I have a suggestion to curb the jetski outrage: Rather than outlawing them outright, it could be made a requirement to have them fitted with governors on their engines so they cannot travel at high speed. No governor fitted and working, no insurance benefits paid in case of accident. Low speeds will definitely drastically curb the incidence of accidents, also limit dangerous operation by irresponsible drivers by discouraging them, and largely eliminate fraudulent damage claims by rental operators.

Posted by Guenter Bellach on February 22, 2015 19:16

Yep... see this kind of behavior all the time. Laem Singh used to be a very nice place, but it is now mobbed with jetskis and rude people. My last trip there was just that... my last trip there. These idiots on jetskis commonly swing around and enter Surin beach where I've seen them come right up to the beach and spin circles spraying water all over, then they scream away. This is yet another great reason why these miserable machines should be banned all along the west coast. If people want to rent jetskis, maybe they should establish a watercraft park on the easy side of the island where there are no swimmers.

Posted by Ed Sanders on February 22, 2015 19:31

Albeit being myself frequent complainer with complains that falls into administrative, civil ,penal and other areas of the law,I doubt this claim has any merits, either as a hooliganism case, or civil compensatory damages claim:
first, where it was a case of hooliganism, at all - or just regular way of entertainment in the water,
second,whether every prank brings liability to compensate all damages, or only reasonably foreseeable,
third, whether a damaged party was not negligent itself - it well may be transporting a digital camera without cover, could constitute such negligence , as splash of water could happen for many other reason- then damaged party can't claim damages. I'd say they should have put protection on camera.

Yes, it could be said - in terms of civil law - that jetski pilots acted "not in good faith" as even if they are action otherwise legitimate, they used it in a wrong way - with a sole purpose to incure damage dingy riders, thus may be liable for damages.

That Lumix Panasonic camera seems be a model last time in production like 5 years ago. Replacement cost for such camera would be like 2000THB - cheapest discounted digital camera on sale.

Not every damage is worth efforts to get compensated, and it is exactly such case - police doesn't deal with civil matters,at best it persuade to cover damages in exchange of not starting petty offence case; otherwise you have to go court - dingy riders will have to prove that damage to camera is sustained as a result of splash by jet ski riders - so they probably will have to pay for technical expert, to establish that camera didn't have pre-existing defect or malfunction caused by dingy ride itself;they will have to prove that jetski riders act was malicious intent or not in good faith - I can't imagine how in practice they will collect sufficient evidence - at best, what witnesses at shore have seen, but what they could see form distance?

I had few Lumix cameras in the past - yes, they are to get out of order after speedboat ride - bumpy ride, wet ride etc. - however they came back to life after few months.

Police surely have more important things to do than to put efforts in investigating petty offences and arriving to a scene thereof.
If they have proofs, dingy riders can always travel themselves to police and file claim, if they feel they want to pursue the thing.

Posted by Sue on February 22, 2015 20:16

Yachties , you mean sailboat sea gypsies - if you dont prepare to get wet on the sea and dont put walkets cameras phones in a 500 baht floating dry bag dont go crying to lifeguarfs and police when it gets wet ! Your own stupidity - i dont condone jetskis in fact i hste them they are a nuisance put please mr French skipper badic rules of the road - prrparation preparation preparation !

Posted by Paul smith on February 22, 2015 20:18

as long as jet skiis are allowed then corruption is allowed.

Posted by Anonymous on February 22, 2015 21:09

French scammers looking for rich Thai jet ski renters to pay them an outboard engine, so they do not have to row. What a lame article. Even I hate jet skies, but please don't start to blame
them for the stupidity of these guys.

Posted by Sascha on February 22, 2015 22:06

Tablets wearing off Sue?

Posted by Mister Ree on February 22, 2015 22:31

Yes Sue and Paul blame the victims.

How silly they were not to cover their cheap and crappy 2,000 Baht belongings.

And the boys on the yet skies, c'mon let them enjoy, it's nothing but fun.

Little water in the dinghi, the scare and a ruined day, people should not be too sensitive.

Posted by Georg The Viking on February 22, 2015 22:44

Have to agree with Paul all you need is a drybag go to any regatta its a standard part of the uniform

Posted by Michael on February 22, 2015 23:00

of course Sue is right, the police have better things to do, such as harassing tourists who bring their own chair to a public beach.

Posted by Shwe on February 23, 2015 05:55

This french teenagers are really unpleasant people. They have no manners and even ordinary french tourists hate them. Especially in Patong I can watch it again and again. The tourists you can happily do without.

Posted by steve on February 23, 2015 07:21

Concerning this particular incident, the lifeguard telephoned me (as a TPV), to ask for assistance.

His request for assistance was not about the camera, but about the dangerous activities of the jet-skis, who completely ignored the LG's warnings about swimmers in the area and shouted abuse at the LG.

I also spoke to the yachties who confirmed the dangerous use of the jetskis, and mentioned the damage to the camera, (but as a secondary issue).

This was the second occasion in a couple of weeks that this LG has called me for assistance to stop the dangerous riding of jetskis under his watch.

Since I am based some distance away at the airport, I called the 1155 Tourist Police hotline, identified myself as a TPV, explained the problem (in Thai), and asked for police officers to go to Laem Singh beach to help the LG and to apprehend the jetskiers (who were still on that beach).

Unfortunately, it seems that my urgent request to 1155 went unheeded.....

Posted by Simon Luttrell on February 23, 2015 09:14

Not been on many boats have you no matter the weather or conditions you always take a drybag water and electronic equipment dont match

Posted by Michael on February 23, 2015 11:05

I see many vendor type umbrellas and plastic beach loungers on the beach. They should have called to report that and could have gotten the entire region 8 police division there in no time.

Posted by The News Mare on February 23, 2015 11:33

@Ed

Sorry, ANY movement between vessel and shore requires applying some wet protection, especially entering/exiting, also out of dinghy to a shore as a sudden wave can come - you never know , also while stepping out it is easy to fall etc.
People should not enter such vessel with digital cameras and phones in their hands, the opposite is indeed apparently not clever.

Main focus of the article is on damaged camera, as result of the prank, thus on being the prank Damaging (to a sense of well-being (getting wet, humiliated by misconduct etc.), secondary or collateral damage of things getting wet and then malfunctioning), rather than Dangerous(threat of very possible damage to life, health - direct or indirect).

When we address that it is too much for Damaging prank, now , in defense, it appears, that the prank allegedly was indeed Dangerous - however reported conduct of parties is about Damaging prank.

@Simon Luttrel

I am puzzled why a regular police was contacted, that doesn't have any competence over marine manners, not Marine Palice/Marine Office 5, if the topic was indeed was not damaged camera but misconduct at seas?

Did you contacted Tourist Police in anticipation they will contact Marine Police/Marine Office 5? (The article says Chalong Police was contacted by Tourist Police - they probably didn't come because of petty property claim, that is within their jurisdiction, not because they received call for misconduct at seas, that is beyond their jurisdiction, which they normally should forward to appropriate office if received by mistake)

Why lifeguard contacted you as Tourist Police Volunteer and not directly Marine Police/Marine Office 5? He didn't know that they are competent on the matter or didn't have ph.number ...? If that was violation of rules at sea, which he allegedly witnessed himself and evaluated himself as a misconduct, then tourist's element here is immaterial, and no need for marine matters contact Tourist police or its volunteers.

I doubt all that , as most probably focus was all time on property damage claim by a couple.

Posted by Sue on February 23, 2015 15:54

If carrying any type of equipment you need to keep dry any sensible person would put it in a drybag even if 10 metres from the beach, dry bags are cheap
Going to delete this post Mr editor because I do not agree with you

Posted by peter allen on February 23, 2015 16:36

Mister Ree, yes magic tablets "4S" along with iPad tablet ;) Highly recommended!

Rp.: tabletae "4S" - Sun-ium, Sand-ium, Sea-ium, Seafood-ium N.30
1X before the meal daily

Posted by Sue on February 23, 2015 17:29

what you cannot accidentally slip when getting off a yacht onto a tender even in perfectly calm water
of course a dry bag is useful you would have to be crazy not to have one methinks you have not spent much time on the water

Posted by Michael on February 23, 2015 18:28

Sue

Your point? Go for a swim and enjoy yourself, i.e., Thai people, great food and terrific weather. Get away from the computer for a bit or at least downgrade the clutter talk. Oh well, you are one of the reasons I sometime enjoy the comment section. Full of laughs, misunderstanding and lack of accepting Thailand for what it is.

Posted by Anonymous on February 23, 2015 18:33

For those who are in the business of blaming the victims, and saying their s**** camera should have been covered etc, I say this. Don't you see the wider malaise here? Scumbags are given control of menacing machines and then set about terrorising a couple in a boat. For the non-mariners, there are rules on the water, the same as there are rules on the road.
Would it be OK for the same scumbags to drive on the beach wheelspinning sand all over families having a barbeque? No it wouldn't, yee landlubbers would be up in arms.

Posted by geoff on February 23, 2015 21:44

@Anonymous 23.02.2558. 18:33

So far you misunderstood that enjoying indeed terrific weather this year, right on the beach and under direct sun, is not mutually exclusive of using contemporary mobile computer devices like iPad, giving that modern screens display stuff well under direct sunlight, and there are 10MbpsUL/20MbpsDL speeds exactly on the beach.
I post to social networks or forums almost exclusively from mobile devices, being on the beach , restaurant , by the pool etc., but desktop /laptop is reserved for serious works only.
If you are used to bring desktop or laptop to the beach it is no longer necessary.

About enjoying the food in Phuket:
there is hardly any gourmet restaurant, the closest is out of province, "North of Phuket",
and only few places for real foodies, with food being often simply tasteless or of wrong taste,all kind of cuisines, Thai, "Western" subsets, Japanese etc.
In addition there is no place in Phuket to enjoy full sortment of seafood, and at good prices - no fresh market where you can get seafood cooked at spot, like e.g. in Krabi
http://goo.gl/GZiyCo
(picture taken on 21.02. , take a note of white prawns price tag 200THB/kg etc.))
Pattaya, Huahin etc.m which offers much much better Thai food options.

In Phuket locals are eating intestines at prices of seafood in Krabi.
Small(est) White prawns in seafood restaurants in Phuket cost 500-700THB/per kg,or more, and so on.

Albeit some Thai food restaurants/points/joints offer good taste particular items, there is no single Thai food restaurant where you can get full dinner of really good quality in terms of taste, e.g. with a sample menu, nothing extraordinary - just Thai Classic, slightly departing from trivial duopoly DtYG/DtKhG etc.:
starters : Nam Prik Kapi w/vegetables / Goon Che Nam Pla / Yam Mamuang Goong/ Phla Goong
soups: Gaeng Liang Goong /Dtom Yam Po-Tek
1st small main course: Pu Nim Prik Phad Thai Dum/ Pla ChuChi
curries: Gaeng Keaw Wan Gai/Gaeng Bpet Pet Yang (I don't mean prepackaged curry from supermarkets)
2nd big main course:large Mud Crab Stir Fried in Yellow Curry Powder
Mamuang KhaoNiaw

First, you'll have difficulty to find restaurant that have all the items on the menu (unlike other destinations) - if you want to have enjoyable and complete Thai food dinner , you'll have to start in one location, move to another, and finish in the third one.
Then, hardly any place, that offer if not all, but most of the items on the list, cook them at proper taste - if they have fragrant curry, then their soups are horrible , and so on - again , unlike in other destinations.

And I want to pay for the menu above around 1000-1500THB , sans Mud Crab - like in other destinations.

But what is your point? if you offered Nil on the subject of the article of legal situation out of the described prank - on whether legal enforcement agencies acted correctly , what statutory laws are violated by pranksters if any, are expectations of the couple to recoups civil damages with a help of police are legal and reasonable etc. ..?

Posted by Sue on February 24, 2015 02:54

Sue, Sometimes less is more. Your posts are so long my eyes start closing after the first paragraph.
All,
This aint about the camera or the dam dry bag. It's about bloody louts on jet skis and no one controlling their activities.

Posted by pete59 on February 24, 2015 06:44

Had a similar situation with a French jet ski hooligan off Patong a few years back.... got tangled in our fishing line off my yacht way offshore ..my mate on board French....verbal fight..mate called some mates on shore...French hooligan nowhere to be seen...

Posted by david on February 24, 2015 10:01

[quote]
Why lifeguard contacted you as Tourist Police Volunteer and not directly Marine Police/Marine Office 5?
[/quote]

The remit of the TPVs is to serve and protect tourists. That remit does not end at the water's edge. We are here to help and advise tourists, whatever the problem, (and that might include going after tourists who break the law).

As to why I was personally contacted by the lifeguard, the answer is easy. apart from him probably not having a list of Marine Office contact numbers at hand, I was the guy who printed and personally distributed the multilingual advice cards to all the LGs.

I speak good Thai and gave my phone number to all LGs, so that they could call me for advice if they had a specific problem.

It might not be in my 'territory' to deal with problems at Kata and Laem Sing (I am located at the airport). But I work on the basis that any help is better than no help, and so I'll do what I can in any incident.

Posted by Simon Luttrell on February 24, 2015 14:05

We watch jet boats racing past the yachts and have to wave frantically and signal to tell indicate there were children swiming around the yachts with their parents. The Jet Boats fortunalty took note and narrowly missed two of the kids. Our luxury tourists are becoming very unimpressed with Phuket. The snorkeling sites although marked off are not managed by authorities and tour boats disregard the partition netting and drive straight in where the people are snorkeling. Koh lipi and Koh lanta area is very well managed and supervised. We should not only protect our reefs by limiting numbers...we need to take action soon, before we lose the too edhlon tourists who will move to better pastures

Posted by Penny on February 25, 2015 15:41

Sue, reading this and the former article calling for volunteers to join the tourist police, a solution became obvious. For PW to have one of their commissioned contributors performing such a duty, able to provide direct information to the editor. Who is the most nolegible person, who can recite the most obscure local laws, who is willing to have sand kicked in their face just to maintain their claim to position on a beach.
When I saw those new bikes and the possiblilty to mount a tablet bracket on the front, in addition to a little tablet pouch at the rear for those special delicacies, I immediately thought who would be better suited than you.
Rather than Simon L getting the call and traveling South to arbitrate and translate an issue, why not a direct line to our own Sue. Company vehicle, work around the beaches, mixing with fellow aliens, able to clearly translate confusion in most languages. it's almost perfect.

Better still would be the call to duty. " Sue, you're required, on your bike"!

Posted by Manowar on February 25, 2015 18:51

As they french say.. "It's french"

Posted by Bd on February 27, 2015 00:35

@Simon Lutrell

Dear Simon,

thanks a lot for a clarification.

Your activities and involvement as TPV are highly commendable, as well as kindhearted approach of going an extra mile with flyers distribution and operating beyond your TPV territory.

You forwarded tourists' inquiry to Tourist Police, that is of course very right - then they had to call for the right agency, and for me it seems it was their mistake - Chalong Police will not deal with matters that happened at seas.

Of course, during brief interaction with tourists over the phone, TPV can't - and shouldn't involve himself into detailed legal advise on the situation, the TP and other agencies normally should give some legal orientation for complainers.

I do not see that that the described hooliganism is punishable under the Penal code: among "large" criminal offenses only Mischief (Sec.358) - intentional damaging of someone's property - could theoretically fit, but it clearly doesn't , as pranksters had no knowledge of camera on the boat and could not target it.
If marine laws in I their statutes provided anything about rules of conduct , and then also about punishment - then such charges will be governed by the Penal code.
To my understanding there is no written laws on conduct of jetski in Phuket waters at location like in the article , as Kingdom's statutes do not regulate this at all and lead it to local Marine Office 5 - which in turn, haven't issued any administrative guidance on topic.
Therefore even if jetski conduct may be found as being unlawful as against marine customs - and I still doubt there is anything clearly attributable - there is no punishment under Penal code.

Also I do not see any "petty offence" from Book 3 of the Penal code can fit the act, as there is no general Section on hooliganism .

So I hardly see what Marine Police/Marine Office 5 could do to those pranskters.

Civil damages to the camera can be shifted on pranskters either if their action are unlawful as violted statutes - and it doens't seems to be a case, or if their sole purpose was to make a harm - but again, they could nopt target to damage the camera as they didn't know about it. Moreover to prove that water splashs were intentional but not result of negligence is hardly possible.
Also CCC provides exemption of liability for non-predictable losses - again, tehy didn't know about camera in the boat, or that it was not protected.

And, as per CCC, the major point that the ciouple had to invest in their own preventive measure to a reasonable extent - soem people here, incl. me, are of opinion that it was reasonable to cover camera before stepping into dinghy, others disagree. At least it means the couple may not expect that they have clear right to claim damages here.
The thresholdl here is just simple(ordinary) negligence, and for me it's apparent that the couple failed here.

obviously, they should move along and put aside retributions, and continue with their holidays.

Posted by Sue on February 27, 2015 06:14

@Manowar

This brings a line of other questions:

why tourist police volunteers are unpaid, and have to cover costs of running such assignment? Is, say Phuket budget, is not enough to get such function diligently and properly established as a paid employment position? If the budget coffers are not enough may be then look, at provincial hotel tax - as early as few years ago half of what is hotels (not guest houses) have not registered properly as hotels, and as a consequence didn't pay any hotel tax at all..?

I don't know whether in Phuket a specialized Tourist court is functioning now, like in Pattaya. which staff also to provide a kind of solicitor/barrister assistance in guiding a complainant through plaint compilation and its filing, in effect providing free legal assistance to victims.

At the same time those who suffered damage and harm should be well aware that shifting of damages to other person is merely exception than rule, they always are liable to invest in protective measures, and not every incident of hooliganism can of should be retributed, and stays within own risk of sufferer, either because it is beyond scope of law, or for practical reasons.

I think you may like the citation on economic analysis of the tort law from 2006 "Basic Questions of Tort Law from a Germanic Perspective", that has been put in public domain by the publisher and the author :
http://goo.gl/UNnKs0


An ancient saying runs ?? casum sentit dominus ??; in English it would read ?? let the loss lie where it falls ?? . This rule, which is sometimes called the ?? property rule ??, expresses a fundamental and natural idea: If someone suffers damage, then in principle he must bear this damage himself. Everybody bears the risk for his own goods, unless another is liable for the harm. Just as each individual is entitled to enjoy advantageous changes to and uses of his interests, on the other hand he must also bear the disadvantageous changes.
...this principle is not by any means merely expedient, rather it consists in an elementary justice consideration, because it expresses the self-evident nature of the proposition that everyone must bear his own ?? general risk of life ?? and that it is not always possible to pass it on to other private law subjects. This basic rule is also tied to the consideration that firstly, the question as to which other private law subject should bear the damage is necessarily left entirely unanswered and secondly, neither can the public always be expected to cover the risk.
However, it is apparent that in today???s society there is an increased perception ??? fuelled by certain unrealistic political ?? land of milk and honey ?? delusions ???that the individual can be cocooned away from all risks; that someone else is always responsible for any damage the individual suffers, and thus each victim???s loss must always be covered.
...it becomes clear how completely illogical it would be if damage always had to be borne by another person and never by the person basically closest to the damage, who owns the damaged interest and who is best placed to protect it against injury ??? especially when it can be taken as self-evident that the owner of the interest has exclusive enjoyment of the full advantages of this interest.

Posted by Sue on February 27, 2015 06:15

My question would be " who is Sue".. she or he whatever, writing more than ED.. hahahahaha she or he whatever should start her or his own news site.... is it anyone that actually have power and time to read all the nonsense? for crying out load.

Posted by Frog on February 27, 2015 06:37

Sue,
you raise many issues that I have never considered nor do I expect to have the life expectancy to see these issues addressed or resolved. I sometimes consider myself fortunate in this regard.

Posted by Manowar on February 27, 2015 11:36

Frog, when I realise it is a long letter I look who was writing it and when I see SUE or KURT I immediately jump to the next letter. For sure I am not the only one...

Posted by herbert on February 27, 2015 13:42

Frog, "who is Sue"
Good question. From what we have established so far, she can be anything he wants.
We know he was the creator of Suileaks, an Eastern European website exposing the filth and bringing to the surface that hidden from the population.
We also know she is involved in Suoooogle. This is a website he has setup with the help of the KGB to confuse the users by producing large amounts of unrelated answers to simple questions.
We also know, she has direct contact to the general and some even suggest is advising local authorities on how to handle current tourist related issues such as the beach chairs.
He has travelled to more locations than actually exist and she has documented each visit and gradually posting his experiences, unknowing to readers, in a coded manuscript on PW, where other agents (code breakers) in the Kremlin decipher these postings.
We believe she has recently formed an alliance in Phuket with another agent and they communicate via various random postings using on line media.
We know she has a cult following in the USA prison system and is an official representing the East European Plumbers Union ( not to be confused with the EU Plumbers Union) but he is reluctant to acknowledge these connections.
He is everywhere, she could be your next door neighbor and that insect on your wall could be one of his drones.

Posted by Manowar on February 28, 2015 02:49

This is looking like a TV forum- how many people have such contempt for safety at the beach that they are prepared to waste all day arguing about a 500b dry bag? Think you've all had too much sun ( or alterior motive) easy answer - BAN THE ILLEGAL jet skis and parasails

Posted by Farang nemesis on March 9, 2015 14:24