Thailand moped crash horror leaves British student paralysed from waist down

[NoshowJones]

Do vehicle hire companies in Thailand require to see a valid driving license?

No. I have rented motorcycles in Thailand and kanchanaburi and never been asked for my licence.

[Shadychris]

And I suspect "moped" is the wrong description.

Why do some folks go loose in describing things wrong? A mo-ped is exactly what it implies. A motorized bicycle that you can pedal to start or actually pedal a short way. NOT a 110cc motorbike (motorcycle). I haven't seen many mo-peds here.

You are speaking historically. A moped was indeed a heavyweight bicycle with an engine that you could pedal to start, or even pedal a short way if you had the leg muscles of a Titan. These were first around in the late sixties to early seventies, example such as the French Velosolex, Raleigh's Wisp, Puch Maxi etc, all with a 'step thru frame' and an engine size not exceeding 49cc. That was the legal definition of a 'moped' in the UK at least, and you were permitted to ride one of these at the age of 16. On reaching 17 you could ride up to a 250cc and would then need to pass the bike test before progressing to anything larger

However in the early to mid seventies the crafty Japanese saw a loophole in the market and started to build small lightweight motorcycles with 49cc engines capable of speeds between 40 - 50 mph such as the Yamaha FSIE (fizzy) and the Honda SS50. The Italians also followed suit with Gilera and Malagutti offering a couple of models that would top out at nearly 60mph.

These machine did still have pedals - in fact the footrests on cranks that could unlock and form a bicycle pedal arrangement by which it was theoretically possible to propel the bike. The reality was that due to the weight of the machine it was virtually impossible to do so. I know all that because I was 16 myself at that time and working in a bike shop.

As these so called 'mopeds' with 5 speed gearboxes and disc brakes began to get more highly tuned , the accident\injury\death rate of 16 year old novice riders began to rise rapidly and in the late seventies the Government acted to change the legislation. The definition of a 'moped' then became a motorbike of 49cc maximum with a top speed restricted to 30mph. The requirement to have pedals fitted as an optional method of propulsion was dropped - however the term moped stuck as a descriptive way of differentiating the different licensing and insurance requirements of these 49cc machines from larger engined ones. The term moped is still widely used today to describe any 49cc engined bike which is the only class of motorbike you are allowed to ride without restriction on a full car licence..

Hope that clears things up - on the minus side it just reminded myself how old I am that I can remember back that far... :-(

This is a moped. A 1950s Cyclemaster. I had one in 1959 and it cost me 12s 6d or 62 new pence per year for insurance.

1950s Cyclemaster.jpg

This is a moped too :-

Edited July 29, 2015 by Shadychris

[Shadychris]

and this is also a moped - no pedals on this one, but the definition of moped nowadays is purely relative to engine size of less than 50cc. This means you can drive one on a full car licence with no need to take a motorcycle test or training.

Some would refer to it as a scooter due to its styling but of course scooters can have motors much bigger than 50cc, which actually makes them motorcycles as far as training and licence requirements are concerned.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Shadychris

[BaldPlumber]

And I suspect "moped" is the wrong description.

Yes, it's very important to employ semantics in relation to a life changing event such as this.

I wonder, are you poised at your keyboard to point "it's not a retirement visa" whenever the need arises.

[gandalf12]

As sad a case as it is, it appears that he was not wearing a helmet. Back in the UK he would have worn one but acted stupidly in Thailand. Everyone who rides a motor bike should realise their head is softer than the road. Not a widely accepted fact I know but a true one. In this case it looks like Road 1 - Passenger 0

[Guest]

Ladies .. we are on page 6, and you are still like a circle of hens arguing what a moped is.

You can't make up some of the tripe you see on this site.

OK, intermission over .... get back to it girls

"NO !!! a moped is _____________________________"

(PS. I really am laughing out loud)

Edited July 29, 2015 by Guest

[konying]

As sad a case as it is, it appears that he was not wearing a helmet. Back in the UK he would have worn one but acted stupidly in Thailand. Everyone who rides a motor bike should realise their head is softer than the road. Not a widely accepted fact I know but a true one. In this case it looks like Road 1 - Passenger 0

Wearing helmet does not prevent broken spine or legs

[rapom]

After seeing the Thai emergency services in action at a RTA, I'm really surprised he managed to survive those injuries.

i don't doubt their competency-skills being dubious but can you please elaborate on your observations and describe specifically things you saw to be deficient be it by omission or commission.

In Phuket I saw a young Thai who had been hit and run from his motorbike. When I got to the scene there were already a group of foreign tourists which had checked his signs of life and put him into the recovery position. The police arrived first and just parked their car to divert traffic, mone of the police even ca me near the injured kid. Eventually an ambulance turned up and the two paramedics literally just walked up to the kid, turned his head to the side and shone a flash light into his eyes and deemed him doomed, then they both picked him up by his arms and legs and swung him into the back of their van like an animal in a slaughterhouse and drove off. They were on the scene for maybe 25 seconds.

I just remember feeling so sorry for the kid's parents.

The recovery position, that you say the foreign tourists placed the injured man in, was not beneficial to his injuries. It is only used on patients that have had a medical episode, such as seizure, diabetic episode or heat stroke, as examples. If he had any spinal injuries from the accident, the tourists actions only aggravated his injuries and possibly, insured his death. Another MVA death, assisted by non trained bystanders with good intentions. Unless someone has received the proper training, beyond basic first aid ( not first aid from the boy scouts or red cross) they should do nothing, unless the victim is not breathing or bleeding profusely. As far as the police not assisting, this could be because of police SOP (standing operating procedure) or maybe whoever called for medical services reported the victim deceased. Checking a victims pupils with a light is standard practice. If pupils are dilated, they will constrict with bright light and no reaction, is one sign of death. If they did remove the victim as your description implied, that would not have been professional. But, as time flies, I would bet their actual time at the scene was longer than you state.

[Fab5BKK]

I'm not aware of the trainings emergency services personnel in Thailand have to go through in order to be certified.

I know that in countries like UK, France and others, these personnel have to be qualified for the job.

Since you seem to know a lot about these services in Thailand could you please share your knowledge?

Oh sorry for the confusion, let me spell it out for you, they are utterly pathetic and I'd be worried if any of my loved ones needed their help in an emergency.

Most are untrained. Watching them pick somebody up off the road is frightening. They just grab arms and legs and hike them into the back of a pick-up truck or van. no thought for spinal injuries or internal bleeding. Often those who are rescued also find their wallets lighter when they get to their destination. It is a racket run much like to tow truck rackets in the west. We see them roaring down major roads in Bangkok, sirens blaring in a hurry to rescue their next victim and, ironically, almost creating more accidents because of their haste.

Says who? I'd love to see your evidence, and justification, for your promulgation of this urban myth.

You're obviously overlooking the general use of backboards by the rescue services. As for the lighter wallets bit, you think that the rescue services do all this thieving with all the witnesses that always congregate at the scene of these incidents? They travel rapidly using sirens precisely because they are en route to emergency situations, what would you like to see them do, sit in traffic and take their time?

As for their "almost creating more accidents", an accident either happens or it doesn't. An "almost" accident doesn't exist, that would be a non accident.

[gandalf12]

As sad a case as it is, it appears that he was not wearing a helmet. Back in the UK he would have worn one but acted stupidly in Thailand. Everyone who rides a motor bike should realise their head is softer than the road. Not a widely accepted fact I know but a true one. In this case it looks like Road 1 - Passenger 0

Wearing helmet does not prevent broken spine or legs

No it doesnt but it does help to stop bleeding in the brain. He would still be sriously injured but possibly wouldnt have the problem in his brain

[pattayahenry]

How many lives are taken or destroyed with these stupid unsave motorbikes and cycles. Damn things should be outlawed.

thousands of mountain-climbers die each year, these stupid unsafe mountains should be outlawed, not to forget the bad unresponsible weather,which causes most accidents.

[lemonjelly]

After seeing the Thai emergency services in action at a RTA, I'm really surprised he managed to survive those injuries.

So you're giving a very reluctant pat on the back to the emergency services in this instance as well as bashing them in general, yes?

Oh sorry for the confusion, let me spell it out for you, they are utterly pathetic and I'd be worried if any of my loved ones needed their help in an emergency.

the mother of my thai ex gf used to keep the doors on the car locked when we were driving, i pointed out that it was dangerous as the EMS need to be able to get into the car quickly if there was an accident; my gf replied that she locks the doors to try and keep the goons out.

Edited July 29, 2015 by lemonjelly

[lonexpat]

tragic... I'm very sorry

this is not a time for 'holier than thou' statements but for compassion

Perhaps you could enlighten me. I have not seen a lack of compassion in any post......just mentioning things that people take for granted on holiday that causes such horrors. I wish him well. Now have a thought for all the people that get injured or killed by people riding bikes for the first time.........where should compassion go then? The bike rider or the 3 young children he's just killed....and yes, I have seen it.

[lonexpat]

I'm not aware of the trainings emergency services personnel in Thailand have to go through in order to be certified.

I know that in countries like UK, France and others, these personnel have to be qualified for the job.

Since you seem to know a lot about these services in Thailand could you please share your knowledge?

Oh sorry for the confusion, let me spell it out for you, they are utterly pathetic and I'd be worried if any of my loved ones needed their help in an emergency.

Most are untrained. Watching them pick somebody up off the road is frightening. They just grab arms and legs and hike them into the back of a pick-up truck or van. no thought for spinal injuries or internal bleeding. Often those who are rescued also find their wallets lighter when they get to their destination. It is a racket run much like to tow truck rackets in the west. We see them roaring down major roads in Bangkok, sirens blaring in a hurry to rescue their next victim and, ironically, almost creating more accidents because of their haste.

Says who? I'd love to see your evidence, and justification, for your promulgation of this urban myth.

You're obviously overlooking the general use of backboards by the rescue services. As for the lighter wallets bit, you think that the rescue services do all this thieving with all the witnesses that always congregate at the scene of these incidents? They travel rapidly using sirens precisely because they are en route to emergency situations, what would you like to see them do, sit in traffic and take their time?

As for their "almost creating more accidents", an accident either happens or it doesn't. An "almost" accident doesn't exist, that would be a non accident.

Says me......it's urban myth in your mind. People are often picked up and thrown into the back of pick up trucks. And yes, they often sit in traffic and yes, I've seen a ambulance stopped to allow way for a coach full of tourist.

[CarolJadzia]

The recovery position, that you say the foreign tourists placed the injured man in, was not beneficial to his injuries. It is only used on patients that have had a medical episode, such as seizure, diabetic episode or heat stroke, as examples. If he had any spinal injuries from the accident, the tourists actions only aggravated his injuries and possibly, insured his death. Another MVA death, assisted by non trained bystanders with good intentions. Unless someone has received the proper training, beyond basic first aid ( not first aid from the boy scouts or red cross) they should do nothing, unless the victim is not breathing or bleeding profusely. As far as the police not assisting, this could be because of police SOP (standing operating procedure) or maybe whoever called for medical services reported the victim deceased. Checking a victims pupils with a light is standard practice. If pupils are dilated, they will constrict with bright light and no reaction, is one sign of death. If they did remove the victim as your description implied, that would not have been professional. But, as time flies, I would bet their actual time at the scene was longer than you state.

In the UK we now have 'Biker Down' courses. These are aimed at Bikers but open to everyone. It is a proven fact that the sooner someone gets first aid the more chance they have of surviving. My father was a first responder and biker so I was brought up on dealing with RTA's. But I have found the biker down courses (done 2 so far) useful refreshers.

http://www.survivalskills.co.uk/biker%20down.htm

But of course the problem is in Thailand that you have to be careful what you do. Don't want to get blamed for making the situation worse or for causing the accident. Even a friend who is a first responder on Koh Samui will only get involved with RTA's when he is on duty. That is not through choice but through advice from the volunteers he works with.

[CarolJadzia]

the article gives no details about who was the driver or how the accident occured.

also, it says that the travel insurance only covers accidents with mopeds of 50cc or less, what stupid policy is that ?? this needs to be changed, if necessary by law.

To ride a motorcycle or moped UNDER 50cc in the Uk you can do if you have a car drivers licence.

Over 50cc you have to have taken the first part of the motorcycle test before you are even allowed to take it on the road. I believe that you must complete a certasin number of hours of proper motorcycle training.

link https://www.gov.uk/rules-motorcyclists-83-to-88/motorcycle-licence-requirements

You can only get proper insurance for riding something bigger than a moped if you take out a proper policy which will cost extra money.

The majority of tourists don't bother as they "know" that they are safe riders. That is of course before they arrive in Thailand and find that they can rent ANY size of motorbike whether or not they are capable, whether or not they have the right riding gear because Thailand drives on the same side of the road as the UK.

Many of them have no idea what they are getting into and some end up like the guy described in the OP.

Why should the insurance companies change just because YOU think it is a stupid policy?

All moped/motorcycle first time users in the UK have to to undertake a Compulsory Basic Training course. Note this is not a test. It is training in basic road skills set out in modules. The student must demonstrate a understanding of each stage before moving on to the next. This normally takes a day and includes a minimum two hour road ride at the end.

Nobody is legally allowed to ride on the road alone until the CBT is completed. Even then, unless just riding a moped on a car licence, they must ride displaying 'L' plates and if they do not pass their full test within 2 years they must re-take a CBT.

I think that all tourist spots in Thailand should have licence checks and if someone does not have a full motorcycle licence then they should not be allowed to hire a motorcycle.

Maybe scooter hire only allowed after completion of something like a CBT. Also something done about the standards of hire helmets and possibly more hire kit.

The accident black spots like Koh Samui, Phuket and Pattaya all having big problems with poor 'Farang' young tourists doing what tourists do.

I was wondering what was special about this story as I know it's such a common occurrence on Koh Samui.

[Ulic]

"He was thrown from a moped after the driver lost control and skidded off the road. David, from Middleton, suffered multiple injuries including a broken back, broken left shoulder, punctured lung, a bleed in the brain, cracked ribs and nerve damage to his left forearm."

Most of the comments infer he was the driver of the scooter but that is not what I get from reading

the article. Either the article was poorly worded to mislead readers or he was merely a passenger.

Maybe a friend was driving? not really sure. I hope he makes as full a recovery as quickly as possible.

A tragic experience for him and his family.

[manarak]

the article gives no details about who was the driver or how the accident occured.

also, it says that the travel insurance only covers accidents with mopeds of 50cc or less, what stupid policy is that ?? this needs to be changed, if necessary by law.

To ride a motorcycle or moped UNDER 50cc in the Uk you can do if you have a car drivers licence.

Over 50cc you have to have taken the first part of the motorcycle test before you are even allowed to take it on the road. I believe that you must complete a certasin number of hours of proper motorcycle training.

link https://www.gov.uk/rules-motorcyclists-83-to-88/motorcycle-licence-requirements

You can only get proper insurance for riding something bigger than a moped if you take out a proper policy which will cost extra money.

The majority of tourists don't bother as they "know" that they are safe riders. That is of course before they arrive in Thailand and find that they can rent ANY size of motorbike whether or not they are capable, whether or not they have the right riding gear because Thailand drives on the same side of the road as the UK.

Many of them have no idea what they are getting into and some end up like the guy described in the OP.

Why should the insurance companies change just because YOU think it is a stupid policy?

I just want to make 2 points:

1- the article suggests the victim of the accident was not driving !

it cannot be a vehicle passenger's duty to check whether the driver has the proper license and insurance.

so I think travel insurance should cover accidents of passengers in any case of normal use of a normal vehicle.

2- drivers should be covered during normal use of vehicles they are licensed to drive

[SEEDGER]

I have a question for Mango Bob,

So does the following scenario sound about right?

Come to think of it Mango, last night I woke up and found my motor bike trying to sneak out of the drive way on its own!

When I caught it, “Yamaha was upset”, it complained it was tired of being controlled by a responsible rider. Yamaha cried it wanted to behave recklessly and it wanted freedom and it wanted to know what it was like to kill people!

Damn who knew that after coming home and driving carefully your bike has a mind of its own!

I suppose this explains all the gun violence in America, Guns, like motorbikes in Thailand are sentient beings and have minds and feelings unknown to those of us that ride them or shoot them. I suppose that in your world Bob you see gangs or rider less motor bikes out terrorizing the public!

Does this sum up your argument Mango Bob!

[roamer]

the article gives no details about who was the driver or how the accident occured.

also, it says that the travel insurance only covers accidents with mopeds of 50cc or less, what stupid policy is that ?? this needs to be changed, if necessary by law.

To ride a motorcycle or moped UNDER 50cc in the Uk you can do if you have a car drivers licence.

Over 50cc you have to have taken the first part of the motorcycle test before you are even allowed to take it on the road. I believe that you must complete a certasin number of hours of proper motorcycle training.

link https://www.gov.uk/rules-motorcyclists-83-to-88/motorcycle-licence-requirements

You can only get proper insurance for riding something bigger than a moped if you take out a proper policy which will cost extra money.

The majority of tourists don't bother as they "know" that they are safe riders. That is of course before they arrive in Thailand and find that they can rent ANY size of motorbike whether or not they are capable, whether or not they have the right riding gear because Thailand drives on the same side of the road as the UK.

Many of them have no idea what they are getting into and some end up like the guy described in the OP.

Why should the insurance companies change just because YOU think it is a stupid policy?

All moped/motorcycle first time users in the UK have to to undertake a Compulsory Basic Training course. Note this is not a test. It is training in basic road skills set out in modules. The student must demonstrate a understanding of each stage before moving on to the next. This normally takes a day and includes a minimum two hour road ride at the end.

Nobody is legally allowed to ride on the road alone until the CBT is completed. Even then, unless just riding a moped on a car licence, they must ride displaying 'L' plates and if they do not pass their full test within 2 years they must re-take a CBT.

I think that all tourist spots in Thailand should have licence checks and if someone does not have a full motorcycle licence then they should not be allowed to hire a motorcycle.

Maybe scooter hire only allowed after completion of something like a CBT. Also something done about the standards of hire helmets and possibly more hire kit.

The accident black spots like Koh Samui, Phuket and Pattaya all having big problems with poor 'Farang' young tourists doing what tourists do.

I was wondering what was special about this story as I know it's such a common occurrence on Koh Samui.

Lot of misinformation in a newspaper report.

Insurance policy subject to law of England and Wales.

This also means that a travel insurance policy can not cover you for an activity you can not legally undertake in United Kingdom

This is why the minimum requirement in any travel insurance is that you be licensed to use such a vehicle in the United Kingdom.

An insurance policy will also not cover you as pillion passenger unless you are licensed as above.

The "moped" part of this is a red herring, regardless of the legal definition of a moped.

Entirely possible he and driver have policies are underwritten by the same group of underwriters even if policies are issued by different companies. In such a case the possibility of a third party claim against the driver becomes a factor in decision to bring him home.

[Maestro]

Quite often, the basic cover of a travel accident insurance excludes high-risk activities, eg parachuting, bungee jumping, travelling on a motorcycle, etc, and in the case of this man, David, apparently included riding on a moped as per UK definition, presumably both as driver and as passenger.

From the news article, I gather that after negotiation the insurance company paid the medical expenses but not the cost for a family member to travel to Thailand to be with David.

[roamer]

the article gives no details about who was the driver or how the accident occured.

also, it says that the travel insurance only covers accidents with mopeds of 50cc or less, what stupid policy is that ?? this needs to be changed, if necessary by law.

To ride a motorcycle or moped UNDER 50cc in the Uk you can do if you have a car drivers licence.

Over 50cc you have to have taken the first part of the motorcycle test before you are even allowed to take it on the road. I believe that you must complete a certasin number of hours of proper motorcycle training.

link https://www.gov.uk/rules-motorcyclists-83-to-88/motorcycle-licence-requirements

You can only get proper insurance for riding something bigger than a moped if you take out a proper policy which will cost extra money.

The majority of tourists don't bother as they "know" that they are safe riders. That is of course before they arrive in Thailand and find that they can rent ANY size of motorbike whether or not they are capable, whether or not they have the right riding gear because Thailand drives on the same side of the road as the UK.

Many of them have no idea what they are getting into and some end up like the guy described in the OP.

Why should the insurance companies change just because YOU think it is a stupid policy?

I just want to make 2 points:

1- the article suggests the victim of the accident was not driving !

it cannot be a vehicle passenger's duty to check whether the driver has the proper license and insurance.

so I think travel insurance should cover accidents of passengers in any case of normal use of a normal vehicle.

2- drivers should be covered during normal use of vehicles they are licensed to drive

Wrong. Any travel insurance will be void if you travel as a pillion passenger unless you have a licence. It's complex but you would even be covered if the driver did not have a licence provided you did and provided you did not know this.(Provided the policy does not have a blanket ban on all motorbike use, some do) This takes away the onus on you to know if a driver was covered

Edited July 29, 2015 by roamer

[Maestro]

Isn't every insurance company free to write its own conditions?

[manarak]

the article gives no details about who was the driver or how the accident occured.

also, it says that the travel insurance only covers accidents with mopeds of 50cc or less, what stupid policy is that ?? this needs to be changed, if necessary by law.

To ride a motorcycle or moped UNDER 50cc in the Uk you can do if you have a car drivers licence.

Over 50cc you have to have taken the first part of the motorcycle test before you are even allowed to take it on the road. I believe that you must complete a certasin number of hours of proper motorcycle training.

link https://www.gov.uk/rules-motorcyclists-83-to-88/motorcycle-licence-requirements

You can only get proper insurance for riding something bigger than a moped if you take out a proper policy which will cost extra money.

The majority of tourists don't bother as they "know" that they are safe riders. That is of course before they arrive in Thailand and find that they can rent ANY size of motorbike whether or not they are capable, whether or not they have the right riding gear because Thailand drives on the same side of the road as the UK.

Many of them have no idea what they are getting into and some end up like the guy described in the OP.

Why should the insurance companies change just because YOU think it is a stupid policy?

I just want to make 2 points:

1- the article suggests the victim of the accident was not driving !

it cannot be a vehicle passenger's duty to check whether the driver has the proper license and insurance.

so I think travel insurance should cover accidents of passengers in any case of normal use of a normal vehicle.

2- drivers should be covered during normal use of vehicles they are licensed to drive

Wrong. Any travel insurance will be void if you travel as a pillion passenger unless you have a licence. It's complex but you would even be covered if the driver did not have a licence provided you did and provided you did not know this.(Provided the policy does not have a blanket ban on all motorbike use, some do) This takes away the onus on you to know if a driver was covered

Not wrong. The above is my opinion on how travel insurance *should* work, not an advisory on how it really works.

My opinion on what you wrote is that the policy is stupid, and I think insurance companies should be required by law to cover their customers riding pillion *under usual circumstances*, for example as passengers of a motorcycle taxi, or riding with a friend on a road, regardless of their license status as a passenger.

[roamer]

Isn't every insurance company free to write its own conditions?

Provided they comply with English law as above.So some policies, usually the cheaper ones, will often exclude motorbike activity full stop. The condition for pillion passengers is invariably applied as it otherwise opens them up to claims and creates an anomalous situation whereby 2 people could have a policy with the company, hire a motorbike, driver is not covered because of no licence but the passenger would be.

[manarak]

Isn't every insurance company free to write its own conditions?

Provided they comply with English law as above.So some policies, usually the cheaper ones, will often exclude motorbike activity full stop. The condition for pillion passengers is invariably applied as it otherwise opens them up to claims and creates an anomalous situation whereby 2 people could have a policy with the company, hire a motorbike, driver is not covered because of no licence but the passenger would be.

"anomalous situation" 555

there are already loads of such situations with insurance policies, one more or less wouldn't matter much.

the example you give is - excuse me - stupid.

the unlicensed driver makes a mistake and therefore is not covered, but I still cannot see why the passenger should be punished too.

extrapolating to other vehicles, it means only such passengers of a vehicle that are licensed to drive the vehicle are covered by insurance, meaning cars, buses, boats, ferries ??? do you have a license for a passenger bus or a ferry boat?

what about children, disabled persons... ?

the policy is stupid, I rest my case.

I still think there is a need for the government to standardize travel insurance into several categories and by issuing minimum coverage requirements for each category, so insurance buyers are not screwed by the fineprint.

Edited July 29, 2015 by manarak

[roamer]

Isn't every insurance company free to write its own conditions?

Provided they comply with English law as above.So some policies, usually the cheaper ones, will often exclude motorbike activity full stop. The condition for pillion passengers is invariably applied as it otherwise opens them up to claims and creates an anomalous situation whereby 2 people could have a policy with the company, hire a motorbike, driver is not covered because of no licence but the passenger would be.

"anomalous situation" 555

there are already loads of such situations with insurance policies, one more or less wouldn't matter much.

the example you give is - excuse me - stupid.

the unlicensed driver makes a mistake and therefore is not covered, but I still cannot see why the passenger should be punished too.

extrapolating to other vehicles, it means only such passengers of a vehicle that are licensed to drive the vehicle are covered by insurance, meaning cars, buses, boats, ferries ??? do you have a license for a passenger bus or a ferry boat?

what about children, disabled persons... ?

the policy is stupid, I rest my case.

I still think there is a need for the government to standardize travel insurance into several categories and by issuing minimum coverage requirements for each category, so insurance buyers are not screwed by the fineprint.

You can't extrapolate this to other vehicles, it is not a condition that applies to other vehicles. This is an exclusion clause that you may think of as "stupid" but I can assure you that if it was not in there you and everyone else would be paying a lot more for travel insurance or the other scenario would be a simple exclusion clause that forbids motorbikes under any conditions. You can't force insurance companies to issue cover in the way you suggest. In any event they are already stating what their coverage conditions are. No one is screwed by "fine print"here, the exclusion clauses are clear and unambiguous, you choose not to read them, your choice.

[Lex Talionis]

This is just horrendous journalism. Where exactly did this accident happen? When? (figuring back it seems to be about early June.) Who was driving the moto? What precipitated the accident? Was it raining and the road was wet? Was the patch sandy? Was alcohol involved? How fast were they going? What happened to the driver? Was he hurt? If not, how did his passenger incur such horrific injuries? Did he strike any object after he was thrown? Was the rescue done in a timely & professional manner? Where was he treated? What procedures & operations were performed? & etc.

So many basic unanswered questions. If they expect people to make a donation they should provide enough information to allow them to make a judgement.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Lex Talionis

[Keesters]

How many lives are taken or destroyed with these stupid unsave motorbikes and cycles. Damn things should be outlawed.

If outlawing were to happen how would my 10-year-old neighbor get to school? It's all of 500 meters he couldn't possibly walk that far.

Get well soon to the British lad.

[geriatrickid]

Do vehicle hire companies in Thailand require to see a valid driving license?

Only franchises of international brands like Budget and Avis. They also offer proper insurance. Everywhere else is a free for all. No regulations/no enforcement/no concern/no clue/no morality.