goober Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 MISSION Impossible star Jeremy Renner was caught up in a bar brawl in which a pal was hit in the neck with a makeshift AXE, it was claimed today. Renner, who also starred in the Oscar-winning film Hurt Locker, was in Phuket, Thailand, when the fight involving up to 20 people broke out. Weapons including metal pipes, wooden clubs and table legs were wielded during the clash, according to reports. It was said the incident resulted in six staff at the venue being arrested and charged with attempted murder. Renner, who played William Brandt in Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol opposite Tom Cruise, was with Vorasit Issara, manager of a luxury Thai resort, and four other friends at the Rachada Pub in the early hours of Wednesday. Six men allegedly attacked Issara, hitting him in the neck with the axe and also stabbing him in the stomach, it was reported. The axe was a motorcycle part that cops found hidden under a sofa. Several of 41-year-old Renner's other pals were also attacked. Issara, 30, said: "We pushed Jeremy to safety as soon as the fight broke out." Renner, currently filming The Bourne Legacy, was uninjured And, whats your point on tuk tuks? Maybe these attackers were future tuk tuk drivers and the attack was try outs to see who gets a lucrative patong position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waza Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 East Oz can't comment, but, it would have to be expensive compared to Phuket. How much is a 400m taxi ride, and hospital fees for a broken skull? Can't see too many people doing a 400 metre taxi ride in OZ...but... flagfall and 1st kilomtere... close to 200 baht. Plus you are fully insured during the journey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 East Oz can't comment, but, it would have to be expensive compared to Phuket. How much is a 400m taxi ride, and hospital fees for a broken skull? Can't see too many people doing a 400 metre taxi ride in OZ...but... flagfall and 1st kilomtere... close to 200 baht. Plus you are fully insured during the journey. The question of insurance is interesting. This subject came up a while ago. I believe your travel insurance will cover you if your tuk tuk is involved in an accident and you are injured. Normally, insurance companies insist on the driver of the vehicle to be licenced and not under the influence of intoxication liquor or a drug. Who knows if these tuk tuk drivers are licenced? Who knows what the insurance company will say if they are not licenced? Some of the foreign embassies threatened to put a "Travel Warning" on tuk tuks in Phuket. After that Travel Warning is issued, if you use a tuk tuk, and are injured in an accident, you are not covered by your travel insurance. If the foreign embassies issued this warning, it may force some change to transport on the island, but, who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
necronx99 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 It's sad to hear Phuket has gone so far downhill. I have nothing but good memories of most Thai's there back in the 80's/90's. Two cases that stick out are the time me and a friend where walking down beach road and were talking to the jetski guys. They asked were we were from and we said Navy (the ship had just started steaming out of the bay), they pointed this out with some concern and we jokingly reacted with shock and horror. They offered to take us out to the departing ship for free! The second was after a bike accident where I mangled my foot, I was picked up by a guy with a new truck who insisted I lay in the back seat bleeding all over his cab despite my wanting to ride in the tray. He took me to the Phuket hospital without expectation and refused my offer of cash to clean his car. The public hospital and I ended up having a long association (after initially wanting to cut off my toes!) ended up having a long, friendly and cheap association that far surpassed the level of treatment I got when I went back home. It was always better back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waza Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 That would depend on a number of different factors. Priority Low crime stats, low rate of violence and murdered farang Honest tuk tuk/taxi service tropical palmtree beaches with clear water a variety of local and international restaurants close high quality hospitals english speaking locals to be found top notch night time entertainment Now, which areas do you recomend over Phuket? I would recomend Penang, the Gold Coast in Aus, all the way up to Cairnes. The Canary Islands, Vietnam, Maldives, Goa and many many more Gold coast , sunshine coast and all the way up to Cairns has some beautiful clean beaches and lovely scenery. But.. it is expensive compared to Phuket. which is why many Aussies come to Thailand... The prices of consumerables are about the same but accommdation is more expensive. Thats why more Aussie go to Queensland than Bali and Phuket, combined............. Queensland =17,000,000 domestic tourists plus 33.5 million day trips Bali = ~750,000 Aussie tourist Phuket= 2,500,000 aussie tourists But when the aussie government advises............This Advice was last issued on Thursday, 05 January 2012. This advice has been reviewed and reissued. It contains new information in the Summary and under Safety and Security (updated information on terrorism in southern Thailand), Border regions (situation on Thai-Cambodia border), Crime (harassment and threats of violence by jet ski operators and reports of additional items being placed in shopping bags by checkout staff at duty free stores at international airports), Local travel (caution when using taxis and tuk-tuks). and the press says............. Larry Cunningham, Australia's honorary consul on the island, has spoken out about the rip-offs, scams, criminal activities and bad behaviour that are ruining the holidays of scores of Australians, including a new wave of "schoolies". Up to 25,000 Australian tourists a month are visiting Phuket, most of them arriving on cheap direct flights from Australia's capital cities, lured by the benefits of the high Australian dollar and an exotic location. "Many Australians come here behaving as if the same standards and laws apply in Thailand as they do in Australia," Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I believe your travel insurance will cover you if your tuk tuk is involved in an accident and you are injured. Normally, insurance companies insist on the driver of the vehicle to be licenced and not under the influence of intoxication liquor or a drug. Who knows if these tuk tuk drivers are licenced? Who knows what the insurance company will say if they are not licenced? Nothing will happen, because those clauses on the policy are only directed towards the driver of the vehicle, not towards the 3-rd parties, like passengers or other people involved in an accident caused by the driver. This means the insurance company will pay in full, and may try to get reimbursed by the person under the influence. If the dirver were to be not licensed the same would apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I believe your travel insurance will cover you if your tuk tuk is involved in an accident and you are injured. Normally, insurance companies insist on the driver of the vehicle to be licenced and not under the influence of intoxication liquor or a drug. Who knows if these tuk tuk drivers are licenced? Who knows what the insurance company will say if they are not licenced? Nothing will happen, because those clauses on the policy are only directed towards the driver of the vehicle, not towards the 3-rd parties, like passengers or other people involved in an accident caused by the driver. This means the insurance company will pay in full, and may try to get reimbursed by the person under the influence. If the dirver were to be not licensed the same would apply. I accept that in all likelyhood they will payout for your medical expenses and other asociated loss, however, if the day comes when the various travel insurance companies receive so many claims from tourist for tuk tuk related injuries, than the travel insurance companies may deem catching a tuk tuk a high risk and an activity they will no longer cover, so, if you decide to catch one, you will have no insurance if something goes wrong. They already do this with many adreneline sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I accept that in all likelyhood they will payout for your medical expenses and other asociated loss, however, if the day comes when the various travel insurance companies receive so many claims from tourist for tuk tuk related injuries, than the travel insurance companies may deem catching a tuk tuk a high risk and an activity they will no longer cover, so, if you decide to catch one, you will have no insurance if something goes wrong. They already do this with many adreneline sports. Could happen, but you'll know ahead of time because of the exclusion on the policy. As long as there is no exclusion it is covered. And I rarely see any reports of tuktuk accidents with tourists, so chances of this happening are very small indeed. The chance of a general exclusion because of negative travel advisory for tuktuk travel is also very small but more realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I accept that in all likelyhood they will payout for your medical expenses and other asociated loss, however, if the day comes when the various travel insurance companies receive so many claims from tourist for tuk tuk related injuries, than the travel insurance companies may deem catching a tuk tuk a high risk and an activity they will no longer cover, so, if you decide to catch one, you will have no insurance if something goes wrong. They already do this with many adreneline sports. Could happen, but you'll know ahead of time because of the exclusion on the policy. As long as there is no exclusion it is covered. And I rarely see any reports of tuktuk accidents with tourists, so chances of this happening are very small indeed. The chance of a general exclusion because of negative travel advisory for tuktuk travel is also very small but more realistic. I think they are pretty much one and the same. If the embassies release a "do not use tuk tuks travel warning for Phuket" from that time on, if you use a tuk tuk, your travel insurance will not cover you. So, no need for the insurance companies to add an exclusion, however, the insurance companies may add the exclusion if they feel there is such a risk that the embassies had to take action and release a warning. It's rare a tuk tuk is involved in a serious accident, but quite common the drivers are involved in a serious assault of a passenger/s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 (edited) I accept that in all likelyhood they will payout for your medical expenses and other asociated loss, however, if the day comes when the various travel insurance companies receive so many claims from tourist for tuk tuk related injuries, than the travel insurance companies may deem catching a tuk tuk a high risk and an activity they will no longer cover, so, if you decide to catch one, you will have no insurance if something goes wrong. They already do this with many adreneline sports. Could happen, but you'll know ahead of time because of the exclusion on the policy. As long as there is no exclusion it is covered. And I rarely see any reports of tuktuk accidents with tourists, so chances of this happening are very small indeed. The chance of a general exclusion because of negative travel advisory for tuktuk travel is also very small but more realistic. I think they are pretty much one and the same. You can think what you want, but they are not one and the same. As mentioned, one has to be mentioned in the exclusions on the policy, the other one is invoked automatically when there is a negative travel advisory for tuktuk travel. Edited January 12, 2012 by stevenl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 You can think what you want, but they are not one and the same. As mentioned, one has to be mentioned in the exclusions on the policy, the other one is invoked automatically when there is a negative travel advisory for tuktuk travel. They are pretty much the same for the tourist because, either way, they are uninsured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 You can think what you want, but they are not one and the same. As mentioned, one has to be mentioned in the exclusions on the policy, the other one is invoked automatically when there is a negative travel advisory for tuktuk travel. They are pretty much the same for the tourist because, either way, they are uninsured. No, they are not the same for the tourist. What don't you understand? One is never going to happen, because that would mean excessive clasims for the insurance companies based on tuktuk related accidents, so they will adjust their policy conditions. If that were the case, all exisiting policies will remaind valid, only for policies with the tuktuk clause damages because of riding a tuktuk wouldn't be covered anymore. No chance whatsoever that is ever going to happen. The other one there is a remote chance it might happen, if a negative travel advisory will happen for 'riding in a tuktuk'. In that case a soon as the advisory is given all damages because of that are not covered anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 You can think what you want, but they are not one and the same. As mentioned, one has to be mentioned in the exclusions on the policy, the other one is invoked automatically when there is a negative travel advisory for tuktuk travel. They are pretty much the same for the tourist because, either way, they are uninsured. No, they are not the same for the tourist. What don't you understand? One is never going to happen, because that would mean excessive clasims for the insurance companies based on tuktuk related accidents, so they will adjust their policy conditions. If that were the case, all exisiting policies will remaind valid, only for policies with the tuktuk clause damages because of riding a tuktuk wouldn't be covered anymore. No chance whatsoever that is ever going to happen. The other one there is a remote chance it might happen, if a negative travel advisory will happen for 'riding in a tuktuk'. In that case a soon as the advisory is given all damages because of that are not covered anymore. How can you say "one is never going to happen" when it has already happened for extreme sports. If the amount of claims for tuk tuk related injuries were to get to a point where the insurance companies see riding in a tuk tuk as too higher risk to their profits, they will add the exclusion clause, like they have to abseiling, skydiving etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katabeachbum Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 you are both specualting in Insurance. In addition tuk tuks are involved in extremely few accidents compared to their milage, probably cause they drive like mainiacs making everyone else stay away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivinginKata Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 you are both specualting in Insurance. In addition tuk tuks are involved in extremely few accidents compared to their milage, probably cause they drive like mainiacs making everyone else stay away Tuk Tuk mileage ??? But they sit about waiting all the day. At best they must only drive 20 or 30 Km/day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 you are both specualting in Insurance. In addition tuk tuks are involved in extremely few accidents compared to their milage, probably cause they drive like mainiacs making everyone else stay away I agree they are involved in very few accidents, but they are involved in quite a few assaults. That guy a couple of months ago, I think he was German, they beat within an inch of his life would not have been a cheap bill for the insurance company. I think he was in intensive care for 2 weeks and in hospital for longer. No sure if he had to have rehab. Anyway, all I'm saying is, if the embassies ever issue the travel warning about tuk tuks, surely the insurance companies will take notice and see it as a green light to insert an exclusion clause for using tuk tuks on Phuket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katabeachbum Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 you are both specualting in Insurance. In addition tuk tuks are involved in extremely few accidents compared to their milage, probably cause they drive like mainiacs making everyone else stay away Tuk Tuk mileage ??? But they sit about waiting all the day. At best they must only drive 20 or 30 Km/day. all taxis in the world seem to sit about waiting all day. In reality Phuket tuk tuks must make 2k baht a day, one for the owner one for themselves. patong to kata is approx 30km roundtrip and pays 400 baht, so just do the math Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 you are both specualting in Insurance. In addition tuk tuks are involved in extremely few accidents compared to their milage, probably cause they drive like mainiacs making everyone else stay away I agree they are involved in very few accidents, but they are involved in quite a few assaults. That guy a couple of months ago, I think he was German, they beat within an inch of his life would not have been a cheap bill for the insurance company. I think he was in intensive care for 2 weeks and in hospital for longer. No sure if he had to have rehab. Anyway, all I'm saying is, if the embassies ever issue the travel warning about tuk tuks, surely the insurance companies will take notice and see it as a green light to insert an exclusion clause for using tuk tuks on Phuket. You still don't get it. If there were to be a travel warning there would be no need for an exclusion anymore, because it is excluded already based on the travel warning. Don't confuse health and travel insurance BTW. And to KBB: I am not speculating, only refuting speculation from another member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmitch Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 you are both specualting in Insurance. In addition tuk tuks are involved in extremely few accidents compared to their milage, probably cause they drive like mainiacs making everyone else stay away I agree they are involved in very few accidents, but they are involved in quite a few assaults. That guy a couple of months ago, I think he was German, they beat within an inch of his life would not have been a cheap bill for the insurance company. I think he was in intensive care for 2 weeks and in hospital for longer. No sure if he had to have rehab. Anyway, all I'm saying is, if the embassies ever issue the travel warning about tuk tuks, surely the insurance companies will take notice and see it as a green light to insert an exclusion clause for using tuk tuks on Phuket. There is absolutely no way that a travel policy will ever incorporate a riding in a tuktuk exclusion clause. There are many more dangerous activities that are covered, such a motorcycling. What else will they exclude? Walking in dark alleyways? Travelling on boats? Eating street food? Eating any food in India? All of these would cause more claims than tuktuk accidents and assaults. Yes, even insurance companies agree that they have to accept certain risks and if any have ever seriously discussed tuktuks I would be very surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roblin Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) Extortion at it’s very best last night. Tried to get a Tuk Tuk to take me from Patong to Chalong and was quoted as high as 4000 BHT one way! Walked around and asked about 20 different Tuk Tuks, all the fares quoted were no lower than 2000 BHT. I also had some Thai staff with me and asked one of them to try, one girl came back and told me that the driver said they only wanted Farang money and would not help her. He told her to go home by motorbike. After about an hour I found this Tuk Tuk driver dropping off a customer away from the “unofficial” pickup point located in front of Bangla. Nice elderly gentleman quoted 800 BHT. Jumped in a we were home within 40 minutes. Last NYE we were in Bangla and wanted to go to Karon around 3am. Ofc it was impossible to get a taxi so I told my friends to just wait and I would fix it. I just went into the traffic jam in the street, knocked on a nice car's window and said "We want to go Karon". He said "Sorry I not Taxi" and I said "One thousand baht" and showed him the bill. He thinks for like 5seconds eyes moving up to the left and then says "OK!" ^^ Edited January 13, 2012 by roblin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Extortion at it’s very best last night. Tried to get a Tuk Tuk to take me from Patong to Chalong and was quoted as high as 4000 BHT one way! Walked around and asked about 20 different Tuk Tuks, all the fares quoted were no lower than 2000 BHT. I also had some Thai staff with me and asked one of them to try, one girl came back and told me that the driver said they only wanted Farang money and would not help her. He told her to go home by motorbike. After about an hour I found this Tuk Tuk driver dropping off a customer away from the “unofficial” pickup point located in front of Bangla. Nice elderly gentleman quoted 800 BHT. Jumped in a we were home within 40 minutes. Last NYE we were in Bangla and wanted to go to Karon around 3am. Ofc it was impossible to get a taxi so I told my friends to just wait and I would fix it. I just went into the traffic jam in the street, knocked on a nice car's window and said "We want to go Karon". He said "Sorry I not Taxi" and I said "One thousand baht" and showed him the bill. He thinks for like 5seconds eyes moving up to the left and then says "OK!" ^^ You are lucky a tuk tuk driver across the road didn't see this transaction. They would have dragged him out of the car and beat him up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 you are both specualting in Insurance. In addition tuk tuks are involved in extremely few accidents compared to their milage, probably cause they drive like mainiacs making everyone else stay away I agree they are involved in very few accidents, but they are involved in quite a few assaults. That guy a couple of months ago, I think he was German, they beat within an inch of his life would not have been a cheap bill for the insurance company. I think he was in intensive care for 2 weeks and in hospital for longer. No sure if he had to have rehab. Anyway, all I'm saying is, if the embassies ever issue the travel warning about tuk tuks, surely the insurance companies will take notice and see it as a green light to insert an exclusion clause for using tuk tuks on Phuket. There is absolutely no way that a travel policy will ever incorporate a riding in a tuktuk exclusion clause. There are many more dangerous activities that are covered, such a motorcycling. What else will they exclude? Walking in dark alleyways? Travelling on boats? Eating street food? Eating any food in India? All of these would cause more claims than tuktuk accidents and assaults. Yes, even insurance companies agree that they have to accept certain risks and if any have ever seriously discussed tuktuks I would be very surprised. "There is absolutely no way that a travel policy will ever incorporate a riding in a tuk tuk exclusion clause." Who would ever think that embassies would issue a travel warning about tuk tuks - which means no travel insurance if you use them - but they considered it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Who would ever think that embassies would issue a travel warning about tuk tuks - which means no travel insurance if you use them - but they considered it. As mentioned earlier, that could happen in theory. Small risk, but realistic. And also as mentioned earlier, that is something completekly different than a 'tuktuk exclusion clause'. But either you're not reading or not willing to comprehend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) you are both specualting in Insurance. In addition tuk tuks are involved in extremely few accidents compared to their milage, probably cause they drive like mainiacs making everyone else stay away I agree they are involved in very few accidents, but they are involved in quite a few assaults. That guy a couple of months ago, I think he was German, they beat within an inch of his life would not have been a cheap bill for the insurance company. I think he was in intensive care for 2 weeks and in hospital for longer. No sure if he had to have rehab. Anyway, all I'm saying is, if the embassies ever issue the travel warning about tuk tuks, surely the insurance companies will take notice and see it as a green light to insert an exclusion clause for using tuk tuks on Phuket. You still don't get it. If there were to be a travel warning there would be no need for an exclusion anymore, because it is excluded already based on the travel warning. Don't confuse health and travel insurance BTW. And to KBB: I am not speculating, only refuting speculation from another member. I do get it. Do you???? What tourist come over here for a holiday with "health insurance?" It's "travel insurance." A completely different product. If the travel warning goes on, the insurance companies don't have to do anything, however, if the travel warning is not announced, and they are receiving many large claims, they MAY consider placing an exclusion clause in their policy until the industry gets their act together. The insurance companies are independent of the embassies. They are a business. They do not need a foreign office's permission to add the exclusion clause but note I used the word "MAY." Now, with so many riding motorbikes here, if they have not got a Thai motorbike licence, or a motorbike licence from their own country, they are not covered by insurance if they are in an accident. I dare say there are more unlicenced riders than there are licenced riders here. Now add a travel warning from your embassy and/or an exclusion clause in your travel insurance and how the hell is anyone going to get around this island whilst still being covered by their travel insurance???????? There is not that many "black taxis" to go around. Edited January 13, 2012 by NamKangMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) Your 'MAY" is never goping top happen, it is simply impossible. The German guy was living here, that's why I said 'don'rt confure health and travel insurance', because since he is living here he would not have travel insurance. And yes, health insurance from quite a few countries is valid abroad as well. Edited January 13, 2012 by stevenl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NamKangMan Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Your 'MAY" is never goping top happen, it is simply impossible. The German guy was living here, that's why I said 'don'rt confure health and travel insurance', because since he is living here he would not have travel insurance. And yes, health insurance from quite a few countries is valid abroad as well. Many of the western countries do not cover you for health insurance whilst you are abroad. Tell me some that do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) Many of the western countries do not cover you for health insurance whilst you are abroad. Tell me some that do. Netherlands, Belgium and more. But we're going way of topic here, only because you claim people riding a tuktuk may not be insured. Until there is a negatiove travel advisory for tuktuk travel there is normal insurance coverage. Edited January 13, 2012 by stevenl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmitch Posted January 13, 2012 Author Share Posted January 13, 2012 There was a thread some time ago about tuktuks and insurance. This one has been hijacked a bit. Stevenl you are right in what you have been saying. And my final comment on the subject is that this is a triviality for travel insurance companies, regardless of what locals and tourists here may think.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now