State firm told to pay Bt26m over death of 25 in van tragedy

By The Nation

 

File photo

 

THE CHANTHABURI Provincial Court yesterday ordered Transport Co Ltd, a state enterprise, to pay Bt26-million compensation for 25 deaths caused by a van accident last year.

 

The van, operated by a licensee of the company, crashed head-on into a pickup in Chon Buri province last year. The two vehicles then caught fire, killing the people on board. Among the victims was a medical student of Chulalongkorn University. 

 

The court heard that the van driver had fallen asleep, causing the van to plunge into a roadside ditch. 

 

File photo

 

It then slid further into a traffic lane on the opposite direction and collided head-on with a pickup truck. 

 

The Chanthaburi Provincial Court ruled on the case, as the operator of the van was a native of that province.

 

It ruled that the operator was not liable to pay compensation because it had not yet recruited the driver as a permanent employee. It therefore only held Transport Co Ltd responsible for the civil damages. 

 

Yuppadee Noonkuakul, who lost her elder sister in the accident, said her father had become depressed after her sister’s death. 

 

“He has suffered from depression. His condition is so serious that I had to quit my job to take care of him,” she said. 

 

It is not yet known if Transport Co Ltd plans to appeal the verdict.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30355841

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-10-05

A racist/troll post has been removed.

 

2) You will not use ThaiVisa.com to post any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, inaccurate, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law.

You also agree not to post negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

 

9) You will not post inflammatory messages on the forum, or attempt to disrupt discussions to upset its participants, or trolling. Trolling can be defined as the act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

 

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.

"It ruled that the operator was not liable to pay compensation because it had not yet recruited the driver as a permanent employee."

 

Seems like a nice get out to me. Only hire temporary employees so as not to be held responsible when they <deleted> up.

37 minutes ago, edwinchester said:

"It ruled that the operator was not liable to pay compensation because it had not yet recruited the driver as a permanent employee."

 

Seems like a nice get out to me. Only hire temporary employees so as not to be held responsible when they <deleted> up.

Please read the article again.... I think that you misunderstood.... the Company has held liable, the non-permanent driver avoided penalty. Had the employee been a permanent employee, the employee would appear to have been fined as well as/instead of the company

6 hours ago, webfact said:

Transport Co Ltd, a state enterprise

Remember that all Thailand state enterprises were organized by the NCPO under the State Enterprise Policy Commission (Superboard) with Prayut as its chairman.

• Prayut stated, “People across the country are watching us and I hope everyone will follow my intention and policy, and work for the success of all state enterprises,”
• Kasikornbank chairman and CEO Banthoon Lamsam, who is a Superboard member, said the State Enterprise Policy Commission would focus on two things – service efficiency and spending transparency.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/business/Prayuth-unveils-strategy-as-state-enterprises-come-30240988.html

If Prayut wants oversight power of all the State Enterprises, shouldn't he also share responsibility in any adverse outcomes from the performance of these enterprises?

If Prayut and his government avoid or deny any responsibility in the deaths caused by TCL negligence, what does that say about Prayut wanting to become an elected PM?

Vote for my party but don't expect responsibility from me?

3 hours ago, wirat69 said:

Please read the article again.... I think that you misunderstood.... the Company has held liable, the non-permanent driver avoided penalty. Had the employee been a permanent employee, the employee would appear to have been fined as well as/instead of the company

I don't read it that way. My reading is Transport Co Ltd granted a license to the bus operator that crashed. This operator was not held liable because the driver who fell asleep was a temporary employee.

Instead Transport Co Ltd who granted the license were held liable.

Edited October 5, 20187 yr by edwinchester

The Grapevine network informs me that acting Deputy PM Big Joke will be personally responsible for seeing that justice is done in this and pretty well every other case that's happening in Thailand, just now.

And, if that doesn't drop a big enough clue, it has also been reported that the Cabinet room table has been enlarged to accommodate the additional four chairs that Big joke will be sitting on.

32 minutes ago, tomazbodner said:

hey didn't seem to be under Prayuth's control.

They are now.

Well it's something i suppose,but money cannot bring back a loved one.

At least someone or a company has at last been held responsible for the actions of their employees.

The compensation will go part way to rebuilding the lives of the families who lost someone precious to them.

 

6 hours ago, edwinchester said:

9 hours ago, wirat69 said:

Please read the article again.... I think that you misunderstood.... the Company has held liable, the non-permanent driver avoided penalty. Had the employee been a permanent employee, the employee would appear to have been fined as well as/instead of the company

I don't read it that way. My reading is Transport Co Ltd granted a license to the bus operator that crashed. This operator was not held liable because the driver who fell asleep was a temporary employee.

Instead Transport Co Ltd who granted the license were held liable.

Thank you for posting that up. The company, they term it "operator" is found not liable because their driver who fell asleep was NOT a permanent employee. An excellent bit of sophistry that this article makes appear normal.  Impressive

 

Must be an important "operator" so important it cannot be named.     or the owner of said 'operator' even mentioned.