rethaired

I think it might be better to state your hypothesis, motivation and intention in setting up such a complex poll as this.

You are interested in respondents' views on whether Western Buddhists are well-adjusted or not; self-centred or not; whether these variables apply to a majority, minority or about half the population of Western Buddhists people know; what religious affiliations or non-affiliations respondents have and whether they have changed them, and how long within a limited range of periods respondents have lived in Thailand. (The outside range of 3 years or more does not acknowledge the potentially vast degree of difference in attitudes between someone who has been in Thailand for 3 years and someone who has been here 15 or 20 years or more - the latter group being possibly the most likely to know some Western Buddhists and have been able to form some views.)

Perhaps if you reveal why you want this information and state your own position or hypothesis you might get some helpful discussion.

I have found Western buddhists that I have met highly arrogant, feeling as if they are superior as they are --supposedly-- enlightened!

But, considering this poll was supposed to corroborate or disprove the notion that Buddhism can lead to that kind of behaviour or psychosis by being posted in the general forum so that not all buddhists would be voting in a predictable manner and so that the general population would vote, it has become a fruitless exercise. I am not too sure if a discussion can take place considering the sensitive nature of the hypothesis.

Thank you all for your participation.

Note to moderator(s):

Not too sure why this poll was moved into the Buddhism forum! Could you please put this poll in general topics as it follows that if you ask people who are buddhists or are interested in buddhism how they feel about buddhism they are more likely than not going to be voting one way and not another? This poll is not directed to just people who are or are interested in Buddhism.

Thank you.

BTW, I failed to cut the "not" (not self-centered) in the penultimate choice of the first question. It should read "[...] and are self-centered". Can moderators make those changes?

Not too sure if it best to limit this poll to just that: a poll. I would think that there is the possibility that allowing comments could degenerate into something dysfunctional, which is not my wish at all. I will let TV mod. set the parameters. Thank you.

You came to that place and things are done there since always and nobody ever felt annoyed.

So, isn't it much more questionable, that there is someone complaining now?

Wrong! My GF who is Thai IS annoyed, but the stupid saving face (and retaliation that ensues if you make someone lose face*) prevents her --and others I am sure-- from complaining. If one is, I ask how many more are? In fact, if one uses the poll, there are 6 people who are bothered and 7 who do not seem to, although one of them might be waking up at these times, so now it is a 50-50 proposition.

So, there is one person complaining AND MANY others agreeing! If my math is good, that is not just not ONE person complaining! I rest my case!

But, more to the point, you enjoy being awaken when YOU sleep? You think that there should not be any nuisance laws? Anyone can do what they want? No one can disagree? No one can complain? Of course, if no one can complain (because it is questionable), there are no issues! Right? They vanish! Right? I disagree! MANY people disagree!

Of course, you might be able to block it off, because you are very special! Are you? Perhaps you have the ability (that others don't have) to? Is that so? Unfortunately for you, there is more than you who lives on this Earth. Be nice for the weak and the unable like us! What should we do, kill ourselves? There is nothing that you dislike? Oh! Wait! You don't like people who complain! It looks we have more in common than you think we have, if you get what I am stating, that is!

And, if one follows the same logic that people have to avoid the issue by either moving or blocking it off (in this case), then it seems that we should allow all dogs to defecate on roads and never clean them, not bother with putting nice flowers on streets, allow putrid dumps to be erected wherever,... Come on! Criticism can be healthy! It can make the world a better place for all to live! And, what about the people who cannot move? You know! The people who cannot sell their house because they do not have the means to? What about the people who have signed long-term leases? And, what if there are no other places where one can live decently, unless of course, one is wealthy and can afford to buy peace and quiet.

* Mature people can take criticism, albeit all the more if there are of the kind and sensitive type. Funny that many people in this country seem to not want confrontation, yet they don't see noise as being aggressive. I think they do, but they are fearful of the retaliation or the penalty that their religion (or the person in question) might inflict upon them. Laws are needed, if Thailand wants to keep its image of being the paradise that it claims it is. At this time, paradise is very far away!

Missed a category in the top 20 categories - "Doesn't bother me - can't hear it" and it's variants.

Me? I'm deaf and wouldn't hear WW3 if it started. I presume others can be dead to the world in the mornings after the previous night's bender.

But you would certainly see WW3 if it started!

Would you be okay if you were forced to sleep in a room from which you are constantly bombarded with a neon sign flashing? Yes! Of course, you could choose a different place. The problem in Thailand (and of course, there are other countries were this is an issue, but then they are laws that seem to curb noise since laws have been written and are enforced) is that noise seems ubiquitous. It is not just temples. It is dogs. There is this new construction site nearby and they seem to work 12 hours + Saturday and Sunday included. That would never be tolerated in the West. I know this developments and freedom take time and enlightement ... or awareness. This posting should help in that regard. The squeaky wheel gets the oil!

The point I am making is that noise is ubiquitous (as light is in the dark, unless of course you are blind). Since the majority of human beings are neither deaf or blind, it would be nice to think that other people who want to make noise would make that noise outside the hours when people usually sleep.

Thanks fast sailor for your comment and for all of those who voted.

50% of you voted that we should move! Of course, you must be monks or Thai nationalists because no one wants to be awoken at that time on Jan. 1st. Anyway, the argument is baseless as explained earlier. No one, unless you are a monk, you usually wake up at this time, don't go to bed, or you must wake up ! Anyway, I hope you go to another country and have to put up with that kind of nonsense! Fortunately for you, most of the world has nuisance laws. Perhaps it is time for Thailand to ... wake up to this idea!

I know! I know! If I don't like it, maybe I should move or go back from where I come from! And what if I don't like things over there, then where?

And, this kind of response is very dysfunctional anyway! We all know that many of us do try to make Thailand (or our own country) better by initiating things or trying to improve things. If Thais are not going to do it, who should? Maybe they are!

Obviously, blaring noise at 6 a.m. is not being a good, kind citizen since it is illegal in most developed countries. It is also common sense! One should know that people like to sleep at this time, especially the 1st of Jan. It is not rocket scientist! I know it is a call for food, but are they that oblivious? Aren't they supposed to be self-aware, enlightened? Or is it that no one says boo because, well, one cannot because they might lose face? Mind you! With that noise, who could? Not everyone wants to sleep at 8 p.m., so that they can wake up at 6 a.m. I don't turn my stereo at 2 a.m. because I don't like to disturb my neighbour! It is common sense and a nice rules to follow.

After living in this country for many years now, I just don't get that part along with the part when you ask in many restaurants to not put ANY hot chillis two or three times and they still do! Are they deaf? OK! It does not happen everywhere and many Thais are very kind and respectful! But, I find that too many need to learn that they need to respect others first and then they will be able to respect themselves? Or is that most are just not clued in? Maybe it is the by-product of buddhism? Care to enlighten me?

I think I know the answers to most of these questions, but I would not want to be too direct in case some people might be ... annoyed!

Of course, noise at 6 a.m. on Jan. 1st does not annoy me! Of course! And, it does annoy anyone else either! And pigs do fly!

Don't you lose merit points when you kill or injure someone? Is it about human nature or about something more profound?

Granted, mistakes do occur, but there are very few drivers who use their signal lights, so is it that they cannot multi-task or remember that when you turn or is it that deep-seeded attitude that some have that the bigger you are, the more you can get away with it! Although, when you see the number of students allowed to drive out of their school parking lot without helmets, one might ask why is the staff no doing anything, it seems? Is it the Mai Pen Lai mentality? Or is it also about Buddhism?

"To Buddhism, however, death is not the end of life, it is merely the end of the body we inhabit in this life, but our spirit will still remain ... "

Or is just human nature (or animal) claiming back its right, for some people anyway!

some people's iq is not higher than their shoe size

luckily european size is different and bigger than us (size 9 US = size 42-43 european)

lol

ps: americans and brits have it so much more easy to learn a new language

as they only speak english in general

in my case, Thai is/would be my 5th language ...

as where english is my 3rd...

any consideration ???

Well! Let's make a distinction between Thai being your 5th language and the notion that, in reality, you know a little bit of Thai and, presumably, a few sentences in some of those other languages that you are boasting about! I am a linguist and, even though most would consider me fully bilingual in 2 languages, I don't even consider myself so, but then I am really picky and consider most unilingual speakers unable to claim that they know their first language, especially English, which is one of the most illogical and backward languages around, but I digress (as this sentence is). Assuming you mean being somewhat conversant in those languages and Thai, knowing a little of Thai is nice, especially if you have been staying here for a while and are young, but what a pain and waste of anyone's time, especially when a good proportion of Thais know English (and learned it for many years more than most foreigners will ever be able to learn Thai) better than most foreigners know Thai and especially when research demonstrates without a shadow of a doubt that it is extremely hard to learn another language well, past puberty (especially the accent). So, forcing expats to learn Thai seems totally counter-productive. And is Thai or the thousands of dialects? And, why would I want to learn more than just a few sentences to get by, because honestly, assuming they are interested, talking philosophy in Thai is not on my TO-DO list anytime soon! Maybe more effort should be put in reducing class size, improving their pedagogy around teaching English, and changing the culture that makes learning a language (especially English) extremely hard. Not that I am blaming anyone here, as some of these impediments are obviously gigantic, if not impossible to tackle! Although we know that the well-off just send their children abroad as a way to bypass this, which is a clear indightement that the system is inadequate. But I digress again!

So, about the crackdown! I am afraid those immigration officers know very little about linguistics and should not be ruling so harshly on a situation which is contrived at best. As far as I know, there are no clear expectations set in the visa asking someone to become proficient in Thai. And, if so, where are the objective tests that would determine one's proficiency. And, anyway, what about the "Mai Pen Lai" attitude? Some day it is on; some day it is off? Come on! It was hinted in those fantastic commercials that everyone spoke English in Thailand! Can I get my money back?

And what is democratic about anything that would replace it?  Nothing.  Michael Moore is to the left what Rush is to the right.  An equally self promoting moron of about the same weight and dimensions.  We can only hope they cancel each other out.  Blob meets blob.

Perhaps Michael will visit North Korea and fail to return from his new found utopia.  Please.

M. Moore is an extremist, but for a very good reason: to every extreme action an extreme reaction is called for. He recognized --and rightly so-- that a soft, pleasant message is not going to get you very far nowadays. Some people need extreme views to make them aware of the situation, to wake them up from their boring daily routines. The path to deregulation that some trace back to Nixon and others to Reagan was the wrong path to take because unchecked and unbridled capitalism does not work. A classroom with no teacher is not going to work. Some of us need structure because they can create laws that allow them to do what they want. This type of free market capitalism, this laissez-faire has led to creating plutocracies where groups of man and women control much of the earth resources, services, and goods. It has created globalization where we transport goods from where there is the cheapest labour and goods to the richest countries (it used to be called colonialism, but it is easy to use euphemisms nowadays). The mass of people fed sport's and people's news on TV or on their Iphones to prevent them from knowing about what really matters is another factor capitalism has failed. Give them games, said the Romans, and we will rule over them. The Far West mentality works only for the rich and the powerful and you better be very rich and very powerful. The rest of us better keep a low profile. Now that some of the rich and the wealthy got taken for a ride by Maddoff and co., they are re-appraising their views. The system is crooked because it is now run by mostly crooks. It needs to be reformed. Too bad that we have many human beings so selfish that they can deny others the right to water, food, and shelter just because they want the biggest and the most expensive goods to feed their egos (and the women that love them), things they can get by buying shares of companies that will just do that. Of course, since they are not the ones actually doing it, it is not a crime and everyone goes back to their big home and condo with a happy face. BTW, let's not confuse real communism with despots (right and left) like the ones that roamed the USSR (Stalin,...) and Chile (Pinochet,...). BTW, you might have the right to say just about what you want in Western democracies, but since big corporations control just about anything, only a few will. How many times have you seen Chomsky being interviewed and hwo many times have you seen Cheney and Rumsfeld and Kissinger freely expressing their lies. It is about time the mass of people have a guy like Moore to state what so many could not say out loud. He might be a bit of an extremist, but was he left with any choice? So Capitalism is not evil per se. Unbridled capitalism is. "Unbridled capitalism is evil" is too big a title for people to read or editors to print, assuming they understand the word in the first place, of course.

Why don't you use a upholstery shop. I guess for 7'000 Baht they will build your seats like new and even part of door pannels with new velour. That's about the same price if you would buy seat covers. Upholstery shop does great jobs in this country andn ot expensive. Luuk much better than some ugly seatcovers.

Thanks for the advice, but I am looking to cover the seats so that the new ones don't get used up, so that when one resells the car, it looks nice and new! The original seats are fine and quite attractive, I would say!

My Senior Police contact at immigration is saying that they are tired of Farangs abusing the law and the kindness of the Thai Immigration Department.

There are new laws being planned at the moment that will black ban people that maliciously abuse the overstay laws.

Something about black banning (refusing entry) multiple offenders for a period of time!

Think about it!

BB

If the people deliberately overstay, ok, I can understand their frustration, but then the fine is good money, no?

Now, for the regular folks, let's be fair here! Since it is a fact that a 60 days visa is actually 59 and since 2 months is actually/usually 61 days long, perhaps it is time that Thailand (and other countries, I am sure) have laws that actually COMPLY with reality and logic! In other words, who is at fault here? Let's remember that laws are just laws made by human beings. Errare humanum est! To err is human and so are some laws! I wonder why these inaccuracies in the law exist and continue to exist. Is it because it is lucrative? Or is it because no one is stepping up to make changes? So, for those who believe that laws should be respected, I agree with you only if YOU agree that they should be followed if they make sense! It is clear that this law does not make sense!

Now, in all fairness, I read that custom officers waive the 1 day overstay (which is not really an overstay if it is one day, as ascertained earlier) if one leaves the country by air! It would be nice though if the law reflected a 61 days period not a 59 days period for a 60 days visa, just because this gives room for unscrupulous and/or righteous people the right to abuse people.

Why is leather too hot? My seats are leather, (real), and never feel hot or sweaty.

Thanks for the comment! Ok! Are they from a higher-end car? Is there some kind of build-in AC or ventilation system in them?

I have had leather seats and have found them to be really, really too hot to sit on initially after the sun had shone on it! I usually had to resort to using a towel to allow me to sit on them! The leather seats admittedly not from a luxury car and hence lower grade (thinner) leather) got a tear early on the side panel, BTW. I was told that the side panels were vinyl, actually! But, it is true that high-end leather seats will last longer, unless you protect or cover fabric seats, I think.

As far as sweat is concerned, higher end models do comes with leather seats that have small holes. I presume this was/is for comfort and sweat control! So, it the seats have those holes, things might be better for prolonged periods of time, although I think fabric is much better (but not as durable, hence the cover) for when one initially sits and, I think, even for prolonged amount of time, but one would need a leather seat and a fabric seat side by side to know, I suppose! I also think that luxury models have AC or direct ventilation build into the seats! Is that true? Still! It would sting if you sat on one after it has been exposed to the sun. So, as far as I am concerned, leather is not an option in hot climates, unless you have higher-end models and are willing to cover your seats with some kind of fabric to shield them from the sun before you sit on them. I will take the cheaper option (as I am not a millionaire) of buying a cheaper car and using covers on fabric seats.

Am I the only one (amongst foreigners) who think that these car cover seats are usually ugly, but more importantly an insult to my intelligence? Why do I need to advertise I am really a 12 years old when I am 4 times that age? Moreover, I need a back seat cover as well.

I have seen a few people resorting to using towels with some added cut and design and I am heading the same direction. The sport seats are not suitable for the car I have. Leather (IF it is genuine,... big IF) is too hot in LOS, so not an option either. And I am pretty sure the cartoon seats are polyester. So, is tere anyone who has any idea where I could find car seats that are decent looking?

Is there anyone who is using a towel, modifying to fit around the car seat?

Not sure if Honda has car seat covers and if they look better than the cartoon ones, which should not be too hard?

City is a bit more expensive than the Vios for most levels, but City has a few features that won me over: big trunk (for carrying customers' luggages), USB MP3 player hook up (versus the cumbersome alternatives (CDs), the blue is a richer, metallic blue (although I am 100% sure), more pockets and I like the umbrella holder down at the bottom of the rear seat (again for business and practicality). I also think the City has a full-sized spare tire. And, it looks like oil and filter change is REALLY the easiest thing one can do on the city, but more difficult on the Vios.

Since some people seem to be extremely "concerned" about following rules and being legal, let me flip things around, since the topic is overstay of one day.

Let's agree that one day is 24 hours. That is the intent of the rule. You can stay in Thailand 30 days or 60 days and that implies 30 X 24 hours. So, technically, they should respect their laws first, IMHO.

I had a case which highlights the problem very clearly since it is such an extreme case. I came to Thailand at night, landing at 11:30 p.m. Is 30 min. one day? Not in my books. Of course, it can be construed as being one day if one asks a lawyer! Sure, you land on Jan. 15, Jan. 15 is the day you start things. But, seriously,... one day is 24 hours, last time I went to school. If one day is not one day, then the rules should be changed to include HOURS of arrival. We are paying for 60 days, not 59 days! I would think that immigration officers and custom officers should be a bit more lenient and accommodating. This is Thailand after all! Right?

Could the kind people of Thailand and immigration rectify* the situation please?

* (from the Latin "make it right")

PS: I suppose other countries are probably using the same system that Thailand is using, ... in which case, maybe I should contact the Hague!

PPS: If one had been in LOS many times without overstaying and is caught overstaying for one day or two (meaning s/he has a ticket to fly the next day or so), I would think that the reputation of Thailand as a Land of Smile would be losing its shine a wee bit! Of course, there are some custom officers who are a bit dysfunctional in every country! I would think that custom officers in LOS would be smarter and wiser than that because I doubt that the tourist who has been caught in this situation will probably make the country lose 10 or 100 times more! Would that be smart?

One thing I would never recommend is pre-purchasing an airline ticket without the visa first being approved.

I have to agree with Bridge on this it is not recommended to buy the tickets before the visa is approved. I however used my frequent flyer miles and got the refundable ticket before applying.

It is true that you don't have to use the return ticket if you really wanted to stay abroad! What a pain this whole process is! If it was fully refundable, then I suppose that would be ok. I agree. Cannot hurt!

Yes, it would seem to me the key 'issue' is to provide evidence that your wife will return to Thailand, being married doesn't actually strengthen your case for a tourist visa.

Thanks for the info. You make some good points.

BUT, if you can demonstrate that you or her have no desire to stay abroad, then I think it should clarify things, rather than muddy things. If you have traveled abroad before and she did not overstay, then that would strengthen the case. Does she have an apartment with a lease in LOS? If she has a car or other possessions (the more significant the better, I suppose), that would be good. I would think that if she is making payments that would show that she has interest in staying in LOS. Who would be silly to let go of a car where the deposit was substantial? Why would anyone buy a car and not want to use it? Same for a condo, although it is easier to sublet those, I suppose. How are the visits to parents and relatives? Frequent? Images show this. Also, if you have some kind of agreement between whoever you are working with abroad to visit LOS (and have in the past), this might help as it shows that you will return (presumably with your wife)! I am sure that all single piece of evidence does not make a case (you are right), but the breadth and depth do. It is true that we do not know how these custom officers are going to react and how much they can process.

However a spouse visa may be easier to get now that you have been together for nearly 18months since your last application, a clear demonstration that your relationship is ongoing and more evidence that it is genuine.

Good Luck.

Thanks for your reply.

Got the good news today my Wifes family Visit Visa(6 month) was approved after applying on the 23rd September we got back today so nice and really quick turnaround after being told could take 4-6 weeks, I was a bit apprehensive after only 10 working days saying it could be collected that it could be bad news but over the moon at moment. Now my Wife can come to the Uk for Xmas for a change.

Brief History.

Met my now wife in 2005, We have rented out appartment in BKk since 2006,I have personally made 15 Visits since this date and got married only last month before applying. The Wife has no job but Studies at University(She is 26)(i am 35). I have full time job in UK in cinstruction i Live with relatives in UK and the Wife has No Children or Property.

Keeping all relavent Documents ie Money transfers, Phone Calls, MSN Messenger Chat is all important.

Also i done the Application my self after looking at thai-uk-visa.co.uk a good sensible self expanatory pack which made the visa application easy

Good Luck to all those still waiting.

Anyone need any advice fel free to message me.

Thanks for the post and congrats! It gives me some hope that my wife who is in a similar situation could be granted the visa! Did your wife get any letters or support from her family? What do you mean by money transfers?

hello all.

my wife would like to travel to australia for xmas to meet family & spend time together.

we have been married for 18 months now & i have spent a total of about 6 months with her in thailand on & off on a non o visa.

we applied for a tourist visa for her before we married in march 2008 & this was declined as we could not prove we had known each other long enough.after we married in march 2008 we then applied for a spouse visa wich was also denied,reason could not prove a genuine ongoing relationship.i have since collected every possible evidance of our relationship for the entire time we have know'n each other,over $4000.00 in western unions ,travelled to see her 4 times in 18 months & have all supporting documents.my question is, i have saved $4000.00 AUD in a trust account for my wife in australia, is this enough money to show for a tourist visa ? she has no savings in thailand apart from our joint kasikorn bank account about 5000 thb.when applying for the tourist visa should the funds be in this australian trust account or send it to her to show in thai bank account?

thanks to all those that can advise me about this topic.we will be applying for a 12month visa but will be happy to get three months

Doosyhindleg,

Much of what you are asking has been covered in countless posts many times before on these forums. Just do a search back.

With regards to anyone thinking of depositing funds into their GF/BF account the 'help' the application. I strongly advise against doind this. Please refer to my previous post on this topic that I posted several months ago:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=2521592

In order to be granted a tourist visa an applicant must be a 'genuine visitor', and also have adequate funds or access to adequate funds to support themselves for the purpose and duration of their proposed visit/stay in Australia. As to what funds are adequate, well that would depend upon many factors, such as: How long does that applicant want to remain in Australia (1,3,6,9 or 12 months)? Where will the applicant be staying, friends, hotel, traveling etc?. You can't put a dollar amount on it, as it really comes down to 'duration and purpose' of the proposed visit. Someone staying for 2 weeks with a friend would need less than someone staying for two week at a 5 star hotel.

Note, those funds can be provided by someone else. I would advise including an accompanying letter of support (invitation) outlining the support that you are prepared to offer, such as meals, accommodation, sightseeing, airfare etc. You must also include documentary evidence of your ability to provide that support, such as a letter of existing employment, bank statement, pay slip, lease or rates notice, last income tax assessment. It is one thing to say that you will provide the support, but DIAC needs actual proof that you can in fact actually provide the support offered.

Secondly a genuine visitor is someone who wants to visit Australia for tourist purposes only, will not work or study beyond what is permitted by their visa. Finally, that they will depart Australia prior to their visa expiring. Whether a person is deemed to be a 'genuine visitor' will depend upon a whole host of circumstances, and is mainly centered around whether circumstances exist that would encourage the applicant to return to their home country prior to the expiration of their visa. The list is not exhaustive, but can include such things as: on-going employment in that persons country, strong family ties in the applicants home country, land or significant ownership etc.

On a final note, and not to be a downer, but your partner will have a higher threshold to establish that she is a genuine visitor as she has previously applied for temporary residence which was refused.

Hope this has helped

Regards

bridge

Thanks for the detailed reply! It really helps!

My situation is a bit different since I own my condo outright and command a very good salary in my home country (work there for 6 months). The only significant expenses I have every month is the condo fee! BTW, I worked hard --and legally-- to get there! Anyway, I think that $1000 is a bit too much for me to leave in the hand of my GF (or anyone)! Of course, I trust her and all that, but one has to be careful with that amount of money! She would be stupid to blow it because she would blow many other future opportunities. In the 3 years we have known each other (apart or not) she has not strayed (and that is quite probable, although one never knows which stratagems one can use to evade scrutiny ). I did not have a GPS device on her so I cannot be 100% sure! And a lie detector test might not be too welcomed! Anyway, ... all food and expenses will be paid! I suppose $500 a month would be more than sufficient! I could put this money into her accounts! Could traveller cheques be used ... to pay for the wedding ceremony (see later) and bring photocopies for visa application? The thought here is that I would actually take the TC with me before she comes to re-unite with me! But what happens if the custom officers at the border knows about that! I don't know why she would even need that kind of money other than for the wedding expenses! She will have insurance that I will pay. Anyway,... is the money needed at her disposal to cover in case there is a break-up or something happens to me in my instance? Can I put this money into a trust or that defeats the purpose if the money cannot be accessed by her (and by her only)? The issue is that in the past she did use some of her money as soon as I had provided some money for a car deposit to renovate her parents place. She worked hard to bring this money back into the car deposit account, but this created some issue as I thought the expenses for the renos were a bit wild. Anyway, all is good because she does not owe anything to her parents now. I know this woman for 3 years and she has been mostly good with money and what she did was documented and nice for her family (and unselfish) since her sister will inherit some of most of the house. Anyway,... Some people have recommend that a ticket (return) be bought before (with I hope a clause to recover most of it should the visa not be accepted). I think that would be a good idea to show that she intends to leave. On the other hand, if she wanted to stay, she still could. For a migrant wanting to stay, that would be a small amount to pay. But, are those custom officers as smart as we think they are? Hopefully, they are, but knowing how people get jobs (connections), there is no guarantee! She is paying for a car at the moment. Is that good to include in the papers submitted? Is it a good idea to say that we would like to have the wedding ceremony during her stay? (We went through the whole process and the official way to the amphur to get married). We plan to have her visit for 3 months. He job cannot be guaranteed as the company is working somewhat illegally in Thailand! She is legal! The people working above her aren't! She is thinking of changing jobs to work for legitimate companies! What a pain when you come from a poor background! People have no idea how easy it is for people with money and parents with professional background!

BTW, this is for Canada. They do not have the same kind of visa as other countries. No marriage visa apps I have been able to locate!

I guess it is important she goes to deliver all those documents in person to BKK! I don't really trust those companies because what guarantees can they really give us. I guess the docs written in Thai be translated (you would think that they would have someone at the embassy who can read Thai. No?). No? If so, I guess it would be prudent that I check the translation, just in case.

Thanks for all the help!

I will look into it, but I have the feeling that I should go for the temporary visa option. Maybe requesting residency might confuse them. The $550 for residency (plus all translations) is not cheap compare to the $75 for a visa. Of course, there are some advantages, but I might lose my residency if I start staying in LOS for more than 6 months (not likely) and she might not be able to keep hers (as she is not likely to stay more than 5 months a year in Canada. She probably could work in Canada, but leaving after 5 months might not show well on a resume.

After carefully rereading the pages from the Canadian embassy on visas, it is quite clear that one needs to apply for a temporary resident visa if one is a Thai citizen! This is very complicated as the name implies that you want to be a resident! Very confusing!

The more I read about this, the more I get really angry! Who has created these names must have had his or her dad sponsor them to get that job! We know how fearful the Canadian government is about people staying in Canada while visiting Canada. Why, o why, do they call this temporary RESIDENT visa? If you got to Canada, you are a visitor, not a temporary resident. If they want you to be a resident, you better have all the right of residency. But, of course, you don't! You do have, of course, all the responsibilities. Anyway, I am not too sure how other countries call their visas, but Canada I think takes the cake for choosing inappropriate names, I think.

Thanks for all the help!

I will look into it, but I have the feeling that I should go for the temporary visa option. Maybe requesting residency might confuse them. The $550 for residency (plus all translations) is not cheap compare to the $75 for a visa. Of course, there are some advantages, but I might lose my residency if I start staying in LOS for more than 6 months (not likely) and she might not be able to keep hers (as she is not likely to stay more than 5 months a year in Canada. She probably could work in Canada, but leaving after 5 months might not show well on a resume.

After carefully rereading the pages from the Canadian embassy on visas, it is quite clear that one needs to apply for a temporary resident visa if one is a Thai citizen! This is very complicated as the name implies that you want to be a resident! Very confusing!

So, you are not married, correct?

Intend to go to what country? U.S.? UK? Oz? NZ? Canada? Other?

Mac

I am.

Canada.

Ah, this is what confused me: "We have not had any official ceremony in LOS or abroad."

From that I inferred that you had not "registered" a marriage at your local amphur.

Don't know about Canada but it's sometimes more difficult to get a tourist visa to the U.S. if you're married. The automatic assumption is that you're just trying to jump the queue and have your spouse "adjust status" when he/she gets to the States. The last time my wife got a 10-year tourist visa I was the one who was mainly interview, turned out to be pretty easy as my passport shows a good series of Thai retirement extensions here.

Canada, don't know, below from the Canadian Embassy Bangkok www site.

Mac

Canadian Embassy Bangkok visa page here:

http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/thail...id=3&menu=L

Non-Immigrat visa info here (not very informative it seems):

http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/thail...id=3&menu=L

Immigrant visa info here:

http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/thail...n.aspx?lang=eng

Note: The visa section of the Canadian Embassy in Bangkok does not accept applications for immigration to Canada. The application for permanent residence in Canada are processed by the Regional Processing Centre at the Canadian High Commission in Singapore:

CANADIAN HIGH COMMISSION

Immigration Section

Robinson Road,

P.O. Box 845

SINGAPORE 901645

Fax : (65) 325 3291

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thanks for all the help!

I will look into it, but I have the feeling that I should go for the temporary visa option. Maybe requesting residency might confuse them. The $550 for residency (plus all translations) is not cheap compare to the $75 for a visa. Of course, there are some advantages, but I might lose my residency if I start staying in LOS for more than 6 months (not likely) and she might not be able to keep hers (as she is not likely to stay more than 5 months a year in Canada. She probably could work in Canada, but leaving after 5 months might not show well on a resume.

To gain ILE the UK you must prove a relationship has been subsisting for 4 years or more etc.

And she has not passed the KOL requirement so a tourist visa is all that's required ?

Should this be a UK application please advise.

3.5 y. when she will set foot on Canadian soil, if she can! One would hope there is some leeway with this apparent rule, which, I would not be surprised, prevails in other countries, although I have read nothing of the sort!

Thanks.

So, you are not married, correct?

Intend to go to what country? U.S.? UK? Oz? NZ? Canada? Other?

Mac

I am.

Canada.