Any reports on back-dating of your 1-year permission to stay during the Amnesty?

[Peter Denis]

There seems to be no consistency during the Amnesty in how IOs treat Non Imm O or O-A holders applying for a 1-year extension of stay AFTER their permission to stay expired.

Some IOs stated that they will not process such an application when the permission to stay date has expired (thus forcing the applicant to leave the country once the Amnesty is over, and start a new application from scratch again).

Others (like CM or CW according to recent reports) confirmed that they will process the application even if the permission to stay expired during the Amnesty.

But what is NOT clear in case they are willing to do so, is the date from which that renewed 1-year extension of stay would start.

And there are 3 possibilities:

a) Back-dating of your new 1-year permission to stay, so that there is no gap between the end of the previous and the start of the new 1-year permission to stay;

b) Your new approved 1-year permission to stay starting from the application date for your extension of stay;

c) Your new approved 1-year permission to stay starting from the automatically Amnesty-based extended permission to stay date, being 31 July.

 

So I would be interested in any reports from Non Imm O or O-A holders that actually applied for a 1-year extension of stay AFTER their permission to stay expired.

Obviously the IO were they applied should be mentioned, as well as which of the 3 date-possibilities their IO applied for the renewal of their 1-year permission to stay. 

Note: Depending on the start date of their new permission to stay, the period for which they have to prove they met financial requirements will differ, so any info on that aspect would also be much appreciated.

 

Sharing of actual experience would be preferred, but of course also responses from IOs queried about the above are welcome.

 

 

[BritTim]

I agree that having this information for each immigration office would be extremely valuable. If there was a national policy on this, it would be a lot easier. My own (minority) view is that the amnesty ought to be treated as a grace period during which you either apply for a regular extension of leave the country. In the case of an extension, this would be OK at any time up to the end of the grace period and backdated to the end of your regular permission to stay as the grace period is not a formal extension.

[userabcd]

Why would one let their extension of stay expire?

 

Immigration offices are open as usual and for consistency, extensions of stay should renewed as usual before they expire.

Edited June 29, 2020 by userabcd

[Peter Denis]

13 minutes ago, userabcd said:

Why would one let their extension of stay expire?

Immigration offices are open as usual and for consistency, extensions of stay should renewed as usual before they expire.

I agree that most of those that were already staying in Thailand on a 1-year permission to stay based on their Non Imm O or O-A Visa, will have applied for their 1-year extension of stay before their permission to stay expired.  It was recommended to do so by UbonJoe, Tanoshi and many other knowledgeable TVF-members from the very beginning of the Amnesty (although there were a couple of posters that argued that it was not necessary).

But there are of course also those that were stuck in Thailand on a 1-year MultipleEntry Non Imm O Visa with a 90-day permission to stay.  For all of those their permission to stay has already expired.  And it would be very worthwhile for them what to expect when applying for a 1-year extension of stay at their local IO on the basis of that already expired ME Non Imm O permission to stay.

[JackThompson]

27 minutes ago, userabcd said:

Why would one let their extension of stay expire?

 

Immigration offices are open as usual and for consistency, extensions of stay should renewed as usual before they expire.

Those in a high-risk group to get sick from covid (elderly and/or known medical conditions) might have not wanted to go to immigration and risk death.  It seems reasonable they would be able to extend-late, backdated to their last non-covid "permitted-stay" date.

[userabcd]

38 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

I agree that most of those that were already staying in Thailand on a 1-year permission to stay based on their Non Imm O or O-A Visa, will have applied for their 1-year extension of stay before their permission to stay expired.  It was recommended to do so by UbonJoe, Tanoshi and many other knowledgeable TVF-members from the very beginning of the Amnesty (although there were a couple of posters that argued that it was not necessary).

But there are of course also those that were stuck in Thailand on a 1-year MultipleEntry Non Imm O Visa with a 90-day permission to stay.  For all of those their permission to stay has already expired.  And it would be very worthwhile for them what to expect when applying for a 1-year extension of stay at their local IO on the basis of that already expired ME Non Imm O permission to stay.

OK, could you not visit the immigration office in your area and ask them?

[Peter Denis]

1 hour ago, userabcd said:

OK, could you not visit the immigration office in your area and ask them?

I am not asking this for myself, as I am on an O-A Visa of which the permission to stay only expires end of January 2021.

Hoping for reports of applicants that actually did it (or enquired at their IO and got a clear answer), so that at least some of the confusion on this issue could be cleared.

[BritTim]

2 hours ago, userabcd said:

Why would one let their extension of stay expire?

Right now, there is no good reason to do so. But

• at the time the amnesty was announced, there was community transmission of Covid-19 and reluctance by people (especially the elderly with underlying health conditions) to visit possibly crowded immigration offices; such people would now like to extend late when visiting immigration is less risky;
• some might have allowed their extensions to lapse because they expected to lave Thailand, but now (because of the changed circumstances) want to change their minds and apply for the extension.

[SODS]

4 hours ago, userabcd said:

Why would one let their extension of stay expire?

 

Immigration offices are open as usual and for consistency, extensions of stay should renewed as usual before they expire.

Most would not I guess, but those stuck outside the country are not able to return to renew their extensions. Surely, they should be allowed to be able to return to do so. And it is surprising that there appears to have been no mention of those needing to return to renew their extensions.

 

Somebody needs to ask Immigration about this!

Edited June 29, 2020 by SODS

[PFV]

Here in Chiang Mai, I recently was extended until May 20, 2021 from a ME Non-O (Marriage) obtained in HCMC.

My original visa expired on May 21, 2020. My last extension (Covid) allowed me to stay until May 13. Prior to that I had obtained a 60 day extension expiring on April 13.

So it would seem that they used the expiration date of the original visa as a starting point.

[DJ54]

I was told my Non-O Retirement extension needs to be renewed on or before expiration date. Immigration wasn’t crowded and measures put in place for social distancing. UT

[drbeach]

7 hours ago, PFV said:

Here in Chiang Mai, I recently was extended until May 20, 2021 from a ME Non-O (Marriage) obtained in HCMC.

My original visa expired on May 21, 2020. My last extension (Covid) allowed me to stay until May 13. Prior to that I had obtained a 60 day extension expiring on April 13.

So it would seem that they used the expiration date of the original visa as a starting point.

So by the sounds of it, you did your extension just in the last few days or so? In any case, that seems to answer a question I've been posing a lot recently. I can live with that, though would have preferred it if I wasn't forced into doing a 1-year extension already in late July...was originally advised I could do a 60-day marriage extension (not yet done in my case) which would start on the date of application. If that were the case and I were to go in late July, that would bring me up to end of September before needing to do the 1-year extension.

 

Now it looks like (though I will need to confirm at CW) that I my 1-year extension would start August 2nd, because that's when my 60day extension would expire, based off of the expiration of my 90-day stamp (June 4). In other words, I might receive 7 weeks less time than I was hoping for.

[Pattaya46]

7 hours ago, SODS said:

Most would not I guess, but those stuck outside the country are not able to return to renew their extensions. Surely, they should be allowed to be able to return to do so. And it is surprising that there appears to have been no mention of those needing to return to renew their extensions. //

Several threads already on this subject.

And just today in on of them, this post about a FB group for that.

[Max69xl]

On 6/29/2020 at 11:46 AM, JackThompson said:

Those in a high-risk group to get sick from covid (elderly and/or known medical conditions) might have not wanted to go to immigration and risk death.  It seems reasonable they would be able to extend-late, backdated to their last non-covid "permitted-stay" date.

Risk death in an almost empty immigration office? There's a higher risk to get infected when going shopping at a supermarket or fresh food market. 

[Max69xl]

22 hours ago, SODS said:

Most would not I guess, but those stuck outside the country are not able to return to renew their extensions. Surely, they should be allowed to be able to return to do so. And it is surprising that there appears to have been no mention of those needing to return to renew their extensions.

 

Somebody needs to ask Immigration about this!

"Surely, they should be allowed to be able to return to do so."

Why would a retiree with an extension based on retirement "be allowed to return" by default? If you ask an IO, they will probably answer with a question: Why did you leave Thailand in the first place if you're retired?

If you have to start all over again from scratch, it will only cost  ฿2000 for the conversion to a 90 days Non-immigrant O at the local immigration office OR the cost for a 90 days Non-immigrant O Visa obtained at an embassy/consulate in your home country. Then you just apply for a 1 year extension 60 days later at the local immigration office and you're back on track again. It's not very complicated if you meet the financial requirements. 

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, Max69xl said:

Risk death in an almost empty immigration office? There's a higher risk to get infected when going shopping at a supermarket or fresh food market. 

Some small offices, perhaps, but CW was not "almost empty" when I was there trying to apply for a legit extension - it was a zoo.  They would only let a certain number into the immigration-zone at a time, then took out all the chairs everywhere else, so the only seats were on planters (all taken, of course).   Everyone else had to sit on the ground, picking up whatever from that.

Since that time, I have seen pics where they put spaced-chairs in the atrium area - so at least you don't have to sit on the ground for hours, waiting for your "L" queue number, as I and my wife had to then. 

 

Recent reports indicate they are still doing normal business for all but TR types, who were never in the same queue, anyway, so don't affect the wait-time - time spent hanging-out with hundreds of potential-carrier strangers in a large indoor area.   I am not in a high-risk group, so not an issue for me - but if I were older or had hypertention, diabetes, etc, then I would not risk it.

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, Max69xl said:

Why would a retiree with an extension based on retirement "be allowed to return" by default? If you ask an IO, they will probably answer with a question: Why did you leave Thailand in the first place if you're retired?

Answer: "I always just visited visa-exempt or with a valid Tourist Visa for visits until recently, but your buddies at the airport threatened not to let me in if I didn't get a retirement-extension." 

 

They know many will end up using an agent - why they forced so many part-time visitors to either leave (as most did - hurting Thai businesses/jobs), or play their game.

 

1 hour ago, Max69xl said:

If you have to start all over again from scratch, it will only cost  ฿2000 for the conversion to a 90 days Non-immigrant O at the local immigration

... which would require proving the 800K came from abroad (years ago). 

 

1 hour ago, Max69xl said:

OR the cost for a 90 days Non-immigrant O Visa obtained at an embassy/consulate in your home country.

Many of which offer only the Non-OA type, which requires overpriced, useless insurance to extend here, forever.

... so likely end up using an agent.  Which is the point of the entire exercise.

[OJAS]

1 hour ago, Max69xl said:

OR the cost for a 90 days Non-immigrant O Visa obtained at an embassy/consulate in your home country.

Thai embassies and consulates in Western countries, generally speaking, don't issue non-O visas on the grounds of being aged 50+ these days. The only exception of which I am aware relates to the London Embassy, who are prepared to issue single-entry non-O visas to recipients of the UK State Pension (for which the minimum age entitlement is currently 65).

 

The only non-immigrant visa option available to most retirees stuck in their home countries on expired permissions to stay is the OA - complete with mandatory health insurance policy, of course.

 

[Tanoshi]

34 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

They know many will end up using an agent - why they forced so many part-time visitors to either leave (as most did - hurting Thai businesses/jobs), or play their game.

 

34 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

... so likely end up using an agent.  Which is the point of the entire exercise.

Jack, your conspiracy theory that Immigration want to force everyone to use an agent gets boring, like an old gramophone record after a while. Especially when your own experience and subsequent refusals were due to you not providing the correct or acceptable documentation.

Thousands of expats apply and successfully obtain extensions based on retirement or marriage without the need of an agent, because they meet the requirements and supply acceptable documentary evidence.

 

If you cannot meet the requirements, then you open yourself up to corrupt and expensive measures in order to obtain an extension. That is no fault of Immigration, they don't twist your arm up your back.

There are other options available and nobody is forcing you to use an agent.

 

There is a small group who through lack of confidence or time, choose to use an agent to do the legwork on their behalf, but meet the requirements. They use an agent by personal choice, not by force.

 

You blame everyone but yourself because of your inability to supply acceptable documentation.

Take a look in the mirror, there's the problem.

[PFV]

18 hours ago, drbeach said:

So by the sounds of it, you did your extension just in the last few days or so? In any case, that seems to answer a question I've been posing a lot recently. I can live with that, though would have preferred it if I wasn't forced into doing a 1-year extension already in late July...was originally advised I could do a 60-day marriage extension (not yet done in my case) which would start on the date of application. If that were the case and I were to go in late July, that would bring me up to end of September before needing to do the 1-year extension.

 

Now it looks like (though I will need to confirm at CW) that I my 1-year extension would start August 2nd, because that's when my 60day extension would expire, based off of the expiration of my 90-day stamp (June 4). In other words, I might receive 7 weeks less time than I was hoping for.

Yes, I applied on May 20, with an under consideration stamp due June 19

[JackThompson]

58 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

 

Jack, your conspiracy theory that Immigration want to force everyone to use an agent gets boring, like an old gramophone record after a while. Especially when your own experience and subsequent refusals were due to you not providing the correct or acceptable documentation.

I provided every documented requirement every time, and those applying via agents don't even need the financials.  That is a FACT. 

 

I will not deceive appliants into walking into a trap, like I was decieved, by reading things like what you just wrote.

 

Quote

You blame everyone but yourself because of your inability to supply acceptable documentation.

Take a look in the mirror, there's the problem.

That is a lie.  I provided proven income, and proof where I lived, etc Every Single Time.  You are defending people whose accurate-description is so low, it would violate forum rules to repeat here.

Edited June 30, 2020 by JackThompson

[jackdd]

40 minutes ago, PFV said:

Yes, I applied on May 20, with an under consideration stamp due June 19

You most likely got the extension starting from the day when you applied, that your multiple entry visa expired at the same time probably didn't play a role.

Your previous 30 day extension allowed you to stay until 13th May, then you fell 7 days under the "amnesty", then on 20th May you applied for a one year extension, and are now allowed to stay until 20th May 2021, correct?

One year extension for having Thai spouse/children or for being retired?

 

[Tanoshi]

2 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

That is a lie.  I provided proven income, and proof where I lived, etc Every Single Time.  You are defending people whose accurate-description is so low, it would violate forum rules to repeat here.

Proven in your eyes, but obviously not acceptable to Immigration.

 

By your own admission in previous posts, copies of your landlords Tabien Baan and ID card (who lives overseas) were not acceptable as proof of address.

That tells me one of two things, either the copies were so poor they were illegible ( an occasional occurrence at my own IO where the applicant supplies such poor copies, they are required to obtain new copies), or more than likely her ID is invalid as it's expired.

 

The company documents again could have been old or illegible.

Did you supply the originals as well as legible copies.

Why were you supplying company documents, when for an extension based on marriage and working in Thailand the financial requirement is a personal income tax form with the payment receipt as proof of 40K monthly income.

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

Proven in your eyes, but obviously not acceptable to Immigration.

I followed all the advice here on what to provide every time.  In some cases, I was the first to report a new "undocumented requirement," which was later reported by others.  For example, and MFA-stamped embassy letter in Jomtien being rejected.
 

Quote

By your own admission in previous posts, copies of your landlords Tabien Baan and ID card (who lives overseas) were not acceptable as proof of address.

That tells me one of two things, either the copies were so poor they were illegible ( an occasional occurrence at my own IO where the applicant supplies such poor copies, they are required to obtain new copies), or more than likely her ID is invalid as it's expired.

No, the issue on the 3rd (or 4th) attempt - each time with what they asked for the previous time - was that the signed House-book copy was "too old" / format - it was completely legible.  They knew I could not get a new one, as my wife had told them on a previous visit we had to get these shipped from the overseas landlord - so used that as a way to prevent our application.   They were coming out to the house to verify we lived there - so not as if I was providing a "fake" address.  The Jurstic Person even came to try and help - and told them we lived where we did - offered to sign anything they wanted.
 

Quote

The company documents again could have been old or illegible.

Did you supply the originals as well as legible copies.

Why were you supplying company documents, when for an extension based on marriage and working in Thailand the financial requirement is a personal income tax form with the payment receipt as proof of 40K monthly income.

That was years later - this past March at CW.  I had originals of the tax-docs and a bank-statement showing my income depositied (multiples of the minimum).  I brought (again) what was Reported Here on This Forum as needed.  Again, I was the first (evidently) to get hit with MORE than ever reported as needed before for a family-based Thai-income application.  I even had copies of all docs used for my work-permit - but, of course, they would only accept originals - meaning someone from the company has to go all those places to get them - plus pictures in an office closed due to covid (asked about this - no pics = no extension). 

A report about a week ago confirmed what I had reported in a HELPFUL warning to someone else (dismissed at the time with the usual "It's just you" / "mirror" type replies).  That report indicates you must have the last 3 mo of tax-docs - which I had before, but cannot get now, because the tax-officials allow deferred payments due to covid.  Immigration do not recognize work-permits as valid, and will break up your family over covid changes to tax-dept rules and/or covid office closings.

Edited June 30, 2020 by JackThompson

[BritManToo]

3 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

Jack, your conspiracy theory that Immigration want to force everyone to use an agent gets boring, like an old gramophone record after a while. Especially when your own experience and subsequent refusals were due to you not providing the correct or acceptable documentation.

Nah, Jack's right, they always wanted 'new' documents from me as well (Chiang Mai), that they never wanted last time.

When they noticed I had a kid, they suddenly required birth certificates .... even though that wasn't required before I had the kid, then 1 year they didn't like the bank letter, even though it was the same format as last years bank letter. They also did the 'new rental contract', even though the owner was a Thai living overseas.

 

It's just so much less trouble to travel abroad and get a 'non-o' VISA, if COVID carries on with no amnesty and no borders open, I'll just pay 25k to an agent and buy a retirement extension without having to provide anything, even though I've got a current 'non-o' VISA valid until next year.

Edited June 30, 2020 by BritManToo

[Tanoshi]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

No, the issue on the 3rd (or 4th) attempt - each time with what they asked for the previous time - was that the signed House-book copy was "too old" / format - it was completely legible.  They knew I could not get a new one, as my wife had told them on a previous visit we had to get these shipped from the overseas landlord - so used that as a way to prevent our application. 

Well the format of Tabien Baans hasn't changed in the last 50 years.

Why couldn't the landlord email a new signed copy.

 

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

I even had copies of all docs used for my work-permit - but, of course, they would only accept originals - meaning someone from the company has to go all those places to get them - plus pictures in an office closed due to covid (asked about this - no pics = no extension). 

You sign to certify it's a copy of the original, which Immigration can request (the original).

Regardless if you couldn't or were unable to supply the original documents, Immigration are within their right to refuse.

 

In either case you failed to adequately prepare or failed to supply the requested documents.

That doesn't mean they are trying to force you down the agent route.

You should be blaming your landlord and company, not Immigration.

Why do you feel you should be treated any differently than anybody else that doesn't meet the requirements.

[JackThompson]

11 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

Well the format of Tabien Baans hasn't changed in the last 50 years.

Why couldn't the landlord email a new signed copy.

They said he had to "Go to an Amphur for a new one."  It Was A Trap.  They Wanted Money. 

Note at CW, this past March, nothing about any of this - they use a different set of arbitrary-criteria to put groups of applicants into the "agent money only" pile.

 

Businesses pay RTP "envelopes" to exist.   Traffic incidents are paid in-cash.  Ask Thais about the "land office" envelopes, etc - or what the police are.  I have found they usually use the English word for Italian crime syndicates.  The only "theory" here, is that all of this is just a big "coincidence."

 

Quote

You sign to certify it's a copy of the original, which Immigration can request (the original).

Regardless if you couldn't or were unable to supply the original documents, Immigration are within their right to refuse.

According to the "rules" - they can add anything they want in requirements.  The POINT is, they are corrupt, and use their "discretion" to further corruption - something you seem to be denying is the case.

 

Quote

In either case you failed to adequately prepare or failed to supply the requested documents.

Wrong.  In all cases, they Added New Requirements which had never been reported or published before.  They REFUSED to provide a Printed List, at 2 offices when we asked (Jomtien and CW).

 

Quote

That doesn't mean they are trying to force you down the agent route.

You should be blaming your landlord and company, not Immigration.

Why do you feel you should be treated any differently than anybody else that doesn't meet the requirements.

Why don't they just publish exactly what is needed?  Why do they ask for irrelvant things - varying by office, by week, by applicant, etc? 
 

They often abuse and/or make problems for us, our Thai families, our landlords, and our employers, unless we use an agent.  So Why do you feel the need to attack decent and honest people who Report The Truth about Immigration, and shill for corrupt  (deleted, deleted), who treat us like criminals?

Edited July 1, 2020 by JackThompson

[Tanoshi]

2 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Wrong.  In all cases, they Added New Requirements which had never been reported or published before.  They REFUSED to provide a Printed List, at 2 offices when we asked (Jomtien and CW).

In your own words you stated they requested new updated documents to the one's you supplied.

That's not a new requirement and the fact you failed, or couldn't comply is Immigrations fault?

[JackThompson]

50 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

In your own words you stated they requested new updated documents to the one's you supplied.

That's not a new requirement and the fact you failed, or couldn't comply is Immigrations fault?

My experience, was that they added unpublished requirements, one after the other - with each attempt to submit my application, until they succeeded in blocking my application completely. 

 

"Landlord Docs" beyond a lease were new "unpublished requrirements" at the time - not reported needed before, and still not required at Chiang Wattana and many other offices years later.  It has nothing to do with the official requirements, which are - married, living together, and sufficient income. 

 

This new method to block honest applicants, which spread among several offices during/after this period, is generally ONLY applied to those applying based on Thai-Family - the applicants immigration clearly hates the most, as evidenced by both "official" and "unofficial" measures to make these difficult to achieve. 

 

So, yes, that cruel and capricious behavior - continually moving the goalposts by adding "new" requirements, often changing with each attempt to apply - is entirely immigration's "fault," and is not limited to my experience.  MANY have reported this technique being used on them, to wear them down, and force them to use an agent, so immigration can get their payoff.

[JimGant]

20 hours ago, JackThompson said:

I provided every documented requirement every time, and those applying via agents don't even need the financials.  That is a FACT. 

No, that's BS. On a recent thread Ubonjoe reported that CW does NOT collude with dishonest agents. Now, how he knows that, I haven't the foggiest idea. But, he certainly has many more sources than the rest of us.

You probably observed agent-aided customers readily getting their business concluded. This is because agents make sure all is in order before wasting an IO's time; and the IO knows this will be the case, and is grateful. Smiles all around.

Yeah, I'm one of many who use an agent to facilitate matters, meaning only one trip to Imm -- and at CM, no parking problem. And, for only 4000 baht. When you see much higher agent costs posted here, you're looking at the dishonest end of the spectrum. Unfortunately, this forum still has a hard time differentiating between the two brands of agents. Thus, causing considerable confusion.

Jack, why not try an honest agent, since it's not your bonafides that are out of order, but your presentation.

Edited July 1, 2020 by JimGant