Maestro

I think your thinking is wrong. Have the possessor of the blue book you are talking about explain how your name — probably only your forename(s) — got there.

1. The caution you were given was probably based on Article 12 of the Immigration Act. 2. The information you received from the Phuket Town immigration office is wrong, unless an announcement has been published in the Government Gazette stating such blanket limit of VE-60 entries. The immigration official's authority to deny entry under Section 12 is not tied to the number of previous entries made within the year.

1. In ordinary language and in legal terms, everything that is not limited is unlimited, without the need to explicitly specify that it is unlimited. 2. Yes, immigration officials at border entry points have the authority to deny a traveller permission to enter Thailand in accordance with Section 22 of the Immigration Act and to use their discretion in exercising this authority.

"The previous order" was for the VE30. This topic is about the VE60. The announcement of the VE60 mentioned no limitation on the he number of entries. To the best of my knowledge, no subsequent announcement about a limitation has been made.

A new Police Order for extensions of stay is needed, if it has not already been done.

Removed an abusive post. @transam and @Liquorice Stop your bickering, please.

In the unofficial English translation to which I linked, I found the text "Tourism, Work, or Short-Term Business Engagements" puzzling and this prompted me to take the corresponding Thai text and use Google Translate, which gives quite a different translation: "tourism and telework". I find this equally puzzling.

A limit was published in the Government Gazette for VE30 entries. Someone posted a link to it in this forum but I don't have it available; anyway, it is off topic here. An English translation of the official publication of the VE60 is here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/12Zn4PQT7dlqS39lhdeEd6HIGXsAeEG8Z/view?usp=drive_link without any mention of any limitation on the number of entries via any type of entry point, but the announcement states that the VE60 was launched under the authority of the Immigration Act and therefore Section 12 and all other provisions of that law apply to the VE60. One limitation mentioned in the announcement is the purpose of the visit, ie "Tourism, Work, or Short-Term Business Engagements" The official text published in the Government Gazette, in Thai language, is here: https://ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/documents/37563.pdf P.S. Edit on 20 DEC 2024: I corrected the link for the Thai document

Section 12 of the Immigration Act https://aseannow.com/applications/core/interface/file/attachment.php?id=991237&key=afcda8a9154676f45da42331902f33c8 Every application for permission to enter Thailand, ie presentation of one's passport to an immigration official at a border checkpoint, is subject to vetting under this section of the Immigration Act and thus any application might be refused.

This topic is about the new 60-day visa-exempt entry (VE60), which is separate and distinctly different from the 30-day visa exempt entry (VE-30). Therefore, any request for proof of an official rescission of limitations and/or restrictions related to the VE30 are off-topic here. Anyone with knowledge of a publication in the Royal Gazette of a limit of the number of entries with VE60 within a specific period of time is kindly invited to post the relevant link here.

I suspect that the refusal of your Kasikorn branch was due to what I call "information overload" All you wanted was "a letter that showed my full name, account number and address" but you added the unnecessary information about meeting "requirements of my New Zealand bank and their new anti money laundering laws for when I transfer funds" and that talk about anti money laundering scared them off. Most likely, if you had simply asked for last month's signed bank statement, it would ould have been given to you without a problem.

How many months and days had you left of your permission to stay when you asked about the possibility of an extension of stay?

There is no anticipated end date for the visa-exempt entry for 60 days.

Yes, it might.

Removed a meaningless post, because the immigration office was not mentioned.

Removed an off-topic pos about DTV

Removed an off-topic post about sexual debauchery. @JimTripper probably meant to post it in another forum, perhaps the lounge.

You forgot to post the link to the report you read. Could you post it now, please?

The Thai consulate in Savannakhet has an analogous announcement on its website. https://assets.aseannow.com/forum/uploads/monthly_2024_11/Screenshot_20241124_150707_Chrome.jpg.0fc142a5f26103868c009820f66cb0bb.jpg

That falls under the requirement of evidence that the marriage is not only de jure but also de facto, for example that it is being consummated on an ongoing basis. Consider yourself lucky that immigration is not asking for video evidence.

I believe the part about payment of the visa fee in cash is an error.

Not quite, but the Immigration Bureau tries to make you believe that it is so with a page on their website.

The TM.30 notification that was made for your arrival is obviously registered in immigration's database but for some unfathomable reason some, if not all, immigration offices ask for a new copy of that TM.30 notification with ever application of extension of stay. However, you mention "a new TM-30 receipt". Are you saying that the immigration office wants a new TM.30 notification to be made and wants a copy of the receipt for that new notification? That would be weird.

No chance at all, in my opinion. With all other visas and and with extensions of stay, immigration regulations clearly spell out that the relationship has to be de jure, ie legally registered, and I see no reason why embassies and consulates would not apply this to the DTV, but it will do no harm if you inquire at the Thai embassy in France about this.

More off-topic posts have been removed andthe topic iis now closed.