A couple of surprises on application for extension on an O visa.

[DwizzleyMatthews]

So, as the title suggests i got a couple of unwelcome surprises when I applied for the first retirement extension from my newly acquired ( Sept 16th ) Non Imm O visa.

Here I should add I was on an OA visa, and subsequent retirement extensions, since 2017, in August 2022 i visited the U.K. without a re-entry permit ( intentionally ) to return visa exempt to start afresh with an in house O visa followed by retirement extensions , and yes … to rid myself of the mandatory health insurance.

All was going well with applying for, and obtaining, the O visa valid until Dec 14th. Mid Nov i decided to apply for an extension based on retirement. Due to laziness on my part i received surprise number 1 !!

Assuming that this first extension only needs proof of 800k in the bank for 2 months I first proceeded to my BKK Bank for a 3 month statement, the bank letter and the usual bank book update etc. Upon document check in immigration i was immediately told that i needed a 12 month statement, my claims that only 2 months proof is needed and questioning how a person entering Thailand for the 1st time could do this fell upon deaf ears and knowing when I am flogging a dead horse I conceded defeat. Returning to BKK Bank to order a 12 month statement, they require 3 working days, I regretted not visiting the IO the previous day to get the requirements after all i do live local, hence my previous “ laziness “ remark.

Returned the following Mon armed with the 12 months statement and the other usual docs, this time i made it past the front desk to enter the main room and was happy to be attended straight away.

After the obligatory paper shuffling, photo taken and payment of 1,900 baht i was feeling relaxed until ……. surprise number 2 !!

The IO , with a feint hint of a smile i swear, told me that i was under consideration and would have to return on Dec 13th ( my O visa expires Dec 14th ) after a home visit by immigration staff.

Now home visits I know are not uncommon but I was surprised to see an under consideration stamp for a retirement extension.

 

Surely a rarity if I’m not mistaken ??

Anyway, home visit booked for today (Tuesday ) , hope they are not expecting a smile on any of their photos

Followed by another 2 weeks before returning to see if my extension is actually granted.

 

Now, it has been said that the 12 months statement requirement is related to my previously unfinished extension ( Sept 2021 ) to ensure I hadn’t dropped below the 800/400k limits and I can understand that even if i don’t agree with it.

 The under consideration stamp to me is just bloody mindedness, especially as if the home visit goes okay I can see no reason why i cannot obtain my extension immediately after. If they had given me the extension stamp and asked me to return after the home visit for it to be stamped/signed i would feel less aggrieved.

Any thoughts ??

 

[Chaimai]

I am sure everything will be fine.

 

1. They were "wrong" about the 12 months' bank statement - your counter argument was spot on, but...........T. I. T. 

 

2. I have had one home visit in 12 years; I think that was around the time of the Erewan bombing and Immigration realised that they had no idea where their Farangs were. I think I still have a piece of paper stapled in my passport from that visit.

[Chaimai]

From another forum and he had a single entry visa rather than visa exempt - but same criteria IMO.

 

 

I recently flew back into Thailand with a 90 day single entry Non-Imm O visa and wish to change to visa based on retirement.

 

 

 

 

The documents are fairly basic.

The most important thing is the financial requirements.

If you are using money in bank method you need to have 800k in Thai bank account for 2 months prior to application and maintained for 3 months after application and at other times not below 400k. 

If your embassy provides "income letter" you may be able to use income method 

What is pp country.

The best time to apply for extension is couple of weeks prior to expiry of your 90 day stamp.

 

[BainaiThai]

When I extend my non imm O visa based on marriage I get a 30 day 'under consideration' stamp and home visit (virtual until covid is lifted) every year so far.

[DwizzleyMatthews]

33 minutes ago, BainaiThai said:

When I extend my non imm O visa based on marriage I get a 30 day 'under consideration' stamp and home visit (virtual until covid is lifted) every year so far.

Yes, based on marriage an under consideration stamp is common but based on retirement is quite rare I believe, do I feel honoured ? …… nope !

[DwizzleyMatthews]

1 hour ago, Chaimai said:

I am sure everything will be fine.

1. They were "wrong" about the 12 months' bank statement - your counter argument was spot on, but...........T. I. T. 

2. I have had one home visit in 12 years; I think that was around the time of the Erewan bombing and Immigration realised that they had no idea where their Farangs were. I think I still have a piece of paper stapled in my passport from that visit.

1. Am sure that it was spurred on by my previous extensions and on that other forum posters immediately questioned if i had gone below the financial requirements ( I hadn’t ) . Even if that’s the case to what extent do they take it, if I had stayed in the U.K. for a year would they have still have asked for proof of my compliance with a previous extension ??

2. Sort of counters number 1 in a “ we see you have been living here for some years and have proven you have abided by the financial rules but we are still going to come to your home just to annoy you “ sort of way.

TBH I had a home visit a few years ago but cannot remember if it was when i got 1st extension from the OA or when i moved province, and it was relatively painless.

I see it all as immigration trying to justify their existence.

[Faz]

In relation to surprise number 2, a home visit.
A friend in a similar position to yourself, original O-A Visa, visited the UK back in March 2020, just before all International flights were cancelled due to Covid, with the same intention of cancelling his O-A Visa and obtaining the Non O visa to rid himself of the mandatory Insurance requirement.

However, he didn't re-enter again until July 2022, VE + 30 day extension and applied for the Non O in Sept.
That was when he was informed all new applications for the Non O were now subject to a home visit as per the 'big boss' in Bangkok instructions and the first time I'd heard of this new requirement. He was given an under consideration stamp pending the home visit and the Non O being approved.
He applied for his 1-year extension 2 weeks ago, which was issued within the hour.

I suspect your IO perhaps should have done the home visit when you applied for the Non O, forgot, or not received the new instructions, so are carrying out before they approve your 1-year extension.

Nothing in the written regulations about this new requirement, but then again it's been standard practice to have a home visit for the first application for an extension based on marriage for as long as I can remember, and nothing in written orders about that either.
Incidently, a further expat associate who entered VE and just applied for the Non O last week had a home visit yesterday and now awaiting approval.

In relation to surprise number 1, I think your IO were mistaken.
When starting anew > Non O > 1 year extension, you're only required to prove 800K in the bank on the day of submission of the Non O application. It therefore follows that the 800K should only have to be in the bank for 2 months prior to the first 1-year extension application.
They've treated your application as though you've been consecutively permitted to stay in Thailand.

After obtaining his Non O, a 3-month bank statement was sufficient for my friend's 1-year extension application.

[Faz]

1 hour ago, BainaiThai said:

When I extend my non imm O visa based on marriage I get a 30 day 'under consideration' stamp and home visit (virtual until covid is lifted) every year so far.

You're not extending your visa, it has an expiry date.
You're extending your permission of stay, a permit, not a Visa.

Based on Thai spouse, a home visit is usually only required for the very first extension application.
If you're getting a visit every year, that's down to your specific IO and not the norm.

[DwizzleyMatthews]

44 minutes ago, Faz said:

In relation to surprise number 2, a home visit.
A friend in a similar position to yourself, original O-A Visa, visited the UK back in March 2020, just before all International flights were cancelled due to Covid, with the same intention of cancelling his O-A Visa and obtaining the Non O visa to rid himself of the mandatory Insurance requirement.

However, he didn't re-enter again until July 2022, VE + 30 day extension and applied for the Non O in Sept.
That was when he was informed all new applications for the Non O were now subject to a home visit as per the 'big boss' in Bangkok instructions and the first time I'd heard of this new requirement. He was given an under consideration stamp pending the home visit and the Non O being approved.
He applied for his 1-year extension 2 weeks ago, which was issued within the hour.

I suspect your IO perhaps should have done the home visit when you applied for the Non O, forgot, or not received the new instructions, so are carrying out before they approve your 1-year extension.

Nothing in the written regulations about this new requirement, but then again it's been standard practice to have a home visit for the first application for an extension based on marriage for as long as I can remember, and nothing in written orders about that either.
Incidently, a further expat associate who entered VE and just applied for the Non O last week had a home visit yesterday and now awaiting approval.

In relation to surprise number 1, I think your IO were mistaken.
When starting anew > Non O > 1 year extension, you're only required to prove 800K in the bank on the day of submission of the Non O application. It therefore follows that the 800K should only have to be in the bank for 2 months prior to the first 1-year extension application.
They've treated your application as though you've been consecutively permitted to stay in Thailand.

After obtaining his Non O, a 3-month bank statement was sufficient for my friend's 1-year extension application.

Ah okay, that would explain why I saw a report of someone getting a home visit on application for the O visa ( and not on application for extension , as in my case ). Also some reports that on applying for the O visa they were asked to return on the very last day of their visa exempt irrespective of when they applied ( my return date was 9 days before exempt expired, a friend had a similar experience at another IO and no home visit although he is yet to apply for extension).

Sounds like a case of my IO getting it Arsenal about face !!

When the IO on the docs checking desk told me I needed a 12 month statement I knew straight away that that is what I would be getting, i tried to explain that it was a new start on a new visa and only 2 months was required but I knew i was on to a loser . She took my passport away for a second opinion and came back with the same result , I searched her expression for any signs of a smile but she hid it well ……. I swear I could sense her punching the air in triumph when I turned and left the building though

[Chaimai]

58 minutes ago, Faz said:

In relation to surprise number 2, a home visit.
A friend in a similar position to yourself, original O-A Visa, visited the UK back in March 2020, just before all International flights were cancelled due to Covid, with the same intention of cancelling his O-A Visa and obtaining the Non O visa to rid himself of the mandatory Insurance requirement.

However, he didn't re-enter again until July 2022, VE + 30 day extension and applied for the Non O in Sept.
That was when he was informed all new applications for the Non O were now subject to a home visit as per the 'big boss' in Bangkok instructions and the first time I'd heard of this new requirement. He was given an under consideration stamp pending the home visit and the Non O being approved.
He applied for his 1-year extension 2 weeks ago, which was issued within the hour.

I suspect your IO perhaps should have done the home visit when you applied for the Non O, forgot, or not received the new instructions, so are carrying out before they approve your 1-year extension.

Nothing in the written regulations about this new requirement, but then again it's been standard practice to have a home visit for the first application for an extension based on marriage for as long as I can remember, and nothing in written orders about that either.
Incidently, a further expat associate who entered VE and just applied for the Non O last week had a home visit yesterday and now awaiting approval.

In relation to surprise number 1, I think your IO were mistaken.
When starting anew > Non O > 1 year extension, you're only required to prove 800K in the bank on the day of submission of the Non O application. It therefore follows that the 800K should only have to be in the bank for 2 months prior to the first 1-year extension application.
They've treated your application as though you've been consecutively permitted to stay in Thailand.

After obtaining his Non O, a 3-month bank statement was sufficient for my friend's 1-year extension application.

 

 

I get @DwizzleyMatthewscomment about compliance with the previous extension, but that obligation would surely end when he left without a reentry permit. At worst he should only have to prove compliance for the period of stay in Thailand  -  not the 12 months preceding the new application.

[ExpatPattaya]

10 hours ago, DwizzleyMatthews said:

that i was under consideration and would have to return on Dec 13th ( my O visa expires Dec 14th ) after a home visit by immigration staff.

Have you lived in the same "home" since 2017? 

Maybe they want to check to see you are not growing something illegal or living with someone illegally?   Who owns the home?  Am unfamiliar with single foreign men living in "homes" as a rule.

Good luck.... I would be exasperated as well. 

[DwizzleyMatthews]

6 minutes ago, Chaimai said:

I get @DwizzleyMatthewscomment about compliance with the previous extension, but that obligation would surely end when he left without a reentry permit. At worst he should only have to prove compliance for the period of stay in Thailand  -  not the 12 months preceding the new application.

The whole thing is a poorly thought out system, having to provide proof of compliance for the previous 12 months . Some IO’s require a return 90 days after extension ( Jomtien and Sisaket that I know of ) to provide proof of the 800k still in the bank, why not 180 days and 270 days as well ?? ( I know, I know, wash my mouth out with soap and water !! ) .

 

I do wonder if I had dropped below the 800/400k requirements since Sept 2021 but okay for the last two months what they would have done …. refuse my current application for extension ??

Seems unlikely they could make that stick, probably a few idle threads in the hopes of a donation to the ice tea and som tum fund ??

It all goes to prove that the rules are obscure, antiquated and in need of some form of standardisation between IO’s but it appears every new rule addition only muddies further the already murky waters .

[DwizzleyMatthews]

14 minutes ago, ExpatPattaya said:

Have you lived in the same "home" since 2017? 

Maybe they want to check to see you are not growing something illegal or living with someone illegally?   Who owns the home?  Am unfamiliar with single foreign men living in "homes" as a rule.

Good luck.... I would be exasperated as well. 

Yes lived here since June 2017 when “ we “ ( long term partner and myself ) bought the house.

As Faz states earlier in this thread, it seems like a new O visa now requires a home visit, my IO missed the boat and are applying that on my first extension.

[Chaimai]

1 hour ago, DwizzleyMatthews said:

The whole thing is a poorly thought out system, having to provide proof of compliance for the previous 12 months . Some IO’s require a return 90 days after extension ( Jomtien and Sisaket that I know of ) to provide proof of the 800k still in the bank, why not 180 days and 270 days as well ?? ( I know, I know, wash my mouth out with soap and water !! ) .

I do wonder if I had dropped below the 800/400k requirements since Sept 2021 but okay for the last two months what they would have done …. refuse my current application for extension ??

Seems unlikely they could make that stick, probably a few idle threads in the hopes of a donation to the ice tea and som tum fund ??

It all goes to prove that the rules are obscure, antiquated and in need of some form of standardisation between IO’s but it appears every new rule addition only muddies further the already murky waters .

 

 

@DwizzleyMatthews.............................Wash your mouth out with soap and water!  

[Faz]

2 hours ago, Chaimai said:

I get @DwizzleyMatthewscomment about compliance with the previous extension, but that obligation would surely end when he left without a reentry permit. At worst he should only have to prove compliance for the period of stay in Thailand  -  not the 12 months preceding the new application.

Agreed, which is why I stated IMHO his IO got it wrong.

By leaving without a re-entry permit, any remaining permission of stay he'd been granted was immediately cancelled. It could well be that if @DwizzleyMatthews departed just prior to renewing his previous extension, then returning VE after a short break, they suspected it was perhaps because he couldn't meet the previous financial requirements for a further extension and was trying to circumvent the system with a new VE entry and Non O application.
E.g. If for any reason, someone fell below the 400K during the year, or couldn't top up to the 800K in time, the advice would be to exit, re-enter VE and start the Non O > extension process again.
It probably wouldn't dawn on them that he was changing his visa type to rid himself of the compulsory Health Insurance required for extensions from a Non Imm O-A visa.

The only difference and comparison I can make with similar circumstances between DM and my friend, was my friend was out of the Country for over 2 years.

[DwizzleyMatthews]

So , had the home visit, an IO with Trainee , arrived promptly, took the usual photos holding passport and stood in front of the house number. Plus an additional photo of me sitting on the bed, what that proves is a mystery to me !!

20 minutes all in, questions about how long we live here and where we lived before, gf signed some paper , done and dusted.

[Faz]

2 hours ago, DwizzleyMatthews said:

I do wonder if I had dropped below the 800/400k requirements since Sept 2021 but okay for the last two months what they would have done …. refuse my current application for extension ??

It would appear that was the stance they were taking, although completely wrong.

Sometimes in these cases you have to stand tall and politely agree to disagree with the IO and demand to see the senior IO to argue your position, even referring to their own orders.

[Faz]

6 minutes ago, DwizzleyMatthews said:

So , had the home visit, an IO with Trainee , arrived promptly, took the usual photos holding passport and stood in front of the house number. Plus an additional photo of me sitting on the bed, what that proves is a mystery to me !!

20 minutes all in, questions about how long we live here and where we lived before, gf signed some paper , done and dusted.

Just an inconvenience, that's all.
For Thai spouse application, my IO requires two Thai witnesses be present with copies of their TB and ID cards. They sign a pre-prepared affidavit, basically just acknowledge we cohabit at that address and a couple of photos, on the front porch.

Your g/f probably signed an affidavit just confirming she knows you and can confirm you're a resident at that address. That was what my friend's partner signed.

[Faz]

2 hours ago, DwizzleyMatthews said:

As Faz states earlier in this thread, it seems like a new O visa now requires a home visit, my IO missed the boat and are applying that on my first extension.

That was what the IO told me, new orders from above.

However, it remains to be seen whether all senior IO's at the various Immigration offices actually enforce that, or is it purely a recommendation.

[gazmo16]

1 hour ago, Faz said:

It would appear that was the stance they were taking, although completely wrong.

Sometimes in these cases you have to stand tall and politely agree to disagree with the IO and demand to see the senior IO to argue your position, even referring to their own orders.

And how has that worked out for you or anyone else so far? 

As a law unto themselves it's maybe better to smile, nod and walk away remembering this is your Immigration office who has your balls firmly grasped so to speak.  Immigration officers don't like losing Face as you know. 

[Faz]

5 minutes ago, gazmo16 said:

And how has that worked out for you or anyone else so far? 

Very well, actually on all 3 occasions, the extensions were granted.

Sometimes the IO's are ill-informed or not informed of changes at all, which is the senior IO's responsibility.

[gazmo16]

11 minutes ago, Faz said:

Very well, actually on all 3 occasions, the extensions were granted.

Sometimes the IO's are ill-informed or not informed of changes at all, which is the senior IO's responsibility.

I stand corrected then, but we all know it's a risky move to embarrass an IO in front of his boss even if he is wrong.  I admire your bravery Faz. 

Edited November 29, 2022 by gazmo16
grammar

[Chaimai]

9 minutes ago, gazmo16 said:

I stand corrected then, but we all know it's a risky move to embarrass an IO in front of his boss even if he is wrong.  I admire your bravery Faz. 

 

I think the art is in not trying to make them lose face, but calmly point out that you believe they are wrong and require a second opinion from a superior. 

If @DwizzleyMatthewsreally thought that he was going to be refused an extension there is little to be lost in challenging an IO.

It takes confidence in your own knowledge - far too many people hit the rant button at the slightest obstacle and often do not understand that THEY are in the wrong.

[DwizzleyMatthews]

22 minutes ago, Chaimai said:

I think the art is in not trying to make them lose face, but calmly point out that you believe they are wrong and require a second opinion from a superior. 

If @DwizzleyMatthewsreally thought that he was going to be refused an extension there is little to be lost in challenging an IO.

It takes confidence in your own knowledge - far too many people hit the rant button at the slightest obstacle and often do not understand that THEY are in the wrong.

Yes, going to a higher ranking official with the proof to plead your case , preferably in Thai , is always preferable to raising your voice or starting a rant, that approach is almost certain to give negative results.

[Faz]

3 hours ago, gazmo16 said:

I stand corrected then, but we all know it's a risky move to embarrass an IO in front of his boss even if he is wrong.  I admire your bravery Faz. 

I may add these weren't my extension application, but those of a disabled expat that I was applying on behalf of. As @Chaimai correctly points out, it greatly depends on your own knowledge of the orders, remain calm, polite but request to see a senior IO.

Example; In 2020 I submitted an extension application on behalf of an Australian expat using the 65K per month income method. The Australian Embassy, ceasing the Income letters from Jan 2020.
At the end of December 2019 Immigration issued a new order, due to the cessation of certain Embassy Income letters, amending section 2.18 and 2.22 of the previous order 138/2557, thus allowing income to be proven by way of monthly overseas transfers to a Thai bank account. Amend 138-2557 (2014 ) clause 2.18-2.22 for Thai bank income ENG.pdf 

He originally obtained an Embassy Income letter before they ceased the service, which were valid for 6 months, but unfortunately he lost it. Therefore, in April 2020 I submitted an updated passbook, 12 month statement and standard letter.
The IO stated they only accepted Embassy Income letters as proof of income, even though he was aware the Australian Embassy had ceased the service. I politely rebutted him and stated income could now be proven by way of monthly overseas transfers to a Thai bank account and produced the above order amending order 138-2557.
He and a colleague had never seen this order and were inquisitive as to how and where I'd obtain it, and not prepared to proceed until the following day when the senior IO could be consulted.
The following day, the senior IO immediately ushered me to her office and very politely and profusely apologised for the misunderstanding, explaining she had received the email and read the amendment, but had been too busy to update her staff and wasn't expecting anyone to apply as early as April using the income in the bank method. She called in the two IO's I'd dealt with and apologised to them, as well as informing them at the same time of the additional income method.

It was smiles all round at the end, and she promised to inform the rest of her staff at a meeting the following morning. I blamed that experience on a break-down in communication, which in my experience frequently happens in Immigration (and elsewhere).