Englishman fights for his life after motorbike crash in Phuket, Thailand

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

10 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

(each and every time my Wife (Thai) has applied for a Schengen visa, she has to purchase Travel Insurance... (even though she has better health / medical insurance cover). 

 

You can get travel insurance to come to Thailand but if you don't follow the rules everything is negated and this is why we're reading about these idiots now.

 

The point I made was that for a Thai to obtain a Schengen Visa insurance is required.

Conversely, there is no such requirement for Thailand - placing such a policy inlace could improve this situation because many people are a lot more ‘happy go lucky’ than you and I.

 

When I first came to Thailand I was lucky that I was insured by my company, I never bothered with the policy or looked at what it included or excluded.... and I rode motorcycles without a licence. 

 

Perhaps I was an idiot...    I’d argue I was just naive. Thus, calling people who succumb to having no insurance ‘idiots’ is harsh and shows a lack of humanity.

 

Additionally, a licence is just a bit of card - it doesn’t really change the chances of an accident... 

That said, having a UK (or western) MC licence might as those rides go through fairly stringent training and tests. But, to legally ride a motorcycle in Thailand, all I did was show my Car licence at the DLT and go through the process... then was issued  Thai MC licence...  

 

 

[torturedsole]

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The point I made was that for a Thai to obtain a Schengen Visa insurance is required.

I'm struggling with your point here.

 

Yes, insurance is required for entry to the EU for a Thai but if your wife suddenly decides to go skiing and breaks her leg, then her insurance is invalid. Unless she's purchased dangerous sports insurance, of course. 

Edited May 9, 2023 by torturedsole

[swbaggies]

27 minutes ago, torturedsole said:

My wife and I regularly visit Europe for short breaks but there has never been a requirement to evidence adequate travel insurance coverage for each and every eventuality.

 

It's the same the world over, the onus of responsibility is on the traveller to have a backup plan(s), otherwise we're on our own. 

 

If people want to take unnecessary risks, so be it, although Go Fund Me make a lot of money from irresponsible travellers. 

 

This may be true but if you rent a car in the UK it come with compulsory basic insurance so you do not have a choice. You can then upgrade it to cover other things such as the vehicle. 

[IvorBiggun2]

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Additionally, a licence is just a bit of card - it doesn’t really change the chances of an accident... 

Yes it does when it comes to claiming after an accident.

[swbaggies]

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

How is a small rental operator in a tourist supposed to know if the license they are shown is even real? You can show the most anything. I gave a "license" I got from the Autopia ride at Disneyland to a police officer and he took it. 

 

If it's up the operator to check licenses or insurance, they'll be someone down the street selling licenses and insurance. 

 

Compelling the rental operators to carry insurance to cover medical would be a better strategy. Let the people renting motorcycles pay for it. 

Accountability. If the rider offers an invalid licence and the bike rental company accepts it and copies it for proof at a later date, then the onus should be on the rider for circumventing the rule. They would have known it not to be a valid licence. 

 

Conversely, if no licence is taken then the company should take some of the blame. 

 

[Yellowtail]

6 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

The point I made was that for a Thai to obtain a Schengen Visa insurance is required.

Conversely, there is no such requirement for Thailand - placing such a policy inlace could improve this situation because many people are a lot more ‘happy go lucky’ than you and I.

 

When I first came to Thailand I was lucky that I was insured by my company, I never bothered with the policy or looked at what it included or excluded.... and I rode motorcycles without a licence. 

 

Perhaps I was an idiot...    I’d argue I was just naive. Thus, calling people who succumb to having no insurance ‘idiots’ is harsh and shows a lack of humanity.

 

Additionally, a licence is just a bit of card - it doesn’t really change the chances of an accident... 

That said, having a UK (or western) MC licence might as those rides go through fairly stringent training and tests. But, to legally ride a motorcycle in Thailand, all I did was show my Car licence at the DLT and go through the process... then was issued  Thai MC licence...  

 

 

I may be wrong, but I think most westerners visiting Thailand do not need a visa, so making insurance a visa requirement will do nothing. 

 

I also think it a good bet that most people traveling to Thailand for holiday either have insurance or a little money or both. It's not like the medical bills are astronomical, this guys bills are less than $20K. 

[torturedsole]

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Awww gawwdd.....    are you that slow ??

I've been perfectly reasonable but I'm not slow so ignore list it is. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, torturedsole said:

6 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The point I made was that for a Thai to obtain a Schengen Visa insurance is required.

I'm struggling with your point here.

 

Yes, insurance is required for entry to the EU but if your wife suddenly decides to go skiing and breaks her leg, then her insurance is invalid. Unless she's purchased dangerous sports insurance, of course. 

Valid point...   we can all find holes in every system... that doesn't make the systems in place useless. 

There is no one fits all cover in such cases and there are always examples of ‘what-if-ery’ to counter any discussion. 

 

 

But, I get your point... We do Go Skiing, and yes, we take out extra insurance as I’m not 100% convinced our existing insurance covers us properly for skiing (the policy seems deliberately vague on that part). 

 

The issue of insurance cover would be ‘moot’ IF countries had universal reciprocal agreements to simply also cover tourists - that looks to me like a civilised world. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[torturedsole]

5 minutes ago, swbaggies said:

This may be true but if you rent a car in the UK it come with compulsory basic insurance so you do not have a choice. You can then upgrade it to cover other things such as the vehicle. 

But you'll be treated on the NHS free of charge. 

 

The onus is on the traveller and always will be. 

[IvorBiggun2]

1 minute ago, swbaggies said:

 

 

Conversely, if no licence is taken then the company should take some of the blame. 

 

You're a farang and there's an accident, irrespective of right or wrong, the police will come down on the side of the Thai. End off. 

[swbaggies]

1 minute ago, torturedsole said:

But you'll be treated on the NHS free of charge. 

 

The onus is on the traveller and always will be. 

OK. But no licence no car. No car no accident. No accident no nhs

[torturedsole]

Just now, swbaggies said:

OK. But no licence no car. No car no accident. No accident no nhs

Blame everyone else. Cool.

[swbaggies]

1 minute ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

You're a farang and there's an accident, irrespective of right or wrong, the police will come down on the side of the Thai. End off. 

That is a myth. I have personally experienced a Thai having to pay for my bike to be repaired, whilst my insurance covered my hospital bill. 

[richard_smith237]

9 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I may be wrong, but I think most westerners visiting Thailand do not need a visa, so making insurance a visa requirement will do nothing. 

 

I also think it a good bet that most people traveling to Thailand for holiday either have insurance or a little money or both. It's not like the medical bills are astronomical, this guys bills are less than $20K. 

That was my point earlier... 

 

The medical cost burden of Tourists in Thailand is 0.04% of the income from international tourism.... 

 

I don't see why there is any need for anything other than free emergency healthcare in the first place and that would ‘offset’.

 

For those on longer term visa’s they could pay into the Thai health care system.

And, for those on tourist Visa’s longer than 1 month, they could show proof of insurance. 

[torturedsole]

1 minute ago, swbaggies said:

OK. But no licence no car. No car no accident. No accident no nhs

What about if you got drunk and nicked a car or motorbike? Insurance won't cover it.

 

There's no one system that can cover all eventualities so insurance it is. 

[swbaggies]

1 minute ago, torturedsole said:

Blame everyone else. Cool.

Why should the person causing a situation not be blamed. I agree they should be helped but that is an ideal world and Thailand does not have that system. 

 

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, swbaggies said:

Accountability. If the rider offers an invalid licence and the bike rental company accepts it and copies it for proof at a later date, then the onus should be on the rider for circumventing the rule. They would have known it not to be a valid licence. 

The problem typically arises when the person renting is irresponsible, putting the onus on them will not pay the hospital bill. 

 

2 minutes ago, swbaggies said:

 

Conversely, if no licence is taken then the company should take some of the blame. 

 

So as long as they have a copy of anything they're clear? 

[swbaggies]

Just now, torturedsole said:

What about if you got drunk and nicked a car or motorbike? Insurance won't cover it.

 

There's no one system that can cover all eventualities so insurance it is. 

Really, you are helping my argument as in that scenario, who is to blame? 

 

And.. I actually said insurance is required. 

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, torturedsole said:

10 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Awww gawwdd.....    are you that slow ??

I've been perfectly reasonable but I'm not slow so ignore list it is. 

Erm... I’m besides myself.... ????

 

But really... we were discussing the need for insurance when applying a Schengen visa for Thai’s to travel to Europe and you argued that with the information that your Wife has never needed to show insurance to travel to Europe.

 

You deliberately missed out key infmation that your Wife uses UK passport and doesn't need to apply for a Schengen visa in the first place... ????

 

your comments were deliberately misleading and ridiculous given the point.

[swbaggies]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

The problem typically arises when the person renting is irresponsible, putting the onus on them will not pay the hospital bill. 

 

So as long as they have a copy of anything they're clear? 

I said some of the blame.. I know it is too simplistic but if you cannot ride a bike because you have no licence or insurance, then you should not be rising the bike

[richard_smith237]

5 minutes ago, swbaggies said:

8 minutes ago, torturedsole said:

But you'll be treated on the NHS free of charge. 

 

The onus is on the traveller and always will be. 

OK. But no licence no car. No car no accident. No accident no nhs

Wrong... Even if laws are broken and someone illegally takes a motorcycle and has an accident, they still receive full emergency medical care without charge. 

[Yellowtail]

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

That was my point earlier... 

 

The medical cost burden of Tourists in Thailand is 0.04% of the income from international tourism.... 

 

I don't see why there is any need for anything other than free emergency healthcare in the first place and that would ‘offset’.

 

For those on longer term visa’s they could pay into the Thai health care system.

And, for those on tourist Visa’s longer than 1 month, they could show proof of insurance. 

So when everyone that comes gets free medical do you not see that 0.04% rising significantly?

 

[torturedsole]

1 minute ago, swbaggies said:

Really, you are helping my argument as in that scenario, who is to blame? 

 

And.. I actually said insurance is required. 

No need to apportion blame when an appropriate level of travel insurance coverage is in place and the conditions of the policy followed.

 

It's not difficult. 

[swbaggies]

Just now, richard_smith237 said:

Wrong... Even if laws are broken and someone illegally takes a motorcycle and has an accident, they still receive full emergency medical care without charge. 

If you are going to quote me then please read what I wrote. 

I said if their was no accident then the NHS would not be required. 

 

 

[swbaggies]

Just now, torturedsole said:

No need to apportion blame when an appropriate level of travel insurance coverage is in place and the conditions of the policy followed.

 

It's not difficult. 

OK. That is my point so I do not know why your arguing. 

My actual point was the bike rider should have insurance. My further point was if they falsely showed they did then the ride should pay

[IvorBiggun2]

1 minute ago, swbaggies said:

That is a myth. I have personally experienced a Thai having to pay for my bike to be repaired, whilst my insurance covered my hospital bill. 

Tosh. I have it on dashcam whereby I had an accident where I rear ended a motorcyclist who only had one leg. At first the cops saw me as being the guilty party until my insurance agent showed them the dash cam video. They then turned full circle and blamed him. So it's not a myth as you say. 

[torturedsole]

Just now, swbaggies said:

OK. That is my point so I do not know why your arguing. 

My actual point was the bike rider should have insurance. My further point was if they falsely showed they did then the ride should pay

I'm not arguing but happy to accept something lost in translation. Take care.

[richard_smith237]

5 minutes ago, torturedsole said:

8 minutes ago, swbaggies said:

OK. But no licence no car. No car no accident. No accident no nhs

What about if you got drunk and nicked a car or motorbike? Insurance won't cover it.

 

In the UK (if thats the argument here with NHS)... The NHS would provide treatment. 

 

The vehicle would still be insured as it would be considered theft.

If someone took their own car and crashed it DUI - that insurance may not cover that cost. 

 

Either way... in all senarios in the UK free emergency medical care is provided.

And... for anyone moving there (ILR etc) they have to pay into the NHS to continue ‘free' treatment. 

 

 

Thailand does not offer free emergency care to foreigners...  EVEN if they are hit by a car while crossing the road on a pedestrian, they are still billed.

 

This is the difference - Thailand does not have this system right at all. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Yellowtail]

31 minutes ago, swbaggies said:

I said some of the blame.. I know it is too simplistic but if you cannot ride a bike because you have no licence or insurance, then you should not be rising the bike

Therein lies the rub. Yes, people should have valid insurance and I driver license, I think we all agree on that. The issue is what's to be done about the irresponsible few? 

[Yellowtail]

29 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

In the UK (if thats the argument here with NHS)... The NHS would provide treatment. 

 

The vehicle would still be insured as it would be considered theft.

If someone took their own car and crashed it DUI - that insurance may not cover that cost. 

 

Either way... in all senarios in the UK free emergency medical care is provided.

And... for anyone moving there (ILR etc) they have to pay into the NHS to continue ‘free' treatment. 

 

 

Thailand does not offer free emergency care to foreigners...  EVEN if they are hit by a car while crossing the road on a pedestrian, they are still billed.

 

This is the difference - Thailand does not have this system right at all. 

 

Why do you assume it's Thailand that does not have it right?