British tourists to Thailand: Are you really covered? Travel insurance warning for medical emergencies

[hotchilli]

1 hour ago, kingstonkid said:

And a better sager destination is where.  

 

Bottom line unless you obey the laws and look after your self responsibly you are screwed.

There is no where in the world that you can safely ride a bike with no helmet or training

Well if you can't obey the laws, or stay away from death defying  activities, then maybe look for a country closer to home where medivac is a viable financial option.

[Paddy 696]

12 hours ago, still kicking said:

I am not British but I have top class insurance so were does that leaves me 

Please wear a proper helmet, keep it fastened. Gloves a good idea, if you do hit the ground save you knuckles! Be aware of the local Lunatics! 

[Bday Prang]

29 minutes ago, chang1 said:

On small bikes they are hopeless compared to disc brakes. On a car or pickup you won't notice the difference but on the front of a bike you will for sure. Disk brakes either work or don't whereas drum brakes gradually become less efficient. Rental bikes are often not well maintained so just not worth the risk.

I also travel with my wife and son so efficient brakes are a must. A small person riding solo on a well maintained bike can get away with them.

Not true at all , nothing you have said makes any sense at all

What's more to the point , Nobody seriously concerned with the safety of their wife and son would ever travel  3 up on a motorcycle even with "air brakes"  Unless......are you Thai?

[Bday Prang]

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

people who pass judgements on medical procedures are usually not qualified to do so - furthermore they don't realise that - it is a paucity of thought.

And what about those who pass judgement, on people who pass judgement on medical procedures ?  even less qualified perhaps?

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

6 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Recently when switching medical insurance policies (for my Wife and Son) I narrowed the choice down to a selection of 5 Companies / Policies - I requested the details (the detailed Policy cover - including what some would call the small print). 

 

I was told I could only receive this once confirming / taking out the cover. 

I’m not sure if this was down the broker or the individual companies themselves. 

 

 

 

 

 

A policy of insurance is a legal contract between two parties. To deny one party the ability to review the contract before entering into it is in my opinion a sign of bad faith.

 

If the insurer is denying a chance to review the policy, that's reason to exclude it from your search. If your broker is too lazy to get you a copy of the policy, you need a new broker.

 

 

[chang1]

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

No it's not... ‘your version of putting yourself in danger’ is different from mine.... 

Is getting on the back of a motorcycle taxi putting yourself in danger ?... With a thin plastic helmet ?

 

Insurance companies CAN do better at outlining what is not covered - they never make it that clear because they want to attract the customer and not frighten them away with exclusions knowing many will not read the pages of details.

 

Agreed....  Should insurance companies also insist that we wear a full face ECE rated helmet when going on a motorcycle rather than a Big C plastic bucket ?

 

 

Mini-vans and safety in the same sentence is somewhat of an oxymoron.... 

In the car yesterday my Wife and I both noticed a Mini-van behind me, driving considerately and not tailgating us... We both commented on the rarity of seeing a considerate mini-van driver !!! 

 

No you don’t... you take Mini-vans !!! (ok, a bit harsh... IF you are privately hiring minivans you can control the driver - but if you are taking a public mini-van the drivers are generally lunatics and you have no control over their speed or driving). 

 

What rack ???...  you mean a shop or do motorcycle rental shops have racks ?

(I have a number of helmets in my house - Bell (closed face), Bell (Open Face), Shoei  (Modular) AVG (open face - the last one mail ordered to Phuket when I was sandboxing there for 2 weeks and hired a motorcycle - I refuse to use rental helmets... because, the best one on the rack is still rubbish).

 

This shows you are making stuff up...  No motorcycles use drum brakes anymore.... 

And... Chose one with ABS.

 

 

You mean you wear full body gear (riding boots, riding pants, riding jacket with armour, Gloves and full-face helmet) ?????......     If you don’t you’re being hypocritical..... 

And... no insurance offers you are ‘more likely to be covered if you have worn kit to improve your chances of survival’... it simply stipulates you must have followed the law (and the law is to wear a helmet and ride licensed). 

 

 

100% Agree..... But where is that line ????......   I’ve been on elephants and never once considered that my insurance would not be valid because its considered a ‘dangerous activity’... 

... So is rafting also dangerous ? what about the water-park.....      the ’dangerous clause’ offers the insurance company way too much wiggle room IMO. 

 

 

UK law doesn't matter in other countries, only the law of that country matters and any further clauses an insurance company would add. 

 

i.e. Do insurance companies cover pillion passengers with a cheapo- plastic helmet ? apparently so, but that helmet would be illegal in the UK.... it may also be illegal in Thailand too as there are safety standards here, but the issue is that they are not so commonly followed or enforced, there are also many counterfeit items). 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for your comments I will try to do them justice. You can't remove all dangers and Thailand is a dangerous country so you have to be realistic. I have a full UK bike licence and ride very defensively on small rental bikes.

 

"your version of putting yourself in danger’ is different from mine.... 

Is getting on the back of a motorcycle taxi putting yourself in danger ?... With a thin plastic helmet ?"

Absolutely it is so I don't use them. You can reduce the danger by wearing the helmet with the chin strap adjusted correctly though. Not much help but better than nothing.

 

"Insurance companies CAN do better at outlining what is not covered"

Agreed but they don't want to give you loop holes that you can exploit. This is why "reasonable" is used so often in these sort of definitions. If they cover you for riding on motorcycle taxis but you don't use the helmet properly, why should you expect to be covered? You have not taken reasonable care. Also the more definitions there are, the less likely people will read them all.

 

"Agreed....  Should insurance companies also insist that we wear a full face ECE rated helmet when going on a motorcycle rather than a Big C plastic bucket ?"

I would say this is more a Thai regulatory problem but yes, insurance companies should be pushing for this. If they refused to cover people wearing inadequate head protection it could force a change in the law. Getting Thais to comply and making it clear their helmets are upto scratch is the next hurdle.

 

"No you don’t... you take Mini-vans !!! (ok, a bit harsh... IF you are privately hiring minivans you can control the driver - but if you are taking a public mini-van the drivers are generally lunatics and you have no control over their speed or driving)."

Be as harsh as you want. We only use private minivans for airport transfers except on rare occasions. They seem to have improved over the years but it is pot luck so best avoided otherwise wear the seat belt (if possible).

 

"What rack ???...  you mean a shop or do motorcycle rental shops have racks ?"

Yes, rental shops often have a rack of helmets to chose from, so take time to pick the best instead of the red one to match your red bike.

 

"This shows you are making stuff up...  No motorcycles use drum brakes anymore.... 

And... Chose one with ABS."

This doesn't just apply to Thailand and thankfully drum brakes are being phased out. There are still drum brakes around on small (125cc) bikes which is all my insurance covers. I ride slowly so am not interested in anything faster. Not many will have ABS yet.

 

"You mean you wear full body gear (riding boots, riding pants, riding jacket with armour, Gloves and full-face helmet) ?????......     If you don’t you’re being hypocritical..... 

And... no insurance offers you are ‘more likely to be covered if you have worn kit to improve your chances of survival’... it simply stipulates you must have followed the law (and the law is to wear a helmet and ride licensed)."

This is Thailand and I only use bikes for short distances so I wear a helmet, shorts and sandals. If I was to ride a larger bike for longer distances I would get the safety gear but we have a pickup for those kind of trips or public transport. I don't ride bikes in Thailand for pleasure, they are for convenience.

Just look at how many ride with the chin strap undone. They may be legal but the insurance company may have a clause to not pay up if they suffer a head injury.

 

"100% Agree..... But where is that line ????......   I’ve been on elephants and never once considered that my insurance would not be valid because its considered a ‘dangerous activity’... 

... So is rafting also dangerous ? what about the water-park.....      the ’dangerous clause’ offers the insurance company way too much wiggle room IMO."

Elephant trekking being dangerous is a new one on me too. This is where the operators should cover you as they have the duty of care. This goes for all such activities and as soon as companies start losing business because tourists refuse to take the risk, they may provide cover. TIT so don't hold your breath. Insurance companies could say if organised activities are covered or not. This would still be hard to define as would visiting a temple or zoo be covered? They do usually list some activities but it would be impossible to list all of them so how would you word your policy if you had to write it?

 

"UK law doesn't matter in other countries, only the law of that country matters and any further clauses an insurance company would add."

I was thinking more of common sense things like needing a licence, wearing a helmet correctly, not riding while drunk etc. If it is illegal in the UK, there is a good chance you won't be covered abroad even if it is legal. For instance if I was riding a 900cc bike on a beach path without a helmet or licence and drunk. It may be legal but I doubt my travel insurance would cover me if I crash into a wall and end up in ICU for months with a head injury.

 

" it may also be illegal in Thailand too as there are safety standards here, but the issue is that they are not so commonly followed or enforced, there are also many counterfeit items)."

This is where self preservation should kick in. If the rental shop only has rubbish helmets, why not ask for something better otherwise go elsewhere, there is usually plenty around. Same with the bikes, check it over before handing over any money.

When I was single, safety was less of an issue but now I have a family, I have more responsibilities to consider.

 

I hope this has cleared up some of the points you raised. We are only in Thailand for around 5 weeks a year and only at the beaches for one or two weeks of that. Bikes are by far the most dangerous activity we do but they are an important part of our holiday and the alternatives are not much better.

It is good to see you take wearing a helmet seriously as some people take pride in saying they never wear one at all yet alone a good one.

[kwilco]

2 hours ago, chang1 said:

On small bikes they are hopeless compared to disc brakes.

Unfortunately your post suggests you know very little about brakes.

[chang1]

1 hour ago, Bday Prang said:

Not true at all , nothing you have said makes any sense at all

What's more to the point , Nobody seriously concerned with the safety of their wife and son would ever travel  3 up on a motorcycle even with "air brakes"  Unless......are you Thai?

It makes no sense to you because you obviously don't know what you are talking about. I am an engineer and have a full bike licence. I have rode many bikes large and small, old and new. I have worked on many bikes so I have a good idea of what I  am talking about.

Just ask yourself this question

"Would you buy a large engined sports bike  (over 600cc) with a drum brake on the front?"

If the answer is no, as it should be, explain why not?

As for riding 3 up, I know it is not the safest but for the short distances involved and the few trips done it is not that bad especially compared to some of the alternatives. As long as I have good brakes.

 

[chang1]

3 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Unfortunately your post suggests you know very little about brakes.

Unfortunately your post suggests you know very little about brakes.

 

When did you last ride a big bike with a drum brake on the front? There is a reason they don't use them anymore.

[3NUMBAS]

thomas cook insurance comes with a small booklet of get out clauses that takes all day to absorb the details......  not for the numpties 

[richard_smith237]

42 minutes ago, chang1 said:

Thanks for your comments I will try to do them justice. You can't remove all dangers and Thailand is a dangerous country so you have to be realistic.

 

**snipped / cut**

Yup... completely agree with all you have written there chang1... 

 

 

Well, apart from the drum brake thing, I didn’t think they any bikes which can be rented which have them (maybe beaten up old ones in shoddy rental shops... but I those places should be avoided anyway).

Edited April 10, 2023 by richard_smith237

[chang1]

3 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

thomas cook insurance comes with a small booklet of get out clauses that takes all day to absorb the details......  not for the numpties 

You don't have to be a numpty to not want to read a book of insurance clauses. Did you read it all cover to cover?

If there is a blanket statement saying "All dangerous activities are not covered" more people may get the message. Now we just need the numpties to work out what dangerous means. They might have more luck than me.

[chang1]

Just now, richard_smith237 said:

Well, apart from the drum brake thing...  

I never thought that would be so controversial.

[kwilco]

13 minutes ago, chang1 said:

Unfortunately your post suggests you know very little about brakes.

 

When did you last ride a big bike with a drum brake on the front? There is a reason they don't use them anymore.

THe reasons are usually cost.. Now you have changed - you are talking about big bikes with discs - you do realise the differences?

Edited April 10, 2023 by kwilco

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, chang1 said:

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Well, apart from the drum brake thing...  

I never thought that would be so controversial.

We're in alignment on this one...   my point is that I didn’t think it was possible to rent a bike with drum brakes in Thailand - its such antiquated tech... 

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, kwilco said:

15 minutes ago, chang1 said:

Unfortunately your post suggests you know very little about brakes.

 

When did you last ride a big bike with a drum brake on the front? There is a reason they don't use them anymore.

THe reasons are usually cost..

Which ‘big bikes’ cut costs and use drum brakes ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[chang1]

11 minutes ago, kwilco said:

THe reasons are usually cost..

Not in this case. Sports bikes are optimised for speed, handling and very importantly, stopping ability. Even if disc brakes were 4 times as expensive they would still use them.

When I was 16 I started on a moped. It was a Honda SS50 and probably the only moped, at the time, fitted with a disc brake on the front. My mates all had Fizzies (Yamaha FS1E) all with drum brakes. I could outbreak all of them even though it was cable operated. Modern hydraulic disc brakes are far more efficient than cable operated drum brakes. Drum brakes are fine for rear brakes as they don't need to do much work.

[3NUMBAS]

WHAT’S COVERED WITH INSUREANDGO TRAVEL INSURANCE?

All our travel insurance will cover the following:

• Cancellation cover. So if you have to cancel or cut short your trip, you won’t lose out.
• Medical expenses. To cover the costs if you’re unlucky enough to become ill or be injured abroad.
• Covid cover. All our policies will cover you if catch Coronavirus, either before you go or while you’re abroad.
• Baggage cover. If your luggage is lost, damaged or stolen, we can help you replace your things.
• Activity and sports insurance. From abseiling to yoga, bungee jumping to zip-lining, we cover over 100 sports and activities.
• Lots and lots more!

Check out our policy wording for full details of these and the other policy benefits.

[chang1]

25 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

We're in alignment on this one...   my point is that I didn’t think it was possible to rent a bike with drum brakes in Thailand - its such antiquated tech... 

I think there are still a few around but places like Cambodia will no doubt still be renting them out. I rented one to go around Ankor Wat about 22 years ago. It was a death trap with almost no brakes at all but OK for what I wanted.

 

I was more giving it as an example of the sort of things we can do to keep ourselves safe. I can't remember when I last was offered a drum brake but there is usually a line of bikes and I would just move on to the next in line if one has a front drum brake.

Edited April 10, 2023 by chang1

[madmitch]

11 hours ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

There wouldn't be many surprises if people would read and understand the terms and conditions of an insurance policy, preferably before purchasing it.

 

The insurance industry does not use "small print" to describe a policy's terms, conditions and exclusions. These clauses are printed using the same size type as the rest of the policy and it is disappointing to see the media perpetuate this trope. Those citing "small print" are those who didn't bother to read their policy before they purchased it.

 

Insurers have every right to impose limitations on what they will cover and I don't think it should surprise anyone that hazardous activities like bungee jumping or motorcycling without a helmet would be excluded. Insurers are well aware of the frequency and severity of injuries involving these pursuits, certainly more so than most of those who would undertake them.

 

Purchasing a policy online directly from an insurer may be convenient, but this means that the policyholder won't have the assistance and commercial influence of a major insurance broker behind them if they have issues with claims. When I worked for an insurer, one of the first questions raised when there was an issue with a claim was "who is the broker". The insurer did not want to jeopardize the relationship with the broker, so would take a more favorable view towards paying the claim from the outset.

 

It does matter which insurance company you use. Coverages can vary as can claims-paying ability and attitude. A good broker will steer their clients towards insurers that treat their clients and their claims fairly and professionally. 

 

A policyholder should not hesitate to approach the insurance regulator if their claim has been denied incorrectly.

Good to see a post from someone that actually understands the subject (there are a couple more as well) but I chose just to quote one.

 

You are absolutely right about the small print certainly in UK policies, as insurance regulators have decreed that consumer policies, i.e. individuals and small businesses, must be made more simple and easy to understand. Those talking about small print must be living in the past or they're American, where the wordings are still pretty dreadful.

 

It is no longer permissible under the UK Insurance Act 2015 to decline a claim based on a misrepresentation or breach or warranty or condition if the claim had nothing to do with the breach. So the poster who had a heart issue declined as a result of not answering the mental health question should have been paid out under UK law but not necessarily in other jurisdictions.

 

All policies have complaints clauses and insurers take complaints very seriously. If you think you've had a claim wrongly declined then complain and if you get no joy from the insurers take it further. Details will be in the policy.

 

EU law, which is still in force in the UK, insists that an Insurance Product Information Document (IPID) be issued for all consumer and SME products. This sets out in a simple list form the coverages and exclusions. It's not a perfect document as the size is limited but those that don't want to read the policy can get the basics from this document.

 

It was also stated by someone that exclusions should actually be in larger print, rather than the imaginary small print. French law does insist on exclusions being clearer and Insurers lost a high profile case fairly recently based upon this law. It is uniquely French, however.

 

Good claims assessors/adjusters will know pretty soon whether or not they should be looking at the exclusions, terms and conditions but many claims are very straightforward and will be paid out without question. It's commonly believed that the first thing they do is find a reason not to pay a claim. This might be the case with some but not any I've ever worked with. Underwriting ability should be such that the company should still make a profit after paying out all genuine claims and actuaries are employed universally to help calculate the premiums.

 

I could go on but I believe that most insurance companies and Lloyd's Syndicates are rather more scrupulous than most on here perceive. And I wonder how many disparaging posters have had genuine claims, without breaches of terms and conditions, declined? Or how many simply believe the hype!

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

6 minutes ago, madmitch said:

Good to see a post from someone that actually understands the subject (there are a couple more as well) but I chose just to quote one.

 

You are absolutely right about the small print certainly in UK policies, as insurance regulators have decreed that consumer policies, i.e. individuals and small businesses, must be made more simple and easy to understand. Those talking about small print must be living in the past or they're American, where the wordings are still pretty dreadful.

 

It is no longer permissible under the UK Insurance Act 2015 to decline a claim based on a misrepresentation or breach or warranty or condition if the claim had nothing to do with the breach. So the poster who had a heart issue declined as a result of not answering the mental health question should have been paid out under UK law but not necessarily in other jurisdictions.

 

All policies have complaints clauses and insurers take complaints very seriously. If you think you've had a claim wrongly declined then complain and if you get no joy from the insurers take it further. Details will be in the policy.

 

EU law, which is still in force in the UK, insists that an Insurance Product Information Document (IPID) be issued for all consumer and SME products. This sets out in a simple list form the coverages and exclusions. It's not a perfect document as the size is limited but those that don't want to read the policy can get the basics from this document.

 

It was also stated by someone that exclusions should actually be in larger print, rather than the imaginary small print. French law does insist on exclusions being clearer and Insurers lost a high profile case fairly recently based upon this law. It is uniquely French, however.

 

Good claims assessors/adjusters will know pretty soon whether or not they should be looking at the exclusions, terms and conditions but many claims are very straightforward and will be paid out without question. It's commonly believed that the first thing they do is find a reason not to pay a claim. This might be the case with some but not any I've ever worked with. Underwriting ability should be such that the company should still make a profit after paying out all genuine claims and actuaries are employed universally to help calculate the premiums.

 

I could go on but I believe that most insurance companies and Lloyd's Syndicates are rather more scrupulous than most on here perceive. And I wonder how many disparaging posters have had genuine claims, without breaches of terms and conditions, declined? Or how many simply believe the hype!

In another post I cited the Thai Civil and Commercial Code's section 865 that defines an insurer's ability to void coverage for non-disclosure. Under this clause, it appears that non-disclosure needs to be intentional and there is also an apparent five-year time bar. I wonder how many ab initio cancellations could have been overturned if the policyholder had appealed to the OIC.

[Bday Prang]

1 hour ago, chang1 said:

It makes no sense to you because you obviously don't know what you are talking about. I am an engineer and have a full bike licence. I have rode many bikes large and small, old and new. I have worked on many bikes so I have a good idea of what I  am talking about.

Just ask yourself this question

"Would you buy a large engined sports bike  (over 600cc) with a drum brake on the front?"

If the answer is no, as it should be, explain why not?

As for riding 3 up, I know it is not the safest but for the short distances involved and the few trips done it is not that bad especially compared to some of the alternatives. As long as I have good brakes.

 

In previous post you admitted that you ride small capacity rental bikes but now you change to 600cc sports bikes but ok I'll answer your question.      

     Would I buy a large engined sports bike with a drum brake on the front,?  well actually yes  I did a couple of years ago It was a 1957 Norton dominator 99 which I restored.

           Would I buy a modern sports bike with a drum on the front, well no and the reason being  that it would be very difficult to actually source one as far I am aware there are none currently in production. 

            My question for you is , have you ever ridden a classic sports bike with a large twin leading shoe front brake ? If yes, what was it like ? If no, then no further comment is required,

             Now ask your self,  how come  Geoff Duke managed to Lap the TT course in 1955 at 99.97 mph  and Bob Mcintyre managed to achieve a lap speed of 100mph 2 years later both, on bikes fitted with drum brakes, front and rear, whilst you are reluctant to consider a trip to the 7=11 or the beach on a similarly equipped  Honda wave

             And as for riding 3 up, not only is it "not the safest" as you say, but it is also Illegal and guaranteed to void your insurance which is what this thread  was all about 

              Are you aware that statistically you are more likely to be involved in an accident  within 5 minutes of home and the best brakes in the world won't help you if you get "tail ended" or "t boned" 

              But what would I know eh ? 

Edited April 10, 2023 by Bday Prang

[madmitch]

2 minutes ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

In another post I cited the Thai Civil and Commercial Code's section 865 that defines an insurer's ability to void coverage for non-disclosure. Under this clause, it appears that non-disclosure needs to be intentional and there is also an apparent five-year time bar. I wonder how many ab initio cancellations could have been overturned if the policyholder had appealed to the OIC.

You're right, however with travel insurance, the laws and jurisdiction of the home country would apply, however many countries do have similar rules. A policy should of course be drafted accordingly.

[Bday Prang]

51 minutes ago, chang1 said:

I think there are still a few around but places like Cambodia will no doubt still be renting them out. I rented one to go around Ankor Wat about 22 years ago. It was a death trap with almost no brakes at all but OK for what I wanted.

 

I was more giving it as an example of the sort of things we can do to keep ourselves safe. I can't remember when I last was offered a drum brake but there is usually a line of bikes and I would just move on to the next in line if one has a front drum brake.

Considering you like to ride 3 up with your wife and child  you would be better advised to settle for a bike with working brakes rather than continuing your obsession with dsc brakes, Which as an "engineer" I'm sure you must be aware can also be subject to problems if not correctly maintained. 

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

7 minutes ago, madmitch said:

You're right, however with travel insurance, the laws and jurisdiction of the home country would apply, however many countries do have similar rules. A policy should of course be drafted accordingly.

Yes, of course.

 

In the other post I was responding to someone who had his Thai medical policy cancelled due to non-disclosure of a condition that wasn't the subject of the claim he was submitting. It was probably something that would have triggered an exclusion for a pre-existing condition and likely not declination of cover.

 

 

[ukrules]

13 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

The FCO puts out a pretty strict warning about riding a motorcycle in Thailand 

That's not good enough, if you were to get run over crossing the road you would be in the same situation.

 

[dirtybirty]

15 hours ago, harleyclarkey said:

What we see here is mostly scooter/motorcycle accidents. A recent go fund me for £200,000 - really??? ????

Stupid to rent a bike anywhere in the world without at least a helmet. 

Stupid of any country to allow bikes to be rented without providing a helmet.

Stupid of any police force not to fine idiots with no helmet. 

Props is most UK insurances only cover if you have UK license (even having a Thai 1 doesn't cut it with UK insurance,I ask several companies) a lot do not haves licences for motorbike and as stated in original post UK licence does not cover you under Thai law

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, 3NUMBAS said:

WHAT’S COVERED WITH INSUREANDGO TRAVEL INSURANCE?

All our travel insurance will cover the following:

• Cancellation cover. So if you have to cancel or cut short your trip, you won’t lose out.
• Medical expenses. To cover the costs if you’re unlucky enough to become ill or be injured abroad.
• Covid cover. All our policies will cover you if catch Coronavirus, either before you go or while you’re abroad.
• Baggage cover. If your luggage is lost, damaged or stolen, we can help you replace your things.
• Activity and sports insurance. From abseiling to yoga, bungee jumping to zip-lining, we cover over 100 sports and activities.
• Lots and lots more!

Check out our policy wording for full details of these and the other policy benefits.

Do they cover elephant treks ????

 

 

 

 

 

 

Erm...  ????  +  ????  +  ????  +  ???????? + ????   ????   that sort ??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, dirtybirty said:

Props is most UK insurances only cover if you have UK license (even having a Thai 1 doesn't cut it with UK insurance,I ask several companies) a lot do not haves licences for motorbike

UK Travel Insurance policies do not recognise the legal right to ride a motorcycle in Thailand ? (i.e. they dont recognise a Thai licence ?)

 

3 minutes ago, dirtybirty said:

and as stated in original post UK licence does not cover you under Thai law

The original post is wrong - Atourist can drive and / or ride in Thailand on their UK Driving Licence or UK Motorcycle Licence (they obviously can’t ride on their driving licence)....    

 

 

 

[dirtybirty]

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

UK Travel Insurance policies do not recognise the legal right to ride a motorcycle in Thailand ? (i.e. they dont recognise a Thai licence ?)

 

The original post is wrong - Atourist can drive and / or ride in Thailand on their UK Driving Licence or UK Motorcycle Licence (they obviously can’t ride on their driving licence)....    

 

 

 

I thought also req international driving permit. With is easily obtained in uk