simple1 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 @bookman My post #58 comment wasn't aimed at you, but our "friend" Hamlet07 who comes across as sarcastic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evadgib Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Helmet, Engine size (125cc or 50cc in many cases), Toxicoligy (Drink/Drugs) or Licence are among the most common "get out" clauses used by insurers. Anyone unable to tick all 4 can expect similar probs. Well those four are definately Fair to be observed but when they try to pull a swifty under your nose and refuse to honour their obligations it's another thing..... Ticking all 4 substantially reduces the chance of insurers wriggling on a technicallity. 3 on a bike or driving the wrong way up a one way street etc is a different matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 The "Treaty" to which the last bullet point of Section 42, and Section 42-2 refers is the Vienna Convention 1968, which supercedes the 1949 convention. It is the Convention, not the Thai Government, that stipulates that an IDP is not valid unless a corresponding drivers licence of the home country can be produced. That is the other way around from what I am saying. You're stating here an IDP is not valid unless a home license is produced, I am saying the IDP is not necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now