deecfc67

You would have to imagine that of all the ways underage youths can get hold of alcohol, ordering online must surely be the least commonly used method.

I would guess that online ordering would only be a tiny percentage of where they get it, so to ban it for everyone is ridiculous...

6 hours ago, steven100 said:

so then they ask an older friend to order it for them and they just pay him  ?  as they do in advanced countries.

But if an older friend is willing to buy it for them online, they would clearly be just as able to get it from any local shop the same way.

So banning online sales solves absolutely nothing.

I'm sure this is at a restaurant at Haad Salad, Koh Phangan.

If it is, they're a friendly bunch so I'm sure the sign is purely tongue-in-cheek.

17 minutes ago, kidneyw said:

Strange that "not guilty" verdicts were ordered to be changed to guilty verdicts. It is usually the other way around here. I guess someone has a major grudge against the defendants.

Or, as in the infamous Koh Tao case with the two Burmese lads, it could be that by securing convictions against some "patsy's", the real guilty parties get off with whatever they are charged with (assuming that the many rumours about that case are correct of course).

I keep seeing posts by people saying it's not such a big deal to pop in to your local I.O. when returning from a trip.

However, if you happen to live on either Koh Phangan or Koh Tao, the nearest I.O. is on Koh Samui.  And take make matters even worse, they are one of the I.O.'s that do not allow reporting online (they did for a very short while, and it was perfect the one time it worked for me a few years ago).

So, if anyone living on either of these two islands takes a trip to another province, they are then expected to take the ferry to Samui and back, just to inform Immigration that they have returned!

1 hour ago, Brunolem said:

Since I am right now into the application process for extension based on having a Thai child, I can tell you that, at least in my province, the immigration does indeed check that the child and his father live in the same house. 

 

The chief of the local immigration came himself to my home and spent more than an hour interrogating witnesses, filling forms, taking pictures, to confirm that I was indeed living here and had done so for quite some time... 

Thanks for that.

It seems unlikely that i'll have any chance or getting the extension based on supporting my daughter then, going by your experience.

Seems crazy that i can't get a visa extension to support her, whilst working here legally, just because my work requires me to live in a different province.

Can't say i'm surprised though.  It is the land of beaurocracy after all...

33 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

One option would be to get a multiple entry non-o visa based upon marriage before he gets divorced or one afterwards based upon being the parent of Thai.

Thanks for the feedback guys.

I had considered asking the wife to delay the divorce until after i apply for another 1 year extension, based on marriage.  This would at least give me another year's breathing space.

She's fairly open to doing this but of course, at any moment IO guys could come to my house to check that we're living together.

It's never happened before, but sod's law and all that...

Ideally i would like to sort out the divorce and then try to get my future extensions based on being the parent of my Thai/UK (Thai born) daughter.

The issue is whether or not it's possible with me living in a different province from my daughter, even though the reasons for this are my work location and her school location.

I have 400k in the bank, have a work permit and earn the required minimum for visa requirements.

So it seems i meet almost all of the criteria, with the possible exception of this separate province thing.

Do you guys know if the "living in the same province" thing is a confirmed requirement, and if it is, how stringent is it?  I'd hope that the reason i'm living in a different province is due to the fact i'm working to support my daughter would be taken into consideration.  But knowing how things tend to work in the LOS, i'm not overly confident...

25 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

I'm assuming you have an extension based on marriage (not a Visa).

Are you aware.

1. Your extension will immediately cease on the date of divorce.

2. You won't be able to renew your WP based on marriage anymore.

Hi.

Yes, i know my extension based on marriage will cease once the divorce is finalised.  This is likely to be in October, around the same time my visa expires.

I can still get a visa based on my WP but obviously that means yearly trips to Penang, plus 3-monthly "border runs".

Obviously these are doable, but a real pain.  That's why i'm exploring the possibility of the extension based on supporting my daughter, even though we live in different provinces.

It just seems a bit daft that i possibly can't get the extension based on support due to my daughter and i living in different provinces, because as i originally posted, i work in the diving industry and she requires schooling that is not availble here.

There IS a special needs school in Samui, but as my wife's parents live in Bangkok, it's much easier for them to stay there and use the special needs school in the local area.
If she were to move to Samui to use the school there, i'd then have to cover the costs of them living there, which financially would be a stretch too far.

Thanks for that mate.  Unfortunately i'm based on one of the other islands.

If they had something similar here it would be a godsend.

Hi,

I'm currently separated from my wife, pending divorce.

We have a 6 year old daughter together and i've been on a "Marriage Visa" for the past 8 years.

My visa is due to expire in October 2019, but which time the divorce should be completed.  So i would really like to get the visa based on being the parent of my daughter.

I have a work permit, and i also have 400k in the bank, as well as all the birth certification documents, etc.

However, here's where it gets tricky...

I live and work on one of the islands in the Gulf of Thailand, working in the dive industry.

My (soon to be ex) wife now lives in Bangkok with my daughter because my daughter has autism and there are no schools here on the island that can meet her education/development needs.

So basically, i'm working here to support both my wife and daughter, and if i was forced to leave things could go pear-shaped very quickly.

My concern/confusion over this option to apply for a visa based on supporting my daughter is that we are not living in the same province.

I'm hearing conflicting accounts of this being a requirement or not.

If it is, i'm assuming there wouldn't be any chance of them assessing my situation on its own merits?

Clearly, i cannot relocate to Bangkok as i work in the diving industry, and my daughter cannot relocate back down to the island because there is no option for her schooling here.

My big worry is that this rule (if it exists) will be set in stone, with no consideration of the actual circumstances.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

2 hours ago, observer90210 said:

Sorry to my environmental friends,.... but I will be the last one to cry if sharks and snakes are erradicated from the equation.

Then I seriously hope you have no chance of passing on your genes.

"Ignorant" doesn't even begin to sum up your opinion!

11 hours ago, atyclb said:

having lived and surfed in hawaii i cant exactly break out into tears over the tiger sharks gone.

So in your opinion, indigenous marine life should be eradicated to facilitate your leisure activities?

If that's the case then you're part of the problem...!!