youreavinalaff

In a nutshell "No". Refer to my above post. I believe that to be your best option.

He doesn't actually say that. He says he has only 10 months deposits. He wants to use the combination method and add 200 000. That appears to mean he wants to add 200000 to bring him up to the 800k. So he has 600k in the bank? He can't do that anyway. Combination method would only work if he had 12 deposits but they were under 65k. He's coming on a 90 day visa. That would suggest a Non O.

Apply for a Non O in UK. Arrive in August. You will have a 90 day stay issued upon arrival. Make 2 more deposits, September and October, then apply. You will then have 12 deposits. Ignore any mention of Embassy letter. The British embassy no longer issue them.

@DrJack54 Here it is. The subject of Non O ME Retirement.

I have more than one 800k. I'd much rather stay legal. Once you've used an agent it is difficult, some would say impossible, to get back to dealing directly with immigration. Agent prices and the costs of bribing officials is only going to increase.

Sure. Anyone can ask for advice. Indeed, I gave advice. All my advice is based on personal experience and what I have heard from others. People ask for advice and others give it. It is a public forum after all.

Retirement "extension of stay". The easiest extension to get. Think of what else you could use the 20k baht on. Unless you are talking about the 12 month "visa" you got via an agent with no financials??? That means that you are actually breaking immigration law. The agent is paying to circumnavigate the rules. I'm not going to come on here and ask you about your financial situation but it would be far easier and better for you for the future to put 800k in a Thai bank and do things by yourself and by the book.

No need for an agent. Embrace what you are being shown here, instead of trying to ridicule it, and you will have more than enough knowledge to do things yourself. That's how I learnt. By reading, listening and digesting info from those that know.

That, however, would not be a long stay visa. It would require leaving the Kingdom every 90 days.

With the fact that different immigration offices work in different ways taken into consideration, I have to say that my experience says it is possible.

Muddying the waters, I'm afraid. You are incorrect on all counts.

I was referring to the post asking about applying for a Non O 90 day VISA. No need to sigh. What I said was correct.

You always need to give a reason on the application for a visa. In the case of a Non O it would be; marriage to a Thai, bring the father of a child in Thailand or being over 50. If you are in Thailand on an O based on being over 50 and you get a job offer, immigration will be able to cancel your extension and issue a new one based on work. You'll need all the correct documentation, which varies among different offices. You'll need to speak to your local immigration office to see how they want to go through the process.

Extensions of stay based on retirement are all done and agreed at local immigration level. Those for marriage or being the parent of a child are sent to regional headquarters for approval. Much more difficult to pay a bribe in the case of missing documents. Also, the documentation for retirement extensions is relatively easy when compared to that of other types of extensions.

If you are putting money in the bank for a visa you need to visit a consulate outside of Thailand. In some cases you may be able to go to immigration to convert a visa exempt or tourist visa to a Non O visa. You cannot "renew" a visa. If you are within Thailand and are putting money in the bank to visit immigration and get permission to extend your stay, you are not getting a visa or "renewing" a visa. Those that call things by the wrong name and use the incorrect terminology are those that end up in a bit of a mess and confusion. No such thing as a "family" visa. Visas are Non O, Non B, Non Ed, Non OA and Tourist. I've forgotten the class for volunteering. Sorry.

Please remember. This thread is not about visas. It's about extension of permission to stay in the kingdom. You your point. Yes, regional head offices gave to rubber stamp applications for an extension based on having a child. As pointed out by Litebeer several posts ago.

Funds for an extension based on having a child do not need to be seasoned. So long as the funds are there on day of application the permission of stay should be granted. I say "should" as even son immigration officials are not aware of this rule. Be armed with the number if immigration helpline just in case.

Yes. Good point. Particularly since they changed to process to work permit BEFORE extension. The situations I have seen have been successful. Most labour offices will be understanding of this technicality.

If you entered the Kingdom with a Non Immigrant O visa, you can extend or obtain permission to stay by way of work, with the correct documentation. I know you can as I have done it.

People need to stop thinking about differences between O and B. They are both Non Immigrant visas. Changes of permission to stay can all be done at immigration. Marriage to retirement, retirement to work, work to marriage and all vice versa. All done at immigration. No need to obtain a new visa.

I think you should have stopped there.

Thanks. Now we know you are making assumptions. Not even worth talking about.

You must frequent some quite deplorable places if that is what you experience. I have to say, I can't remember the last time I experienced such a scene. If I had, I would have turned around and left. I don’t need the risk of getting a virus to tell me those are not the sort of places to go to. It would be easy to create different rules for different establishments. That said, from a few posts on here, many places are not adhering anyway.

The OP was in a restaurant with his daughter. Not a drunk or some pisshead out on the lash. I agree with him. A casual beer with lunch can do no harm. The drunks are more likely to be sat behind a mom and pop shop getting lashed on cheaper beer.

So, you've changed the story. First you said one needed a teaching licence to teach. Then you changed to teaching licence OR waiver. My point was not false information. You do not need a teaching licence to teach. A waiver is sufficient.