Sandbox tourist forced to stay in ASQ hotel after fellow passenger on her flight tests positive

[RayT]

It's what happens if you fly around the world during a pandemic, to a country where the infection numbers are still rising. Suck it up.

[JohninDublin]

3 hours ago, TobyAndrews said:

Thank you John. I am grateful for your long and detailed explanation. It seems the 25 euro remedy is only used between EU countries. Is that right? 

However I have seen a way this lady can enforce a refund from the SHA hotel. If she booked with an agent, I believe she can sue the agent for the refund. Still I am not sure.

I am of the opinion the only way a Thai will refund any money is if they are put under financial pressure.

I once wanted a refund on a motorbike that was hard to start. They were not going to give it. I told them if they don't I will dump the motor bike in the jungle and leave town. I received the refund.

I always advise anyone who wished to visit Thailand never pay up front. Problem with the sandbox was, the visitors did not have that choice.

Regarding your first question. You are right. The only way my original post can be applied is say, if you have a German CC and you are living in Ireland. But there is a strong likelihood that she paid either by DC or CC. If the latter, then she should be safe. With a DC, she can ask, and they will make only one attempt at it, and if it fails, then it is up to her.

I think I have a massive experience  with these probs. I was in TH when all this kicked off last year. I was initially supposed to go to Boracay in PI for a family wedding for 5 days, and then 4 weeks in TH. I had C bookings on all elements, which included a side trip to CM and CR while in TH. The hotel in CR was clearly stated as being "non-refundable" and was booked through Agoda. Regardless, I got a refund from Agoda on both hotels in CM and CR within 72 hours as well as refunds from Trip.com within a week on hotels and transfers to Boracay and in MNL in about the same period. Cebu Pacific and Cathay Pacific both agreed refunds almost immediately, but in the case of the former, they furloughed the staff within days and this took nine months to be paid. Cathay paid in about 3 months. 

The only people I had problems with was Kiwi.com who have a terrible reputation for "customer service". Take a look at their Wiki entry for more details. They cited "gov restrictions" A guff state airline who refused to concede that there was a travel ban on entering Phils. That was the case that went to the EU small claims system.KLM who tried to fob me off with a 12 month credit note, and a travel agent in Pattaya, who refused to engage with Visa. Visa asked Kiwi what the gov restrictions were, and when they got no reply, made the refund. Visa paid the KLM claim, because the EU law is that you can insist on full refund. They refunded the money from Pattaya, but did warn me that if the agent later made a claim, they would reverse this. 

My refunds were about €4700. So you can see the effectiveness of using a CC to secure your rights.

Regarding the lady suing her agent she would probably have to prove that the agent was negligent. I can't see how that applies. But in this day and age, there is probably a very good chance that she paid by CC in any case.

Regarding your remedy over the  motorbike kudos to you. You've just reminded of a scammer that I was aware of in Pattaya some years ago. He operated a motorbike/car rental business from the steps of the Lovely Corner bar which is on Beach Rd and Soi 7. His scam was to take a deposit as well as the rental of the bike, and then when the bike was returned, he would tell the renters, they would have to wait for his boss to come back because he had no money to pay them. The customers returned daily without any luck, until eventually, they had to fly home.

[BeerIsLife]

Something I am curious about is the whole idea that simply sitting near a person who later tested positive is enough to get bounced into full lockdown quarantine. Maybe I missed that little rule in the runup to the sandbox...

 

If a person is fully vaxinnated and has also tested negative twice, the chance of either catching or spreading covid is basically nil.  Especially being next to someone on an airplane- planes are one of the safest possible indoor settings there are.  This whole situation strikes me as unscientific paranoia.

[TobyAndrews]

1 hour ago, JohninDubin said:

Regarding your first question. You are right. The only way my original post can be applied is say, if you have a German CC and you are living in Ireland. But there is a strong likelihood that she paid either by DC or CC. If the latter, then she should be safe. With a DC, she can ask, and they will make only one attempt at it, and if it fails, then it is up to her.

I think I have a massive experience  with these probs. I was in TH when all this kicked off last year. I was initially supposed to go to Boracay in PI for a family wedding for 5 days, and then 4 weeks in TH. I had C bookings on all elements, which included a side trip to CM and CR while in TH. The hotel in CR was clearly stated as being "non-refundable" and was booked through Agoda. Regardless, I got a refund from Agoda on both hotels in CM and CR within 72 hours as well as refunds from Trip.com within a week on hotels and transfers to Boracay and in MNL in about the same period. Cebu Pacific and Cathay Pacific both agreed refunds almost immediately, but in the case of the former, they furloughed the staff within days and this took nine months to be paid. Cathay paid in about 3 months. 

The only people I had problems with was Kiwi.com who have a terrible reputation for "customer service". Take a look at their Wiki entry for more details. They cited "gov restrictions" A guff state airline who refused to concede that there was a travel ban on entering Phils. That was the case that went to the EU small claims system.KLM who tried to fob me off with a 12 month credit note, and a travel agent in Pattaya, who refused to engage with Visa. Visa asked Kiwi what the gov restrictions were, and when they got no reply, made the refund. Visa paid the KLM claim, because the EU law is that you can insist on full refund. They refunded the money from Pattaya, but did warn me that if the agent later made a claim, they would reverse this. 

My refunds were about €4700. So you can see the effectiveness of using a CC to secure your rights.

Regarding the lady suing her agent she would probably have to prove that the agent was negligent. I can't see how that applies. But in this day and age, there is probably a very good chance that she paid by CC in any case.

Regarding your remedy over the  motorbike kudos to you. You've just reminded of a scammer that I was aware of in Pattaya some years ago. He operated a motorbike/car rental business from the steps of the Lovely Corner bar which is on Beach Rd and Soi 7. His scam was to take a deposit as well as the rental of the bike, and then when the bike was returned, he would tell the renters, they would have to wait for his boss to come back because he had no money to pay them. The customers returned daily without any luck, until eventually, they had to fly home.

Ah interesting. I am not sure that I would have to prove the agent negligent. If the agent sold a service that did not produce, I would think the agent was liable. I will find out one day because I will sue Trip.com for a flight by Vietjet, who did not fly. And gave no reason why they did not fly, nor offered another flight, and no refund.

I did sue Qatar for not honouring a flight, by suing them for the cost of alternative BA flight, and other expenses. They just paid up before court.

A long time ago the Pattaya bike rentalers bolted on the small parts loosely so they would fall off. I think they just gave this scam up because of all the trouble it caused. Bikers do not take kindly to being scammed.

I do not have a credit Card. I shall have to consider applying for one, just for the ease of sueing.

Thankyou for the infomation John.

[JohninDublin]

30 minutes ago, TobyAndrews said:

Ah interesting. I am not sure that I would have to prove the agent negligent. If the agent sold a service that did not produce, I would think the agent was liable. I will find out one day because I will sue Trip.com for a flight by Vietjet, who did not fly. And gave no reason why they did not fly, nor offered another flight, and no refund.

I did sue Qatar for not honouring a flight, by suing them for the cost of alternative BA flight, and other expenses. They just paid up before court.

A long time ago the Pattaya bike rentalers bolted on the small parts loosely so they would fall off. I think they just gave this scam up because of all the trouble it caused. Bikers do not take kindly to being scammed.

I do not have a credit Card. I shall have to consider applying for one, just for the ease of sueing.

Thankyou for the infomation John.

You are very welcome.

You may have a problem with suing Trip.Com as they are based in Macao and have no financial footprint in the EU. 

It's also worth looking at https://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/Image/Regulation EC261 2004.pdf if yo in the you are based in the EU which explains a lot of your rights. The case I mentioned of having to sue a Gulf States airline was one which fell through the cracks of the legislation. 

In my case, I refused to attend the airport because I knew that by the time I arrived in Phils, I was past the time for the grace period for entering the country, and I would have been kept in custody pending a flight home. The airline denied that there was a ban on my entering the country, in spite of multiple news reports confirming this  and refused a refund on the grounds that I was a no show. However, shortly after this, they stopped all flights to and from Phils and have still not been back there in over a year.

This gave rise to two issues. The first is that in order to be protected by this rule, you have to be refused service by the airline. As I didn't turn up in all the circumstances that were prevalent, I could not rely on this. To qualify, your flight must commence in the EU. The second is that all return journeys are treated as two separate journeys, The practice among airlines is that if you don't make the first leg, they presume you will not be there for the return, cancel your seat in the hope of reselling it, and wait for you to claim a  refund assuming you are aware that you can. As I had not commenced my journey in the EU for this ticket. I lost the EU protection for the return flight also. If I'd made the first flight, then I would have been protected by the EU when the airline cancelled an ll flights to and from and from MNL.

As I said, I sued in small claims and was paid in full before the case made it to court.

Best of luck with Trip.com, but short of going to Macao, I can't see how you can go to court. Alternately, can I suggest you try this: https://ie.trustpilot.com/review/trip.com They seem to be responsive to complaints in this forum. If you do that, I'd suggest that you don't go OTT as you know how important it is for Orientals to save face. If the responses are window dressing, you can at least go back again and mention that. As mentioned in my last post, my own experience with them was 1st class. here's hoping that you can also have the chance to revise your opinion.

[Stonker]

6 hours ago, AdvocatusDiaboli said:

Well let’s correct that point.

Those who cannot prove that they have been vaccinated for COVID-19 and cannot prove they have tested negative for the virus may enter Phuket on the condition that they observe a 14-day quarantine either at home or at a designated hotel under the supervision of communicable disease control officers and the Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) staff for the area where the arrival will be staying.

Those who must observe a 14-day quarantine at home are to self-monitor for any signs of infection 

Any persons arriving in Phuket and not staying the night are exempt from the quarantine requirement, as are all goods transport drivers, medical workers, officials and anyone else permitted to pass  through the checkpoint onto the island during the hours 11pm to 5am.

https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2137163/rules-for-arrivals-in-phuket

But could also use the biggest example to prove my point, for Home quarantine, for someone in close proximity to a high risk person in Phuket  …… Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha.

Maybe the people to have some pity for are the Phuket locals whisked away to ALQ with bills unknown. No one is speaking up on their behalf. Maybe a Thaiger article needed.

Sorry,@AD, but the point doesn't need correcting as it was correct.

 

Your quote from the BP is, I'm afraid, out of date and one of the many ongoing changes and it's been reported here -  there's NO 14 day quarantine anymore for those entering by land or sea.  It's fully vaccinated or a PCR test under 72 hours before or not at all - except, as far as I know,  for the absurd anomaly of delivery drivers and day visitors.

 

I'd assumed @Jaizan was talking about Thais or anyone else only contacting a Covid carrier from a Sandbox flight during their "quarantine" period, as they're the only ones who've been "whisked away to ALQ" - the seven hotel staff.

 

Everyone else, from the PM to Starbucks clientele, whether in Phuket or anywhere else in Thailand as long as they test negative, Thai or farang, just self-quarantines at home.

 

Why the ALQ quarantine for those contacting Covid carriers from the sandbox but no other Covid carriers?

God knows. 

My guess is someone just thought that as other "sandboxers" have to be quarantined in ALQ, presumably because everyone coming in on a normal flight has to be quarantined in ALQ anyway, so anyone else would have to be quarantined in ALQ too.   Arguably logical or totally illogical either way.

 

What happens if one Starbucks waiter serves a table of sandboxers who test positive and another Starbucks waiter serves a table next to them with non-sandboxers who also test positive?

God knows.

[AdvocatusDiaboli]

12 minutes ago, Stonker said:

God knows.

I think we can agree on this. 

[TobyAndrews]

2 hours ago, JohninDubin said:

You are very welcome.

You may have a problem with suing Trip.Com as they are based in Macao and have no financial footprint in the EU. 

It's also worth looking at https://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/Image/Regulation EC261 2004.pdf if yo in the you are based in the EU which explains a lot of your rights. The case I mentioned of having to sue a Gulf States airline was one which fell through the cracks of the legislation. 

In my case, I refused to attend the airport because I knew that by the time I arrived in Phils, I was past the time for the grace period for entering the country, and I would have been kept in custody pending a flight home. The airline denied that there was a ban on my entering the country, in spite of multiple news reports confirming this  and refused a refund on the grounds that I was a no show. However, shortly after this, they stopped all flights to and from Phils and have still not been back there in over a year.

This gave rise to two issues. The first is that in order to be protected by this rule, you have to be refused service by the airline. As I didn't turn up in all the circumstances that were prevalent, I could not rely on this. To qualify, your flight must commence in the EU. The second is that all return journeys are treated as two separate journeys, The practice among airlines is that if you don't make the first leg, they presume you will not be there for the return, cancel your seat in the hope of reselling it, and wait for you to claim a  refund assuming you are aware that you can. As I had not commenced my journey in the EU for this ticket. I lost the EU protection for the return flight also. If I'd made the first flight, then I would have been protected by the EU when the airline cancelled an ll flights to and from and from MNL.

As I said, I sued in small claims and was paid in full before the case made it to court.

Best of luck with Trip.com, but short of going to Macao, I can't see how you can go to court. Alternately, can I suggest you try this: https://ie.trustpilot.com/review/trip.com They seem to be responsive to complaints in this forum. If you do that, I'd suggest that you don't go OTT as you know how important it is for Orientals to save face. If the responses are window dressing, you can at least go back again and mention that. As mentioned in my last post, my own experience with them was 1st class. here's hoping that you can also have the chance to revise your opinion.

Trip.com is registered in the UK John. They booked the flight through Skyscanner. They are liable.

[JohninDublin]

30 minutes ago, TobyAndrews said:

Trip.com is registered in the UK John. They booked the flight through Skyscanner. They are liable.

I hope you right, but I couldn't find a registered office for them outside of Macao.

[TobyAndrews]

4 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

I hope you right, but I couldn't find a registered office for them outside of Macao.

Floor 10 70 St Mary Axe London England EC3A 8BE.

[JohninDublin]

9 minutes ago, TobyAndrews said:

Floor 10 70 St Mary Axe London England EC3A 8BE.

Good for you. I'm usually a pretty good researcher, but I couldn't find that. Go get them.

The court you need to claim in is here: https://www.moneyclaimsuk.co.uk/county-court/mayors-and-city-of-london

[RayT]

On 7/11/2021 at 10:20 AM, BeerIsLife said:

Something I am curious about is the whole idea that simply sitting near a person who later tested positive is enough to get bounced into full lockdown quarantine. Maybe I missed that little rule in the runup to the sandbox...

If a person is fully vaxinnated and has also tested negative twice, the chance of either catching or spreading covid is basically nil.  Especially being next to someone on an airplane- planes are one of the safest possible indoor settings there are.  This whole situation strikes me as unscientific paranoia.

A fully vaccinated person can still catch and pass on the virus, especially when they visit a country where the vaccination levels are low. Sitting immediately next to someone who has the virus, for hours and hours on end, in an indoor environment, is one of ways to definitely catch it.

[KhunG]

On 7/10/2021 at 5:53 PM, JohninDubin said:

Thanks for that interview, It's added a bot more flesh to the bones of this episode. 

There are still unanswered questions that Steffanie might be able to help with. If you do another interview with her, can you ask, was that group of 15, the only passengers on the flight. My interest is if the quarantine was only applied to economy class? Also, why on a 350 seat plane, was she placed alongside this group, especially if these were the only 15 passengers on the entire flight? I've written elsewhere, that Emirates, if there were only 15 pax, could have made life a lot easier for her, by moving her, or that family group to biz/first class to maximise social distancing. 

I can't help but wonder if Emirates might have been negligent here?

She said in another one  I read that the first leg of her flight was 1/3 full and she had a whole row to herself, then the plane filled up more on the second leg.  She was seated next to the infected passenger who wore his mask below his nose.

The 15 appear to be the infected passenger, now in hospital, 13 of his relatives who opted to return to the UAE as they had tested negative, and her.  She chose ALQ because she's actually moving to Thailand.

 

[JohninDublin]

9 minutes ago, KhunG said:

She said in another one  I read that the first leg of her flight was 1/3 full and she had a whole row to herself, then the plane filled up more on the second leg.  She was seated next to the infected passenger who wore his mask below his nose.

The 15 appear to be the infected passenger, now in hospital, 13 of his relatives who opted to return to the UAE as they had tested negative, and her.  She chose ALQ because she's actually moving to Thailand.

Thanks for that. Again my understanding is that the other 13 are still in ALQ in Phuket waiting out their quarantine. I know they asked to leave, but there are a couple of obvious problems here. The first is would an airline Captain accept them if they are considered suspects. The second is that the original round up of lose contacts included seven Thais, mainly drivers I would guess. Who is going to drive them to the airport at the risk that they might ended up being interned as close contacts of these cases under investigation.

AFAIK, the 13 are still in the ALQ and will remain there until they have completed their quarantine.

[KhunG]

30 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

Thanks for that. Again my understanding is that the other 13 are still in ALQ in Phuket waiting out their quarantine. I know they asked to leave, but there are a couple of obvious problems here. The first is would an airline Captain accept them if they are considered suspects. The second is that the original round up of lose contacts included seven Thais, mainly drivers I would guess. Who is going to drive them to the airport at the risk that they might ended up being interned as close contacts of these cases under investigation.

AFAIK, the 13 are still in the ALQ and will remain there until they have completed their quarantine.

That could very well be correct.  I read where they wanted to leave, not that they had.

[JohninDublin]

8 minutes ago, KhunG said:

That could very well be correct.  I read where they wanted to leave, not that they had.

Same here.

Got to say, I really enjoy the generally non-doctrinal tone of this site. By that, I mean that we are not like a bunch of religious zealots claiming "My truth is the only truth".

[BeerIsLife]

2 hours ago, RayT said:

A fully vaccinated person can still catch and pass on the virus, especially when they visit a country where the vaccination levels are low. Sitting immediately next to someone who has the virus, for hours and hours on end, in an indoor environment, is one of ways to definitely catch it.

Yes, there is a very small chance of that happening. But what are the odds? We can worry ourselves to death over the remote possibilities, or we can get on with life and acknowledge the very slight risk. Considering the lady was vaxxed, the man was vaxxed, and most of Phuket is vaxxed, it is a very slight risk. 

 

Plus, airplanes are actually quite safe. The filters and air con draw the air upwards so that it does not circulate.  Many studies have shown that flying does not pose a big risk of covid spread, clusters, etc.  

[ChristyS]

On 7/11/2021 at 12:15 PM, Stonker said:

After watching the video I've got to agree with you, @Pompies, but it's all just a bit wierd. 

She's a "translator" who "speaks English and Spanish" but apparently not German although she has a German passport, but has a strong accent, possibly Eastern European, but definitely not German. 

She "doesn't know" why she came to Thailand, whether it was possibly to learn Thai, go diving, or learn how to ride a motorbike.

Nobody except the hotel receptionist has told her to do anything and she had to find the ASQ hotel herself, but seven hotel staff and the family group of 12 all apparently found the same ASQ hotel which they're all staying in.

I hope the Thaiger has done its homework, because this all just sounds a bit too wierd.

She speaks perfect German on a video on her FB blog  page.   There's only one ASQ hotel, but she had to find it on her own- no one took her.   She mentions   her plans are flexible as to travel within Thailand but wants to learn Thai and will get an education visa  to do so,  and she  sold her big touring style bike ( see pics)  before coming here so I'd say you  seem deliberate on misunderstanding her and bent on giving her a hard time as do a lot of others. 

 

 

[ChristyS]

On 7/10/2021 at 11:32 AM, Artemis080 said:

Shocking. Welcome to the Phuket Sandbox Hoteliers money making scam. Do you expect anything else from a program that was their brainchild? 

Is it the same chaps who dreamed up the Summer Season a few years back  when about 30 tourists from China and Russia mostly  drowned in the monsoon rip tides, then they stopped publishing the numbers.?   

[TobyAndrews]

23 hours ago, JohninDubin said:

Good for you. I'm usually a pretty good researcher, but I couldn't find that. Go get them.

The court you need to claim in is here: https://www.moneyclaimsuk.co.uk/county-court/mayors-and-city-of-london

Thank you

[Soidog]

On 7/11/2021 at 10:20 AM, BeerIsLife said:

Something I am curious about is the whole idea that simply sitting near a person who later tested positive is enough to get bounced into full lockdown quarantine. Maybe I missed that little rule in the runup to the sandbox...

If a person is fully vaxinnated and has also tested negative twice, the chance of either catching or spreading covid is basically nil.  Especially being next to someone on an airplane- planes are one of the safest possible indoor settings there are.  This whole situation strikes me as unscientific paranoia.

Tend to agree it feels a little like paranoia. You cold have been sat next to anyone either before the flight or after and potentially contracted Covid. I do have some sympathy with the Thai authorities given they wish to restrict the chances of more cases. In the U.K. the track and trace system would tell you to self isolate if you were in close proximity to a person who later tested positive. I guess that’s the same principle the Thais are following. It’s just unfortunate that you have spent a lot of money potentially flying half way around the world to then be told you have to isolate. The morale of the story is that you really shouldn’t be travelling too far during a global pandemic. 

[ChristyS]

2 hours ago, JohninDubin said:

Thanks for that. Again my understanding is that the other 13 are still in ALQ in Phuket waiting out their quarantine. I know they asked to leave, but there are a couple of obvious problems here. The first is would an airline Captain accept them if they are considered suspects. The second is that the original round up of lose contacts included seven Thais, mainly drivers I would guess. Who is going to drive them to the airport at the risk that they might ended up being interned as close contacts of these cases under investigation.

AFAIK, the 13 are still in the ALQ and will remain there until they have completed their quarantine.

Good question, are they still here?  

[TobyAndrews]

On 7/11/2021 at 6:15 AM, Stonker said:

After watching the video I've got to agree with you, @Pompies, but it's all just a bit wierd. 

She's a "translator" who "speaks English and Spanish" but apparently not German although she has a German passport, but has a strong accent, possibly Eastern European, but definitely not German. 

She "doesn't know" why she came to Thailand, whether it was possibly to learn Thai, go diving, or learn how to ride a motorbike.

Nobody except the hotel receptionist has told her to do anything and she had to find the ASQ hotel herself, but seven hotel staff and the family group of 12 all apparently found the same ASQ hotel which they're all staying in.

I hope the Thaiger has done its homework, because this all just sounds a bit too wierd.

"All a bit weird" - like your post. Check my spelling it is correct unlike your spelling and most of your post.

She is German; she has a German passport. But YOU state she does not speak German, What claptrap.

Of course she does. Even if she was not born German, Germany would insist that she spoke German before she received a German passport.

She does know why she came to Thailand she said so. You are just making her look bad. She is a victim and you are kicking when she is down, because Thais made her a victim, isn't that right?

And Thais can do no wrong according to most of your posts isn't that right?

She had to find the ASQ hotel, yet seven hotel staff and 12 tourist did. What does that mean. She found it did she not? She never stated she could not find this hotel. You want to make her out to be stupid? 

Her only mistake is believing that she could travel to a nest of scamming rats, who are intent on looting tourists, and be treated fairly, as this story indicates.

She is not contagious. She could have quarantined at the better hotel she was staying, but the Thais saw an opportunity to treble the price of her stay and give her a hotel that was not the quality of the hotel she paid for.

Anyone reading this do not fall for the same racket. These tests could be fake to move healthy people to ASQ and make more money from tourists. Who among these people transferred are contagious anyway, Two? 

Stay away.

[JohninDublin]

47 minutes ago, ChristyS said:

Good question, are they still here?  

AFAIK.

[PQBC]

Can someone show me where -  in Stephanie's case - it says that "at-risk" sandboxers will be subject to a 14 day confinement in an ASQ hotel? I don't see it in the government's TAT website information. Are these not the official "Terms of Engagement"?  Perhaps I have overlooked something.  https://www.tatnews.org/2021/07/phuket-sandbox-faqs/

Were the other passengers who chose to leave similarly confined until departure? We have a confirmation from Dr Kusak that they did, in fact, leave. Was the passenger who tested positive allowed to board the departing plane? Was this passenger tested again before boarding? If negative, what impact does this have on Stephanie's incarceration? Has any journalist been in contact with these passengers and published a report?

Do we know for certain that a government agency decreed that Stephanie must go to ASQ? Surely they should communicate their decision to her in writing, as there may be insurance claims to be filed.  Is anyone aware of an instruction, other than that of a desk clerk at the SHA+ hotel who told her she must move to an ASQ hotel that is 3x more expensive?

Has she actually received her refund from the SHA+ hotel?

There are any number of news organizations in Thailand and abroad that could be doing a more thorough job of covering this story.