yaketyak

The last offensive against drugs had a huge impact on drug supply and use in Thailand, and that is why it is well-supported by most Thais and some farang.

Not according to the Thai Office of Narcotics Control Board (ONCB) who stated the murders had absolutely no effect on the drug trade in the long term and just shortly after the death squads had finished supply and prices were back to normal levels.

Exactly. Its a battle that will never be won. Why on earth Governments even bother beats me. If people choose to kill themselves taking drugs or risk serious harm why not legalise it and educate them , give them the choice, and then let them get on with it.?

After making my post yesterday i phoned the Border and Immigration people and asked them if one was unuable to show 20 documents and indeed fell so far short that the application was refused or indeed did not fall so far short but the officer was just in a bad mood and refused because technically he/she can , (at this point he chuckled ... which was hardly reassuring that this doesn't happen from time to time)was i right in assuming that no-one would be asked to leave but a furthur 2 years FLR would be given during which time more documents could be found or created and a new ILR application made ?

He said yes that was what would happen , assuming it failed only on the lack of co-habitation proof and not other things as well, and i repeated it again just to be sure and he said yes again.

Scouse is fairly definate that this is wrong so we can only conclude that the Border and Immigration department are giving out wrong advice.

If i get time today i will try and call again and ask the same question . If i get the same answer as yesterday i will post here. If i get a different answer i will tell them what was said yesterday as its vitally important that their operatives know the correct answer. I will also post that here.

As far as possible, you should have as many documents as you can muster up to the 20 for which they ask, and these should span the entirety of the last two years. You can't submit what you don't have, so send in what you've got and write a covering letter explaining why you can't reach the magic 20. Reinforce the point in your letter that you have a son etc. and include evidence of his birth.

If the worst happens and the application is refused, your wife should have a right of appeal before being required to leave.

Scouse.

Am i not right in saying that , in the unfortunate event that the application is refused through lack of this magical , and ramdom, 20 documents, then not only would there be a right of appeal but , reassuringly, there would also be given a furthur 2 years leave to remain during which another application for ILR can be made at ANY time? Thus the question of the wife being asked to leave does not really occur , even after a refusal.

br37,

yep sounds like you were unlucky. I very recently took my partner to the French Embassy in Bangkok to get a visa for France. He has no job or income but we showed them the reservations for the hotel AND crucially it now seems , travel insurance for the whole trip , and although it took them 5 days to process (years ago it was next day but then again is there anything about visas that wasn't better years ago??) he got it no problems.

Then again we do live permanently in the UK so i guess that makes a difference.

If you both live permanently in the Uk can I ask why you approached the French embassy in BKK.

Because we were on holiday in Bangkok and wanted to go to France very soon after returning to the UK.

br37,

yep sounds like you were unlucky. I very recently took my partner to the French Embassy in Bangkok to get a visa for France. He has no job or income but we showed them the reservations for the hotel AND crucially it now seems , travel insurance for the whole trip , and although it took them 5 days to process (years ago it was next day but then again is there anything about visas that wasn't better years ago??) he got it no problems.

Then again we do live permanently in the UK so i guess that makes a difference.

Razzell,

to answer your last sentence question , it depends on exactly why she was refused. In theory there is no minimum time you have to wait (nor should there be if you think about it) to re-apply , but you must have addressed all the reasons for refusal when you do.

So the answer is ... it depends on the reason (s) for refusal.

These kind of threads bring me close to despair.

19 yr old has sex with his 17 yr old girlfriend. So what !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why is this even a story?

Mind you he sounds a bit thick. I mean if you are offered the chance to pay a pittance or jail ... well need i spell it out .?

Its very difficult ( i have both passed and failed on different occasions , most UK citizens would fail it without reading the book) , COMPLETELY irrellevant , and just another hurdle that this spiteful government has placed in the way of people getting ILR and citizenship. They cannot stop the East Europeans coming here , they are beside themselves with fury over this , so they spitefully take it out on those they can stop by making it harder to get ILR .

A friend of mine has just got his British Citizenship after taking this test. Cost him unneccessarily to do it and the nett result is he is the same person he was before the test. Absurd!! Just another way for the govt to make some money. I have encouaged him to get housing benefit , which he did, so now he is getting back from the govt what they took from him with interest !! Marvellous!!

I can understand them making it a requirement that applicants must be able to speak English to a certain level , but a simple oral test with an examiner would be enough to establish that.

Bird on the wire and others,

you seem to have misunderstood my post totally.

So let me make it clear , i was NOT blaming the OP OR the professional helper one iota.

I was curious to know how a complete and utter refusal could turn into an about turn. I wondered if the fault lay with the application or with the ECO . Thats all.

No offense was meant and i can't see why anyone thought it was.

There are a few interesting points here.

You used a professional to help prepare your case but it was rejected out of hand , and agressively too apparently. Magically whilst on appeal (if i read you right) it was overturned (by whom.....by the ECM at the Embassy??..its not totally clear)

Now the point is , if you used a certain professional then it is to be assumed he made sure you put everything into the application that was needed to be successful. So why was it turned down so firmly only to be overturned at a later date? Was it because the initial application was lacking , or was it because you got a pig of an ECO looking at your case?

When it was overturned did you receive an apology from the British Embassy for refusing you originally? No of course you didn't. So i guess what i am asking is , in your opinion , who was at fault for an application , professionally prepared , getting refused in the first place?

Yet another "crackdown" on something that can never be eradicated. A battle that year after year , can and has never been won.

Yet Governments around the world spend billions every year on crackdown after crackdown on a battle they know they can't win. Is it worth the money and effort??

Educate people about the dangers of drugs right through their schooling, and through the media, and then if they choose to ignore it , let them get on with it.

People will stop coming to Thailand? I believe the targeted clubs cater to Thais.

How many teen agers come to Thailand?

You have to spell it out childlike to some people. Everyone else seemed to understand. This absurd crackdown on worrying about what time and what age people are in clubs (which CAN be frequented by foreigners too) will and has put some people off coming .

My not-too-difficult-to-understand comment was that i cannot understand why the authorities seem obsessed with what time people leave the clubs and what age they are. As i said, back in the good old pre-Taksin anything goes days , no-one (rightly) cared. And the world kept spinning. So why does it matter !!??

What a fuss about nothing.

When will the Thai authorities learn that one of the key reasons a high percentage of people come to Thailand in the first place, bringing with them tons of spending money, is that Thailand WAS pewrceived as being very open , few rules anything goes kind of place. If they start unneccessarily cracking down on nightlife venues then some of these people will stop coming and stop thus spending.

What does it matter what time bars shut? It should be down to supply and demand . If the owners want to stay open all night ...so what??

And as for this absurd rule (it all started when Taksin got in if i remember correctly) that people under the age of 20 (!!!) are minors...well i'm speechless.

In the good old days pre-Taksin bars opened later and anyone could get in . Thats how it should be now.

It seems that hardly a few days pass on Thaivisa without a discussion of some kind on drugs. Hardly a day passes on the news bulletins on t.v. without some (bad) news on increasing use of drugs.

So i have to ask myself (again) , if even Thailand with its well known almost barbaric treatment of people convicted of drug offences cannot stem the flow , then is it not time to just throw in the towel and admit that no Government has a hope in hells chance of ever eradicating or indeed even reducing the desire to use drugs.

A certain percentage of people (and by all accounts its not an insignificant percentage either) have , are and always will use drugs. They are and have been and always will be available in vast quantities . So i do wonder why Governments spend vast amounts of my taxpayers money on fighting a battle they cannot win.

I guess its because , like all those other things that Governments want to but cant stop (underage sex, child pornography , drinking alcahol-underage or not-, smoking , and taking drugs) to admit the truth ie they cant stop it , is a worse loss of face than continuing what they know is a losing battle. And there is nothing they won't do , no price they won't pay , to avoid addmitting the truth.

Why do we have to go through this constant pretending . There is no power on earth that can stop people doing what they want to do. It is just driven underground .

You are talking about a long stay visa obtained in your home country. Most people just extend a non immigrant visa for retirement at an Immigration office in Thailand. Extensions do not require any such paperwork.

Got it now !! Thanks Lopburi3

...is this not so ?

It is not.

--

Maestro

OK i don't want to go on about this point , especially as 2 people have said i am wrong. I accept i must be . But when i check the official sites it says that for a retirement visa you need to show police clearance. Or are we talking about a different visa here? (i thought there was just 1 retirement visa)? can someone enlightern me as to where i am going wrong please?

Gambling is a <deleted>' plague, as bad as drugs if not worse.

I used to run an establishment where many of our customers were known to do drugs (elsewhere) while others gambled (on site). One can only take so much drugs in an evening, a hundred or so bucks,some less, some more, as for the gamblers, there was just no end to it, hundreds, thousands.

Yes maybe so , but the point is why do you care? its not your business ... its theirs.

Also remember in Thailand much of the gambling is small, a group playing cards for a few baht etc.

I may be wrong but i think the article has also missed out that you have to show a letter from your home country confirming you have no criminal record. Is this not so ?

Isn't it bizarre that there is a punishment of any kind for gambling?? If people want to gamble thats their business , why should anyone else care ?

Shame they don't acknowledge and give the same rights to same sex couples , (one Thai and one UK citizen) who have been legally married in the UK.

Over the years i have had occasion to speak to many of the various British Embassy officials in Bangkok. On a very few occasions , all quite a while ago, i found them to be vaguely human and approachable to an extent. On most occasions i have found them to be very arrogant , rude and unhelpful. It seems you need to be a particular typoe of person to work in British Embassies and rudeness and arrogance seem to be it. I often ask myself why people want to work in certain jobs, British Emassy visa section , traffic wardens, immigration officers and the like and then i realise they are all the same kind of nasty person.

You only have to try and talk to Ms Howerd at the BE to understand what i mean. And they can behave like this because .... well because they can . No-one in the UK is interested in complaints about individuals. I went to my local MP who said "yes well i am always hearing complaints about Embassy staff. They can be real bastards" , but there was nothing he could do about it . Complain to UK Visas and they express surprise saying "ooohhh... its the first time anyone has complained about him/her" yeah right. The truth is the government wants the nasty people there . Frightening.

Personally i can't see a problem with reducing the 6 month visa to 3 months. Most tourist visits should fall well short of that.

Also can't see a problem with the £1000 bond , although i agree with others that it won't make getting a visa any easier but yet another thing to do .

It could be good news that they are thinking of scrapping the full appeal if it IS replaced with a simpler and cheaper (and thus probably much quicker) appeal system. The current situation where you wait ages at often huge expense (if you decide to go through a lawyer) is long overdue an overhaul. Have to sit on the fence until the details of this are announced.

Of course all these changes are bourne out of the government's fury that they cannot stop the EU people coming here so they turn instead on those they still can.

Interestingly it appears that every year more British citizens are leaving the country to be replaced with EU and foreign nationals settling here. I like this concept as it is slowly replacing the Boring Brits with the more open minded foreigners. Perhaps in 20 years time we will see a less controlled police-state Britiain that we have now and see it replaced with a more relaxed one as more and more the population is made up of those from abroad.

Whether he did kill the guy or not , whether he was naive or not , all this is hardly the most important thing here. The most important thing is that jails anywhere in the world should not be like his description which , as i knew someone who was in the BKK Hilton , i know to be absolutely true.

How people can callously call him scum and be indifferent to anyone whose mistakes lead them to be incarcerated for an incredibly long time in inhuman conditions (and so unneccessarily so) is beyond me .

I wouldn't wish that on anyone , but then again i sleep well at night as my conscience is clear..

I never quite understand the hysteria that these money lenders seem to generate both in Thailand and here in the UK.

You have to remember that these people are exactly the ones who cannot go to the banks because they have a terrible credit history or they have insufficient income.

These loan sharks take on a big risk in that they are dealing with unreliable people who say one thing but don't do it (ie pay back the money) so of course to outweigh the risk the rates must be much much higher than the banks .

I feel more sorry for those in Thailand who are genuinely poor as opposed to those in the UK who , largely speaking , are not

I think i have come into this a day or so too late as its mostly all been said.

I can only talk from 1993 but i have noticed a few changes even in this shortish space of time.

1) Traffic...there is no doubt in my mind that it is VASTLY better than in the 1990's. Its been a while since i have seen a real belter of a traffic jam , the kind that were commonplace in the 1990's. I remember getting stuck in a taxi around the Victory Monument for 2 hours. And Monday and Friday afternoons used to snarl up into virtual gridlock all around Silom , Sukhumvit, Sathorn , around MBK etc.

As someone who liked to stand and watch the traffic choas i actually am a bit sad the traffic is better. I liked it as it was !!

2) Prices ... have generally risen but not by as much as our western wealth has, so effectivally that , with the devaluation in 1997, now means that prices are about half what they were then in real terms pre 1997. How good is that??!!

3) Nightlife.... was very much anything goes in the 1990's, now , unfortunately , it is much more controlled with far too much "can't do this ... can't do that" about it. Shows are more tame and are performed by ever older models (interfering western governments influence here) to the point where sometimes i feel younger than the models in the "shows".

Another change for the worse is that now clubs and pubs in the tourist areas (i'm talking about the famous , obvious ones , not the tucked away ones where i am sure all hours still operate) have to close at a stupidly early time, unlike the 90's where they stayed open until 3/4 am .

4) One thing that hasn't changed .. taxi fares. Although there were still unmetered taxis in 1993 they were on their way out and if you got a metered taxi, they would charge 35 baht to start . Its still 35 baht.

I could go on but its all been said.

On balance I would definately say i think life was better and much more fun and free back then.

When Taksin got in, the government pursued an almost puritan clensing of the nightlife. Shame , a lot of fun went out of Thailand after that.