Tony M

The applicant does not require a TB test/certificate if staying less than 6 months in the UK, so not required for a standard visit visa. I'm not entirely sure how that is logical, as it seems possible to infect others with TB in less than 6 months, but that is UKVI logic.

Totally wrong ! If she has a visa that expires on 23rd May, that is when she must leave the UK, unless she has not been in the UK for 6 months. If, for instance, she has only been in the UK for one month on 23rd May, she can then apply to extend her stay by the the remaining 5 months of the 6 months. It will, however, cost around 1,000 GBP to do so. See theoldgit's link above : If you have permission to be in the UK for less than 6 months You may be able to extend your stay as long as the total time you spend in the UK is no more than 6 months. You must meet the eligibility requirements and pay the £993 fee. For example, if you have been in the UK for 3 months, you can apply to extend your stay for 3 more months. This applies if you needed a visa to visit the UK and also if you did not need one.

Yes, Thai tourism is magical. The Thai government made it disappear.

This VFS (Trendy Building) web page gives you information on either scanning the documents yourself or letting VFS scan them for you when you are at Trendy. It costs 460 THB at Trendy. https://visa.vfsglobal.com/tha/en/gbr/supporting-documents

I think you misunderstod me, but no disrespect taken. I just find it wrong when people say it's okay to do something when there is nothing definitive to say that it is okay. This country and this government can change their minds about almost anything at any moment, so telling people it's okay to travel with limited insurance when the published guidance says it isn't, just seems a bit tenuous. But, please don't tell me that Thailand probably isn't the right place for me. No disrespect intended, but please keep your opinions on my life to yourself.

I'll tell my Embassy to stop trying to follow up on this then, as Dr Jack54 says it's okay.

I guess that's a "no" then, you don't have anything definitive to offer ?

So, with respect, ubonjoe, you and others are guaranteeing that this is the official position ?

You have that in writing or in an official statemnet from the Govt - " "admitted untill date would match the insurance" " ?

What a nonsense article. This happened in Jomtien yesterday. The beach road was busy with illegally modified bikes. Not 100, but many hundreds. The photo - op was opposite the Chao Doi coffee shop, and the police (maybe a dozen of them) were checking and impounding bikes that were already parked. While doing that, they took no notice of the dozens of loud exhausts riding past the photo op. In the resort opposite, several dozen bikers had been partying noisily all night, and were unable to exit the resort until the police moved on. The police could actually have blocked the exit to the resort, gone inside, and arrested/impounded all they wanted, but I guess they couldn't be bothered. This was actually a repaet of what happened last year, and the photo-op was in the same place.

Well, it's only 3 or 4 months since you said you would try to get some kind of answer to this, and we still haven't heard anything from you. What happened ? It's still an ongoing uncertainty for many of us :

I think many of us know, or have heard, that 30 days will get you in, or did get you in, but where is the definitive statement from anybody in the Govt that it is sufficient for long-term stayers ? The way the OP reads is that they can refuse entry to us if they want to, when we arrive with 30 days insurance. It's about time for Richard Barrow to get a more definitive statement from his highly-placed contact. I have tried my Embassy, and you can guess the response....nothing at all.

And the requirement for the insurance, stating that it must cover the entire duration of yout stay in Thailand is, again, a contradiction of many of the posts in this forum that 30 days insurance cover is fine for long term extension of stay holders. Has this ever been "clarified" by anyone ?

There isn't any answer to that question, I'm afraid. At the moment it's around 6 weeks, but I did hear, unofficially, that all Thailand visa processing has now been moved to the UK. I can't confirm that, but if that is correct, then processing times could change in either direction.

And the Pensions man.

Maybe so they can tell the tax man where you live.

I don't think I was being optimistic, more like realistic. The govt knows that they need tourism income, and they will surely realise (sometime) that tourists will probably not come in the numbers they are hoping for. They seem to be "realistic" about the arrival of several thousand American seamen in February, and are "opening" Walking Street, even though bars, go-gos, etc are still banned. It appears that they are advising such venues to be "restaurants" Hypocrisy (and financial greed) rules !

There is quite a lot there. First, your wife is right to have concerns about tech problems. The UKVI had big problems with the document uploading "system" for a long time. Basically, it didn't work properly. They didn't really openly admit this, and many applications were refused on the grounds that some documents weren't submitted. This led to lots of complaints, appeals (in settlement visa refusals), etc. Documents are scanned to the "cloud", and ECOs were unable to locate or see some of the uploads. This applied in both self-uploading and VFS uploading. There has been no notification as to whether the problems have been fixed or not. Of course, there is nothing to stop you using both systems to upload your documents. If you use VFS scanning, then I would recommend making a list of every document you are getting scanned. Then ask the VFS person to sign the list to confirm that each document was uploaded. They will probably refuse, but if your wife can be forceful in the face of "authority", then she might succeed. Other have done so. If you use self-uploading you will get a printable receipt. It lists the documents that you have uploaded, so make sure that each document description (before you upload them ) is concise and clear. Either option, or both, will be useful if the application gets refused for "missing" documents. Regarding the documents for your accommodation. Yes, submit a copy of your mother's passport. If you are submitting a Title Register, then also submitting mortgage statements is unnecessary (and vice versa). It is duplication. Regarding the environmental search and layout, I have never submitted these. They are not required documents, but if it makes you feel more comfortable, then submit them. ECOs can, and do, use Google street view and Zoopla to check properties. If it is unclear that a flat/property, for instance, is one or two bedroom, then they might ask for more evidence, but, from experience, that seems rare.

Might need to rethink the shisha laws then.

You can't upload documents before the application is submitted online, and submitting means paying too. You said you were using the VFS scanning at the application centre ? That will cost 3,000 THB. Self-uploading is free (after you have paid the fee to submit online).

You are right, theoldgit. Far too much "information" for the ECO. He will not be interested in anything other than deciding if the applicant meets the requirements of the rules, and the genuineness of the relationship. He doesn't want information that is otiose (I had to look that word up when one of my bosses used it in a file note to me. Something for you to do on a boring Sunday afternoon, and Google is your friend).

I suspect that, as soon as they realise how much money will be lost at Songkran time, all the requirements will be ditched. Songkran is one of the biggest money-makers of the year. So, in the next month or so, all testing and all quarantine will disappear in the greed for April income.

It should be fine, as long as it has a contact number or email address for the UKVI to check if they want to.

"People Administrator" ? I've never heard that before ! Yes, it's okay or them to sign it.

Where did you "hear" that ?