Bangkok: An elderly woman and her husband in Nakhon Ratchasima were in tears after their state welfare benefits were revoked because their names were listed as owners of a motorcycle. They pleaded with the government for understanding.
According to Thai News Agency, Mrs. Sa-ard Nakjaturat, 64, from Hua Thale Subdistrict, Nakhon Ratchasima Province, couldn't hold back her tears and pleaded for government help after she and her husband, Mr. Sommai Pimanthong, 73, had their state welfare benefits revoked, despite having received them continuously before. The reason for their disqualification was that they owned an old motorcycle purchased over 20 years ago, which is now dilapidated and hardly used. Her husband earns a meager income collecting and selling scrap to buy food and support their family.
The elderly woman also reflected on the requirement that those who own old motorcycles must travel to the Department of Land Transport to have their names removed from the system, stating that it is extremely difficult due to health problems, inconvenient travel, and the distance to the office, making it impossible for her to do it herself. Throughout the interview, Mrs. Sa-ard cried intermittently, raising her hands in a gesture of respect and pleading with the government and relevant agencies to investigate the facts and reconsider the criteria to reflect the living conditions of the people, especially those who still own old assets that do not reflect their current economic status.
At the Krung Thai Bank branch in the Khon Kaen Provincial Government Center, a large number of people came to appeal the results of their 2026 state welfare card applications. The bank had to deploy security personnel to help manage the queues. Many said they had previously received the benefits but were now denied. They appealed to the Prime Minister to consider increasing the welfare allowance from 300 baht per month to 500 baht per month to reflect the rising cost of living. They also suggested that eligibility consideration should prioritize the applicant's income, arguing that low-income earners should receive more assistance than high-income earners, even if they possess some assets, to ensure government assistance reaches those truly in need.