Jump to content
BANGKOK
Sign in to follow this  
webfact

Fatal RTA in Samui leads to dispute over who will pay for damage to a taxi

Recommended Posts

There are conflicting 'laws' here. It was explained to me a long time ago. Accident between -

bike and motorbike - motorbike pays

car and bike - car pays

lorry and car - lorry pays.

The reasoning being that the owner of the larger of the two has more money!

Hi-so hits anyone - anyone pays. Hi-so can buy freedom

foreigner hits anyone - foreigner pays as we all have more money than most Thais.

When a Thai truck ran into the back of my wife's car, she took the number and went to the police. They said - claim on insurance.

As many have said - insurance should pay. If the bike has the compulsary insurance - it will pay a max of 50,000 baht to the taxi. Meanwhile - the taxi driver should also pay something to the family of the dead guy. (But do not hold your breath.)

That's my understaing of life here anyway. In a traffic case that I was involved in at court - the judge's words were 'even if you are innocent - as a foreigner you have to pay something.'

What a load of poppy cock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's simple, the insurance on the rented scooter will cover it. If there's no insurance, the owner of the scooter pays. Insurance is (supposed to be) included when you rent any vehicle, if the owners don't bother to pay it, then they are responsible.

Why should an innocent party (m/c owner) be liable for the actions an other (the rider). All vehicles for hire should carry insurance and I would have thought that all Taxis must have fully comprehensive insurance, they are after all being hired and can carry up to 4 passengers, who could equally be injured in an accident. Therefore, if the innocent party can not claim off the guilty party's insurance, they have to claim off their own fully comprehensive insurance. Simple and logical - ah, forgot, this is Thailand!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of poppy cock.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread. Very eloquant. clap2.gif

However, as you were neither at the police station in the first example, nor the court in the second one, I am interested as to how you obtained your opinion. (Fol de rol?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of poppy cock.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread. Very eloquant. clap2.gif

However, as you were neither at the police station in the first example, nor the court in the second one, I am interested as to how you obtained your opinion. (Fol de rol?)

Yeah Iam just speaking from experience myself. most recent accident was a scooter ran into the side of me.

Guess who paid for the repairs to my pickup...... not me.

Yet according to the crap you spewed forth I should have been paying for the scooter.....

Edited by Don Mega
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah Iam just speaking from experience myself. most recent accident was a scooter ran into the side of me.

Guess who paid for the repairs to my pickup...... not me.

Yet according to the crap you spewed forth I should have been paying for the scooter.....

Well done - you did well to get a Thai on a scooter to pay for the repairs to your truck. thumbsup.gif

I have not heard of that happening very often.

Last week I saw a Thai on a scooter run into the back of a car in Fisherman's village (Thai car driver) and the two drivers spent a couple of minutes talking then the scooter driver pushed his scooter down the road. No details/money changed hands. I asked the Thai car driver if he wanted my name as a witness (and I have a car cam). His reply was 'what is the point - he has no money'.

I was the person that the judge and the policeman spoke to in my examples. So - one person's crap is another person's experiences. I guess that everyone has similar stories from both sides. My point was to show that UK/USA law whatever does not rule here.

Have a great day wai.gif

Edited by Tropicalevo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of poppy cock.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread. Very eloquant. clap2.gif

However, as you were neither at the police station in the first example, nor the court in the second one, I am interested as to how you obtained your opinion. (Fol de rol?)

Yeah Iam just speaking from experience myself. most recent accident was a scooter ran into the side of me.

Guess who paid for the repairs to my pickup...... not me.

Yet according to the crap you spewed forth I should have been paying for the scooter.....

You do it on a serial basis? :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of poppy cock.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread. Very eloquant. clap2.gif

However, as you were neither at the police station in the first example, nor the court in the second one, I am interested as to how you obtained your opinion. (Fol de rol?)

Yeah Iam just speaking from experience myself. most recent accident was a scooter ran into the side of me.

Guess who paid for the repairs to my pickup...... not me.

Yet according to the crap you spewed forth I should have been paying for the scooter.....

You do it on a serial basis? smile.png

Average out to about 2 every 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's simple, the insurance on the rented scooter will cover it. If there's no insurance, the owner of the scooter pays. Insurance is (supposed to be) included when you rent any vehicle, if the owners don't bother to pay it, then they are responsible.

100% agree with this

So do I!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The taxi driver's rice bowl is broken. Someone MUST pay. But he is dead. Someone else MUST pay. Taxi drivers on Samui never lose out. It is in their job description. I am surprised that a farang walking past was not collared, blamed and forced to pay up.

The Taxi driver should have had fully comp insurance, but there again so should the bike rider have at least 3rd party, and the owner of the bike should have checked or provided insurance for the rider, that would also mean checking that the rider was qualified to ride the bike, if not this would almost certainly negate any insurance held.

Maybe the taxi driver should go seize the Russians corpse until his relatives pay up, well that should certainly cause an international stink...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...