A Thai taxi driver returned more than 320,000 baht in cash to two Sri Lankan tourists after they accidentally left a bag containing EUR8,500 and personal belongings in his vehicle in Bangkok.

Get today's headlines by email

The handover took place on 2 June 2026 at the FM91 Trafficpro radio station headquarters, operated by the Royal Thai Police Communications Division on Phahonyothin Road in Bangkok. Representatives from FM91, including Dr Jaiton Sriwangpol, Deputy Managing Director of Vilai Center and Sons Co Ltd, and senior station executives, witnessed the return of the cash and belongings to their owners.

Earlier that morning, at 8.35am, taxi driver Pathapee Yamsanor, 50, from Samut Prakan, contacted FM91 after discovering a black Biaowang shoulder bag in his green-and-yellow taxi. Inside were EUR8,500 in cash, a pair of white Tommy Hilfiger trainers and a room key.

Pathapee explained that he had picked up foreign passengers from Suvarnabhumi Airport and dropped them off at Silom Soi 19 at approximately 8.10am. He only noticed the bag afterwards, as it had been left on the rear shelf behind the passenger seats. Unsure of the owner’s identity, he decided to take the property directly to FM91 to help locate the rightful owner.

Picture courtesy of Thaitabloid

The driver said he was shocked by the amount of money inside the bag and wanted to return it immediately. He explained that keeping it would only create a burden, adding that the money did not belong to him. Pathapee noted that he had previously returned lost mobile phones and smaller amounts of cash to passengers and wanted to demonstrate that taxi drivers act honestly when finding property left behind.

FM91 subsequently broadcast an appeal to locate the owner. Staff from the tourists’ accommodation later contacted the station after learning that guests had reported missing property, allowing arrangements to be made for its return.

The owners, Sri Lankan nationals Mr Mohammed Aashif and Mr Mohammed Onaiz, said they had become extremely worried after realising the bag had been left behind. They explained that they were tired and sleepy during the journey and had placed the bag behind the headrest before forgetting it when leaving the taxi.

The tourists reported the loss to police but were unable to enter their accommodation because the room key was inside the missing bag. They thanked both the taxi driver and FM91 for helping recover the cash and belongings and said they would offer the driver a reward as a gesture of appreciation.

Thaitabloid reported that the case serves as another example of cooperation between taxi drivers, police-affiliated media services and the public in returning lost property to its rightful owners.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

Adapted by ASEAN Now Thaitabloid 3 June 2026

View full article

Haha... long overdue for another feel-good story like this one. Pity they don't report on all the times people get scammed.

35 minutes ago, Sir Dude said:

Haha... long overdue for another feel-good story like this one. Pity they don't report on all the times people get scammed.

Pity "all those times" don't get reported to the authorities, if they did, we would hear about them.

10 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Pity "all those times" don't get reported to the authorities, if they did, we would hear about them.

No, we wouldn't.

The absence of reports doesn't mean the absence of scams. It usually means people know reporting them is a waste of time because they know the police are not interested.

Anyone who uses Bangkok taxis regularly knows that late-night meter refusals around Asoke, Nana and Siam are routine. The authorities know it, the public knows it, and the drivers know it. Yet it continues year after year.

If every scam and scam attempt were reported and published, these pages would be filled with little else. The problem isn't a lack of incidents. It's that many have become so common they're treated as normal.

11 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The absence of reports doesn't mean the absence of scams

I didn't say that it did.

12 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Anyone who uses Bangkok taxis regularly knows that late-night meter refusals around Asoke, Nana and Siam are routine

Those same people also know that many late-night taxis around those areas do not refuse fares. They don't all do it.

Well, a muslim from the Indian subcontinent that can leave EUR 8.500 behind wont receive the boards traditional bashing. Well done Pathapee Yamsanor

13 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

26 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Anyone who uses Bangkok taxis regularly knows that late-night meter refusals around Asoke, Nana and Siam are routine

Those same people also know that many late-night taxis around those areas do not refuse fares. They don't all do it.

Try hailing a taxi on Sukhumvit Soi 11 after 11pm. The likelihood of a driver agreeing to use the meter is close to zero - it's an extremely common occurrence.

In fact, taking a street-hailed taxi from these areas late at night almost guarantees that the meter won't be used.

Instead, you'll typically be quoted a fixed fare that is three times, or more, higher than the metered rate.

So, while you're technically correct that many drivers don't outright refuse the fare. Rather, they circumvent the regulations by demanding inflated prices - often three, four, or even five times what the meter would charge.

It's the main reason I avoid regular taxis in these areas whenever possible. More often than not, the experience is negative. By contrast, taxis operating outside these nightlife hotspots are generally far more reliable and willing to use the meter.

The pattern is so consistent, so widely observed, and so well established that it's difficult to view it as anything other than fact. If you attempt to take a taxi from the areas I've mentioned late at night, there's a very high probability you'll be overcharged. I can say that with a considerable degree of confidence.

Well done sir, you would be getting a 40,000 Baht reward if it was my bag.

Would like to know how much they gave him as a reward.

I'd up the above poster to 40,000 baht because a lot of folks living hand to mouth would not have returned 320,000 baht.

That money could have gone a long way to constructing a house in Issan.

No need for the cynicism to this story.

Actions like this should get reported, it serves as an example for ALL of us (not just for BKK taxi drivers)!

I hope his good deed did not go unrewarded.

What I dislike about these stories is that they presume that Thais are generally dishonest and must offer up proof to the contrary. I've found Thai people to be kind and honest in their dealings with me which is one of the reasons I chose it for retirement. They have nothing to prove.

4 hours ago, flaming dragon said:

What I dislike about these stories is that they presume that Thais are generally dishonest and must offer up proof to the contrary. I've found Thai people to be kind and honest in their dealings with me which is one of the reasons I chose it for retirement. They have nothing to prove.

A fair point, in my opinion. The fact that a story like this makes the news at all arguably suggests that many others would simply have kept the money and said nothing.

At the same time, those of us who live here regularly experience levels of honesty and public safety that have become increasingly rare back home. Just look around any street café, bar, or restaurant. People leave phones on tables, bags hanging from chairs, wallets sitting in plain sight. In much of Europe, many of us have become conditioned to do the opposite - phones stay in our pockets, bags are zipped up, and we're constantly aware of the risk of opportunistic theft or pickpocketing.

What some forum members are really reacting to, however, is the familiar timing and presentation of these stories.

Every few months there seems to be another "honest taxi driver" headline. The script is almost always the same: a passenger leaves cash or valuables in a taxi, the driver returns them, the police get involved, the local media arrive, photos are taken, and the whole thing becomes a feel-good story about honesty and virtue.

The problem is that the same industry being praised in these stories has also earned a reputation for overcharging, refusing meters, intimidating passengers, and generally treating customers poorly. Not every driver, of course, but enough that many long-term residents now instinctively reach for Grab or Bolt instead of flagging down a taxi.

So I agree with your point in general - that Thai people are honest, decent, and kind. That's been my experience over many years. But there is also a more mercenary element that exists alongside that, particularly in parts of the tourist economy, and it often displays the exact opposite traits. Both realities are true at the same time.

17 hours ago, WHansen said:

Well done sir, you would be getting a 40,000 Baht reward if it was my bag.

It does raise an interesting question.

Leaving aside the fact that someone can carry around ~$10,000 in cash and then somehow forget about it in the back of a taxi - (astonishing in the first place).

At the end of the day, though, the taxi driver didn't return ~$10,000. He returned a bag.

As far as the driver was concerned, it could just as easily have contained a football kit, a change of clothes, or a week's worth of dirty laundry. The contents weren't his concern. All he knew was that a passenger had left a bag behind and he returned it to its owner.

So what exactly are we rewarding?

If you left your gym bag in a taxi and the driver brought it back, would that suddenly be worth a $200 reward? Most people would say no. Yet if the bag happens to contain $10,000, the expectation seems to change dramatically.

The logic reminds me of the tipping debate.

A waitress serves a couple a $100 meal and expects a 30% tip. Fine. Another waitress in a high-end restaurant carries the same number of plates, pours the same number of drinks, and provides essentially the same service, but because the bill is $1,000, she's suddenly entitled to a $300 tip. The workload hasn't changed. The effort hasn't changed. Only the value of the transaction has changed.

The same principle applies here.

If the act being rewarded is the return of a lost bag, then the contents should be irrelevant. The driver either did the right thing or he didn't. Why should the reward be determined by what happened to be inside?

Which leads to the bigger question: are we rewarding the act of returning lost property, or are we rewarding someone simply for not stealing it?

Because those are two very different things.

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

It does raise an interesting question.

Leaving aside the fact that someone can carry around ~$10,000 in cash and then somehow forget about it in the back of a taxi - (astonishing in the first place).

At the end of the day, though, the taxi driver didn't return ~$10,000. He returned a bag.

As far as the driver was concerned, it could just as easily have contained a football kit, a change of clothes, or a week's worth of dirty laundry. The contents weren't his concern. All he knew was that a passenger had left a bag behind and he returned it to its owner.

So what exactly are we rewarding?

If you left your gym bag in a taxi and the driver brought it back, would that suddenly be worth a $200 reward? Most people would say no. Yet if the bag happens to contain $10,000, the expectation seems to change dramatically.

The logic reminds me of the tipping debate.

A waitress serves a couple a $100 meal and expects a 30% tip. Fine. Another waitress in a high-end restaurant carries the same number of plates, pours the same number of drinks, and provides essentially the same service, but because the bill is $1,000, she's suddenly entitled to a $300 tip. The workload hasn't changed. The effort hasn't changed. Only the value of the transaction has changed.

The same principle applies here.

If the act being rewarded is the return of a lost bag, then the contents should be irrelevant. The driver either did the right thing or he didn't. Why should the reward be determined by what happened to be inside?

Which leads to the bigger question: are we rewarding the act of returning lost property, or are we rewarding someone simply for not stealing it?

Because those are two very different things.

The driver said he was shocked by the amount of money inside the bag and wanted to return it immediately.

17 hours ago, bannork said:

The driver said he was shocked by the amount of money inside the bag and wanted to return it immediately.

We're all different... I'd have been shocked too...

.....but then would have *spent most of it on booze & women, and squandered the rest... Now that would be worthy of social media reaction !

(*to paraphrase good old Georgie Best)....