Motorcycle V Car

[richb2004]

I heard that if you have an accident with a motorcycle you are always to blame provided that you are in a bigger vehicle. Is this true? If so it’s a pretty stupid law.

[Thaiboxer]

According to books on Thailand, it is true; those in the bigger vehicles are responsible for damages regardless whether or not the motorcycle person is at fault. In the eyes of corrupt policemen being a foreigner may work against you as well. With so many motorcycles and with the way many people ride them, you really have to keep your eyes open so you don't end up having to pay somebody and/or their family.

Despite this law, I would always take a car over a motorcycle any day. There are some advantages to having a bike: easy to ride in tight spaces, easy to park/store, great on gas and fun to ride. However, a car provides A LOT more safety by having a metal body around you and on a rainy day you don't have to park under an overpass and wait until the rain stops. You can carry more passengers and/or shopping bags than you could on a bike.

Edited December 11, 2005 by Thaiboxer

[corkscrew]

According to books on Thailand, it is true; those in the bigger vehicles are responsible for damages regardless whether or not the motorcycle person is at fault. In the eyes of corrupt policemen being a foreigner may work against you as well. With so many motorcycles and with the way many people ride them, you really have to keep your eyes open so you don't end up having to pay somebody and/or their family.

Despite this law, I would always take a car over a motorcycle any day. There are some advantages to having a bike: easy to ride in tight spaces, easy to park/store, great on gas and fun to ride. However, a car provides A LOT more safety by having a metal body around you and on a rainy day you don't have to park under an overpass and wait until the rain stops. You can carry more passengers and/or shopping bags than you could on a bike.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Even if the motrcycle blows right through a red traffic signal and slams into the side of a car? How about if the motorcycle smashes into a legally parked car?

[Thetyim]

It is not true in my experience.

I have had three motorcycles ram into my car and each and every time the cyclist was held to blame and had to pay for the damages.

[Thaiboxer]

I was once in a taxi that was rear ended by a motorcyclist. It looked as if he ended up paying for damages as well. I believe what the OP meant was what happens if you hit a motorcyclist...even one who blows through a red light. I believe the bigger vehicle is held accountable. It would be impossible to blame somebody if the car is just sitting there but if you're driving and you plough into some guy on a bike, there's a good chance you will be held accountable. Unfair I know, but that's how I've seen it in print. A lot of these motorcyclists ride with zero concern for themselves and others which is why most accidents on the roads here which result in severe injury or death involve motorcyclists.

[Thetyim]

Sorry, Thai, I disagree.

The bit about the bigger vehicle being responsible is a myth which has gotten into print and onto the net.

It just isn't part of thai law.

I got the police involved in my accidents and they immediately agreed it was the cyclist at fault.

[Tywais]

Sorry, Thai, I disagree.

The bit about the bigger vehicle being responsible is a myth which has gotten into print and onto the net.

It just isn't part of thai law.

I got the police involved in my accidents and they immediately agreed it was the cyclist at fault.

Agreed, else it leaves open a big hole for opportunists to exploit.

[tom yum goong]

I was once told it could be to do with the fact that motorbikes never have insurance. Much easier for the cops to say it was the fault of the guy in the car if he's insured. Less hassle all round i suppose.

I know bikes legally must have a "Por Ror Bor" which is a type of insurance but not sure what it covers.

[Thaiboxer]

Sorry, Thai, I disagree.

The bit about the bigger vehicle being responsible is a myth which has gotten into print and onto the net.

It just isn't part of thai law.

I got the police involved in my accidents and they immediately agreed it was the cyclist at fault.

A lot of laws here don't make much sense so I figured the myth about the bigger vehicle being held responsible was true. The rule where the cops take your license isn't really practical so it's better to just pay them off rather than go through the hassle of going to a police station somewhere. I once had my license taken away for three weeks and it wasn't even a moving violation (I had my tires on the zebra crossing while sitting at a red light). At least I didn't need to drive during that time as I hadn't started working yet. Another time the bigger boss came out of his police box and had the lower ranking cop give me my license back. In the States they never take your license; they just write a ticket and send you on your way. Everything is done through computer so they can track who's paid their fines and who hasn't.

[sierra01]

Despite this law, I would always take a car over a motorcycle any day. There are some advantages to having a bike: easy to ride in tight spaces, easy to park/store, great on gas and fun to ride. However, a car provides A LOT more safety by having a metal body around you and on a rainy day you don't have to park under an overpass and wait until the rain stops. You can carry more passengers and/or shopping bags than you could on a bike.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey Thaiboxer, surely you've seen 5 on a bike here? I certainly have, somewhere on thaivisa is a picture of 6 on a bike! As for shopping, again you must have seen the 2 wheel grocery stores in your travels

[richb2004]

Despite this law, I would always take a car over a motorcycle any day. There are some advantages to having a bike: easy to ride in tight spaces, easy to park/store, great on gas and fun to ride. However, a car provides A LOT more safety by having a metal body around you and on a rainy day you don't have to park under an overpass and wait until the rain stops. You can carry more passengers and/or shopping bags than you could on a bike.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey Thaiboxer, surely you've seen 5 on a bike here? I certainly have, somewhere on thaivisa is a picture of 6 on a bike! As for shopping, again you must have seen the 2 wheel grocery stores in your travels

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I saw eight on a motorbike and home made side car the other day. Fairly good I thought.

[Thetyim]

[Thaiboxer]

Hey Thaiboxer, surely you've seen 5 on a bike here? I certainly have, somewhere on thaivisa is a picture of 6 on a bike! As for shopping, again you must have seen the 2 wheel grocery stores in your travels

I see three on a bike pretty often although somewhere along the line I must have seen four or five. These little commuter bikes don't have very wide tires which makes them unstable; particularly when you stick so many people on at once. Some of them have tires that are so narrow they're nothing more than motorized bicycles! At least the big cc Japanese bikes have wide tires which provides more stability. If you hit a patch of oil or sand on the road you only have two tires so it doesn't matter how wide they are; the bike may go right out from under you and then you'll get "road rash".I saw eight on a motorbike and home made side car the other day. Fairly good I thought.

Somebody should take photos of stuff like this and put them up in every traffic school and bike shop with a sign saying, "This is what NOT to do!"

[The Dan Sai Kid]

I got rear-ended (not in the biblical sense) by a bike in Chiang Mai, the police came and took less than 30 secs to decide that the bike was at fault and liable to pay.

[monty]

Friend of mine drove over the foot of a child, which was playing unsupervised on the road.

The child just ran onto the street from between 2 parked cars, right in front of my friends car. Quick reaction and an emergency stop resulted on the right weel going over the childs foot, instead of killing the kid!

His insurance had to cough up over half a million in hospital costs and permanent disability compensation (the foot ended up being permanently slightly disfigured, 300.000 Baht!).

It seems the law says that weaker road users (pedestrian being the weakest) will mostly be in their right. The best of the isurance company's lawyers could not get them away from agreeing to my my friend being faulted and coughing up the money! And they sure tried, they're not known to pay big damages with a big smile

So I wouldn't be surprised if the same thinking would happen with car-motorbike accidents.

[zzap]

I know bikes legally must have a "Por Ror Bor" which is a type of insurance but not sure what it covers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It covers medical expenses for the driver of the bike, if s-he wasn't at fault.

Nothing else.

It's of more use than one might think at first glance, since it's common practise for the other vehicle to immediately leave the scene and few Thais have a private medical.

[ThaiPauly]

I heard that if you have an accident with a motorcycle you are always to blame provided that you are in a bigger vehicle. Is this true? If so it’s a pretty stupid law.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I really hope not, the kid that hit me is still in hospital, so I will let you know the oucome when we meet at the local Nick when he gets out

[Ajarn]

I heard that if you have an accident with a motorcycle you are always to blame provided that you are in a bigger vehicle. Is this true? If so it’s a pretty stupid law.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, it's not true