MangoKorat

I'm sure you'll find someone but if you don't and have basic mechanical knowledge - its just a machine with moving hydraulic parts. The usual things relating to the engine: Undue blue smoke (burning oil) Undue black smoke (injector/pump problems) Oil in the water/water in the oil Overheating Knocks and rattles Selects all gears No harsh gear noise when moving As for the hoe/hydraulic parts: Leaks Hoses for age, cracking and crushing Smooth movement not jerky Extend hydraulic arms fully to check for pitted chrome etc. Over-work on the engine when performing hydraulic actions (can relate to a bent rod/piston). The engine note will always change when its working but over-work should be clear. Check for undue wear on all joints, swivels, pins and actions. Check greasing points are intact. Allowing for age and price, if all the above are OK and the machine does what its intended to do, you should be good to go. Hopefully you'll find a mechanic

I read the new rules, either here or eslewhere and there was a specific clause stating that gifting could not be used in the way suggested. I can't remember the exact wording but it was clear that a spouse could not gift money in order to avoid tax. Mike should know the SP on this.

You may note that I am refering to the effect that travel advice has on Travel Insurance - not whether its correct or not.

I'm not suggesting anyone does anything illegal here but I often let my girlfriend change money for me. For some reason she's able to do it much faster than I am and rarely has every note photocopied as I do. The transaction is recorded, if at all, under her ID.

I don't doubt that you are correct but there's enough risk in riding around Thailand without taking additional ones - note, I only said be careful. I didn't say don't do it. The facts are though, that if you are a foriegner relying on Travel Insurance from outside Thailand, you have to take account of the fact that you will almost certainly not be covered down there if your government's advice is not to travel. I have no knowledge of Thai Travel Insurance/Accident policies, or indeed regular insurance but it would not do any harm to check this as well. Fore-warned is Fore-armed.

I'll rely on my government's travel advice thank you. Traveller's should also be aware that their travel insurance is unlikely to cover them if they travel to an area against government issued travel advice.

Malaysia I can understand, should be a great trip - careful in the troubled Southern Thai provinces though. I'd take my time taking in Thailand as well as Malaysia. However, given the size of the island and the traffic there - is Singapore really worth the possible hassle? Never done any of it - keep us posted on how it goes.

Over 50 years of riding bikes and over 40 driving cars. Three serious accidents in that time - two in cars, none my fault but the worst injuries were caused in a car crash. You can be however, more vulnerable on a bike and moreso if you don't ride correctly and with total awareness. One of my serious accidents was indeed on a bike but a bike that I was not in control of - Bangkok motorbike taxi.

Meanwhile monks walk around Thai villages every morning begging food. 'Monks and nuns were expected to live with a minimum of possessions, which were to be voluntarily provided by the lay community.' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_monasticism

The key words being 'that we are aware of'. There are several reports of murders on AN most weeks and most of them have some connection to foreigners or are particularly gruesome, bizarre etc. If you read the Thai press you will find many more murders every week that we never become aware of. Likewise, I'd suggest there will have been many Thai on Thai drink driving cases that have involved deaths recently - we are not made aware of those either.

Whilst I believe that people should be able to state their feelings towards others to an extent. Its true that some nationalities have 'ways' that are unnaceptable to the mainstream but I'm very surprised that blatant racism is tolerated here - especially calling an entire race, dirtbags!

I'm no lover of Russians but that's a totally racist comment. Drink driving is unfortunately, not limited to any nationality and I doubt there's any evidence to state that Russians are any more likely to drink-drive than any other nationality.

You just can't help yourself can you? I have stated many times that from his post, the OP could have been on either a Non O or a Non B. I only found out his actual status by checking his previous posts. I don't expect to do that normally.

Utter tosh. What sort of school did you go to - approved? Variations in views can differ greatly due to many factors. 1310 people out of a polulation of over 70 million is unlikely to produce a representative sample.

Yes, you do need to include your banking details if you are acting as a financial sponsor, whether an obscured account number is acceptable, I know not. A P60 whilst helpful, is only proof of what you have earned, it doesn't prove you still have the money or that its available to sponsor the visit. I've only ever submitted un-altered bank statements so can't comment on whether they will have anything to say on that. However, many people including myself, regularly give their bank details to complete strangers on the phone etc. Your bank should have safeguards in place such as One Time Passwords that will prevent your account number alone from being useful to fraudsters.

I note from taking a look at the OP's other threads, that he is in fact on a Non O based on marriage and has held a work permit for over 4 years. In which case he should be able to produce the 12 months of income receipts and tax documents that will enable him to convert to the income method of satisfying the financial requirements for a 12 month extension. OP, as you may already know, different offices (even officers) have variations in their requirements when it comes to paperwork. My mate who is married and working in Thailand had to produce his tax documents, payslips and bank statements showing his salary going into the bank. Then when he returned with all those, he was asked to provide a letter from the bank confirming the bank statements were true. I'm not at all sure that's the norm but as he needed the extension, he had to comply. He also said that he noted on his first visit when he went to ask what was required that the officer was generally trying to dissuade him from converting from the 400k in the bank method - at first telling him it wasn't possible. I believe that was only on his first application using the income method and could possibly have been due to an altercation he had with the officer previously, where the officer was forced to back down on something (a story in itself). He tells me that things have got considerably easier since but be aware that you could be asked for more than you might think and could face some resistance.

Which is precisely why I said there is no need for any financial requirements rather than no financial requirements, I knew you'd miss the subtlety of that and have to come back at me. Not necessarily. I'd actually think you'd know about each method if you were already using one. I do and I'm on neither. Yes - especially those who refer to transfers in which is specifically related to income from abroad - everyone has their own take on things. Above all else, you should be aware that a far greater amount of people read these topics to gain answers for themselves rather than ask in their own right. Amongst those might well be some that are already on a Non B and considering switching. In which case ALL information may well be useful. I remain of the opinion that the OP could either hold a Non B or a Non O.

Sorry but I do not agree but you will no doubt carry on because you have to win. He would not be enquiring about an extension based on employment at all, he either is or is about to be married and may therefore asking about his position after marriage. I repeat, he may well already hold a Non O based on marriage but let's say for argument's sake that he is as I suggest he could be, currently on a Non B. He could ask the very same questions framed in exactly the same way. Someone married or marrying a Thai citizen would not have any particular interest in simply applying for the initial Non O based on marriage - there is no need for any finacial requirement for that. What would be of interest is their position when applying for the extension - for which there are financial requirements. You say take the OP on face value........... he states: 'A question regarding the 1 year extension. Can I use the proof of at least 40k per month instead of 400k in a bank account to apply for an extension? If so, what documents do I need to provide? I work in Thailand and have a work permit. Thanks for any feedback.' I don't see any reason why those questions would be framed any differently if the person holds or is intending applying for a Non O based on marriage. Nobody, already living and working in Thailand and married/marrying a Thai would be interested in the visa alone, they would want to know the requirements for an extension. He may well already hold a marriage based Non O but I hope for your sake, he doesn't come back and state that this will be his first application - you'd be mortified. Frankly it wouldn't bother me at all if he does already hold a Non O because I am entirely happy that my proposition of him potentially not holding one is fair - given that most people who already have a marriage based Non O, already know the financial requirements.

Precisely where does he say he holds a Non O? He may well do so but equally he could be on a Non B. What makes me think that is a possibility is that the title says - marriage to a Thai and not married to a Thai as if he is about to be married and making enquiries. I note that once again you are attempting to pull a post of mine apart but in this case you are failing and doing so without any justification. The man may or may not hold a Non O based on marriage, he has not given enough information for that to be 100% clear.

I have read the title. It is entirely possible that as he is working in Thailand, this is his first application for a marriage based Non O and subsequent extension. He does not say what his current status is but he does say he's working in Thailand. He could currently be on a Non B.

This man works in Thailand, he won't be transfering money in. If he was working in Thailand before he was married he will have had to earn at least 50k per month to obtain a B visa whereas for a Non O marriage based extension, he will need to show an income of 40k per month.

The OP doesn's say if this is his first extension or not. It is possible that he is on a B visa and has recently married. Does he have to switch a Non O based on marriage immediately? I note you say 'transfers' and I guess that's just a figure of speech but if he has 12 months proof of income (he works in Thailand) - that's the same right?

Perhaps the connection is that they're all dead? 😁

I can't speak from a 'worldwide' perspective but not so in my home country. We of course have our share of bad/illegal driving for example but it doesn't even 'scratch the surface' compared to the driving/legality standards in Thailand. Why? Because most people in the UK are in fear of the law and losing your licence here actually means that you cannot drive. Left to their own devices, the standards practiced by many UK drivers would no doubt fall over time and unlicenced/uninsured/untaxed/speeding drivers would become common place. The UK police may not patrol so much these days but ANPR and Speed Cameras mean that such offences are difficult to 'get away with'.

Good to see the standard of reporting remains the same - consistently cr@p. Totally confused by the above stories: In the first story the body of an Indian man is found and later identified as 'a 53 year old Indian national, Poulose Varghese.' Then in Update 1 note Update: he's identified as a 53 year old Indian but his name is undisclosed. In the first story the body was found on the roadside in Songkhla on May 15, whereas in the 'Original Story' 'A resident today stumbled upon the lifeless body of an unidentified foreign man on a roadside in the Takua Thung district in the southern province of Phang Nga. Songhla and Phang Nga are distinct and separate provinces. Quite how 'the body of an unidentified woman was found on Freedom Beach in Phuket on May 1' is 'Related Report' is puzzling. Even more puzzling is what this has to do with the murder of the Indian man and the similarity of the report below, somehow escapes me. Still, at least there's consistency. AI perhaps?