Mattd

The OP doesn't state the reason for moving to Thailand, if it is for work purposes and a work permit, has, or will be issued for at least a 12 month period, then he would be allowed to import one of the items duty free, so long as the work permit and a 12 month extension of stay are in place when the container arrives here for clearance.

Though, as stated by other members, it would be hardly worth it, unless the monitors / speakers are something special.

As per Keeniau96, bring the Mac with you on the flight and check the prices of the rest to buy here, Invade IT, Lazada etc. are good places to start.

1 minute ago, KhunBENQ said:

Also you do her a favor as she would have to leave the plane and wander around/spent almost 8 hours (!) in this boring overpriced air site area.

+1 As a transit airport BKK is terrible, for a 80 year old it really will be a horrible experience.

1 minute ago, qualtrough said:

Pardon me, but that thread is 160+ pages long. I didn't see an answer to any of the questions I raised in the first 15 pages and rather than wade through the remaining 150 pages I was hoping that someone with knowledge experience dealing with these three requirements might be kind enough to respond.

 

BTW, I am serious, having visited the office. 

I understand your point, however, all of your questions so far are answered in the thread and loads more. Compared to the time the application will take in total, skipping through the thread is nothing and it will save you a lot of time in the end, so many lessons learned and experience shared in there, honestly, take the time, it will be worth it.

I strongly recommend that if you are serious about applying then take the time to read through the link Samran posted, it will be time well spent, nearly every possible question you can think of will have been asked and answered in this thread and it is monitored by those that have successfully applied in the past, plus those currently in the application process.

15 hours ago, grollies said:

Manchester airport.

Shame that she is arriving in to Bangkok then!

Just now, lopburi3 said:

10 minutes ago could not even reply to thread and yes indeed it was slow.  Now seems good again so guess server got another kickstart?

Thinks so, as suddenly OK again, for now...........

33 minutes ago, Tech Doctor said:

Server was rebooted and all db connections cleared, quite fast here now.

 

TD

Improved a lot for a while, seems to be slowing down again now though.

13 hours ago, cyberfarang said:

Thanks. Posting on TV was worth a shot in case someone had a similar experience and could tell me 100%.

 

Don`t fancy flying to Bangkok from Chiang Mai on a wasted trip. Think it`s probably best that I contact the Bangkok immigration at the airport directly and ask them.

There is nowhere that she can meet you whilst she is international air side and not cleared in to the country, it is not possible for transiting passengers to mix with domestic passengers, the only way that you could meet with her is for her to pass through immigration and customs, then you could meet somewhere. She would need to allow say 2 - 3 hours of the 8 hours for immigration etc. to be safe, if you think it is worth flying to see her for 5 hours, then it might be worth her while, personally, I can't imagine a worse airport to spend 8 hours in transit than BKK!

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

Not on my computer.....

 

It started off well, but earlier than normal went into 'go (VERY) slow' mode again.....

Same here.

8 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

I agree the airline should show due diligence but check in clerks are human beinings and subject to making miistakes. Hence if the airline or one of its employees or agents allows the passenger to fly when they have recieved a deny boarding code, the airline is responsible.

So, what you are saying is that it is possible for the APIS system to issue a deny boarding code and the airline somehow still allow the passenger to board and fly?

So the system isn't automated then?

A mere mortal like me would have thought that the whole process would be automated, i.e. if a deny boarding code is in the system, then it would not be possible (or at least simple) for the system to issue a boarding pass. 

1 hour ago, 007 RED said:

Sorry Tim... The airline is only responsible when they have allowed a passenger to fly after receiving a 'Refuse Boarding Code' through the Advance Passenger Information System.

This cannot be right by default, if the airline received a 'refuse boarding code', then surely that is exactly what they would do?

In reality, the airline has to carry out due diligence of all boarding passengers, i.e. visa or no visa, if no visa, onward ticket, etc. etc. and if Thai immigration can show that the airline did not carry this out with diligence, then they would make them liable to fly the person back.

5 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

That is pure supposition and nothing more.

The cabinet is the only entity that can declare additional holidays and that has not happened.

Whilst this is 100% correct, I do also think that those outside of main catchment areas such as Bangkok, Chonburi, Phuket etc. would be wise to allow a little more time, although they may not actually close the immigration office outposts, there is a possibility of staff shortages if a larger than normal percentage of staff take annual leave to go to Bangkok to pay their respects.

It doesn't harm to be prepared.

7 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

One idea, in case she cannot raise the additional 20k THB needed, was that she leaves to a neighboring country where she can teach English to earn money for her flight.

And how exactly does she manage to depart to a neighbouring Country without paying the 20k overstay to get out of Thailand, plus of course, as she will then be banned, she cannot re-enter Thailand and flights to African countries from Laos, Cambodia etc. are pretty scarce.

On 29/09/2017 at 2:00 PM, sandyf said:

Any chance you can come up with some way to disable Skype from Outlook, that is more of a headache.

According to this link, then it isn't possible to do this!

https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA34705/how-do-i-turn-off-skype-in-outlook-com

Quoted from this page 

Skype is fully integrated with Outlook.com and cannot be turned off. We have received customer feedback that people would like the ability to turn off Skype and we’re working on adding this feature – watch this space.

1 minute ago, lopburi3 said:

Not good anymore.  Just wait until 1000 and it seem to go to crap every day and today is no different

Yep, same here and seems to get slower and slower as the day progresses, then around 16.30 odd speeds up again.

59 minutes ago, sinbin said:

No I haven't, but I've also never found anything that states a farang can be a POA to a, let's say in this case, a Thai wife who is medically incapacitated. I looked at your link. Not much use really.

It may well be that a farang may be able to get POA but it's strange that there's nothing even remotely suggesting it's allowable. I'm open to correction.

I have had POA for several things in a work situation, whereby the board of directors have issued me with a POA to carry out something on their behalf, I don't see where it would differ in civilian life, so long as the person being given the POA is legally allowed to be here.

POA's in the situation you describe are known a living wills in Thailand and governed by the Thailand National Health Care Act 2007

8 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

And should leaving to Cambodia or Laos still be an option

Plus so far she hasn't raised enough money to even pay her overstay fine here, let alone survive anywhere but her home country.

I do not use Hotmail (Outlook) as personal email, however, found this link which seems to explain how to alter the way it handles attachments.

https://uit.stanford.edu/service/office365/online-and-onedrive/disable

1 hour ago, steve187 said:

someone who was not making full use of the 30 + 30 days could require more to stay full time.

I suppose this could happen if they were to use just a few days of the extension each time, in which case they are not really staying full time, far better off getting a visa of some type.

1 minute ago, chrisinth said:

I don't think 6 exemptions in a year is correct. It is 6 records that are in their computer system, not necessarily back-to-back to trigger the alert.

The OP asked the question 'maximum extensions in a year' as he was seemingly refused an extension due to 6 previous extensions, I was just pointing out that 6 extensions would be the maximum you could get in a 12 months period. 

1. I do not see why not and as early as she possibly can, basically as soon as Kenyan open check in.

2. There should be no problem at check in or at security checks, they will have seen ETD's before.

3. She will go to the immigration desk and will then be escorted to the overstay desk, where they will process her.

4. Once through immigration, then why not.

5. She will be in transit at NBO, so again, this should not be an issue.

1 minute ago, Aditi Sharma said:

It would be naive on The Girl's part to assume that they will pay. Assuming she has 20k baht, she will have to make sure their procedure does not take too long or else she would miss the Kenya Airways flight departing 00.35 hrs. It would not be the responsibility of the immigration department to ensure that she does not miss the flight because of the time taken by their process. I am sure they will be run off their feat by her overstay status. I remember only once my flight was delayed by two passengers who had already checked in at the airport but not boarded and the airline said they were obliged to wait for them. 

I totally agree in the OP's case, as she is not being deported in the true sense of the word, my point was more leaned towards those who are arrested and then deported, the advisory from ICAO does also state that States should adopt, rather than must, so it is a grey area.

Most Countries that are deporting somebody do arrange it, as they want the person gone, the UK for example, even goes to the length of chartering aircraft to send illegals back to where they come from, in the end, it is cheaper than keeping them in detention for an extended period. 

Regarding airlines being obliged to wait for late passengers, that is not correct at all, most airlines will attempt to locate the missing passenger(s) for a certain period of time after the scheduled departure, then if the passenger(s) have checked baggage in the hold, this will be located and removed, once that decision has been made by the Captain, then the passenger(s) will be refused boarding, I've been on several flights where this has happened.

This kind of thing costs airlines a lot of cash, miss a slot time at Heathrow for example and the plane could be delayed hours, waiting for a new slot time that not only gets them out of LHR, but also slots them all the way to their destination.

1 hour ago, BritTim said:

No. Under international law, only the national airline of the country where the deportee has residence can be forced to carry someone being deported.

Where is this actually written?

Under ICAO regulations, then it is perfectly possible for an airline other than the National airline to fly a deportee, annex 9 clearly states that the carrying airline will not be penalised should the deportee be refused entry in to the destination or transit state.

Granted it would be best practice to deport somebody on an airline that is flying directly to the destination country, which in this case, is not possible.

Interestingly, it does also state the following:

States should adopt as best practice the following ICAO Annex 9 standard 10, which reads:

”Contracting States removing deportees from their territories shall assume all obligations, responsibilities and costs associated with the removal.”

Which technically means, if Thailand chooses to deport a person, then Thailand is liable, as a member (contracting State) of the UN!

They will simply 'never learn their lesson' this driver, like 95% of them, has absolutely no idea that he / she is doing anything wrong or dangerous, the only thing in their mind is themselves and the fact they they need to go from A to B.

The total disregard for others on the road extends to most things, it seems that the word selfish was invented for here!

Education won't change this I'm afraid.

Yep, back to slow as dogs again, pages taking ages to load, notifications even longer and bad gateways.