MikeyIdea

On ‎3‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 7:51 AM, Langsuan Man said:

You only have to have a Yellow Book if you are going to seek permanent residency, otherwise it is up to you  

That is wrong, you don't need a yellow book to apply for permanent residency at all

The main benefit of a yellow book is that it really is the document (in a different colour) that all Thai's recognize, it is a house register for you and it kills questions like name to use, address to use. This is very useful when you want to buy and register a car in your name
- Standard answer : No can do, this is simply because the people don't know what name and address to use. Give then the yellow tabien baan, easy

Second benefit: Master of the house hold (chau baan) can be in the yellow book = it's possible to register electricity, water etc for a property in your name so you control that. No more must be nice to the old girl friend / wife because she is chau baan and will turn off electricity and water if I kick her out

But most westerners on ThaiVisa say that yellow tabien baan is useless so maybe I am narrow minded

I work for a big American multi-national in Bangkok since 1997. I feel that multi-nationals really do change. HR still likes Satit and TriUdom Suksa of course but it doesn't really matter, they're high schools and University is much more important. HR likes Thammasat, Jula and Sukhothai and a few more and don't weigh Ramkhamhaeng and the Rajabhat's that much but we do have quite a few graduating from there too. It's more difficult to get selected for the interviews but interview results clearly rules over university name. And then comes work experience on top of that. The right interview results and work experience and we choose Ramkhamhaeng and Rajabhat over Thammasat any day 

Thai companies won't change as fast of course but I feel that EQ is becoming more and more important in the Thai world too (at the expense of tradition, a very slow process of course).

Personality will always rule at the end of the day, that's why I believe in bilingual schools over Thai Thai schools even though they are supposed to teach the same thing just using a different language. It's more than that. Diversity develops and is good, Philippine teachers in the good expensive bilingual schools have full Ed degrees so they have been taught to teach (unlike a native English speaker with a BA in English Literature) and they are good, it can take a couple of minutes on the phone before we realise that we're talking to a Filipina and not an American :) That's more than just good enough

I like the more expensive combination of qualified good Asian teachers, some western native speakers, some Thai, prepares a half Thai kid well for the world without costing over half a million baht per year. Of course a Cambridge and EdExcel accredited international school will do better on the educational front but I wouldn't want only western native English speakers for sure. That's not how the world will look when the kids finish university

Michael

Just checked. Boarding at IBS3 has gone up quite a bit, it's up to 29,500 baht per term now

Grade 1 to 6:  (29,500+5,500)*2 + 9,000 + (29,500*2) = 138,000 baht per year

Grade 7 to 12:  (34,500+5,500)*2 + 9,500 + (29,500*2) = 148,500 baht per year

Interkids used to be a pure bilingual school = they taught approx. 50% of the Thai curriculum in English and the students got a Thai High School certificate when finishing grade 12. They offer a second "international" path now (following the trend :)). The price that I gave is for the standard 50% English teaching Thai curriculum and Thai High School diploma

So, tuition has gone up a bit and is for grade 1 to 6:  (29,500+5,500)*2 + 9,000 = 79,000 baht per year.

Grade 7 to 12:  (34,500+5,500)*2 + 9,500 = 89,500 baht per year.

Boarding is separate, they don't state the price but it used to be surprisingly cheap, can't remember exactly but around 15,000 per term.

Some 110,000 baht per year including boarding for Primary, 120,000 or so for secondary now. That is a very acceptable price.

There will always be additional costs: First time registration 10,000 is cheap by the way, uniforms will be extra of course, Chinese may cost extra but still be obligatory :) my guess would be 2-3,000 baht per term, if any extra cost at all. They may charge a 2,000 baht or so re-test fee if student fail an exam. The standard summer camp for new students for 7,000 baht, good to take. All external tests cost extra!

Their "International" option: Thai teachers teaching Thai social studies, Thai history, housework, and scouting? That's obligatory subjects in the Thai curriculum so the students still get a Thai High School diploma and the iGCSE is just "on top". iGCSE on top? Ehhh, iGCSE is not easy. They do call it "intensive"!! :) It's easy to pass the Thai exams but iGCSE require minimum C in 5 scholastic subjects. That's only for high achievers who easily gets Bs in scholastic subjects for sure. They do not have Cambridge or EdExcel accreditation so their teaching practices are not audited, they use another accredited centre for the iGCSE exams, quite normal but should be considered. The last page is just a Thai adapted special package for grades 8 and 9 iGCSE preparation costing more, should be because Thai's need more English and have more to catch up to pass iGCSEs I suppose

You need to contact IBS 3 for exact boarding costs, I'd recommend a visit and you'll probably be quite impressed. Total cost is a bit above 100,000 baht per year nowadays but it's still very good. I am really hesitant to their "international option", it is not international! It's Thai with international put on top and that's tough, very tough. I'd like to discuss openly with the school about not joining some Thai classes at all, just go to the library and study Maths, Science - They must refuse of course because they're obligatory subjects, iGCSE is not. Boarding limits extra tutoring choices of course, the "in-house" Philippine tutoring will be good but should be at least 500-600 baht per hour, group prices less. InterKids have 3 campuses, do they have "international" at IBS 3 where boarding is?

Still a good option 

Michael

On ‎2‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 5:36 PM, chrissables said:

As you have no idea of how the structure of the company is set up, what it does or does not do, you are in no position to say it is illegal or not.

 

 

This is boring, it has been discussed over and over and the ones who believe in this way wont stop until land use comes under scrutiny

Yes of course it can be perfectly legal, as long as the company use it for business and no foreigner lives on the land

On ‎2‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 1:57 AM, Delight said:

Point 2

 

 

Has the law changed ?

 

 It is my understanding that Thai law only recognizes 30 year lease

 

The ‘Extra’ is only optional if the land owners signs to this extension after the 30 years has expired

 

Please do tell more

Yes, the extra 30 years cannot be enforced if the land owner does not accept. The 30*3 is just the standard scam around Hua Hin and other areas where westerners "buy" often, it's useless except out of kindness 

13 hours ago, Mysterion said:

Just wondering what would be the benefit(s) of registering the building on the leased land? 

 

I mentioned the clause in the lease agreement simply because if the land owner refuses afterwards... well, the westerner can look at the lawn for the next 30 years but can't build a house, put a caravan there perhaps or pay the extra money demanded stupid idiot :) Does not matter much very up-country but it does really matter in many other places today. I don't like westerners posting on ThaiVisa that they have been fooled  and ripped off when in fact they didn't do their due diligence or were trying to bend the law so it was their own fault. That is so low 

Other advantages: Must have an address to get electricity, water and drains. Can get insurance, can be chao baan (master of the house hold in the yellow book without PR, blue book with PR). Never any problems buying / registering cars etc. Become PR and you have your own blue book and don't have to worry about others, more??? 

4 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

1 hour ago, jackdd said:

Imho there are 2 choices for living in a house in Thailand that make sense:

1. Rent a house. Don't like the area anymore or the house is "getting old" and you want a new one? Just move. 

2. Make your wife take a loan to build the house and keep everything on her name. You pay the rates to the bank while you are together.

 

I opted for 2.

BUT no good building a house, gives the wife too many opportunities to profit from inflating build/labour prices.

She purchased from a company that stated the finished house price for every plot they sold, no room for her stealing from me.

I bought a smallish house (well, my first wife and I did in her name ) with a lease registered at the land department in Huaykwang attached for 350,000 in 1992 and then lived there happily for 15 years paying 260 baht per month in rent. The land lord asked if I wanted to buy the land for 40,000 baht per tarang waa and the house was already mine so nothing for that of course in 2007 and I did so I paid 40*26K and 10K to the lawyer, seller paid tax of course and we transferred the title deed into my 2 year old daughters name (took 8AM to 2PM :) )   

I still live in the same house so I've lived there for 25 years now. 350K + 47k rent for 15 years + attractive price for the land and my daughter owns the land

I can't imagine anything that could have been cheaper for me than that lease. Brilliant of my first wife :)

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 7:46 PM, ExpatOilWorker said:

After 29 years and 364 days you can still rent a bulldozer and level the house. Enjoy the countdown to this event. 

Leases normally state that the leasee must clear the land when the lease expires so you just wrote a statement of fact

You don't need the land owners permission to build if the lease agreement specifically states that you are allowed to do it, need permission if that statement is missing. Someone else will confirm exactly what you can put in your name, I think it is the building permit but not certain

You can go to "pannääk Yååtaa" at the amphur / tessabaan (everything to do with the house is done at the amphur, land = land department)

pannääk means department, double consonant means short vowel before, double vowel means long vowel, ä is a sound like a very American pronunciation of and, Yååtaa means approx. architect,  å is the sound of a in water. I have found the people at pannääk Yååtaa nice and helpful when I have been there

4 hours ago, vogie said:

Can we remind ourselves what the OP asked.

 

"Does anyone know why Pick-up trucks in Thailand are only available with Diesel engines?"

 

Maybe you should start another topic on gas conversions, electric driven vehicles or even nuclear powered cars. I suspect the nuclear car would not need filling up too often, once every 5 years?

 

Easy answer to the OPs question: Most models are available only with diesel engines because the Thai government subsidise diesel but not petrol. That was not rocket science :)

1 minute ago, vogie said:

You wrote

"Yes and the "Pickup" as you write doesn't have to be diesel, it's just that most of them in Thailand are"

And to repeat, most pickups anywhere in the world are diesel, surely that must speak volumes.

So, you thought that if I write that "Yes and the "Pickup" as you write doesn't have to be diesel, it's just that most of them in Thailand are" then I meant that most diesels are in Thailand too. You assumed a bit too much vogie. -- It is simply irrelevant what is or was, the larger the volume of vehicles using an environmentally bad solution is, the more important it is to either replace or improve that solution  

43 minutes ago, transam said:

Pickups mainly use diesel engines because of their huge torque numbers at low RPM where they spend most of their time. To provide similar grunt with a petrol engine it would have to be an engine waaaaaaay bigger so being waaaaay more expensive to run..

 

The Toyota 2.8/3.0ltr turbo diesels provide max torque of around 370ft/lb from 1400rpm, the 2.7 petrol has half the torque, 180ft/lb, and starts providing that at a very high 2600rpm so it really is a no brainer if you want a work vehicle..

So what you mean is actually that an electrical engine/motor would have been even better :) I don't care what is better, it's irrelevant. Electrical motors are currently out because the total environmental effect is negative, diesels are currently out because of the current environmental effect but manufacturers should try to change that trend please, petrol and LPG are both bad solutions but unfortunately the most environmentally friendly ones we have as of now. Yes, I know that I go against the trend saying that electrical motors are dirty but most countries don't have enough clean infrastructure to produce electricity for them so what do they use to get it?

14 minutes ago, vogie said:

I am really not sure of the point you are trying to make here. Pickups don't have to be diesels, they don't have to be petrol, I sure if the pickup had a thick rubber band to drive it, it would be better for the enviroment. But I can say without contradiction (except from you of course) that diesels are better in many ways for a pickup, and if you don't believe me, google it. 

Where do you get the idea that most diesels are in Thailand, most countries I've lived in, vehicles of this ilk mostly are fitted with diesels, why, because diesels are better in this type of vehicle. 

Because your company has 400 hundred gas conversions doesn't weaken my discussion. If you cannot see that I cannot say anymore to you.

 

I don't get the idea that most diesels are in Thailand, perhaps you can enlighten me as to where you get that idea from

I don't argue what is better or worse in pickups either, my opinion is simply that it is fortunately becoming more and more irrelevant now-a-days. Petrol is more environmentally friendly as of today and that's why many big cities are planning to prohibit diesels from entering in the future. I hope the situation gets reversed if diesel manufacturers can make diesels more environmentally friendly than petrol but it's rather unlikely as diesel is a less refined fuel and it's easier to control refineries pollution than individual cars/trucks pollution.

The company I work for did the LPG conversions for economical reasons only so they actually did the right thing for the wrong reason

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

You do know that this is the 'Diesel and Pickup Forum' don't you?

Yes and the "Pickup" as you write doesn't have to be diesel, it's just that most of them in Thailand are

On ‎1‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 9:45 AM, NanLaew said:

On ‎1‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 7:35 AM, vogie said:

I believe what my wife tells me about what she sees on telly. What reason does your wife have to lie to you about a news item, in the past have you given her reason to lie to you?

 

But maybe that is most of us and not just you.

TBH, Mrs NL doesn't tell me what she sees on telly, that's her business. However, most weekday mornings, we watch the national, Thai language news on the telly together. I can say without fear of contradiction that "gas car/van burnt out" are NOT a daily staple of the national news.

No one is lying I suppose, there are lots of free Thai channels showing "edutainment" and "news" containing what the uneducated want which of course is news about soap opera stars and as greasy as possible accidents. They are hugely subjective and anyone who believe what they say or show is certainly not a critical thinker  

On ‎1‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 9:59 AM, transam said:

Way back when many UK rides had the fuel tank in the boot, the ones l recall were bolted to the back seat bulkhead well away from a rear end shunt, but these were not pressurised tanks.

On my fun ride I had a tank fabricated to fit in the boot together with a 1000psi N2O bottle.

But, I installed a sheet metal bulkhead behind the rear seat to make me feel better...

Thailand is creating new Ford Pinto's every day :) There are regulations for how far pressurised tanks must be from the rear end of a car also in Thailand but many just bribe the car past that 

On ‎1‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 4:48 PM, vogie said:

Are you saying you can convert a diesel to LPG. What qualifications have you got btw. I have answered you without being rude, if you cannot do the same please refrain from answering my post as I can see where this is going.

The above is your answer to the taxi discussion:

There are 106,000 taxis registered in Bangkok as of 2012 and fortunately for the environment, almost none or all of them are diesel. No one in this thread is talking about converting diesel to LPG so why do you mention converting diesel to LPG?

7 minutes ago, vogie said:

Nuff said!

No one with that name in the company any longer. There was before I started there in 1997 but he left because he didn't like the difficult and tough American company culture :)

It's not an easy company but it's a very good company to work for, as long as you perform only

39 minutes ago, Mattd said:

A certain German company (along with most others no doubt) proved that software can make diesels perfectly clean and green 

 

There is no doubt that the days of diesel engines are numbered for personal vehicles, in fact all internal combustion engines on their own, however, in certain applications, it is going to take more advancements in technology to replace diesel engines, that day will come.

Interesting and fun article to read

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/how_toxic_is_your_car_exhaust

Also the new WLTP standard is unfortunately open for "test optimisation", to a lesser extent

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

It's probably more economical to walk, LPG more stopping for refuelling, if you run out of gas at the side of the road can you syphon gas from another vehicle. I have had many experiences with repairing burnt out gas engines, I will stick with diesel. BTW who is "the company"

American multi-national with a fleet of 400 cars. Sorry but not at privilege to be more detailed

36 minutes ago, MINIMIGLIA said:

I would not have an LPG even if it was free, I see far too many burnt out

Yes, Thai's are masters at saving 5,000 baht on the initial conversion cost, use bad quality every day for 10 years and of course spend much more at the end of the day. But there are better quality options to choose from

A colleague requested quotation for their fleet of a hundred or so vehicles and were happy with the what they got for the price. Some Thai's laughed and commented - I can get one car converted 5,000 baht cheaper than that, others understood the point: Quality 

17 minutes ago, vogie said:

Diesel is an oil, oil will lubricate your engine. LPG is a gas which in turn is a dry fuel and will shorten the life of your engine, but 'up to you.'

The company calculates with double life span for diesel engines vs LPG converted petrol so already catered for and LPG conversion still comes up as more economical 

13 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No heavy loads or long distances for the True pickups.

Sure, but I would be surprised if the posters in this thread were driving diesel heavy-duty vehicles  

Long distances in diesel light-duty vehicles just emphasize the economical gains with LPG

10 hours ago, kartman said:

 

Friendly nudge: Where in Thailand is this?