Non-O marriage visa 90 day admission, what to do?

[doomslayerxyz]

Hi,

I have a multiple entry non O visa based on marriage that’s valid until November

I was supposed to go outside the country every 90 days which is up soon (admitted until may 6). What is the situation right now with COVID and what should I do?
 

Also last time I got in they said that I need to get on the wife’s tabien baan. But I still haven’t done it. Is that a big issue?
 

Thank you so much for your help,

[jackdd]

They will probably extend the automatic visa extension, this would mean you have to do nothing: https://immigration.go.th/content/visa_auto_extension

 

1 hour ago, doomslayerxyz said:

Also last time I got in they said that I need to get on the wife’s tabien baan. But I still haven’t done it. Is that a big issue?

Who told you this? If you are on your wife's tabien baan (no need to start a discussion about difference between blue and yellow book, this would take this thread offtopic) or not, is irrelevant.

 

[doomslayerxyz]

3 minutes ago, jackdd said:

They will probably extend the automatic visa extension, this would mean you have to do nothing: https://immigration.go.th/content/visa_auto_extension

 

Who told you this? If you are on your wife's tabien baan (no need to start a discussion about difference between blue and yellow book, this would take this thread offtopic) or not, is irrelevant.

 

Immigration officer told us that at immigration control. I don’t know if he was right, wrong, looking for a bribe etc. That’s what he told us

[Maestro]

Is it possible that you misunderstood the immigration official? If anything, he might have asked for a copy of the house registration book in which your wife is listed.

[jackdd]

29 minutes ago, doomslayerxyz said:

Immigration officer told us that at immigration control.

With "immigration control" you mean when you entered the country?

[doomslayerxyz]

17 minutes ago, Maestro said:

Is it possible that you misunderstood the immigration official? If anything, he might have asked for a copy of the house registration book in which your wife is listed.

My wife talked with him in Thai but I suppose anything is possible. Maybe she misunderstood. He held me a long time, 5-10 min so it was a bit odd

 

13 minutes ago, jackdd said:

With "immigration control" you mean when you entered the country?

Yes, re-entering the country after the first 90 days of the visa

[KhaoYai]

Over the years I've entered many times on a Multi Non O - last was 4 March. Never once have I been asked to 'get on my wife's tabien baan'. As far as I know this is not in the rules and in any case, you cannot be recorded on your wife's tabien baan.

 

Either the I.O. was wrong or you misunderstood.

[JackThompson]

8 hours ago, doomslayerxyz said:

My wife talked with him in Thai but I suppose anything is possible. Maybe she misunderstood. He held me a long time, 5-10 min so it was a bit odd

 

Yes, re-entering the country after the first 90 days of the visa

 

We have seen what has happened to tourist-visa victims in Bangkok airports - denied entry based on lies, to spite following the laws on the books to the letter.  It should be no surprise if they begin treating those of us on Non-O-ME Visas similarly to the hated "too frequent-visitor" tourists, whom they fear might also "put down roots" here (like us).

 

For precisely this reason, I carry signed copies of wife's house-book, our wedding certificate, and an original Kor-Ror-2 on all trips, and even when traveling within Bangkok.  I also carry the last receipts of payment for any extension or visa currently active.  Beginning last May, when I started working here, I began carrying my work-permit, as well - which quickly shuts down the "what are you doing here" line of questioning.

 

This documentation is helpful to end interrogations with both corrupt immigration officers, and cash-payoff-fishing regular police during "random stops" (while walking and "checkpoints").  The lowest-hanging fruit is targeted, so the goal is to make oneself "more trouble than it's worth" to the bully - so they will pick on someone else.  It is a version of the same technique used with pickpockets, burglars, border-zone touts, etc - don't be the easy-target, and they won't bother you (as much). 

 

[doomslayerxyz]

12 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

Over the years I've entered many times on a Multi Non O - last was 4 March. Never once have I been asked to 'get on my wife's tabien baan'. As far as I know this is not in the rules and in any case, you cannot be recorded on your wife's tabien baan.

 

Either the I.O. was wrong or you misunderstood.

Thanks, that's good news, means I don't need to do anything else.

 

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

 

We have seen what has happened to tourist-visa victims in Bangkok airports - denied entry based on lies, to spite following the laws on the books to the letter.  It should be no surprise if they begin treating those of us on Non-O-ME Visas similarly to the hated "too frequent-visitor" tourists, whom they fear might also "put down roots" here (like us).

 

For precisely this reason, I carry signed copies of wife's house-book, our wedding certificate, and an original Kor-Ror-2 on all trips, and even when traveling within Bangkok.  I also carry the last receipts of payment for any extension or visa currently active.  Beginning last May, when I started working here, I began carrying my work-permit, as well - which quickly shuts down the "what are you doing here" line of questioning.

 

This documentation is helpful to end interrogations with both corrupt immigration officers, and cash-payoff-fishing regular police during "random stops" (while walking and "checkpoints").  The lowest-hanging fruit is targeted, so the goal is to make oneself "more trouble than it's worth" to the bully - so they will pick on someone else.  It is a version of the same technique used with pickpockets, burglars, border-zone touts, etc - don't be the easy-target, and they won't bother you (as much). 

 

Honestly, I usually don't believe in this stuff, but I do think that's along the lines of what was happening. He had a hostile demeanor, questioning me (what do you do here, etc) and then maybe he was testing the waters with my wife to see if he could get something. Probably a good idea to take all documents with me whenever going on a trip, thanks.

[KhaoYai]

5 hours ago, JackThompson said:

It should be no surprise if they begin treating those of us on Non-O-ME Visas similarly to the hated "too frequent-visitor" tourists, whom they fear might also "put down roots" here (like us).

If indeed this has happened - one possibility is that they are getting pee-d off with people using Multi Non O's as a way of not having 400,000 in the bank for an extension.  As I'm sure you know, there's nothing illegal about it but a Multi Non O is not intended to be a way of living in Thailand.

 

Those of us who use a multi non o as it is intended are now finding them more difficult to obtain - I can no longer get a 12 month Multi in London for example.  I'd like to think that's due to an oversight when they introduced E-Visa but it could also be a gradual phasing out of Multi Non O's due to abuse.

[JackThompson]

58 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

If indeed this has happened - one possibility is that they are getting pee-d off with people using Multi Non O's as a way of not having 400,000 in the bank for an extension.  As I'm sure you know, there's nothing illegal about it but a Multi Non O is not intended to be a way of living in Thailand.

If they want to legally-define "living here" and specify "time out before return" or "maximum time per year" - they are free to do so, as THEY write the rules - not us.  Their superiors have not cooperated in this effort, so they ignore the laws/rules and make up their own - even when this contradicts the law.

 

58 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

Those of us who use a multi non o as it is intended are now finding them more difficult to obtain - I can no longer get a 12 month Multi in London for example.  I'd like to think that's due to an oversight when they introduced E-Visa but it could also be a gradual phasing out of Multi Non O's due to abuse.

They are phasing them out because they allow foreigners to stay and support their Thai families w/o paying tribute to immigration via agents.   I have attempted to apply for a 1-year non-o extension at 3 different offices, in 3 different parts of the country.  Denied each time, to spite fully qualifying "by the published rules."

• Office #1 Jomtien - landlord docs "Get your Thai landlord (who lives in Europe) to go to an amphoe for a newer house book copy than this one." Denied.
• Office #2 Wife's home-province.  "Your proven income from international transfers matching 'under penalty of felony-perjury' embassy-letter is not from a state-pension source."  Denied.
• Office #3 CW - "Yes, you have a work-permit and income proven in your certified bank-letter which matches your certified employment-contract, plus copies of all your work-permit paperwork (tax, ss, dbd, etc) ... (scowls and visibly-fumes at my agent-free, 100% legal passport-stamps some more - tells wife I am a lawbreaker in Thai) ... we want your employer to fish up all the original documents for the work permit again, from multiple govt-offices."

Clearly, they have no intention of allowing me, and many others, to "do the right thing."  What they want, is the Wrong thing - an agent-envelope application.  The going-rate for a non-o extension based on marriage in Bangkok is 35K Baht (only "law firms" do them) (Jomtien agents 25K).  Use an agent, and immigration are very happy with "Abuse"  - saw several <5-min agent-extensions processed between official-queue numbers.

 

Bad Guys are Welcome. Retirees tolerated.  Those supporting a Thai family (but not the IOs golden-ticket fund) are singled-out for the most harsh treatment of all.

[KhaoYai]

Sounds like you've been badly treated Jack Thompson but I suspect you know why. Seems the only way to get things done is via brown envelopes. I have that battle to come and I know I'll most likely come a cropper but I'll take it all the way.

[JackThompson]

14 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

Sounds like you've been badly treated Jack Thompson but I suspect you know why. Seems the only way to get things done is via brown envelopes. I have that battle to come and I know I'll most likely come a cropper but I'll take it all the way.

Or - use visas from the more-honest Ministry of Foreign affairs.  That is what I have done each time I was blocked by Immigration's "undocumented requirement" blocks of extensions (and my initial Non-O Visa "change of status" application). 

 

And, it looks like I will be doing it again.  It seems paying me on-the-clock for my visa-run days is more efficient for the company than dealing with immigration -  tying up accounting and other management personnel with this never-ending "another document" nonsense. 

 

They did the work-permit routine no problem - but that was with the labor-dept, where you supply a finite/known list of documentation, and it's done.  The goalposts don't move arbitrarily with each application-attempt at the labor-dept.  The company are as fed-up with immigration's corruption as I am.

 

Working is 100% legal on a Non-O entry based on marriage (the labor-dept is OK with it), so it works for me.  Keeping my wife out of immigration's cruel-clutches is well worth getting paid to sit on a bus for a day every 3 mo.

[KhaoYai]

One thing that disappointed me when the TM30 fiasco came to a head and a meeting between expat groups and Thai immigration came about, was that for whatever reason, a liason group was not set up which could have dealt with future issues.

 

Its absolutely ridiculous that individual Immigration offices can make their own rules up and refuse perfectly legitimate visa applications.  No doubt those in charge would deny that such things go on but if they could be shown they do, in public - they'd have nowhere to go.

 

The lawyer I use has taken my local Immigration office to court (twice I believe) and won - seems crazy that the courts have to step in when immigration flouts the rules - I would have thought that such bodies would have their own methods of dealing with complaints and injustices.

 

As I've said in other posts relating to immigration matters - a couple of years ago a friend was experiencing a problem with his local office. They were quite clearly going against the rules by demading that his income (from employment) came from abroad.  how could it? He's married, has a Thai company, work permit and pays taxes in Thailand, clearly his income comes from Thailand.  After his visa application was refused, he called Immigration head office in Bangkok and explained what was being asked of him. He was told his local office were wrong which of course he knew. Yet when he asked the person he talked to to call his local office and put them right - they refused!!!!!  Its been suggested that 'loss of face' is the reason for that but I suspect that is has more to do with the upward flow of brown envelopes.

 

I would have thought there was some sort of appeal procedure but I've asked the question on TV several times without a reply so maybe there isn't.

 

[JackThompson]

49 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

... a couple of years ago a friend was experiencing a problem with his local office. They were quite clearly going against the rules by demading that his income (from employment) came from abroad.  how could it? He's married, has a Thai company, work permit and pays taxes in Thailand, clearly his income comes from Thailand.  After his visa application was refused, he called Immigration head office in Bangkok and explained what was being asked of him. He was told his local office were wrong which of course he knew.

We have reports of foreigners being told by immigration that they "cannot" work here legally on a Non-O/marriage/family Visa (permitted-stay) or extension.  This has been reported at "Show Your Papers" inspections of schools and business.  Their assertion is not true, but seems to be what some at Immigration believe should be true. 

 

My experience at CW indicates that they have reacted by making a Non-O extension based on income from work follow the same excessive document-requirements as a Non-B.  The fix is to require Immigration to issue Non-Os and Non-Bs to anyone who can show a work-permit, work-contract, and proven income, matching the contract - provided it is in excess of the minimum for the extension and/or type of work.  They are blocking legit business-activity with what they are doing now - anti "Thailand 3.0".  Unfortunately, the immigration-component at BOI is "in on it" with them - won't issue work-permits for Non-O married at all.

The "employed legally" question has already been decided by the Labor Dept, as evidenced by a work-permit - but immigration thinks the labor-dept should not have that power, and cannot be trusted.  Similarly with the MFA providing Visas - they want to re-check the money you already showed to get the visa, again, when you enter - and in Cash, THIS time.  I "will not be allowed" to get another Non-O Visa was classic-attitude - imagining that they make the MFA's decisions (because they should, of course).

 

It is no wonder they think all other branches of govt are untrustworthy, given their own agent-game behavior.  No one is more paranoid about being burned than a huckster.