requirements again wouldn't work for me. It also seems to involve a lot more paperwork than is required for an extension obtained within Thailand? I've seen others comment that this is far easier obtained whilst in Thailand - correct? If I do enter on an either an exempt or a SETV and then go on to a Non O, would my 800,000 have to stay in the bank for 3 months?

That's not really the point. To use one of the non-bank exchanges you have to visit them. I almost always have 2 very large suitcases with me as I slowly move personal items to my home in Thailand. Lugging those cases down to the train station at Suvarnabhumi is a PITA. I do sometimes stay one night in Bangkok before travelling to my home - but even then I have to go to one of the exchanges and since they have become more popular - that usually involves queueing. Compare that to sitting in front of my laptop and simply moving the money by transfer through Wise and its a no brainer. Also having the ability to transfer further funds at any time during my trip should I need to. Using one of the Super Rich exchanges after I arrive home involves a 200km round trip. My UK banking is totally free and my Thai Visa card costs me somewhere between 200 and 300 baht per year but I would pay that anyway, its not an extra to facilitate Wise transfers. ATM withdrawals within my Thai bank's area are free. I make withdrawals when I go out - there would not be much point in simply travelling to an ATM, withdrawing cash and taking it home so there are no 'transport fees' specifically to obtain cash. There are therefore no additional charges or effort as you suggest, no lugging of suitcases when I arrive - I simply walk out of the arrivals hall and get my lift home. You suggest I 'learn to live stress free' - what could be less stressful than taking 2 or 3 minutes to sit at my laptop and transfer my cash whilst actually getting a better rate?

Your attempt at being clever goes right over my head - just seen as a stupid comment. It is also incorrect, should you choose to readthe posts correctly. Nothing to do with any form of thunder stealing, not in the slightest. The point is that I was asked why I didn't 'have a Thai bank account and use Wise like everyone else' when it was clear that I do and that was exactly what I was suggesting. Its a sad fact that some members here simply read posts in order to find fault with then and then post negative or accusing replies. Quite often they make the mistake of not reading a post properly in the first place so their reply actually makes no sense. You have actually just done the same. Its both tiresome and boring - especially when your posting information that might actually be beneficial.

You are introducing new facets again - the key there being that you bought the property whilst you were not a UK resident. As you accept, the case with most members here who have sold up and moved abroad will be different and I'd suggest that the vast majority will have both bought and sold their sole residence whilst they lived in their passport country. In which case, what I have stated is correct and there is no CGT payable (UK). Just an an addendum and a point which you have made that is also clearly stated in the 'Simple Guide' - rental income from a house 'back home' does form part of the assessable income in Thailand. Quite how that works between the UK and Thailand, I'm unsure given the UK's rules on living abroad and renting out property. One of which (from memory) is that 10% or is it 20% tax must be witheld at source by either the agent or the tenant. Not 100% on that as I have never lived abroad and rented any of my houses out. I know of 'private' owners that have done and are doing that now and don't include it on their tax return but that's up to them. They may have a problem hiding it from both the UK IR and the Thai RD if the rent is coming into their Thai bank account.

I can categorically tell you that if you nominated your flat as your principal residence in the UK, there is no CGT chargeable. There is also no duration for which you have had to live in a property - just that it is your principal residence. The IR have tried to charge 'income tax' on some people who only owned a house for a short period of time, the sale of which has provided a decent uplift. However, that is another matter and its extremely difficult for the IR to prove your intention when you bought a property - - usually several moves would be needed to establish that. You have added in the term 'globally' - I know nothing about that. What I am referring to is a normal UK resident (which most of us are), selling their home and moving to Thailand. If its their home and if they own other property, they have nominated it as their principle residence - there is no CGT payable if the transaction takes place before you can be considered as resident in another country. To avoid potential problems, that would be better whilst you are actually resident in the UK. I would note though, that my accountant told me of several cases where sales had taken place soon after someone had left the UK - at which time they sucessfully claimed that they were simply on holiday and had not actually ceased their UK residence. I am a landlord and own several properties, I will be selling some of these soon when I move to Thailand. You can therefore be sure that I have checked out my position with my accountant. If there is a problem with your flat, I am pretty sure that a short 'move back' to the UK would sort that problem.

The UK DOES NOT impose Capital Gains Tax on the sale of your home whilst you live in the country provided its your sole residence. I said 'sold their house in their home countries, moved to Thailand and bought a home' - note SOLD. That implies that someone SOLD their home before they moved to Thailand - they would most likely need that money to but their Thai home. I am not 100% sure on this but I also think that if you sell your HOME - i.e. a house that has been your principal residence, after you leave the country, there will still be no Capital Gains Tax on it. I don't know if the 'principal residence' status of a home is lost if its rented out whilst you live abroad but in any case, I mentioned nothing about renting. I repeat, my post was in connection with those who sell up then move.

Yes, what's your betting that the retailers will simply think 'great, we will make more profit' and hardly reduce prices at all.

Well he's hardly had a lot of replies to enable an update.

I am a British national and have been travelling to Thailand for over 21 years. I'm single and have a home in Thailand. I was married to a Thai citizen and so the majority of the Thai visas that I have held were Multi Entry Non O visas based on marriage. I've also had a few single entry tourist visas over the years - mostly obtained at the (now closed) Thai Consulate in Hull and made countless visa exempt entries. My Non O's were also obtained at Hull apart from 1 which I got at HCMC Vietnam. So, I'm no newcomer to visas per se but things have changed a bit since I last applied for any visa other than a Non O - which is out of the question now. E-Visas, Stickerless Visas and new requirements seem to be plentiful - I have no experience of any. In around 5 months I will be making the move to live in Thailand permanently although I may be returning to the UK for a few months in the first year. After that things should become quite clear on which route I take to achieve that in terms of visas. I may be starting a business, in which case I will be applying for a Non B and a Work Permit. My first few 'stints' in Thailand could be as short as 2 months but may last longer - lots of things are happening at the moment and I can't make exact plans. When my passport details are entered into the computer at Suvarnabhumi it will clearly show literally hundreds of entries of varying types over the last 21 years. Although all those entries have been legitimate and most have had months between them, I don't want to run even the smallest risk of being denied entry in the future - I will have sold my UK home and have nowhere to be sent back to. I have therefore been looking into my options for visas that will see me through the first year or so. That is not so easy as it seems due to the requirements for visas - depending on where and what you are applying for. I had a serious illness a few years ago and wasn't expected to pull through - although clearly I did. However, when I was diagnosed I decided I wasn't going to let my illness cheat me out of my retirement, cashed in a small private pension and 'retired'. I'm not complaining but nearly 9 years later, my illness has gone but so have my savings and pension - I have now returned to work until I make the move but I have very little in savings. I do however, have considerable assets in the UK and will be selling some of them in a few months So, for example one option I considered was to apply for a Multi Entry Tourist Visa at the Royal Thai Embassy in London, however, according to the RTE London, I need to provide 6 months bank statements showing a balance of at least £5000. I believe that requirement was there when I used to get my visas at Hull but in fact, it was never enforced. As the application is now made through the E-Visa system I guess that the requirements are enforced and I will not be able to provide such statements - not for 6 months anyway, so that seems to be out. I then thought, enter visa exempt, extend that for 30 days then travel to Savannakhet and obtain a METV there. According to Savannakhet's website, bank statements for 6 months with an average balance of 200,000 baht are required and in any case the METV is only available to those who are legally resident in Laos. I guess though, that I could get a single entry (I can meet the financial requirements for that) and extend that giving I believe, a 90 day stay. However, all of this adds up to lots of entries and visas which, when added to my previous history lead me to worry about a future denial of entry. So it seems to me that the best way forward is to enter exempt, possibly extend that and at some point apply for a conversion to a Non O and apply for a 1 year retirement extension. I will have realised some of my assets by that point so will be able to meet the financial requirement. I believe that I could then come and go as I please provided I also obtain a multiple re-entry stamp. Unless that is, someone has a better suggestion? Maybe some of the requirements I mention above are not actually necessary? One further question on the above. Due to potential problems with the new taxation requirements, I'd rather not bring 800,000 baht into Thailand immediately. Does anyone know if the income method (65,000pm) is accepted at Korat and how do you show that on your first application? In the future I won't have a problem in taking them to task on that if they don't accept it but for the first 12 months I'll have enough to do without dealing with that.

More foot shooting.

In previous threads on this subject, many have said that the Thai authorities are in fact, 'shooting themselves in the foot' with these policies. None more so than on the above. How many people have sold their house in their home countries, moved to Thailand and bought a home? In the UK there is no tax of any sort on your home - provided you nominate it as your residence if you own other properties. I don't remember seeing anything in the DTA between the UK and Thailand on that subject so presume that those who sell their house back home and bring the cash into Thailand are very likely to be taxed on that. Who's going to do that now?