theoldgit

What about the extention to Bang Na, any idea when that is due to be completed?

That makes sense, and for that reason it will never happen.

Or this one that searches a number of websites and gives you the cheapest supplier, sometimes.

http://www.dohop.com/

500 what? Dollars or Baht?

So if I renew my passport on a trip to The UK, because it's far cheaper to do so, I can use the extension of stay and re-entry permit in my old passport to get back in.

I then get an Immigration Office to transfer the extension and re-entry permit, or do I wait until the next extension?

I think you will be fine, I have travelled Gulf a few times and there was a good passenger mix, families and single travellers, male and female, never any problems.

There is usually quite a short stop in Abu Dhabi, except for my last flight which went from 90 mins to six hours on the way back to Bangkok as the plane went tech. Have normally flown in some old bone shakers, but the service was fine, but I think they are introducing a newer fleet.

I would certainly use them again.

Yes very true,i had to cut the rental prices of my condos by 50pcent to get tenants which luckilly i have,better something then nothing

Clearly you are not Thai otherwise you would have put up the price to cover your losses.

Hope you can find a tennant at an acceptable price soon.

http://www.kasikornbank.com/portal/site/KB...00056f8f30aRCRD

Your statement should also say how many Baht have been withdrawn.

I see that Qatar are doing flights to some European destinations for 17,000 Baht ++, making them about 27,000.

Limited availability, but pretty good if you want to go next month.

So that means that a can of Chang will have a the excise element raised by 1.65 Baht, assuming the excise element is then subject to VAT, I'm not sure, the increase will 1.76 Baht, so to allow an extra bit of profit for the shopkeepers trouble the price increase should be 2 Baht on a small can, anything more is an attempt at blatant profiteering - which will be forgotten in a week or so.

I see from the above post, and confirmed in today's Bangkok Post, that the government are looking at increasing the duty on cigarettes, but wait a minute some shopkeepers have raised their prices already, what's that all about?

Good luck to both of you, when you give all the details make sure you point the ECO to points you are making perhaps with a summary, he or she doesn't have a lot of time to look at the application so just ensure they understand the case you are making, leaving no room for doubt.

Again good luck.

My local Big C are still selling cans of Chang at 20 Baht, but you are limited to six cans, as you are with all the beers at the old price.

I wonder if there is a tax increase on wine which is already taxed at a prohibitively high price.

Unless you already have an account with them I thought that you have to it in person and supply them with proof of your identification and UK address. Have a look at their web site though as it indicates that you can transfer your banking to them by printing off a couple of forms and posting it to them, you might be able to open an account in any case, I'm not to sure.

The good news is that once you have a HBOS account you can do International Transfers via their web site for £9.50.

To me it sounds far too expensive, they can only help the applicant fill in the form, though no doubt they are experienced in doing this, they are no part of the process whatsoever. They will be experienced in what is required to convince the ECO that it is a valid application and that the applicant is likely to conform to the visa requirements and return, but there is no more chance of getting a visa by using an OISC agent than there is by doing yourself.

If you are absolutely sure that you need to use an agent then yes you are better using one that is registered with OISC, but if you address the reasons for the previous refusal there is absolutely no need to waste 20,000 Baht, not an insignificant amount.

As Kennkate has indicated you would be better posting the reasons for the refusal on this forum and you will get some good advice, though you will need to sort the chaff from the wheat.

We need to be a bit careful with our assumption's, I said there might be an issue for the OP to discuss with the Embassy IF his wife had been to the UK with him, as far as I can make out he has never said that she had a UK visa before.

Sat_dish.html

Last year they didn't even sell booze in a couple of supermarkets I went to.

Err, may I have a reply please or are you content to just witter on? ???

You clearly stated that immigration officers took advantage of the complexity of ' Immigration Law ' and milked the system for years as a consequence. I asked you how.

You see, I was under the seemingly mistaken apprehension immigration officers were discharging their duties under legislative powers etc., and I thought fit to mention it since you clearly raised an alternative modus operandi. Perhaps it was simply clumsy expression on your part for you now seem to be suggesting that officers were milking the system by working long hours and expecting to be paid for that. Never suggested for one moment that IO's shouldn't be well paid for their skills, but you probably know as well as I that many IO's work more Sundays than absolutely necessary to increase their premium payments and subsequently their pensions, and you cannot say in all honesty that it never happened, and I am not just talking about ports.

Well fancy that, actually expecting to be paid for work done? Pshaw! Whatever next? And actually having a pension based upon the fruits of one's labour?? Chaps obviously need a dam-n good kicking. Yes they should be paid for the work that is required to meet the needs of the business, not just to increase the value of their pensions.

Interesting that you consider the Civil Service to be staffed by monkeys. I think you are confused again, 7by7 indicated that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys, he did not say and neither did I that the Home Office or any of it's agencies is staffed by monkeys, if you know different pray tell. In the meantime I will say again that I believe there are a many good staff working in The Home Office and it's agencies.

As I already explained, You didn't really explain, you gave everyone your view. the current malaise has been caused by an increasingly inept higher management structure born out of cronyism serving a miserable party tell us more with no understanding of how government works. Those who could justly be accused of milking the system are the grotesquely over promoted sycophants who consequently retired on inflated fat pensions and then through their network of cronies return to the same work but as alleged consultants.

I have had enough of this thread, I will leave you to wallow in your bitterness

Take care

Sorry about the red replies, I am not very computer savvy.

Soi Sauce

Really sorry to hear about your problem, if your wife had a visa with you as a sponsor did you advise the staff at the embassy that the relationship was no more?

Of course if the new guy was sponsoring her she wouldn't need to show her bank books, he just needs to proof of his ability to sponsor her trip, they would have needed to convince the embassy that they had a long term relationship, and maybe they had one. Of course owning property can be seen as a reason to return, was the house you built in her name?

I think that you need to talk to someone at the embassy, if you haven't already done so, if you think the visa might have been fraudulently obtained, though as it's her visa they might listen but not say what they are going to do.

In the meantime you need to seek legal advice to protect your own interests.

Good luck

I usually stop if I am not sure, then wait for the person to flash his headlights and hoot me.

This had me spitting my coffee at the PC screen! :-) Obviously a woman driver

FWIW there are a whole multitude of signs like the blue one posted on this thread that say Turn Left With Care, others that say Turn Left Always and others that say wait for signal light here before turning. If there is no sign one must wait for the signal. The signs are nearly always in Thai, some times hand painted makeshift signs so you got to learn to read Thai.

I may act like an old woman sometimes but I am not.

In my country where there is a red light and no filter sign I usually stop, especially where there is a policemand there - am I doing something really bad?

^^^^^^^^ In a nut shell

I could list DOZENS or nonsensical road markings and signs - all of which contribute in no small way the the number of incidents and deaths on Thai roads.

Yes, and give ample opportunity for the BIB to issues on the spot fines, or should I say demands for money.

Not sure what you mean by that. My understanding of the system is that the Immigration Service, an integral component of the Immigration and Nationality Department, part of the Home Office, was charged with enforcing the Immigration Rules dictated by the Immigration Act 1971, as amended,within policy guidelines framed by government strategy and case law. Any decision could, in the main, be challenged either administratively or by recourse to the Divisional Court.

True but not really relevant

How did these immigration officers ' milk the system ' for years ?

By ensuring that they always maximise their earnings by being on duty for the maxim amount of time that attracts premium payments, especially during the last year to ensure their pensions are paid at the highest possible rate. As I said this is what IO's have told me, that was the system and I am not, or have never suggested any impropriety.

I don't wish to, nor will I, get into a public slanging match on this forum, but my view remains that there a many good staff working for UKBA, warranted and non-warranted, and as I have said before mistakes are made and when they are it affects peoples lives.

The UKBA have been subjected to years and years of "efficiency savings" what you and I would call "budget cuts", staff jobs have been cut and at the same time the workload has increased dramatically. There are many good and caring staff employed by the UKBA, but like many large organisations they have their fair share of tos*ers, well probably more than their fair share to be honest. With all the efficiency savings you might ask where the increased visa application fees are going.

They do make mistakes, who doesn't, the problem is that their mistakes can either ruin someones life or allow someone to stay in the UK who clearly shouldn't be there, and yes, these mistakes shouldn't happen.

Just my two satangs worth.

Utter and complete rubbish.

The UKBA, previously UK BIA, previously UKIS, was swamped with money at the end of the comprehensive spending review, started by the Tories in 1997 and concluded in 2000, when the Labour government finally realised that the car accident known as bogus asylum claims had torn a gaping wound in the 1971 Immigration Act and it had to address what other countries had understood years previously i.e.that to do nothing was simply not an option.

The upshot was an exponential increase in staff, budget and investment in technology. Unfortunately, the then management structure, whilst being wise to immigration issues, was unused to management of capital projects and into the vacuum a host of fellow travelling opportunist deadbeat civil servants and ' consultants ' flooded, eager to advance their own careers and agenda which were guaranteed by a Minister, Liam Byrne, so anally retentive that Brown actually thought the prick was talented.

And what has this influx, derived from such august organisations as the DWP, Prison Service and Birmingham City Council, achieved? A simpleton organisation staffed by shiney arsed clerks supervised by superannuated self serving managers chosen out of social need, cronyism and nepotism, rather than anything approximating to talent or experience, who have constructed a bureaucracy in which the only imperative is to ensure ' all the boxes are ticked ', as if anything so complex as immigration law could be

condensed to something as simplistic as that.

Nothing new in this in civil service terms but the extent of corruption, graft and sheer abuse of public funds by a Labour government is.

Never in 30 years of employment as a civil servant in 4 departments have I ever encountered such malfeasance as that perpetrated by this wretched Labour government. What is even more dispiriting is observing the utter rubbish, unemployable practically anywhere else in the world, posing as public servants who are currently benefiting from their patronage.

Shooting one in ten could only be a start.

That of course is your view, but I stand by what I said.

Yes UKBA, in all it's previous guises, received a large tranche of cash in the Comprehensive Spending Reviews, a lot of this was to pay for the caseworkers and other staff recruited following the computerisation fiasco.

It is a fact, and if you are, or have been involved you will know it's a fact, that there have been numerous overall cuts in recent years in many departments, enforcement for one.

I also stick with my view that there are some very good staff, but that mistakes are made.

The other comments you make may or not be true, I clearly don't have your vast knowledge, but that doesn't make my comments rubbish.

I agree that Immigration Law is complex and Immigration Officers have taken advantage of that, I know many Immigration Officers and some have admitted to me that they have milked the system for years.

just e mailed truevisions and the e mail was returned undelivered from

[email protected].

Happened to me yesterday, I suspect their mailbox is full.