Road deaths rocket by 3,000 as Thailand set to be named world number one in carnage, say academics

[Scott]

Please stay on topic.   Corruption in the banking system is getting a little far off-topic.  

[HaleySabai]

I'm baffled with how the insurance industry calculates premiums....? considering the overall risk of the driving environment here one would think the cost of insurance would be astronomical.

 

 

[Wanderlust]

On 11/19/2017 at 12:05 PM, HHTel said:

As I said, commonly misunderstood.  Section b is correct and refers to lanes of traffic.  i.e. if the traffic in your lane is going faster than the traffic to your right, then it's legal to 'undertake'.  However, if the the lane you're in is devoid of traffic, then the offender is in the outermost lane.  By undertaking that makes you an offender also. (2 wrongs!).  People do get pulled over for being on the outermost lane when there is no traffic on the nearside lanes. (although rarely).  Try quoting Section 45 to the police and they will put you right.

Can you explain then what exactly section 45 (b) means? Is the English translation wrong, because the sentence, when taken with it's first part reads "No driver shall overtake another vehicle from the left side unless the roadway is arranged with two or more traffic lanes in the same direction." That seems pretty unequivocal and as I say, unless the translation is wrong, that cannot be interpreted in any other way than that you can undertake on roads with two or more lanes going in the same direction. It doesn't say anything about what the other traffic in either lane is doing. It doesn't refer to any other parts of the Land Traffic Act either. It also maintains your legality by complying with sections 33 and 34, as you are keeping to the outermost left hand lane available to you. What exactly is the misunderstanding, as you understand it?

[HHTel]

44 minutes ago, Wanderlust said:

Can you explain then what exactly section 45 (b) means? Is the English translation wrong, because the sentence, when taken with it's first part reads "No driver shall overtake another vehicle from the left side unless the roadway is arranged with two or more traffic lanes in the same direction." That seems pretty unequivocal and as I say, unless the translation is wrong, that cannot be interpreted in any other way than that you can undertake on roads with two or more lanes going in the same direction. It doesn't say anything about what the other traffic in either lane is doing. It doesn't refer to any other parts of the Land Traffic Act either. It also maintains your legality by complying with sections 33 and 34, as you are keeping to the outermost left hand lane available to you. What exactly is the misunderstanding, as you understand it?

Quote

Section 34. In using the road which is divided into two or more lanes in the same direction or a bus lane is provided in the ultimate left lane, the driver must drive in the ultimate left lane or the lane next to bus lane, except in the following cases which the driver may drive in the right lane: (1) there is an obstruction in such lane, or it is not allowed to pass; (2) such road is determined by the traffic officer to be one way road; (3) it is required to get into the right lane when he or she reaches the area around a junction; (4) when the driver wants to overtake another conveyance; (5)9 when the driver drives faster than the conveyance driving in the left lane. Section 35.10 The conveyance driving slowly or slower than another conveyance driving in the same direction, the driver must drive as nearest to the left edge of the road as possible. The driver of a truck, passenger transport conveyance, or motorcycle driving on the road which is divided into two or more lanes in the same direction, or a bus lane is specifically provided in the left hand side, must drive in the ultimate left lane or the lane next to bus lane, as the case may be.

The ultimate left lane as stated is not the outermost left lane available!  If that was the case then everyone should drive in the outermost lane.  There is some 'lost in translation' as in the English version, section 45 appears in direct conflict with the above.  A police officer will tell you straight that you are not allowed in the outermost lane unless overtaking, turning right or doing a U-turn.  These laws are copied from the UK laws so where there's confusion in the translation, refer to the equivalent law in the UK and you will be right 9 times out of 10.

[Wanderlust]

2 minutes ago, HHTel said:

The ultimate left lane as stated is not the outermost left lane available!  If that was the case then everyone should drive in the outermost lane.  There is some 'lost in translation' as in the English version, section 45 appears in direct conflict with the above.  A police officer will tell you straight that you are not allowed in the outermost lane unless overtaking, turning right or doing a U-turn.  These laws are copied from the UK laws so where there's confusion in the translation, refer to the equivalent law in the UK and you will be right 9 times out of 10.

Actually your section 34 is different to the one I am referencing, so it should be established which is correct, but I think you have missed the word 'left' in your reply - outermost left lane means the one furthest to the left. The version I am using does not use the word 'ultimate' either. For reference, I am quoting from http://thailaws.com/law/t_laws/tlaw0140_5.pdf.

And I agree that the outermost right lane is for those things you mention, which is why the Thai law allows that if someone is breaking that law by hogging the far right lane, one can undertake them. I have actually been travelling in the far left lane of a three lane highway (Hua Hin to Cha Am) and gone past vehicles travelling in the far right lane, with an empty lane between us - what you are suggesting the law states is that I should slow to the speed of those vehicles and not undertake them unless or until they indicate that they are turning right, and that equally no traffic coming through in the middle lane should overtake me either because they would be undertaking the far right lane..

[HHTel]

1 minute ago, Wanderlust said:

Actually your section 34 is different to the one I am referencing, so it should be established which is correct, but I think you have missed the word 'left' in your reply - outermost left lane means the one furthest to the left. The version I am using does not use the word 'ultimate' either. For reference, I am quoting from http://thailaws.com/law/t_laws/tlaw0140_5.pdf.

And I agree that the outermost right lane is for those things you mention, which is why the Thai law allows that if someone is breaking that law by hogging the far right lane, one can undertake them. I have actually been travelling in the far left lane of a three lane highway (Hua Hin to Cha Am) and gone past vehicles travelling in the far right lane, with an empty lane between us - what you are suggesting the law states is that I should slow to the speed of those vehicles and not undertake them unless or until they indicate that they are turning right, and that equally no traffic coming through in the middle lane should overtake me either because they would be undertaking the far right lane..

I understand what you're saying and it does highlight the different 'translations' which is why they usually carry a disclaimer.  I agree regarding the road from Cha-am to Hua Hin.  Even police cars drive in the outermost lane on an empty road.  When I'm in the mood, I'll move to the outside lane behind the cop car and flash like crazy until he moves.  But more often than not, I can't be bothered and undertake.

I have seen 'crackdowns' on  hogging the outside lane in Petchaburi, Pranburi and the road out of Pattaya to Rayong.  I was pulled over once, and I was in the outside lane because I was overtaking.  After a 'discussion' with the police, they let me drive on,

[agudbuk]

I'm baffled with how the insurance industry calculates premiums....? considering the overall risk of the driving environment here one would think the cost of insurance would be astronomical.
 
 

Payouts for personal injury and death are low.

Sent from my SM-C900F using Tapatalk

[HHTel]

5 minutes ago, agudbuk said:

Payouts for personal injury and death are low.

Sent from my SM-C900F using Tapatalk
 

Exactly.  Insurance companies here will go out of their way to reject a claim.  That's the reason why payouts are low.  Plus of course many drivers don't have insurance.

[Wanderlust]

2 minutes ago, HHTel said:

I understand what you're saying and it does highlight the different 'translations' which is why they usually carry a disclaimer.  I agree regarding the road from Cha-am to Hua Hin.  Even police cars drive in the outermost lane on an empty road.  When I'm in the mood, I'll move to the outside lane behind the cop car and flash like crazy until he moves.  But more often than not, I can't be bothered and undertake.

I have seen 'crackdowns' on  hogging the outside lane in Petchaburi, Pranburi and the road out of Pattaya to Rayong.  I was pulled over once, and I was in the outside lane because I was overtaking.  After a 'discussion' with the police, they let me drive on,

I actually think by my interpretation of the relevant law that if the left lane is clear, then moving to the right lane to 'warn' another driver (police or not) to move over could be seen as breaking the law because you could have remained in the leftmost lane! Of course one of the big differences in Thailand, and why the comparison with UK traffic laws fails, are U-turns - we don't have them in the UK, but I can completely understand why farmer Lek in his slow moving pickup will move to the far right lane when the opportunity arises even if he is 10 or more kilometres away from his turn because he doesn't know what the traffic will be like when he gets closer, so in some ways he is driving safer, however frustrating that might be, and I think it is also one reason why undertaking is permitted by law in my eyes. I can understand why it is regarded as such a 'sin' in the UK but it is only an issue if people don't use their mirrors when changing lanes - if everybody did, and got used to it, it resolves lane hogging instantly!

[Artisi]

On ‎13‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 8:12 PM, NCC1701A said:

number one in the world!

well done team Thailand!

Come tourist authority, spin that one, new jingle and a new video in the near future, we are the hub, we are the hub .... 

[juice777]

I say that do thing in bkk with people reporting bikes on the pavement is the way to go. Roll it out nation wide reporting all traffic offenses.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[agudbuk]

Exactly.  Insurance companies here will go out of their way to reject a claim.  That's the reason why payouts are low.  Plus of course many drivers don't have insurance.

Thai insurance companies are the same as all others about meeting the terms and conditions.
What I meant was that the monetary amounts paid out for a correct personal injury claim are very low compared to US/European settlements.

[jojothai]

On 11/22/2017 at 5:30 PM, Wanderlust said:

I actually think by my interpretation of the relevant law that if the left lane is clear, then moving to the right lane to 'warn' another driver (police or not) to move over could be seen as breaking the law because you could have remained in the leftmost lane! Of course one of the big differences in Thailand, and why the comparison with UK traffic laws fails, are U-turns - we don't have them in the UK, but I can completely understand why farmer Lek in his slow moving pickup will move to the far right lane when the opportunity arises even if he is 10 or more kilometres away from his turn because he doesn't know what the traffic will be like when he gets closer, so in some ways he is driving safer, however frustrating that might be, and I think it is also one reason why undertaking is permitted by law in my eyes. I can understand why it is regarded as such a 'sin' in the UK but it is only an issue if people don't use their mirrors when changing lanes - if everybody did, and got used to it, it resolves lane hogging instantly!

I would seriously advise against aggravating any other driver who is driving badly.

I don't like playing cat and mouse with angry thais, it can happen for the simplest of things, 

and I certainly do not want a gun pointing out the window.

 

Regular drivers in the provinces know that there are many slow moving vehicles stick to the outside lane.

Thankfully not may trucks do so. IMHO.

Being able to turn right 5 to 10 Km ahead i suppose is logical.

The ruts on the inside lane may be the bigger reason.

Perhaps also because of this it is safer for the pickups piled 20ft+ high to be on the outside.

[William C F Pierce]

On 13/11/2017 at 1:12 PM, NCC1701A said:

number one in the world!

well done team Thailand!

Thais like to be proud at being number one for everything.

[mojorison]

Allow me to fill you all in on Thailand's little secret. In a country ranked in the 80's on the human development index (HDI) out of a total number of countries of around 200, to be top 5, conservatively, for road deaths is extremely surprising.

Unless you understand how Thailand functions. This anomaly, and many more like it, are the product of several decades institutionalized "malfeasance". This part you fill in yourselves...

I can assure you that this is no accident (see what I did there?), and indeed that this ensuing road toll is nurtured to fruition. It is not just some bad luck, it is engineered to be this way.

It comes full circle back to the realization that in Thailand, crime pays. And unfortunately, too many people are allowed to make too much money from other people's grief and despair.

That's it. It's sad but true,

This climate of corruption, apathy, fatalism, and decades of subliminal soft subordination promulgated under the auspices of an "infallible central institution" have led to this appalling state of affairs. Thailand's endemic nepotism has ascended heavenly heights in the past 5 years. The country has unfortunately receded developmentally since general what's his face has taken the reigns. 555.

It has never been this lawless in Thailand, through any administration.

 

.

[metisdead]

Off topic deflection posts about the opium trade have been removed. 

 

Another post containing overly derogatory comments toward Thais has been removed:

 

11) You will not post slurs, degrading or overly negative comments directed towards Thailand, specific locations, Thai institutions such as the judicial or law enforcement system, Thai culture, Thai people or any other group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

[Artisi]

Irrespective of the traffic laws, confusion of the laws, interpretation of the laws, the final law should be the application of common sense and courtesy, a factor missing by the majority of Thai drivers along with many farang drivers as well. 

[fakename]

How about the BLACK film on the windows, can someone actually see outside, at night! Maybe they just Guess, is there something or someone outside, that they should avoid.