Russians Trapped In Pattaya Following Collapse Of Tour Company

[Jingthing]

Just to draw lessons from this and food for thought, my understanding is that nobody can withold your passport, unless it is by court order. The passport you hold does not belong to you, it is the property of the respective Government. If anyone witholds your passport, inform the embassy at once. It belongs to them, they will get it back.

The Thai police do that all the time. Try complaining to them if that happens. You can, but it wouldn't be an embassy matter, it would need to involve engaging a Thai lawyer.

[GentlemanJim]

Just to draw lessons from this and food for thought, my understanding is that nobody can withold your passport, unless it is by court order. The passport you hold does not belong to you, it is the property of the respective Government. If anyone witholds your passport, inform the embassy at once. It belongs to them, they will get it back.

The Thai police do that all the time. Try complaining to them if that happens. You can, but it wouldn't be an embassy matter, it would need to involve engaging a Thai lawyer.

Good point, but the thing is the Thai police do it because they don't know any better, and importantly they believe you don't know any better. Without a court order a passport cannot be witheld. Get the lawyer if need be, and inform the embassy, the passport belongs to them!

[wayned]

Not to worry, when they finally get it all worked out and are ready to go home, immigration will understand their plot and waive all of their overstay fines! RIGHT!!!!

[ozzieman05]

the real point in question here is, thai's enter into a contract with X party

As long as all thing go okay this contract is good

But all contracts have 2 sides and things may go wrong

In this case when things did the Thai Hotels no longer wanted to honour the contract with Party X and expected the end user to pay for the risk they had taken in the first contract

Even my Thai wife understands "Double Dipping"

[Credo]

I don't know what the law is in Thailand, but in many countries if you do not pay your rent, for example, the owner can hold your property until the bill is settled.

If the travel-agency is supposed to pay then it is towards the travel-agency they can direct their claim.

When you check into a hotel, regardless of who booked the room and agreed to pay, you are the one generally signing the register. If the bill is unpaid, then the hotel is not necessarily responsible for determining who owns the belongings.

You won't have much luck in getting the hotel or an apartment owner to believe that the suitcases, for example, were borrowed and actually belong to someone else.

You won't have much luck either if the mini-bar bill isn't paid.

You can try, but you won't be very successful.

The police may have a little more luck and they can ask to see or get the passports.

[metisdead]

A post has been edited due to possible violation of copyright and non compliance of fair use. It is generally accepted, but not written into law, that quoting the first two or three sentences of an article and giving a link to the source is considered “fair use” and not a violation of copyright.

[FOODLOVER]

The Russian peoples have always been quite courteous to me. Had one incident where to young ladies pushed me out of the way for smoked salmon, but hey, it was smoked salmon, as it was nearing the winter season, storage for hibernation is critical. Avoid direct eye contact at all times.

Edited January 30, 2012 by FOODLOVER

[Nisa]

If you were the hotel owner and someone didn't pay his bill, what would you do?

And a devil just got his horns.

They are the victims, any hotel manager worth a salt would know this and allow access to their property and provide them with every convenience necessary until things are straightened out. And a bottle of vodka.

And, by "straightened out" you mean . . . ?

When there are this many of a countries citizens i would think that their representatives would be taking care of things or "straightening them out". Or they could be calling home to get money wired and this can take time until someone over there in Russia can" Straighten things out". Wasn't their intention not to pay and you cant get blood from a turnip so what is the management of the hotel going to do? Sell his customers loot? Wedding rings and the such? They already have copies of their passport or legally should but to keep personal property under these circumstances seems low. I'm guessing the manager did not attend Hotellier school in Switzerland.

These people's representatives didn't pay the hotel and somehow you think the hotel should be the responsible party? Wiring money can be done very fast. These people didn't come here with empty pockets or without ATM or credit cards. If they can't afford that hotel then they should find another. There is nothing to straighten out and there is no reason the hotel should gamble these people will pay up after they already paid somebody else. Threatening to keep their stuff is not appropriate but there should have never been a need to do that because those guests need to pay the bill. Should the airlines foot their return flight bill too? I feel for these people but they are the ones ultimately responsible for their bills ... same is true if your insurance for whatever reason doesn't pay a medical bill.

[Nisa]

the real point in question here is, thai's enter into a contract with X party

As long as all thing go okay this contract is good

But all contracts have 2 sides and things may go wrong

In this case when things did the Thai Hotels no longer wanted to honour the contract with Party X and expected the end user to pay for the risk they had taken in the first contract

Even my Thai wife understands "Double Dipping"

This is an incredibly strange view. So, you think folks should continue to honor a contract when they other party makes clear they have no intention of paying? Or is this only the way it should be for Thais and that they should be the ones considered breaking a contract by not delivering good or services for free when the contract clearly states they will be paid for those goods and services.

[FOODLOVER]

Hi Nisa!

How can wiring monies be done very fast. Remember no access to valuables. If i call my family members they will not get the message for several hours as they are probably asleep. They will then need to go to my house and search for my account info to transfer the money. If these peoples families have thousands in their checking to loan you , sure it can be done much easier. Seems their representatives at their embassy indeed took care of the problem. If the managers enter into a wholesale agreement it is between them and the tour company. Not with each individual guest. You cant screw the guest over because the tour company defaulted. Its just wrong and i am sure against policy. As i see the difference in companies being run here they only want payment at all cost not understanding the repercussions of bad public relations. This is why Thai hotels call there people customers and not guests. A guest you will bend over backwards for a revisit. A customer you don't give a crap about, just like was obviously done in this case. This managers decision was wrong! At any company i have worked previousley this decision would have been reversed( By the Executive Chef If need be, and many a time as MOD i have reversed decissions made, thats part of why a MOD lives at the hotel for a few days a month). I know its not the Ritz or the Four Seasons of the Apocalypse but still humans in a foreign country who just got the 9" member penetration. This would not have happened at the Marriott, Pattaya. Things get changed here but it is not do unto other before they can do unto you. What happened to pay it forward? From what i understand the hotels that took your stance have now been black listed, as they should.

[FOODLOVER]

the real point in question here is, thai's enter into a contract with X party

As long as all thing go okay this contract is good

But all contracts have 2 sides and things may go wrong

In this case when things did the Thai Hotels no longer wanted to honour the contract with Party X and expected the end user to pay for the risk they had taken in the first contract

Even my Thai wife understands "Double Dipping"

This is an incredibly strange view. So, you think folks should continue to honor a contract when they other party makes clear they have no intention of paying? Or is this only the way it should be for Thais and that they should be the ones considered breaking a contract by not delivering good or services for free when the contract clearly states they will be paid for those goods and services.

How do you know their intentions?

[FarangBuddha]

That is terrible for them and even worse the Hotel refused them access to their own safe-boxes, can they do that?

Welcome to the "Land of Smiles."

[moe666]

The tour company goes broke the hotel doesn't get paid and now the hotel is the bad guy for making an illadvised decision. Shouldn't the anger being directed at the hotel be directed toward the tour company for not paying its bills and leaving the tourist stranded. The hotel was a victim as much as the tourist or just another oppertunity for a bit of Thai bashing.

[chooka]

I see that the hotels were being sympathetic to their customers problems.

I agree. Why sieze the belonging of the tourists? they are victims as well and none of this was thier personal doing. The hotels should take the tour company through the courts to recoup thier loses and not penalise the other victims. I guess this is the warm friendly thai way of dealing with farangs and a way of encouraging more tourists to thier hotels. The Thai business plan recoup your loses from anyone you can by any means.

[trainman34014]

Just to draw lessons from this and food for thought, my understanding is that nobody can withold your passport, unless it is by court order. The passport you hold does not belong to you, it is the property of the respective Government. If anyone witholds your passport, inform the embassy at once. It belongs to them, they will get it back.

Try going through the border at Maisai on a visa run and keeping your passport. The Burmese Immigration keep it until you return through on your way back into Thailand, which may be up to a week later. If you don't hand it over you won't be allowed in so what are we supposed to do; call the British Embassy in Rangoon?

[BookMan]

the real point in question here is, thai's enter into a contract with X party

As long as all thing go okay this contract is good

But all contracts have 2 sides and things may go wrong

In this case when things did the Thai Hotels no longer wanted to honour the contract with Party X and expected the end user to pay for the risk they had taken in the first contract

Even my Thai wife understands "Double Dipping"

How is it double dipping if the Hotel hasn't been paid?

By that logic, if my Uncle Harry books 15 rooms at the Hotel and tells the Hotel he will pay for all the 15 rooms on his CC. All the extended family come along, give Uncle Harry all their money for the rooms. Uncle Harry does a runner, hasn't paid for the Hotel.

Should I then expect that I don't have to pay for the room because I already paid Uncle Harry?

I feel bad for the guests here, but , the hotel still needs to be paid, and the guests are the end user.

[chooka]

The tour company goes broke the hotel doesn't get paid and now the hotel is the bad guy for making an illadvised decision. Shouldn't the anger being directed at the hotel be directed toward the tour company for not paying its bills and leaving the tourist stranded. The hotel was a victim as much as the tourist or just another oppertunity for a bit of Thai bashing.

It is not Thai bashing. The hotel should not be directing thier frustrations and anger caused by the tour company toward the other victims (the tourists). The tourists are just as much victims as the hotels. At least the Hotel staff (management) have somewhere to sleep at night, take a shower and have access to thier funds to eat. The hotels are punishing the tourists for something they had absolutely no involvement in. If you think that is Thai bashing then so be it.

[FOODLOVER]

The guests should be accommodated and should pay the bill when they can access their funding, uncle harry should get the shit kicked out of him. Ya win some ya lose some, part of doing business. These type situations occur and hotels have policies in place. If handled correctly they will surely tell of their experience. Rule of thumb, excellent experience, they will tell 3 people but a bad experience they will share with ten.

[Naam]

Just to draw lessons from this and food for thought, my understanding is that nobody can withold your passport, unless it is by court order. The passport you hold does not belong to you, it is the property of the respective Government. If anyone witholds your passport, inform the embassy at once. It belongs to them, they will get it back.

Try going through the border at Maisai on a visa run and keeping your passport. The Burmese Immigration keep it until you return through on your way back into Thailand, which may be up to a week later. If you don't hand it over you won't be allowed in so what are we supposed to do; call the British Embassy in Rangoon?

all that "passport belongs to the government" is rubbish not applicable except it applies (to my best knowledge) only to one country, namely The British Empire. passports are confiscated and held till a certain problem is resolved a zillion times every day by authorities and private parties and no embassy will lift a finger to recoup one. period!

Edited January 31, 2012 by Naam

[ozzieman05]

the real point in question here is, thai's enter into a contract with X party

As long as all thing go okay this contract is good

But all contracts have 2 sides and things may go wrong

In this case when things did the Thai Hotels no longer wanted to honour the contract with Party X and expected the end user to pay for the risk they had taken in the first contract

Even my Thai wife understands "Double Dipping"

This is an incredibly strange view. So, you think folks should continue to honor a contract when they other party makes clear they have no intention of paying? Or is this only the way it should be for Thais and that they should be the ones considered breaking a contract by not delivering good or services for free when the contract clearly states they will be paid for those goods and services.

The answer is simple

If two parties enter a contract, then that contact is legally binding,

The contract will state what must be provided and how payment will be made

if some one signs such a contract with out first making surre that the other parties part of the contract is carried out then they are responsible

For instance if you are not prepared to take the risk simply make sure the contract you sign sees you paid before your part of the contract becomes your responsible to complete, then it the fault of the 2nd party that the contract was never paid

People enter into these contracts to increase their financial gain, and must realise their is always risks in such money making ventures

So yes the contract was with the tour company not the end user

My wife and I run a business in Thailand and sometimes look at doing contracts to supply goods to other companies

Our risk is with the company we contract with, once the goods have left their premises and delivered to the end user, we must take action against the company we have a contract with, as the goods have already been sent out

[TheKeeNok]

"Trapped in Thailand" A somewhat common refrain!

[ozzieman05]

The tour company goes broke the hotel doesn't get paid and now the hotel is the bad guy for making an illadvised decision. Shouldn't the anger being directed at the hotel be directed toward the tour company for not paying its bills and leaving the tourist stranded. The hotel was a victim as much as the tourist or just another oppertunity for a bit of Thai bashing.

It was the hotel that took a risk to get quick money, there fore they must take responsibility for part of the problem

Is this not the reason why when in business you make sure that the company you are dealing with are covered by insurance, or at least your own company is

All contracts have risks

Yes the hotel signed the contract under good faith

But the end user also paid his money in good faith

If you do not want the risk make sure payment must be received before the dater of the client arriving

[ozzieman05]

the real point in question here is, thai's enter into a contract with X party

As long as all thing go okay this contract is good

But all contracts have 2 sides and things may go wrong

In this case when things did the Thai Hotels no longer wanted to honour the contract with Party X and expected the end user to pay for the risk they had taken in the first contract

Even my Thai wife understands "Double Dipping"

How is it double dipping if the Hotel hasn't been paid?

By that logic, if my Uncle Harry books 15 rooms at the Hotel and tells the Hotel he will pay for all the 15 rooms on his CC. All the extended family come along, give Uncle Harry all their money for the rooms. Uncle Harry does a runner, hasn't paid for the Hotel.

Should I then expect that I don't have to pay for the room because I already paid Uncle Harry?

I feel bad for the guests here, but , the hotel still needs to be paid, and the guests are the end user.

You miss the point

You enter a risky contract that you can not loose

If the party you have a contract with does not pay then the person who you have already allowed to pay the company you have the contract with will take away the risk

As said before if you are unhappy to the rule of law make sure you are paid before the client checks in

The are many hotels my family uses in BKK where we pay a deposit to when we book but pay at the front desk when we arrive the balance

What we are talking about here are hotels that have entered risky contracts and when they fail blame the end user

[BookMan]

the real point in question here is, thai's enter into a contract with X party

As long as all thing go okay this contract is good

But all contracts have 2 sides and things may go wrong

In this case when things did the Thai Hotels no longer wanted to honour the contract with Party X and expected the end user to pay for the risk they had taken in the first contract

Even my Thai wife understands "Double Dipping"

How is it double dipping if the Hotel hasn't been paid?

By that logic, if my Uncle Harry books 15 rooms at the Hotel and tells the Hotel he will pay for all the 15 rooms on his CC. All the extended family come along, give Uncle Harry all their money for the rooms. Uncle Harry does a runner, hasn't paid for the Hotel.

Should I then expect that I don't have to pay for the room because I already paid Uncle Harry?

I feel bad for the guests here, but , the hotel still needs to be paid, and the guests are the end user.

You miss the point

You enter a risky contract that you can not loose

If the party you have a contract with does not pay then the person who you have already allowed to pay the company you have the contract with will take away the risk

As said before if you are unhappy to the rule of law make sure you are paid before the client checks in

The are many hotels my family uses in BKK where we pay a deposit to when we book but pay at the front desk when we arrive the balance

What we are talking about here are hotels that have entered risky contracts and when they fail blame the end user

Mate, that really is confusing what you have written.

We are actually only talking about the one tour company here, which the article stated was one of Russia's largest. So not a risky contract from the hotels point of view. As far as the hotel is concerned, the tour company is just organising the money for the guests, maybe getting a group discount. The guest still has to pay.

The rest of what you say in this post, I don't understand

[Apecks]

Just to draw lessons from this and food for thought, my understanding is that nobody can withold your passport, unless it is by court order. The passport you hold does not belong to you, it is the property of the respective Government. If anyone witholds your passport, inform the embassy at once. It belongs to them, they will get it back.

Try going through the border at Maisai on a visa run and keeping your passport. The Burmese Immigration keep it until you return through on your way back into Thailand, which may be up to a week later. If you don't hand it over you won't be allowed in so what are we supposed to do; call the British Embassy in Rangoon?

all that "passport belongs to the government" is rubbish not applicable except it applies (to my best knowledge) only to one country, namely The British Empire. passports are confiscated and held till a certain problem is resolved a zillion times every day by authorities and private parties and no embassy will lift a finger to recoup one. period!

Bit of a history / geography lesson for you. The british empire was not a country, it was a number of countries comprising roughly one fifth of the worlds population at the time. Britain is not a country it is a nation. British passports are the property of the british government not the holder. Inside it states that they should not be given to anyone. They only reason passports are held is because the holder is stupid enough to hand it over, it is illegal to hold one in most countries even thailand (where you are required to keep it on you at all times ).

Edited January 31, 2012 by Apecks

[farangbanok]

Forgive my stupidity, but as I understand this report the Russians paid Lanta-Tour Company for their hotel.

The hotel reservations were made by Lanta-Tour Company, not the unfortunate holiday makers thus In no way should the Russians be penalised, since they did everything in good faith.

Why should they be responsible for the inept management and/or corrupt and unethical behaviour of some company who took their money?

What was the relationship between the Lanta-Tour management and the hotel management?

OK! OK! khow jai ... TiT.

[ozzieman05]

the real point in question here is, thai's enter into a contract with X party

As long as all thing go okay this contract is good

But all contracts have 2 sides and things may go wrong

In this case when things did the Thai Hotels no longer wanted to honour the contract with Party X and expected the end user to pay for the risk they had taken in the first contract

Even my Thai wife understands "Double Dipping"

How is it double dipping if the Hotel hasn't been paid?

By that logic, if my Uncle Harry books 15 rooms at the Hotel and tells the Hotel he will pay for all the 15 rooms on his CC. All the extended family come along, give Uncle Harry all their money for the rooms. Uncle Harry does a runner, hasn't paid for the Hotel.

Should I then expect that I don't have to pay for the room because I already paid Uncle Harry?

I feel bad for the guests here, but , the hotel still needs to be paid, and the guests are the end user.

You miss the point

You enter a risky contract that you can not loose

If the party you have a contract with does not pay then the person who you have already allowed to pay the company you have the contract with will take away the risk

As said before if you are unhappy to the rule of law make sure you are paid before the client checks in

The are many hotels my family uses in BKK where we pay a deposit to when we book but pay at the front desk when we arrive the balance

What we are talking about here are hotels that have entered risky contracts and when they fail blame the end user

Mate, that really is confusing what you have written.

We are actually only talking about the one tour company here, which the article stated was one of Russia's largest. So not a risky contract from the hotels point of view. As far as the hotel is concerned, the tour company is just organising the money for the guests, maybe getting a group discount. The guest still has to pay.

The rest of what you say in this post, I don't understand

Now I am worried when my Thai wife understands and you can not

My she must be getting smarter and I have not seen the improvemnet

Make the story short for you to understand

The hotel should have written onto the reciept where it was issued

1) That they are required to accept full responsibility for all payment if the company they book with does not pass on their payment

2) That the end user only pays a commission rate to the booking company and the balance be paid on arrival

3) That payment can only be made by credit card that is passed onto them for payment not the tour company

4) Insist all people have travel insurance to cover problem like this

If any of the above are used the problem can never happen

My statement where made in General and not at the hotels concerned

Running and business incurs risk, best to minimise them before problems happen

[puntmeister]

That is terrible for them and even worse the Hotel refused them access to their own safe-boxes, can they do that?

If you were the hotel owner and someone didn't pay his bill, what would you do?

And a devil just got his horns.

They are the victims, any hotel manager worth a salt would know this and allow access to their property and provide them with every convenience necessary until things are straightened out. And a bottle of vodka.

Well, the inherent problem is that, if the hotel doesn't fight for their room fees, then the hotels are the victims! Its a rough quagmire - either the Russian tourists get stiffed (by haveing to pay twice, since they already paid the tour operator for the hotel), or the hotel gets stiffed, as they never got paid.

I can assure you, if the tables were turned, and it were Thais (or any foreigner for that matter) in Russia - the hotels would collect their money! If you tried to call the Russian police for assistance, the only result would be that you'd be stuck paying off the police to leave you alone, in addition to paying the hotel's thugs to keep them giving you a beat-down.

I realize these tourists aren't to blame - but let's not for a second think the Russians would be the slightest bit compassionate if they were operating the hotels.

[ozzieman05]

the real point in question here is, thai's enter into a contract with X party

As long as all thing go okay this contract is good

But all contracts have 2 sides and things may go wrong

In this case when things did the Thai Hotels no longer wanted to honour the contract with Party X and expected the end user to pay for the risk they had taken in the first contract

Even my Thai wife understands "Double Dipping"

How is it double dipping if the Hotel hasn't been paid?

By that logic, if my Uncle Harry books 15 rooms at the Hotel and tells the Hotel he will pay for all the 15 rooms on his CC. All the extended family come along, give Uncle Harry all their money for the rooms. Uncle Harry does a runner, hasn't paid for the Hotel.

Should I then expect that I don't have to pay for the room because I already paid Uncle Harry?

I feel bad for the guests here, but , the hotel still needs to be paid, and the guests are the end user.

I would expect the hotel would take payment before allowing guests into rooms

Not many hotels in Thailand that will allow you to book 15 rooms with out a deposit being paid

If Uncle Harry does a runner

Pay the local boys 5000 baht and he will be found very quickly, by one of the best police forces in the world that money can buy

[Cuban]

If you were the hotel owner and someone didn't pay his bill, what would you do?

The hotel's contract is with the tour firm not the tourist.