Brit in intensive care after Thailand moped crash as family can't afford to get him home

[crouchpeter]

If it was your son, you wouldn't be saying, "he deserved it". Accidents happen, usually out of the blue. That's why they're called "accidents". It reminds me of the NHS talking about refusing treatment for hang-gliding accidents 40 years ago. Not many people injure themselves sitting on their fat backsides with a beer in one hand and the remote control in the other. Remember, it's the insurance companies who are scum, not the policy-holders.

[BigStar]

4 hours ago, sidneybear said:

Insurance companies usually trawl small print to wriggle out of paying.

No. A beloved forum myth that's been refuted with evidence several times.

 

Families claim small print to try to shift blame and create more sympathy for their GoFundMe campaigns.

[sidneybear]

10 minutes ago, BigStar said:

No. A beloved forum myth that's been refuted with evidence several times.

 

Families claim small print to try to shift blame and create more sympathy for their GoFundMe campaigns.

Well it's not a myth. Sure, they usually pay out, but I can think of several cases of insurance companies trying to wriggle out of paying legitimate claims that happened to me and people I know. 

[BigStar]

9 minutes ago, sidneybear said:

Well it's not a myth.

Oh, but it is.

 

10 minutes ago, sidneybear said:

I can think of several cases of insurance companies trying to wriggle out of paying legitimate claims that happened to me and people I know. 

You've moved the goalpost, "small print," to wriggle out of admitting the reality that the exclusions applying to these motorbike crash victims are not in small print.

 

In general, on this forum at least, anyone whose bill wasn't paid by his insurance company will claim he was cheated by the insurance company. How "legitimate" those claims really were will never be proven. We'd need ALL the details, the bills, the policy, the reasons given by the insurance co., etc. And you probably don't have all that either, just the word of the disgruntled. We never hear of any lawsuits or even complaints filed with insurance regulators.

 

But that's another point, and individual cases aren't my concern. Believe what you will.

[sidneybear]

30 minutes ago, BigStar said:

Believe what you will.

Observations, actually. Insurance companies can be shysters, just like other businesses that might shirk their responsibilities. Sometimes it's a battle to get them to pay. You probably work for one, or haven't had a bad experience, yet.

[BigStar]

1 hour ago, sidneybear said:

Observations, actually.

????Highly convincing evidence to meet forum standards. Meanwhile, we do have relevant quotations from actual insurance policies NOT in small print.

[sidneybear]

37 minutes ago, BigStar said:

????Highly convincing evidence to meet forum standards. Meanwhile, we do have relevant quotations from actual insurance policies NOT in small print.

No, I don't collect paperwork from friends who were ripped off by insurance companies in the past, just to give to anonymous people like you on Internet forums. Nor am I prepared to allow you to peruse private correspondence of my own, for a reasonable claim that I had to fight for payment of, simply because the company was trying to avoid payment.

 

I really hope that this kind of thing doesn't happen to you, but it might. Since I'm reluctant to post private correspondence, I think we'll have to agree to disagree, and I don't care what you think anyway "Big Star".... Wow. *giggle*

[BigStar]

1 hour ago, sidneybear said:

No, I don't collect paperwork from friends who were ripped off by insurance companies in the past, just to give to anonymous people like you on Internet forums. Nor am I prepared to allow you to peruse private correspondence of my own, for a reasonable claim that I had to fight for payment of, simply because the company was trying to avoid payment.

 

I really hope that this kind of thing doesn't happen to you, but it might. Since I'm reluctant to post private correspondence, I think we'll have to agree to disagree, and I don't care what you think anyway "Big Star".... Wow. *giggle*

Exactly. You didn't see any paperwork from friends, don't have any, just listened to their accounts, and don't have any objective evidence that you were in fact ripped off. Now "fighting" for a claim, if in fact you ever did, may merely mean you had to present sufficient evidence of a real claim to your insurance company, which was bothersome. And it seems you do try to "wriggle" out of things, as you're trying to wriggle out of the small print nonsense. So it was wise of your insurance company not to trust you, no? Perhaps you're simply projecting your own chronic wriggling.

 

Did I say I care what you think? On the contrary, I said "believe what you will," which you're trying to wriggle out of heeding.???? I trust we have that out the way now.

 

I think you'll need some outside help soon getting yourself out of this repetitive bickering loop you're in. It's off-topic to the OP and to my original post. And you're resorting to the inevitable personal attacks because you have nothing else.

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

21 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Sorry but they are not. the Thai healthcare system is very misleading to a casual observer - the reality is a system that doesn't help patients, is devoid of ethics has no regress and no controls over negligence.

Yes and I've read elsewhere that they even misdiagnose cancer.

[kwilco]

12 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes and I've read elsewhere that they even misdiagnose cancer.

THe problem is that a layperson is not really in a situation to judge mediical treatment.  - the faults are really in the system rather than individual cases. You don't need any medical knowledge to see that Thai healthcare is a system with many faults and pitfalls. A major problem is that people are "bedazzled" by the appearance on many of the private hospitals - because they see Corbusier style furniture , fish tanks and lots of medical equipent the think hte place must be good - in the end it relies on the people employed there.

[jerrymahoney]

4 minutes ago, kwilco said:

THe problem is that a layperson is not really in a situation to judge mediical treatment.  - the faults are really in the system rather than individual cases. You don't need any medical knowledge to see that Thai healthcare is a system with many faults and pitfalls. A major problem is that people are "bedazzled" by the appearance on many of the private hospitals - because they see Corbusier style furniture , fish tanks and lots of medical equipent the think hte place must be good - in the end it relies on the people employed there.

I've been here 20 years including 3 inpatient surgeries and nothing has been misdiagnosed.

[Baht Simpson]

On 4/4/2023 at 5:19 PM, Yellowtail said:

Looks a little rougher here: 

 

It looks like he's had swelling on the brain. They may have removed part of the skull to relieve the pressure. If so it will be a while before he can be safely transported.

 

Poor chap. I feel for him whatever the circumstances.

[Liverpool Lou]

On 4/5/2023 at 2:08 PM, richard_smith237 said:

IMO - while Liverpool Lou will ALWAYS defend the insurance company,

Yes, I will always defend the insurance companies from false generalised claims about payout denials being their raison d'être and irrational knee-jerk "scam" reactions when their claims records are easily available...as I have proved.  

[Mac Mickmanus]

On 4/4/2023 at 1:05 PM, tgw said:

 

entitled or not, low-priced flights are well within the means of unemployed people.

 

there is a huge problem with the cost of living in Western welfare countries, so the price of air travel is relatively low compared to social benefits people can claim.

Unemployment benefit in the UK is about ten pounds per day , barely enough to survive on , couldn't afford 700 Pound flights flights on that 

[Pink Mist]

 A troll post has been removed

[Pink Mist]

A troll post with a personal attack on another poster has been removed.  As a reminder all posters are reminded of the following. 

 

9. You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages. You will respect other members and post in a civil manner. Personal attacks, insults or hate speech posted on the forum or sent by private message are not allowed.

 

10. You will not post troll messages. Trolling is the act of purposefully antagonizing forum members by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other members into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

[McTavish]

3 hours ago, Baht Simpson said:

It looks like he's had swelling on the brain. They may have removed part of the skull to relieve the pressure. If so it will be a while before he can be safely transported.

 

Drilling a hole in the skull may relieve pressure from fluids, a fairly common procedure with head trauma.

[NanLaew]

On 4/4/2023 at 1:56 PM, gearbox said:

Going out to buy food? Yeah...

In the land of Grab and Food Panda?

 

Yeah...

[In Full Agreement]

 

 

You could just change the name and print the same story over and over and over again.

 

 

[kwilco]

5 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

I've been here 20 years including 3 inpatient surgeries and nothing has been misdiagnosed.

Hardly think that is relevant, is it?

I've been in Thailand longer than you....this is also irrelevant.

That I have worked with medical staff has more relevance and that I have a good working knowledge of how hospitals are run may be more relevant 

Mostly it is down to how seriously you look at the situation and understand it.

[3NUMBAS]

on the rosta which is this one ,i lost count

[Baht Simpson]

4 hours ago, McTavish said:

Drilling a hole in the skull may relieve pressure from fluids, a fairly common procedure with head trauma.

True. If it's just fluid. If it's swelling they will have to remove part of the skull bone. They can then replace the bone, put a metal plate in or leave it, depending on circumstances. 

[it is what it is]

17 hours ago, sidneybear said:

Insurance companies usually trawl small print to wriggle out of paying. He probably didn't have a licence either.

 

nope, the full policy document is always provided and it is the responsibility on the the insured to ensure they are buying appropriate cover. if you choose not to check your cover then you can't blame the insurer. caveat emptor.

 

excluding motorcycle accident cover is common in travel insurance policies, for obvious reasons. if you require motorcycle cover then you can request a quote, though it is likely to be expensive, again, for obvious reasons.

[sidneybear]

4 hours ago, it is what it is said:

 

nope, the full policy document is always provided and it is the responsibility on the the insured to ensure they are buying appropriate cover. if you choose not to check your cover then you can't blame the insurer. caveat emptor.

 

excluding motorcycle accident cover is common in travel insurance policies, for obvious reasons. if you require motorcycle cover then you can request a quote, though it is likely to be expensive, again, for obvious reasons.

I think that we're talking about two different things: what insurance companies promise to do (the policy document) and what they try to wriggle out of doing. 

[jerrymahoney]

7 hours ago, kwilco said:

Hardly think that is relevant, is it?

I've been in Thailand longer than you....this is also irrelevant.

That I have worked with medical staff has more relevance and that I have a good working knowledge of how hospitals are run may be more relevant 

Mostly it is down to how seriously you look at the situation and understand it.

So this was not irrelevant?

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1286785-british-woman-20-left-for-dead-in-hit-and-run-motorbike-crash-faces-being-thrown-out-of-thai-hospital-despite-horrifying-injuries-after-being-hit-with-£40000-medical-bill/?do=findComment&comment=17916387

 

[Baht Simpson]

9 hours ago, sidneybear said:

I think that we're talking about two different things: what insurance companies promise to do (the policy document) and what they try to wriggle out of doing. 

What you have to be careful of is vague language. Who determines what "reasonable precautions" are?  

[sidneybear]

20 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

What you have to be careful of is vague language. Who determines what "reasonable precautions" are?  

Very true, and good advice to all.

[it is what it is]

29 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

What you have to be careful of is vague language. Who determines what "reasonable precautions" are?  

 

any issues such as this can be referred to the financial services ombudsman, so it would be that body.