1 minute ago, stevenl said:

I saw you posted that, so your 'again' is not justified. So you expect readers to go back to the original post and your reply and understand what you're on about. In that case, better settle things via PM.

But if it is meant for the open forum, quoting the post you're reacting to really is easier.

 

Maybe we can get back on topic now?

Again is fully justified, as this is not the first time that you have jumped on something i have posted.

3 minutes ago, Jeremia Juxtaposed said:

Why?

Stupid reply try again.

There must be at least some insurance coverage from the compulsory 3rd party insurance on the vehicle. 

 

On top of that, the police should have seized the vehicles involved so that the fault party has to pay or they don't get their vehicle back.

1 hour ago, Thaiwrath said:

but she should really have checked with the bank, before departure.

Yes, she should, but who can understand (or even read) 15 pages of "Terms and Conditions", font size 4?

sounds very strange a taxi dont have insurance to cover 3rd party,

is that really not enforced in thailand ?

52 minutes ago, Expatthailover said:

 another sad story into another a thai bashing exercise. 

            You seem hellbent on twisting this so that the thais are portrayed as bad guys.

 

Please get a life. You have chimed in on at least  3 other threads today, with your usual Thai bashing bitch and moan. 

16 minutes ago, sammieuk1 said:

You might have thought governments might like to step in extreme circumstances the Thai's should help out and repatriate this poor innocent girl to save loss of tourism face and the UK's to show the rich have a heart .get off your lazy <deleted> and get this girl home.  

I don't want my government stepping in every time.  Why should I as a taxpayer have to stump up?  They're all extreme circumstances, aren't they?

 

The onus is on the individual to check their insurance policy and the extent of its coverage before going on holiday.

 

Edited May 10, 20188 yr by Unsane

2 minutes ago, poanoi said:

sounds very strange a taxi dont have insurance to cover 3rd party,

is that really not enforced in thailand ?

 

"Taxis" in Phuket aren't subject to much in the way of law enforcement.

11 minutes ago, sammieuk1 said:

Stupid reply try again.

"You might have thought governments might like to step in extreme circumstances the Thai's should help out and repatriate this poor innocent girl to save loss of tourism face and the UK's to show the rich have a heart .get off your lazy <deleted> and get this girl home. "

 

Why.?..Is that better??

Edited May 10, 20188 yr by Jeremia Juxtaposed

Book your ticket with a premium credit card and travel insurance is free

Never tried to use it though.

I read the terms seems legit

1 hour ago, mercman24 said:

why should she pay, she was an innocent passenger in a public service vehicle a TAXI, oh silly me of course it is her fault, she should have walked, only in Thailand.i think the only way to get to a destination safely here is to say to the driver, i drive , you sit in the back lol,, 

"she should have walked"

 

why are posters to lazy to read the articles but post anyway?

 

"Abbie's injuries included a broken spine, three broken ribs and a ruptured spleen and bowel. "

I drive in Thailand. My extra auto insurance covers 3rd party liability. Bodily injury 2 million, compensation 10 million. One of the highest accident rates in the world and a taxi doesn't carry liability insurance. 

 

Can't fix stupid, or cheap! 

3 minutes ago, Unsane said:

I don't want my government stepping in every time.  Why should I as a taxpayer have to stump up?  They're all extreme circumstances, aren't they?

 

The onus is on the individual to check their insurance policy and the extend of its coverage before going on holiday.

As a taxpayer you have control of precisely what its spent on? You might have thought as a passenger in a taxi the onus lies there.

Your comments are easily said to someone unknown in trouble sadly now fairly typical.      

19 minutes ago, Jeremia Juxtaposed said:

"You might have thought governments might like to step in extreme circumstances the Thai's should help out and repatriate this poor innocent girl to save loss of tourism face and the UK's to show the rich have a heart .get off your lazy <deleted> and get this girl home. "

 

Why.?..Is that better??

And you even had to edit that what quality!

Thailand should have the decency to give ALL tourists free medical care that is the result of others negligence - and I;d say an innocent passenger in a taxi cab would count as one. As it is , the only people doing well out of tourists misery at the hands of others (mainly Thai) are the hospitals !

29 minutes ago, sammieuk1 said:

And you even had to edit that what quality!

Yes! Well spotted!  I added a question mark to "why" for grammatical correctness.

 

Now please expand on why a Government of any country should provide repatriation coverage free of charge to all their citizens world wide when everybody knows since the days of Judith Chalmers' holiday programmes of the 70s and 80s that you need to purchase sufficient insurance to cover you for the destination, activities, occurrences and length of holiday...

 

I completed my post unedited but thought I'd throw this in to tease you..

Edited May 10, 20188 yr by Jeremia Juxtaposed

1 hour ago, darksidedog said:

Stories like this really piss me off. If you are in a taxi and it has an accident, his insurance should cover any medical expenses, especially if you do not have your own. On that note though, I am continuously shocked how many stupid people, (and if you come somewhere dangerous like Thailand without insurance, you are stupid), either have no insurance or do not bother to check their coverage. Maybe time for the Government to force people entering the country to show proof of adequate coverage, or for them to be forced to buy a package at the point of entry to cover them.

So it appears that it`s not compulsory in Thailand for public transport vehicles and companies to cover passengers if in the event of injuries caused by accidents.

 

This reminds of what happened to my Thai wife and her mother 40 years ago. They were travelling in a Tuk Tuk in Chiang Mai, when the Tuk Tuk done a U-turn at high speed, lost control of the vehicle and it toppled over. My MiL suffered a broken arm and both my wife and Mil also suffered severe cuts and bruising. Both spent several days in hospital and had to pay all their own medical expenses. The Tuk Tuk driver was not even prosecuted for reckless driving. They were told the driver had no insurance and the police besides making a report, showed very little interest.

 

Thailand public transport safety standards are appalling, passengers that travel on buses, coaches, boats, taxis and trains really are taking a risk.

2 hours ago, Thaiwrath said:

Terrible accident, but she should really have checked with the bank, before departure.

I am sure most travellers get asked by travel agents "do you have travel insurance ?"

of course they do, its an excellent upsell.

15 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

So it appears that it`s not compulsory in Thailand for public transport vehicles and companies to cover passengers if in the event of injuries caused by accidents.

 

This reminds of what happened to my Thai wife and her mother 40 years ago. They were travelling in a Tuk Tuk in Chiang Mai, when the Tuk Tuk done a U-turn at high speed, lost control of the vehicle and it toppled over. My MiL suffered a broken arm and both my wife and Mil also suffered severe cuts and bruising. Both spent several days in hospital and had to pay all their own medical expenses. The Tuk Tuk driver was not even prosecuted for reckless driving. They were told the driver had no insurance and the police besides making a report, showed very little interest.

 

Thailand public transport safety standards are appalling, passengers that travel on buses, coaches, boats, taxis and trains really are taking a risk.

Accident insurance for passengers is compulsory.

A troll post has been removed. 

wait wait wait... didn't the government said Uber is illegal because you may not be insured if you are in accident?

 

Well, here is the "insurance" in reality. While Uber covers you upto $1M

43 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Accident insurance for passengers is compulsory.

So what`s gone wrong in this case?

Just now, cyberfarang said:

So what`s gone wrong in this case?

Why ask me?

 

Illegal taxi, sloppy police, insurance lapsed and wasn't checked by DLT, and I'm sure there's more possibilities.

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

Why ask me?

 

Illegal taxi, sloppy police, insurance lapsed and wasn't checked by DLT, and I'm sure there's more possibilities.

If that`s the case, then why isn`t the taxi company imposed to pay for this woman`s medical expenses? I`m only asking you, because you seem to know it all.

7 minutes ago, WonderfulDay said:

wait wait wait... didn't the government said Uber is illegal because you may not be insured if you are in accident?

 

Well, here is the "insurance" in reality. While Uber covers you upto $1M

Agreed... this was my argument (here on TV) when the debate arose regarding UBER's legality in Thailand. 

 

The DLT suggested that UBER was illegal because the cars were private and fare paying passengers would not be covered by the drivers / car insurance in the event of an accident. My point at the time was, how many Taxis have insurance (A taxi without insurance hit my car before). 

 

Thus: IMO the DLT should be paying up, or the owner of the taxi company. 

 

That said: the injured party was naive in believing her insurance covered her. That said, its very difficult to get specifics out of insurance companies... It took me two months just to get in writing that it was ok to ride on the back of a motorcycle taxi or in a regular taxi without a seatbelt - these insurance companies are very slippery. 

3 hours ago, darksidedog said:

Maybe time for the Government to force people entering the country to show proof of adequate coverage

And why isn't the government, the entity who regulates taxis, requiring the taxis to have adequate coverage to cover the medical payments of the passengers?  That's the bigger question.  The passengers shouldn't be responsible to any of the medical - they are victims!!!

3 hours ago, Expatthailover said:

If you have kosher insurance and you get on a dodgy taxi you will have no problem.

Can you imagine presenting to bumrungrad and saying I have no insurance the taxi driver is responsible for the bill.

Dony leave without proper insurance..it isnt hard 

You have a point about the insurance, however, why should passengers have to pay anything in an accident that was not their fault?

 

According to your logic, it a taxi runs you over, your insurance should pay for it and he should get off Scott free, right?

 

Makes no sense at all.

3 hours ago, sammieuk1 said:

You might have thought governments might like to step in extreme circumstances the Thai's should help out and repatriate this poor innocent girl to save loss of tourism face and the UK's to show the rich have a heart .get off your lazy <deleted> and get this girl home.  

What's stopping you weighing in?

 

 

Edited May 10, 20188 yr by evadgib

2 minutes ago, bwpage3 said:

You have a point about the insurance, however, why should passengers have to pay anything in an accident that was not their fault?

 

According to your logic, it a taxi runs you over, your insurance should pay for it and he should get off Scott free, right?

 

Makes no sense at all.

Makes no sense at all?...It is a perfect example of why you should have full insurance IMHO...

1 hour ago, Jeremia Juxtaposed said:

Yes! Well spotted!  I added a question mark to "why" for grammatical correctness.

 

Now please expand on why a Government of any country should provide repatriation coverage free of charge to all their citizens world wide when everybody knows since the days of Judith Chalmers' holiday programmes of the 70s and 80s that you need to purchase sufficient insurance to cover you for the destination, activities, occurrences and length of holiday...

 

I completed my post unedited but thought I'd throw this in to tease you..

You seam to be struggling with the bit of my post that says you" would have thought" and" extreme circumstances"

And to expand on why the Government should provide repatriation simple on moral grounds if nothing else the girl is a UK citizen and the country is a G7 member and Thailand neither costs can be haggled over anytime.