I never got an answer from the Ask The Lawyer section.

[Soutpeel]

Beetlejuice and Soutpeel:

As a foreigner providing proof of employment and proof of property ownership, I was denied a monthly payment plan, but any Thai person, regardless if broke or homeless, is able to opt for monthly payment.

This isn't due diligence in any way.

I am usually easy going with dual pricing and different policies based on residency where they do make some sense, and no, I'm not howling discrimination, but some things just don't make sense.

do you have a credit record/history in Thailand, do you get a letter from your bank every year giving your credit status/score in Thailand ?

if the answer is no, then you have no credit history, hence a company may ask you to front up on a contract

you were not denied anything, they stated the T&C's they would go into contract with you to provide a service, you had a choice to accept the T&C's or take your business elsewhere

how long have you been on a WP/had a job ?

these can all be factors a company considers

the topic here is dual pricing, what your talking about has nothing to do with dual pricing its to do with specific contractual business practices and due dilligence

let me give you another example, when I first came to Thailand to work, I wanted a car, to buy a car on terms, even though I could very easily afford the payments, i required a Thai national to co-sign for me, made all the payments over the term, went to buy a new car, same finance company... lo and behold dont need a Thai co-signer this time round because I now had a credit history

[manarak]

Beetlejuice and Soutpeel:

As a foreigner providing proof of employment and proof of property ownership, I was denied a monthly payment plan, but any Thai person, regardless if broke or homeless, is able to opt for monthly payment.

This isn't due diligence in any way.

I am usually easy going with dual pricing and different policies based on residency where they do make some sense, and no, I'm not howling discrimination, but some things just don't make sense.

do you have a credit record/history in Thailand, do you get a letter from your bank every year giving your credit status/score in Thailand ?

if the answer is no, then you have no credit history, hence a company may ask you to front up on a contract

you were not denied anything, they stated the T&C's they would go into contract with you to provide a service, you had a choice to accept the T&C's or take your business elsewhere

how long have you been on a WP/had a job ?

these can all be factors a company considers

the topic here is dual pricing, what your talking about has nothing to do with dual pricing its to do with specific contractual business practices and due dilligence

let me give you another example, when I first came to Thailand to work, I wanted a car, to buy a car on terms, even though I could very easily afford the payments, i required a Thai national to co-sign for me, made all the payments over the term, went to buy a new car, same finance company... lo and behold dont need a Thai co-signer this time round because I now had a credit history

The point of article 30 is discrimination, one of its manifestations can be dual pricing, other manifestations are differences in terms and conditions.

I say that foreign legal residents and Thai persons should be treated the same, i.e. if both have no credit history, I fail to see how the Thai person without credit history has a lower risk of breaching the contract (i.e. not paying), especially when the foreigner provides Passport, B-Visa, 5 year DL, WP, bank book and Chanote and the Thai person doesn't provide anything.

T&C that are in breach of the Constitution are illegal and void, so it's no use to invoke illegal T&C to justify any of this.

If a credit history is required, T&C should require it for both Thais and foreigners.

In your example, the practice you described for the loan for your car - did it require a Thai with a credit history to co-sign or was any Thai person fine (beggars?) for signing the documents ?

If it was the latter and you were a legal resident, you were discriminated against.

I'm not sure if you understand my point.

[JLCrab]

I helped author Section 30 of the 2007 Thai Constitution by assisting a group of law and government affairs professors & graduate students who were assigned by the drafting committee to write it.

[Deacon Bell]

I helped author Section 30 of the 2007 Thai Constitution by assisting a group of law and government affairs professors & graduate students who were assigned by the drafting committee to write it.

Surprised you didn't get done for plagiarism, given that it's completely identical to the 1997 Constitution Section 30.

1997 Constitution Section 30.

2007 Constitution Section 30.

[manarak]

I helped author Section 30 of the 2007 Thai Constitution by assisting a group of law and government affairs professors & graduate students who were assigned by the drafting committee to write it.

Interesting, I hope the Thai version is more explicit.

How did you help ?

And do you know why there is no official English translation ?

[slipperx]

Beetlejuice and Soutpeel:

As a foreigner providing proof of employment and proof of property ownership, I was denied a monthly payment plan, but any Thai person, regardless if broke or homeless, is able to opt for monthly payment.

This isn't due diligence in any way.

I am usually easy going with dual pricing and different policies based on residency where they do make some sense, and no, I'm not howling discrimination, but some things just don't make sense.

do you have a credit record/history in Thailand, do you get a letter from your bank every year giving your credit status/score in Thailand ?

if the answer is no, then you have no credit history, hence a company may ask you to front up on a contract

you were not denied anything, they stated the T&C's they would go into contract with you to provide a service, you had a choice to accept the T&C's or take your business elsewhere

how long have you been on a WP/had a job ?

these can all be factors a company considers

the topic here is dual pricing, what your talking about has nothing to do with dual pricing its to do with specific contractual business practices and due dilligence

let me give you another example, when I first came to Thailand to work, I wanted a car, to buy a car on terms, even though I could very easily afford the payments, i required a Thai national to co-sign for me, made all the payments over the term, went to buy a new car, same finance company... lo and behold dont need a Thai co-signer this time round because I now had a credit history

That is quite funny. I had a Visa card here with the SCB and had had it for over 10 years. I moved house and notified them along with my Mastercard. They messed up somewhere along the line and my Visa account was cancelled. I went in to ask why and was met with embarrassment as my Mastercard had been changed to the new address and the Visa had not - no way out for them as both cards notified in the same communication I said not to worry just start a new account - I have 10 years of perfect credit history but NO. No new account unless you have a work permit and being retired doesn't count. Madness but I still have the Mastercard so I suppose I must be grateful for small blessings.

So credit history is not much help if all the boxes are not ticked. I think that is pretty discriminatory to be honest.

[manarak]

Beetlejuice and Soutpeel:

As a foreigner providing proof of employment and proof of property ownership, I was denied a monthly payment plan, but any Thai person, regardless if broke or homeless, is able to opt for monthly payment.

This isn't due diligence in any way.

I am usually easy going with dual pricing and different policies based on residency where they do make some sense, and no, I'm not howling discrimination, but some things just don't make sense.

do you have a credit record/history in Thailand, do you get a letter from your bank every year giving your credit status/score in Thailand ?

if the answer is no, then you have no credit history, hence a company may ask you to front up on a contract

you were not denied anything, they stated the T&C's they would go into contract with you to provide a service, you had a choice to accept the T&C's or take your business elsewhere

how long have you been on a WP/had a job ?

these can all be factors a company considers

the topic here is dual pricing, what your talking about has nothing to do with dual pricing its to do with specific contractual business practices and due dilligence

let me give you another example, when I first came to Thailand to work, I wanted a car, to buy a car on terms, even though I could very easily afford the payments, i required a Thai national to co-sign for me, made all the payments over the term, went to buy a new car, same finance company... lo and behold dont need a Thai co-signer this time round because I now had a credit history

That is quite funny. I had a Visa card here with the SCB and had had it for over 10 years. I moved house and notified them along with my Mastercard. They messed up somewhere along the line and my Visa account was cancelled. I went in to ask why and was met with embarrassment as my Mastercard had been changed to the new address and the Visa had not - no way out for them as both cards notified in the same communication I said not to worry just start a new account - I have 10 years of perfect credit history but NO. No new account unless you have a work permit and being retired doesn't count. Madness but I still have the Mastercard so I suppose I must be grateful for small blessings.

So credit history is not much help if all the boxes are not ticked. I think that is pretty discriminatory to be honest.

It is!

[Deacon Bell]

I helped author Section 30 of the 2007 Thai Constitution by assisting a group of law and government affairs professors & graduate students who were assigned by the drafting committee to write it.

Interesting, I hope the Thai version is more explicit.

How did you help ?

And do you know why there is no official English translation ?

He's joking or lying, section 30 of the 2007 Constitution was lifted word for word from that of 1997.

[Soutpeel]

Beetlejuice and Soutpeel:

As a foreigner providing proof of employment and proof of property ownership, I was denied a monthly payment plan, but any Thai person, regardless if broke or homeless, is able to opt for monthly payment.

This isn't due diligence in any way.

I am usually easy going with dual pricing and different policies based on residency where they do make some sense, and no, I'm not howling discrimination, but some things just don't make sense.

do you have a credit record/history in Thailand, do you get a letter from your bank every year giving your credit status/score in Thailand ?

if the answer is no, then you have no credit history, hence a company may ask you to front up on a contract

you were not denied anything, they stated the T&C's they would go into contract with you to provide a service, you had a choice to accept the T&C's or take your business elsewhere

how long have you been on a WP/had a job ?

these can all be factors a company considers

the topic here is dual pricing, what your talking about has nothing to do with dual pricing its to do with specific contractual business practices and due dilligence

let me give you another example, when I first came to Thailand to work, I wanted a car, to buy a car on terms, even though I could very easily afford the payments, i required a Thai national to co-sign for me, made all the payments over the term, went to buy a new car, same finance company... lo and behold dont need a Thai co-signer this time round because I now had a credit history

The point of article 30 is discrimination, one of its manifestations can be dual pricing, other manifestations are differences in terms and conditions.

I say that foreign legal residents and Thai persons should be treated the same, i.e. if both have no credit history, I fail to see how the Thai person without credit history has a lower risk of breaching the contract (i.e. not paying), especially when the foreigner provides Passport, B-Visa, 5 year DL, WP, bank book and Chanote and the Thai person doesn't provide anything.

T&C that are in breach of the Constitution are illegal and void, so it's no use to invoke illegal T&C to justify any of this.

If a credit history is required, T&C should require it for both Thais and foreigners.

In your example, the practice you described for the loan for your car - did it require a Thai with a credit history to co-sign or was any Thai person fine (beggars?) for signing the documents ?

If it was the latter and you were a legal resident, you were discriminated against.

I'm not sure if you understand my point.

Seeing as you believe you have such a strong case of discrimination under section 30 then all I can really suggest then is you retain a lawyer and take them to court then

but the one thing I will say as regards a "legal" resident" - a WP doesnt make you a "legal resident", a chanote doesnt make you a "legal resident", a 5 year DL doesnt make you a "legal resident", a B- Visa doesnt make you a "legal resident", you have not been bestowed with or granted "legal residency" in any shape or form

The the only thing which makes you a "legal resident" is being a Permanent Resident (PR) or citizenship and by virtue of the fact you mention, a non-imm B, you not PR, so not a legal resident anyway

[Neeranam]

I am fine with dual pricing as long as they differentiate between residents and non-residents, although that could be also interpreted as "difference in personal status" - that article of the constitution is too unspecific and too broad.

I was discriminated against by 3BB whose policy is to force foreigners into a one year contract paid in advance.

My guess is that some Thai corporations do discriminate against foreigners because these pesky foreigners actually complain and sometimes even refuse to pay for bad service !!

They should make the article more specific.

I just got 3BB and paid nothing for my fibre optic until the end of the first month, no 1 year contract.

[Soutpeel]

I am fine with dual pricing as long as they differentiate between residents and non-residents, although that could be also interpreted as "difference in personal status" - that article of the constitution is too unspecific and too broad.

I was discriminated against by 3BB whose policy is to force foreigners into a one year contract paid in advance.

My guess is that some Thai corporations do discriminate against foreigners because these pesky foreigners actually complain and sometimes even refuse to pay for bad service !!

They should make the article more specific.

I just got 3BB and paid nothing for my fibre optic until the end of the first month, no 1 year contract.

and am i correct in thinking your a foreigner ? and a non citizen, or non PR ?

if so, guess that blows manarak's "Thai corporations do discriminate against foreigners making them pay for a year in advance" theory to sh*t then...

I can't talk about 3BB, but DTAC was never a problem for me, TT&T for my internet was never a problem for me, UBC (now True) was never a problem..didnt have to pay a year in advance cos I am a stinking farang, just monthly after they send me the bill...

[manarak]

I am fine with dual pricing as long as they differentiate between residents and non-residents, although that could be also interpreted as "difference in personal status" - that article of the constitution is too unspecific and too broad.

I was discriminated against by 3BB whose policy is to force foreigners into a one year contract paid in advance.

My guess is that some Thai corporations do discriminate against foreigners because these pesky foreigners actually complain and sometimes even refuse to pay for bad service !!

They should make the article more specific.

I just got 3BB and paid nothing for my fibre optic until the end of the first month, no 1 year contract.

and am i correct in thinking your a foreigner ? and a non citizen, or non PR ?

if so, guess that blows manarak's "Thai corporations do discriminate against foreigners making them pay for a year in advance" theory to sh*t then...

I can't talk about 3BB, but DTAC was never a problem for me, TT&T for my internet was never a problem for me, UBC (now True) was never a problem..didnt have to pay a year in advance cos I am a stinking farang, just monthly after they send me the bill...

I only had that problem with 3BB.

For AIS, DTAC, TOT, I am on postpaid.

Reading what Neeranam wrote, maybe it's not 3BB at all that discriminates but just the area manager for Thepprasit / Jomtien.

Regarding "legal resident", you are splitting hairs - I meant anyone staying on 1 year or more renewable non-immigrant visa. Obviously, PR is even better.

[Thanet]

Forget the Thailand constitution, they just make the rules as they go along. Plenty of other things to do in Thailand.

I avoid the so-called tourist attractions that smack higher prices on tourists and if they all done the same, than soon duel pricing would become a thing of the past. It`s that simple.

Agreed that constitutions have as long a service life as tissue paper here in Thailand.

That said, the old one forbade discrimination on the grounds of origin, but presumably allowed it on the grounds of nationality. For example, a Thai citizen of Indian origin must not be discriminated against, whereas an Indian citizen of Indian origin may be discriminated against. Various laws, immigration and labour laws for example, discriminate against non-citizens the world over.

[JLCrab]

I helped author Section 30 of the 2007 Thai Constitution by assisting a group of law and government affairs professors & graduate students who were assigned by the drafting committee to write it.

Interesting, I hope the Thai version is more explicit.

How did you help ?

And do you know why there is no official English translation ?

The group had submitted to the drafting committee a list of rights that should be afforded disadvantaged persons. The drafting committee had rejected the the groups submissions saying an enumeration of rights could go on endlessly. The group was in a hotel conference room and one of the members called me and said they were at an impasse. I said in the USA the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) did not grant any rights to persons with disabilities, but that such persons could not be denied any right granted to others solely on the basis of disability.

And that language I believe is reflected in the official Thai version. All those law professors and grad students as I mentioned were persons with a disabilities. There was an article in that other newspaper in 2007 of those persons presenting their work to the drafting committee.

[kurnell]

I never got an answer either. Perhaps they don't know?

[enuff said]

.

All blaw blaw blaw.

The constitution pertains to Thai people. Not every Joe Doaks who wanders in. All countries have different laws for aliens.

What does the phrase "non-immigrant" mean? It means, at some point, you are expected to leave.

From the preamble and first few sections...

May the Thai people unite in observing, protecting and upholding the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand in order to maintain the democratic regime of government and the sovereign power derived from the Thai people, and to bring about happiness, prosperity, and dignity to His Majesty's subjects throughout the Kingdom according to the will of His Majesty in every respect.

Chapter I General Provisions

Section 1
Thailand is one and indivisible Kingdom.

Section 2
Thailand adopts a democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State.

Section 3
The sovereign power belongs to the Thai people. The King as Head of the State shall exercise such power through the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers and the Courts in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.

Section 4
The human dignity, right and liberty of the Thai people shall be protected.

Section 5
The Thai people, irrespective of their origins, sexes or religions, shall enjoy equal protection under this Constitution.

Sheesh. How can it be plainer? It doesn't say "The Thai people and non-immigrant visa holders, irrespective of their origins, sexes or religions, shall enjoy equal protection under this Constitution."

Doos it?

'nuff said

~

[Soutpeel]

Regarding "legal resident", you are splitting hairs - I meant anyone staying on 1 year or more renewable non-immigrant visa. Obviously, PR is even better.

not splitting hairs at all, the term "legal resident" means someone who has right of abode in country and is specifically defined in Thailand's case meaning Permanent Residence, ie a non citizen of Thailand has been granted right of abode, in the US its the green card system, in the UK I believe "permission to remain" sytem fulfills this criteria.

Somebody on a Non-immigrant visa has been given temporary residence for a pre-defined period ie 1 year at a time, this is not "legal residence"

What do you think the "Non-immigrant" bit means on the visa ?....it means you are being permitted to enter/remain in Thailand for a defined period as a non "legal resident"

per your previous post

"The point of article 30 is discrimination, one of its manifestations can be dual pricing, other manifestations are differences in terms and conditions.

I say that foreign legal residents and Thai persons should be treated the same"

I agree and think you will find "legal residents" are treated the same, but the fact is someone who is on a Non-immgrant B visa, is not a "legal resident" in Thailand only somone with PR is, excluding citizens of course.

[manarak]

Regarding "legal resident", you are splitting hairs - I meant anyone staying on 1 year or more renewable non-immigrant visa. Obviously, PR is even better.

not splitting hairs at all, the term "legal resident" means someone who has right of abode in country and is specifically defined in Thailand's case meaning Permanent Residence, ie a non citizen of Thailand has been granted right of abode, in the US its the green card system, in the UK I believe "permission to remain" sytem fulfills this criteria.

Somebody on a Non-immigrant visa has been given temporary residence for a pre-defined period ie 1 year at a time, this is not "legal residence"

What do you think the "Non-immigrant" bit means on the visa ?....it means you are being permitted to enter/remain in Thailand for a defined period as a non "legal resident"

per your previous post

"The point of article 30 is discrimination, one of its manifestations can be dual pricing, other manifestations are differences in terms and conditions.

I say that foreign legal residents and Thai persons should be treated the same"

I agree and think you will find "legal residents" are treated the same, but the fact is someone who is on a Non-immgrant B visa, is not a "legal resident" in Thailand only somone with PR is, excluding citizens of course.

If I had meant permanent residents, I would have said so.

No, legal residents are people who are allowed to stay for extended periods of time (regardless of having to revew their visa and extension of stay) and who can transfer their official/legal residence to their address in Thailand.

Yes, we are expected to leave. Everyone does leave eventually, such as the majority of legal residents staying on their retirement visa will leave when they die.

[manarak]

.

All blaw blaw blaw.

The constitution pertains to Thai people. Not every Joe Doaks who wanders in. All countries have different laws for aliens.

What does the phrase "non-immigrant" mean? It means, at some point, you are expected to leave.

From the preamble and first few sections...

May the Thai people unite in observing, protecting and upholding the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand in order to maintain the democratic regime of government and the sovereign power derived from the Thai people, and to bring about happiness, prosperity, and dignity to His Majesty's subjects throughout the Kingdom according to the will of His Majesty in every respect.

Chapter I General Provisions

Section 1

Thailand is one and indivisible Kingdom.

Section 2

Thailand adopts a democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State.

Section 3

The sovereign power belongs to the Thai people. The King as Head of the State shall exercise such power through the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers and the Courts in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.

Section 4

The human dignity, right and liberty of the Thai people shall be protected.

Section 5

The Thai people, irrespective of their origins, sexes or religions, shall enjoy equal protection under this Constitution.

Sheesh. How can it be plainer? It doesn't say "The Thai people and non-immigrant visa holders, irrespective of their origins, sexes or religions, shall enjoy equal protection under this Constitution."

Doos it?

'nuff said

~

A constitution is the surpreme Law, many aspects of a constitution apply to government, limiting its powers.

Other articles affirm principles, such as non-discrimination.

So if article 30 says "Unjust discrimination against a person ..." , then the article is meant to apply to persons, not only Thai citizens.

Just think how stupid it would be for a constitutional article on non-discrimination to apply to Thais only ?? hello ?

[theguyfromanotherforum]

I wrote this many times on "another forum". In Canada Thai students pay triple what Canadian resident pays. As a matter of fact if you are a resident of Quebec your post secondary fees will be much lower than of you were from the rest of Canada. So in Canada they even discriminate against their own citizens. I am not even talking about the language laws discrimination in Canada.

[bino]

I was discriminated against by 3BB whose policy is to force foreigners into a one year contract paid in advance.

Total crap.

Not crap.

I was told the same thing by 3BB- one year contract, paid in advance, in full.

I had no problem agreeing to one year service agreement, but had a huge problem with their terms.

I became a TRUEMOVE customer instead.

Edit to add: my work permit or visa status had nothing to do with it. Wasn't even asked or considered.

[manarak]

BTW:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/758173-any-one-sign-up-for-3bb-in-pattaya-lately/