chang1

Sounds like they will do a deal with the senators.

Les majesty is the problem. It is used to remove any opposition and if it doesn't work then the defamation laws are used. Once those are removed the whole house of cards will fall.

Being drunk not a problem?

"Obviously disc brakes are more efficient," This is what I have been saying. "have not suggested otherwise" Yes you have, you keep saying they are as good as each other. "But there is the question of proportion and context." Any proportion better is safer and the context is which kind of brake is more likely to stop you quickly on a, possibly not very well maintained, rental bike. I repeat I don't have an obsession and brakes are just one of the checks I do when renting. I think we have done this to death now.

We are going off topic here but I have to respond. You are clueless, do some research into what marine engineering involves. Vehicle repairs are nothing in comparison. I have worked on cars and bikes since I was a kid. To give you an idea of the size of a ships engine, the turbo chargers are larger than your Norton. Engines don't get much bigger. I can also work on everything in an engine room. As for brakes - they are simple to understand and work on at least until you get to ABS pumps, not that anyone works on them as car mechanics only replace parts never repair them. I have never had to take a car or bike to a garage to be repaired. The only person who goes near my vehicles are the MOT testers. I have rebuilt engines and gearboxes including an automatic gearbox. I have done an electrical job on a car that had had an engine swap which the main dealer said was impossible to do. The dealer said I could have a job there when the lad showed them it running. I have my own diagnostic equipment and even fit my own tyres. I am also into electronics and have plenty of test gear for that. Basically I am a jack of all trades but master of none except refrigeration which I have many years experience and within my company I get given all of the most complicated or larger equipment jobs which suits me as I like problem solving. I could go on but I think you get the picture. Maybe, calling me a refrigeration engineer is a bit over the top but that is my job title and not something I claimed to be. Nevertheless you cannot takeaway from me my training and experience as an engineer.

This is where much of the blame lies. I agree with most of what you say here but I have had very positive interactions when making my two claims and felt both companies handled things very well. Even the first claim with the cheapest backpacker insurance I could find. Credit where credit is due.

Yes I am. Refrigeration now and previously a marine engineer.

That was over 20 years ago, long before I was married. As I said in another post disc brakes tend to work or not. Apart from air in the hydraulics making them spongey. Drum brakes are more finicky. I am not obsessed at all and these days drum brakes are almost obsolete anyway.

The reason I asked about a sports bike is because it makes you think about how many now use drum brakes. Not only do disc brakes reduce the unsprung weight, they need far less effort to give the same braking force. Your Norton was designed for totally different tyres to what are available today. I have not ridden a powerful bike with drum brakes and would be rather careful if I did. TT bikes are not normal production bikes so hardly a fair comparison to abused and poorly maintained rental bikes. They are nowhere near similarly equipped but let's go with it. When was the last time the TT was won by a bike with drum brakes? I tried searching but didn't get far. Riding 3 up - fair comments, no argument there. Statistically we spend most of our time within 5 minutes of our home so hardly surprising that is where we will get into trouble more often. It is due to a false sense of security on familiar roads. I am not at home so I am very alert and careful. I am talking about things you can do to reduce your chances of getting into trouble not eliminating all risks completely.

I think there are still a few around but places like Cambodia will no doubt still be renting them out. I rented one to go around Ankor Wat about 22 years ago. It was a death trap with almost no brakes at all but OK for what I wanted. I was more giving it as an example of the sort of things we can do to keep ourselves safe. I can't remember when I last was offered a drum brake but there is usually a line of bikes and I would just move on to the next in line if one has a front drum brake.

Not in this case. Sports bikes are optimised for speed, handling and very importantly, stopping ability. Even if disc brakes were 4 times as expensive they would still use them. When I was 16 I started on a moped. It was a Honda SS50 and probably the only moped, at the time, fitted with a disc brake on the front. My mates all had Fizzies (Yamaha FS1E) all with drum brakes. I could outbreak all of them even though it was cable operated. Modern hydraulic disc brakes are far more efficient than cable operated drum brakes. Drum brakes are fine for rear brakes as they don't need to do much work.

I never thought that would be so controversial.

You don't have to be a numpty to not want to read a book of insurance clauses. Did you read it all cover to cover? If there is a blanket statement saying "All dangerous activities are not covered" more people may get the message. Now we just need the numpties to work out what dangerous means. They might have more luck than me.

Unfortunately your post suggests you know very little about brakes. When did you last ride a big bike with a drum brake on the front? There is a reason they don't use them anymore.

It makes no sense to you because you obviously don't know what you are talking about. I am an engineer and have a full bike licence. I have rode many bikes large and small, old and new. I have worked on many bikes so I have a good idea of what I am talking about. Just ask yourself this question "Would you buy a large engined sports bike (over 600cc) with a drum brake on the front?" If the answer is no, as it should be, explain why not? As for riding 3 up, I know it is not the safest but for the short distances involved and the few trips done it is not that bad especially compared to some of the alternatives. As long as I have good brakes.

Thanks for your comments I will try to do them justice. You can't remove all dangers and Thailand is a dangerous country so you have to be realistic. I have a full UK bike licence and ride very defensively on small rental bikes. "your version of putting yourself in danger’ is different from mine.... Is getting on the back of a motorcycle taxi putting yourself in danger ?... With a thin plastic helmet ?" Absolutely it is so I don't use them. You can reduce the danger by wearing the helmet with the chin strap adjusted correctly though. Not much help but better than nothing. "Insurance companies CAN do better at outlining what is not covered" Agreed but they don't want to give you loop holes that you can exploit. This is why "reasonable" is used so often in these sort of definitions. If they cover you for riding on motorcycle taxis but you don't use the helmet properly, why should you expect to be covered? You have not taken reasonable care. Also the more definitions there are, the less likely people will read them all. "Agreed.... Should insurance companies also insist that we wear a full face ECE rated helmet when going on a motorcycle rather than a Big C plastic bucket ?" I would say this is more a Thai regulatory problem but yes, insurance companies should be pushing for this. If they refused to cover people wearing inadequate head protection it could force a change in the law. Getting Thais to comply and making it clear their helmets are upto scratch is the next hurdle. "No you don’t... you take Mini-vans !!! (ok, a bit harsh... IF you are privately hiring minivans you can control the driver - but if you are taking a public mini-van the drivers are generally lunatics and you have no control over their speed or driving)." Be as harsh as you want. We only use private minivans for airport transfers except on rare occasions. They seem to have improved over the years but it is pot luck so best avoided otherwise wear the seat belt (if possible). "What rack ???... you mean a shop or do motorcycle rental shops have racks ?" Yes, rental shops often have a rack of helmets to chose from, so take time to pick the best instead of the red one to match your red bike. "This shows you are making stuff up... No motorcycles use drum brakes anymore.... And... Chose one with ABS." This doesn't just apply to Thailand and thankfully drum brakes are being phased out. There are still drum brakes around on small (125cc) bikes which is all my insurance covers. I ride slowly so am not interested in anything faster. Not many will have ABS yet. "You mean you wear full body gear (riding boots, riding pants, riding jacket with armour, Gloves and full-face helmet) ?????...... If you don’t you’re being hypocritical..... And... no insurance offers you are ‘more likely to be covered if you have worn kit to improve your chances of survival’... it simply stipulates you must have followed the law (and the law is to wear a helmet and ride licensed)." This is Thailand and I only use bikes for short distances so I wear a helmet, shorts and sandals. If I was to ride a larger bike for longer distances I would get the safety gear but we have a pickup for those kind of trips or public transport. I don't ride bikes in Thailand for pleasure, they are for convenience. Just look at how many ride with the chin strap undone. They may be legal but the insurance company may have a clause to not pay up if they suffer a head injury. "100% Agree..... But where is that line ????...... I’ve been on elephants and never once considered that my insurance would not be valid because its considered a ‘dangerous activity’... ... So is rafting also dangerous ? what about the water-park..... the ’dangerous clause’ offers the insurance company way too much wiggle room IMO." Elephant trekking being dangerous is a new one on me too. This is where the operators should cover you as they have the duty of care. This goes for all such activities and as soon as companies start losing business because tourists refuse to take the risk, they may provide cover. TIT so don't hold your breath. Insurance companies could say if organised activities are covered or not. This would still be hard to define as would visiting a temple or zoo be covered? They do usually list some activities but it would be impossible to list all of them so how would you word your policy if you had to write it? "UK law doesn't matter in other countries, only the law of that country matters and any further clauses an insurance company would add." I was thinking more of common sense things like needing a licence, wearing a helmet correctly, not riding while drunk etc. If it is illegal in the UK, there is a good chance you won't be covered abroad even if it is legal. For instance if I was riding a 900cc bike on a beach path without a helmet or licence and drunk. It may be legal but I doubt my travel insurance would cover me if I crash into a wall and end up in ICU for months with a head injury. " it may also be illegal in Thailand too as there are safety standards here, but the issue is that they are not so commonly followed or enforced, there are also many counterfeit items)." This is where self preservation should kick in. If the rental shop only has rubbish helmets, why not ask for something better otherwise go elsewhere, there is usually plenty around. Same with the bikes, check it over before handing over any money. When I was single, safety was less of an issue but now I have a family, I have more responsibilities to consider. I hope this has cleared up some of the points you raised. We are only in Thailand for around 5 weeks a year and only at the beaches for one or two weeks of that. Bikes are by far the most dangerous activity we do but they are an important part of our holiday and the alternatives are not much better. It is good to see you take wearing a helmet seriously as some people take pride in saying they never wear one at all yet alone a good one.

On small bikes they are hopeless compared to disc brakes. On a car or pickup you won't notice the difference but on the front of a bike you will for sure. Disk brakes either work or don't whereas drum brakes gradually become less efficient. Rental bikes are often not well maintained so just not worth the risk. I also travel with my wife and son so efficient brakes are a must. A small person riding solo on a well maintained bike can get away with them.

The insurance is provided by a separate company. It was AXA but it has now changed to another. I can't remember having to prove how long my trip was but I probably had to show my passport to their Thai agent.

Did you try their websites as they should be available there?

That is rough. I think UK insurers in that position would pay out as it is not related to the undisclosed condition but if you had a mental condition you probably would not be covered.

I have that account and it is limited to 31 days I think or maybe 45 days per trip and I think you must be a UK resident. Certainly not any good for living abroad. It is clearly stated so he had no excuse for getting that wrong.

Why should insurance companies have to state the obvious? A simple statement that putting yourself in danger is not covered should be enough for those activities. If someone can't be bothered to secure (not just wear) on a helmet when riding a motorcycle, why should an insurance company pay for their preventable head injuries? Many times me and my family have been the only ones on a bus or minivan wearing seat belts. The other passengers may feel cool and look down on me but in a crash I am far more likely to survive uninjured. I always take safety seriously. I will choose the best helmet in the rack not the prettiest. I will choose the bike with disc brakes instead of useless drum brakes. I will check everything works including lights. Accidents will happen so do what you can to improve your chances of survival and you will be much more likely to be covered by insurance. It is impossible to list every activity and your responsibilities so use some common sense and don't be lazy. If it is illegal to do something in the UK, what makes people think a UK insurance company is going to cover you to do it in a foreign country?

My previous post shows why being covered for medical problemsis essential. I like to also be covered for flights but these and baggage losses etc are all manageable, medical bills can easily be unmanageable - best part of £30000 in my case. Try finding that while in hospital in a foreign country. Not having any medical insurance is reckless.

You are talking <deleted>. There will be some rougecompanies who will give you little cover but they are a minority. I have been hospitalised twice in Thailand and both times the insurance companies were fantastic. The first was for a broken leg which the Thai hospital gave me a hip replacement (totally unnecessary, I was offered to be transferred to a private hospital in Bangkok but chose to stay in a government hospital) and I was covered by the cheapest backpacker insurance I could find (£50 for 3 months). Flown back business class even after I said I don't mind flying back on my economy return ticket. The second was when I broke the same leg when my bus ended up upside down and the roof collapsed. I was covered by the travel insurance provided by my bank account. This time I chose to be transferred to a (top) Bangkok hospital for treatment. Me and my (now) wife were both flown back business class, she was my non medical assistant. There was never a hint of trying not to pay in either case and both companies were courteous and helpful. What is covered and not covered is easy to see if you are prepared to read the policy. I always check the medical section and ensure I am covered for motorbikes. For me the bigger problem is in Thailand where businesses don't cover you. The bus company only gave me £300 compensation and I was unable to work for over a year. Classing elephant trekking as dangerous is bad and I have not seen that in any policy but the Thai company should have you covered for that as they have the duty of care. If someone goes for longer than they are covered for it is hardly surprising if they are not covered.

Lookalike the CCP scoring its citizens from travelling abroad incase they learn how the rest of the world actually is. This would weaken years of their xenophobic propaganda. I hope this is a wake up call for Thailand so they are more cautious with future dealings with the CCP.